The False Idea of Replacement Theology

[Randy Kluth]

God chose the faithful and obedient of diverse ethnicities to comprise Israel. Genesis 17:12; Exodus 12:48-49; Leviticus 19:34; Leviticus 24:22

God was not and is not a racist.

I agree--God is not a racist.

Israel was its own "ethnicity." The inclusion of other peoples indicate they "melt into" Israeli ethnicity. Minorities are absorbed into the majority.

Ethnicity is not based on fidelity to God. You are born with an ethnicity, or you marry into it and adopt its traditions.

Israelis were "cut off" from Israel when they were unfaithful. But they were called "unfaithful Israelis." That is, they maintained their original ethnicity.

 

[covenantee]

I agree--God is not a racist.

Israel was its own "ethnicity." The inclusion of other peoples indicate they "melt into" Israeli ethnicity. Minorities are absorbed into the majority.

Ethnicity is not based on fidelity to God. You are born with an ethnicity, or you marry into it and adopt its traditions.

Israelis were "cut off" from Israel when they were unfaithful. But they were called "unfaithful Israelis." That is, they maintained their original ethnicity.

Israel was comprised of diverse ethnicities -- those of Abraham's seed, and those not of his seed (Genesis 17:12).

The faithful and obedient, irrespective of their ethnicities, were preserved and blessed.

The unfaithful and disobedient, irrespective of their ethnicities, were slain.

Being Abraham's seed did not save them.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Israel was comprised of diverse ethnicities -- those of Abraham's seed, and those not of his seed (Genesis 17:12).

The faithful and obedient, irrespective of their ethnicities, were preserved and blessed.

The unfaithful and disobedient, irrespective of their ethnicities, were slain.

Being Abraham's seed did not save them.

You are misreading Gen 17.12. Everybody permanently residing in the land of Israel, Hebrew or not, were to be circumcised if they were male. That is, the land of Israel could contain several non-integrated ethnicities, as long as they maintained certain laws, including the law of circumcision.

 

[covenantee]

You are misreading Gen 17.12. Everybody permanently residing in the land of Israel, Hebrew or not, were to be circumcised if they were male.

Yes, that was God's covenant condition as a demonstration of faith and obedience.

But circumcision did not preclude subsequent unfaithfulness and disobedience by thousands on various occasions, and did not save them on those occasions.

 

[Keraz]

If Diversity figures into God's plan, and it does, then Ethnicity is an essential element in determining Diveristy.

The true Israelites of God are seen by John, in all of the holy Land, soon after the Sixth Seal event. They are Christian people from every tribe, race, nation and language. Revelation 7:9
Is any other proof needed of the diversity of Gods people?

 

[covenantee]

You are misreading Gen 17.12. Everybody permanently residing in the land of Israel, Hebrew or not, were to be circumcised if they were male. That is, the land of Israel could contain several non-integrated ethnicities, as long as they maintained certain laws, including the law of circumcision.

Genesis 17:12 does not refer to the land of Israel. It describes the composition of the new nation of Israel, long before there was a land of Israel.

 

[Davy]

I agree. It's all scriptural.

"As for Me, behold! My covenant is with you, and you shall be a father of many nations [more literally translated from the Hebrew as: a multitude of goy]." Genesis 17:4

"I know, my son, I know. He (Manasseh) also shall become a people, and he also shall be great, but truly his younger brother (Ephraim) shall be greater than he is, and his seed shall become a multitude of nations [more literally translated from the Hebrew as: the fullness of Goy]." Genesis 48:19

"For the head of Syria is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is Rezin; and within sixty-five years Ephraim shall be broken so that it shall not be a people.
And the head of Ephraim is Samaria, and the head of Samaria is Remaliah's son. If you will not believe, surely you shall not be established." Isaiah 7:8-9.

"And He said, Call his name Not-my-people. For you are not My people, and I will not be for you.
Yet the number of the sons of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered. And it shall be, in the place where it was said to them, You are not My people, there it shall be said to them, You are the sons of the living God.
Then the sons of Judah and the sons of Israel shall be gathered together, and shall set over themselves one head, and they shall come up out of the land. For great shall be the day of Jezreel." Hosea 1:9-11

Romans 9
22 What if God, willing to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much long-suffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction;
23 and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy which He had before prepared to glory;
24 whom He also called, not only us, of Jews, but also of the nations?

25 As He also says in Hosea, "I will call those not My people, My people; and those not beloved, Beloved."
26 And it shall be, in the place where it was said to them. "You are not My people; there they shall be called sons of the living God."

30 What shall we say then? That the nations, who did not follow after righteousness have taken on righteousness, but a righteousness of faith.
31 But Israel, who followed after a law of righteousness did not arrive at a law of righteousness.
32 Why? Because it was not of faith, but as it were by the works of the Law. For they stumbled at that Stumbling-stone;

The confusion comes in for some because Paul uses the word "Jews" and "Israel" interchangeably, but it's obvious that he believed what you are saying (and what I have been saying for many years), because if he did not, then he would not have quoted Hosea 1:9-11 when including the Gentiles in the promise that the very people who God said are no longer His people / not His people would one day be called "the sons of the living God".

For the first time I realize that it sounds oddly like the claims in the book of Mormon, except that it's true, and it's also true that many Gentiles in the West after having DNA tests discover they have a small percentage of Semitic genes somewhere in their ancestry, whereas American Indians do not (as far as I know), unless they are mixed with Europeans in their ancestry, and those Europeans have Semitic genes in theirs.

But genetic ancestry never made any difference to God when He promised Abraham, "As for Me, behold! My covenant is with you, and you shall be a father of many nations [more literally translated from the Hebrew as: a multitude of goy]." Genesis 17:4.

It was God's first promise to Abraham. Abraham's seed (Jesus) through whom all the families of the earth would be blessed, would descend from Isaac, and Jacob, and Judah. His seed is not "seeds" as Paul stated, it's one seed: Christ. Salvation and God's election is only found in Him, Jesus, the seed of Abraham.

Besides the fact that The Gospel was ordained to also go to the nations, and that blessing was declared even to Abraham, my point is that God scattered the ten tribes of Israel among the Gentiles so as to receive The Gospel along with the Gentile nations, so BOTH would become one in Christ, the very Hosea prophecy you mentioned which Apostle Paul quoted in Romans 9 to Roman Gentile believers on Christ Jesus.

So it's that... fact in itself, which destroys any and all notions put forth in the men's false Replacement Theology doctrine, which doctrine is thus un-Biblical.

Who then, would want to push that false Replacement Theology idea; who would benefit?

No doubt those who push the false Pre-trib Rapture theory of course would benefit, with Darby's false Dispensationalism, because they teach that the Church is raptured to live in heaven off the earth with Jesus prior to the "great tribulation", and then the nation of Israel is restored after the trib to live upon the earth while the Church remains in heaven. That is a separation idea of Christ's Church apart from Israel, when God's Israel is the Church under Christ Jesus.

 

[Timtofly]

when God's Israel is the Church under Christ Jesus.

That is replacement theology. Calling the church God's Israel is what you claim, no? You yourself accept replacement theology.

The church is not God's Israel. The church was all of humanity called out of Adam's dead corruptible flesh. Israel was a caretaker or gardner of the gospel just like Adam was. The church took over as caretaker, but neither Israel nor the church is the kingdom. The kingdom was always in heaven, not on earth. To claim earthly authority over the heavenly kingdom is replacement theology. Not just the fact the church replaced Israel. But the thought that an earthly kingdom replaces a heavenly kingdom. God's Israel is not of this earth. The church is not of this earth.

The vast majority of the church is already in heaven. They are those souls under the alter given white robes in the 5th Seal. They don't come to earth. They are told to wait in heaven, until the final harvest is complete. Jesus and the angels come to earth in the 6th Seal to gather the final harvest. That is why the church does not go through Jacob's trouble. Neither will the church be on the earth during the Thunders nor those 42 months mentioned in Revelation 11 and Revelation 13.

Job was part of the church prior to Abraham. Abraham was the church called out of Babylon. Even Jacob as Israel was called out of Egypt. After the Cross individual humans from every ethnicity were called out of the world. Being called out is permanent after one enters Paradise in God's permanent incorruptible physical body, leaving Adam's dead corruptible flesh in the dust on the earth.

Of course Israel is separate from the church. Jacob is still Israel. Jesus as King is still the King of Israel. Jesus will reign on earth with people from every tribe of Israel, as well as over many nations. The church is not on the earth. The church has been restored as sons of God, like all the sons of God created on the earth on the 6th day. The church remains in Paradise until Paradise becomes the New Jerusalem and descends from Heaven to the earth, after the millennium.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Would you say that Humanity has nothing to do with Salvation and becoming a true Israelite of God? If not, why is Ethnicity any less a matter than Humanity?

In my understanding of Scriptures, God chose an Ethnicity to begin with, in choosing Israel. The addition of more Ethnicities did not contradict Ethnicity, but rather, added Ethnicities.

If Diversity figures into God's plan, and it does, then Ethnicity is an essential element in determining Diveristy.

I guess Paul and Peter didn't get the memo:

Romans 10:12 For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile—the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, 13 for, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”[f]

Acts 15:7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. 8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; 9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

The lack of favoritism is demonstrated in giving equal gifts to diverse nationalities. l don't think it's "breaking news" to you to realize that about 200 nations on earth each have access to the Christian Gospel?

The NT Scriptures progress beyond the OT Law and its past limitations. Nobody is under OT Law today, with the advent of Christ's NT system.

However, this does not negate God's promises made during the OT era! If so, then the promise of Christ's Coming itself has been abrogated as unworthy of NT consideration, which is patently absurd!

And the thought God made promises under the OT era that cannot apply to the eschaton is equally absurd. God's word, given in whatever era, is eternally valid. What God promised in the OT era concerning the salvation of "many nations" remains a valid promise today, and is confirmed in the NT Scriptures as the International Gospel. This does not demonstrate "favoritism," but rather, proves the impartiality of God as demonstrated in international diversity.

Salvation is an individual thing, not a national thing. Jesus said whosoever believes in Him will have eternal life, not whatever nation believes in Him.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

That is replacement theology. Calling the church God's Israel is what you claim, no? You yourself accept replacement theology.

Who is being replaced exactly and how exactly are they being replaced?

What did Paul say about who is part of the Israel of God?

Galatians 6:14 May I never boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world.15 Neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything; what counts is the new creation. 16 Peace and mercy to all who follow this rule—to the Israel of God.

Paul indicated that "neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything" which meant that being a Jew or a Gentile isn't what matters. Instead, "what counts is the new creation" which is talking about being a new creation in the Lord Jesus Christ. Those who follow this rule of being made a new creation in Christ make up "the Israel of God". So, God's Israel are those who belong to His Son. That is what matters, not one's nationality or ethnicity.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Hello! Breaking news: we have entered the new covenant. The old is gone forever. Race means nothing today. It is all about grace. The Gospel is open equally to Jews and Gentiles alike. There is no racial favoritism any more. Thank God!

None of us disagree that God is not finished with Israel. But they will not be restored to their favored old covenant theocratic status because the new covenant has superseded that arrangement. The favor of God is now international and the vehicle they enter is the spiritual New Testament Church - where race means nothing.

There has only ever been one people of God. We have been grafted into faithful Israel. You are trying to make 2 out of 1, when Scriptures clearly make 1 out of 2. I prefer Scripture to your theories.

Romans 2:25 tells us: “if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision.”

Romans 2:28-29 plainly states, “For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh.”

Paul explains in Romans 9:8: “they which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.”

Romans 10:12 states: “For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.”

I Corinthians 7:17 declares, “Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing"

Colossians 3:11 declares, “there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all."

Galatians 3:28 says, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.”

Galatians 5:2 declares, “if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing."

Galatians 5:5 declares, "For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love."

Galatians 6:15 reinforces that, saying, “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature.”

Race means nothing any more – forever, it is all of grace. Being natural means nothing when it comes to salvation. That is a myth that conflicts with New Testament teaching.

The fact is, there is (and only has been) one people of God from the beginning. Whilst they were largely found within the nation of Israel before the cross, that was broadened out after the cross to embrace all nations. Race means nothing under the new covenant. The New Testament outlines clearly and repeatedly that "there is no difference between Jews and Gentiles.

Exactly. Clearly, God felt that it was very important for people to understand this which is why it was repeated so many times. Yet, people still somehow miss that ethnicity or nationality means nothing, but instead belonging to Jesus Christ is what matters regardless of whether you're a Jew or Gentile. How can people still insist that nationality matters after reading verses like those? It's baffling.

 

[Timtofly]

Who is being replaced exactly and how exactly are they being replaced?

What did Paul say about who is part of the Israel of God?

Galatians 6:14 May I never boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world.15 Neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything; what counts is the new creation. 16 Peace and mercy to all who follow this rule—to the Israel of God.

Paul indicated that "neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything" which meant that being a Jew or a Gentile isn't what matters. Instead, "what counts is the new creation" which is talking about being a new creation in the Lord Jesus Christ. Those who follow this rule of being made a new creation in Christ make up "the Israel of God". So, God's Israel are those who belong to His Son. That is what matters, not one's nationality or ethnicity.

You replaced one church with a new church.

God's family is the second birth, not the first birth. Was Abraham a part of God's family, or God's Israel? So if being of Israel does not matter why do you insist on calling yourself Israel? You have replaced the definition of Israel with another definition of Israel.

If those in the first century, the disciples of Jesus were spiritual Jews, that makes you a spiritual Gentile, unless you are a Jew or from one of the tribes of Israel.

The analogy is to an olive tree, not an Israeli tree. Paul was saying Israel as a corporate nation was in Christ being the natural branches, not that being in Israel could ever bring salvation. Even in the OT, God was not a respector of individual Israelites. He cut off those branches that rebelled against the Law.

That was not respecting those branches that remained. That was the terms of the Covenant given on Mt. Sinai. As a reminder of that, one of the first uprisings, God opened the earth, and swallowed whole families, men, women, and children alive into the earth. Numbers 16. We know that in Israel, judgment was passed on to offspring to the third and fourth generation.

"The LORD is longsuffering, and of great mercy, forgiving iniquity and transgression, and by no means clearing the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation."

After the Cross, it was not just a removal from the nationality standpoint allowing Gentiles in as natural branches, but the whole corporate dynamics changed, where each individual was now their own temple, and it was no longer corporate. You seem to overlook the fact that whole branches were cut off, not just single branches individually. Not all of Israel are Israel, they are now dead branches given over to Satan. But any individual wild branch can be grafted in, not whole families, but individuals.

Coming out of Egypt, whole families to the third and fourth generation could be cut off, because of the sins of a few people. After the Cross the reverse was not true, where whole families could be grafted into the church. Israel was the term given to Jacob to declare his offspring would be the natural branches. But that term can only apply to Jacob and his offspring. Unless you replace that and now call the church only Israel. That certainly was not the point of Paul's analogy. We are in Christ, not in Israel. Israel was in Christ, the church, not in Jacob by offspring. Israel was the called out nation. One had to join that nation and live under the Law. But it was still in Christ, even since Adam disobeyed God. Only in Christ is there redemption, from Adam's punishment.

The Cross did not replace the Law. It was the fulment of the Law. The Cross replaced the Holy of Holies, and the need for an Atonement of sin by animal sacrifices. The church called out of Egypt by Moses was the Israel of God. No one replaced that, not even after the Cross.

 

[Timtofly]

How can people still insist that nationality matters after reading verses like those? It's baffling.

How can anyone insist that Abraham was called out of Babylon?

How can anyone insist that Israel was called out of Egypt?

It is quite baffling they insist one thing, but then insist nationality meant nothing.

No one is insisting we be Israel today, but you all, who insist it no longer means what it once did. If there is no difference, then the term Israel today is meaningless. We are Christians, except all those who claim the name, but are not. We are all sons of God, except those pretending to be.

All you are literally saying is that you are a Spiritual Spiritual. Israel is the spiritual term for Jacob. God said that His people are Israel, and all by birth as long as they stay under the Covenant that Israel is bound by. But they were only Israel by the authority of Jesus Christ. Who do you think Jacob wrestled with when he was given that title?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

How can anyone insist that Abraham was called out of Babylon?

How can anyone insist that Israel was called out of Egypt?

It is quite baffling they insist one thing, but then insist nationality meant nothing.

No one is insisting we be Israel today, but you all, who insist it no longer means what it once did. If there is no difference, then the term Israel today is meaningless. We are Christians, except all those who claim the name, but are not. We are all sons of God, except those pretending to be.

All you are literally saying is that you are a Spiritual Spiritual. Israel is the spiritual term for Jacob. God said that His people are Israel, and all by birth as long as they stay under the Covenant that Israel is bound by. But they were only Israel by the authority of Jesus Christ. Who do you think Jacob wrestled with when he was given that title?

You obviously don't read what is said carefully at all, as evidenced by you bringing up things from the Old Testament to a discussion about how things are in New Testament times. The discussion is about what is true now and has been true in New Testament times. Nationality no longer mattered once Jesus brought Jew and Gentile believers together as one by His blood. That is the point. Are you able to comprehend a simple point like that?

 

[Timtofly]

You obviously don't read what is said carefully at all, as evidenced by you bringing up things from the Old Testament to a discussion about how things are in New Testament times. The discussion is about what is true now and has been true in New Testament times. Nationality no longer mattered once Jesus brought Jew and Gentile believers together as one by His blood. That is the point. Are you able to comprehend a simple point like that?

That is what we are talking about. But that did not change the relationship God has with Israel. Once the church is removed that relationship that was put on hold will be once again front and center. Since you deny such a future, you have merely replaced that relationship with the current arrangement.

No one is refuting current reality nor even redefining it in opposition to your stated belief.

The coming kingdom on earth is not going to bring back the OT economy. But reality will not end until all things are made right including death, which is called the last enemy. You shorten this change to mere seconds, because like several posters here, you feel this is as good as it gets, and God has nothing else to offer. Some have it, the rest don't. Seems like an elitist position to take, but nonetheless some think they have it all figured out.

The promises made in Daniel 9 most agree were still 490 years away from the time they were pronounced. Being able to return and rebuild as a nation was not even a move to independent status. Yes the physical work was accomplished by Jesus, but then you switch to spiritual mode as if the physical did not even matter. The promise was given to Israel, but the physical aspect was put on hold for the heavenly unseen kingdom. Daniel 9 is not about this spiritual kingdom accomplished by the second birth. What Jesus did, redeemed more than one single nation. Adam is the disobedient father of all humanity, not one single nation.

That is why it may seem the NT goes overboard to get thick headed Judaizers to see the redemptive work of God. Now it seems the church is the thick headed bunch who cannot accept that Daniel 9 will still be accomplished by Jesus as a physical King on earth.

You have to Remember that Daniel 9 would also remove the OT economy as well as the current NT economy. That is why the NT economy is not the fulfillment of Daniel 9, but only in part. Yes, the spiritual aspect is real as no one is arguing what the Cross did in God's relationship with Adam's dead corruptible flesh. Most don't even accept that the physical aspect allowed those in Abraham's bosom to now enjoy Paradise physically. No one in Paradise is currently experiencing death, nor the valley of the shadow of death. Even you deny that the physical aspect was completed for all those OT redeemed waiting in Abraham's bosom. You are still futurist in the fulfillment of Daniel 9 yourself.

While you claim Daniel 9 is merely spiritual, you seem to forget that it took the physical appearance of God on earth to change reality. It could have happened without a Messiah come to earth. God could have just implemented it spiritually, no? Jesus as King is just as physical as Jesus being a physical Messiah.

 

[covenantee]

That is what we are talking about. But that did not change the relationship God has with Israel. Once the church is removed that relationship that was put on hold will be once again front and center.

The only relationship that God has, and has ever had, inside or outside of Israel; is with those who are faithful and obedient to Him. He has never put that relationship on hold, and never will. It has always been front and center, and will always be.

Except to the spiritually undiscerning to whom it is foolishness. 1 Corinthians 2:14

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

That is what we are talking about. But that did not change the relationship God has with Israel. Once the church is removed that relationship that was put on hold will be once again front and center. Since you deny such a future, you have merely replaced that relationship with the current arrangement.

No one is refuting current reality nor even redefining it in opposition to your stated belief.

The coming kingdom on earth is not going to bring back the OT economy.

Have you ever read the book of Hebrews? In Hebrews 8 it talks about how the old covenant was inferior to the new covenant and that is why the old covenant with its animal sacrifices and many burdensome rituals needed to be made obsolete and the superior new covenant established by the blood of Christ needed to be put into effect. So, that was progress that was made because of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. So, with this in mind, why in the world would God want to bring back the inferior old covenant? That would be a case of regression and would undermine all the progress that was made under the new covenant. It would make a mockery out of Christ's "once for all" sacrifice that established the new covenant. That makes no sense whatsoever. Please address this specifically and don't ignore it or go on a tangent like you normally do.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You replaced one church with a new church.

God's family is the second birth, not the first birth. Was Abraham a part of God's family, or God's Israel? So if being of Israel does not matter why do you insist on calling yourself Israel? You have replaced the definition of Israel with another definition of Israel.

You are constantly misrepresenting what I believe. It makes it impossible to take you seriously when you have such horrible reading comprehension skills. I don't replace "the definition of Israel with another definition of Israel". That was a false statement. Just one of many that you make on a regular basis. I believe there are two Israels and I don't believe one replaces the other. There is natural Israel (descendants of the nation of Israel) and there is spiritual Israel. I do not believe that spiritual Israel replaces natural Israel. Yet, that is what you are accusing me of. Why don't you try paying closer attention to what I actually believe and then maybe you will stop misrepresenting what I believe and stop making pointless straw man arguments.

 

[Timtofly]

The only relationship that God has, and has ever had, inside or outside of Israel; is with those who are faithful and obedient to Him. He has never put that relationship on hold, and never will. It has always been front and center, and will always be.

Except to the spiritually undiscerning to whom it is foolishness. 1 Corinthians 2:14

Of course He did. What would you call spiritual blindness or the ability to be spiritually discerned?

If you claim a relationship is foolishness on the part of one party, which side has been put on hold, God or the other party?

Did Jesus stop being an Israelite and become a Gentile? Or renounce any nationality?