"He redeemed us in order that the blessing promised to Abraham would come to the
Gentiles in Christ Jesus, so that by faith we might receive the promise of the Spirit."
(Galatians 3:14)
There is a widespread teaching that the Church has replaced Israel, and
that God has therefore finished with the Jewish people as the focus of
His redemptive plan. Known as replacement theology, this states that
all the promises made to the Jews as a nation, including the promise of
the land, has now been transferred to the Church in the spiritual sense.
In this view, the Church is a completely new body having no continuity with
the Jewish people and God's covenant with them, and the New Covenant,
celebrated in the Lord's supper, was made with the Church, completely
replacing God's covenant with Israel.
In this scheme, "the land" no longer belongs to Israel: Instead she is seen
as an alien invader on lands which rightfully belong to the Arab people.
Indeed, the "land of Israel" no longer refers to a literal land, but to
"Christ" "the kingdom of God" or the Church's "spiritual inheritance".
Thus, when the Old Testament speaks of the Jews returning to Jerusalem,
the New Testament, according to replacement theologians, now reinterprets
this as Christians coming to the New (heavenly) Jerusalem. Similarly,
building up the ruined cities means that the kingdom of God is being
built up, and the desert blossoming refers to the heavenly kingdom, etc.
In particular, the covenant people of God (the Jews) are now no longer a physical
people but exclusively a spiritual entity, the Church.
A particularly dangerous style of replacement theology is being proclaimed by
the Kingdom Now or Dominion or Reconstructionist teachers, which is affecting the
charismatic Pentecostal branches of the evangelical Christian community in the U.S.A.
Some of this teaching contains dangerous elements of anti-Semitism.
In his book, "Days of Vengeance" (1984) American Reconstructionist Pastor
David Chilton (1951-1997) wrote: "Modern apostate Jews have absolutely
no theological, and therefore no historical right to the land of Palestine."
"Israel is now a sacrificial corpse."and, "God's people must not seek to
reform Israel, with its new religion of Judaism, but abandon her to her fate."
As the conflict in the Middle East increases, with Israel seemingly obstinate,
unbending, and aggressive, this theology seems easier to accept. Perhaps
Israel should not be in the Middle East; perhaps peace might come to the
Middle East if Christians withdrew their support from Israel
and backed the Palestinian cause?
As the conflict in and around Israel continues and even worsens, there is a
danger that an increasing number of Christians will turn against the clear, simple
meaning of the Scriptures concerning the return of the Jews to their land,
and accept replacement theology.
Not only will this cause the Church to abandon the Jews as a nation, Israel,
but will, according to the teaching of the New Testament, expose her to
to the displeasure and judgment of God, resulting in unspeakable loss.
If God has transferred Israel's promises exclusively to the Christian Church,
this can only mean that He has once and for all rejected Israel as a nation.
But if God intended to take away Israel's inheritance, why did Jesus say,
"Do not think I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to
abolish, but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away,
not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law, until all is accomplished."
(Matthew 5:17-18)
If God has turned away from Israel and exchanged her for a new nation, why
did Paul say, "God has not rejected His people, has He? May it never be!"
and then quote Old Testament Scriptures to prove it?
"It is not for your sake, O house of Israel, that I am about to act, but for
My Holy Name, which you profaned among the nations where you went.
And I will vindicate the holiness of My great Name...For I will take you from
the nations, and gather you from all the lands, and bring you into your own land."
(Ezekiel 36:22-24)
Moreover, replacement theology makes nonsense of Biblical exegesis in
that sometimes verses must be split in two halves, applying one half to the
Jewish people and the other half to the Church. For example:
"Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Israel; behold they say,
"Our bones are dried up, and our hope is perished. We are completely
cut off (obviously the Jews). Therefore prophesy and say to them,
"Thus says the Lord God, Behold, I will open your graves...My people;
and bring you into the land of Israel" (presumably the Church)
(Ezekiel 37:11-12)
The grave mistake of replacement theologians is that they break the
fundamental law of the harmony of the Old and New Testament. The
New Testament does not repeat all the promises of the Old Testament
because its writers and central characters presupposed the authenticity
and accuracy of Moses and the Prophets.
Thus, in particular, the reason Jesus did not spend time teaching that
physical Israel would be living in the physical promised land in the last days
was that He presupposed that all the Old Testament prophetic scriptures
were valid and literally true. Unlike Jesus, replacement theologians cannot
accept the literal truth of the Old Testament.
Replacement theologians also misunderstand the way the New Testament
refers to the Old Testament. The New Testament makes a wider application
of the same principles enunciated in the Old Testament, but never at the
expense of the original meaning. The "spiritual" meaning is dependent
on the "natural" because it flows from it. The New Testament speaks in
terms of "even as, so also" rather than "instead of, now this."
Thus with regards to Israel and the Church, the New Testament teaches,
"even as" Israel, "so also" the Church; not "instead of" Israel, "now the Church".
For example, "even as" God promised to deal with Israel in blessing and discipline,
"so also" will He bless and discipline the Church.
Spiritual fulfillment does not replace the natural, but hangs upon it, flows from it, and
completes it. This is the meaning of the term "fulfill" when used by the New Testament
in relation to the Old Testament. An example of this principle is seen in 1 Peter 2:9,
where the apostle is not saying that the Church has replaced Israel as a "chosen race,
royal priesthood, holy nation, but that "even as" Israel in the Old Testament was and
still is chosen and are called God's special people to declare His glory,
"Now if you will indeed obey My voice and keep My covenant, you will be
My treasured possession out of all nations... for the whole earth is Mine."
(Exodus 19:5-6)
"so also" does the body of believers, the Church, have a similar calling.
"But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for
God's own possession, to proclaim the virtues of Him who called you out of
darkness into His marvelous light."
(1 Peter 2:9)
Although this passage is used by replacement theologians to support their view,
it should be noted anyway that Peter is addressing his letter to Jewish believers
in the diaspora, and contrasts them with the Gentiles.
The view that God has rejected Israel also raises serious difficulties regarding
the character of God. To picture God as having rejected the people of Israel
because of their sin seems inconsistent with the meaning of passages such as
(Jeremiah 31: 35-37),
"Thus says the LORD, who gives the sun for light by day, who sets in order the moon
and stars for light by night, who stirs up the sea so that its waves roar-the LORD of Hosts
is His name: "Only if this fixed order departed from My presence, declares the LORD,
would Israel's descendants ever cease to be a nation before Me. This is what the
LORD says: "Only if the heavens above could be measured and the foundations of
the earth below searched out would I reject all of Israel's descendants because
of all they have done," declares the LORD.
We need to remember that grace, and not human merit, is the ground of all salvation,
be it personal or national, and despite Israel's recognized failings today as a nation, she will
be delivered and restored on the ground of God's grace and faithfulness, never her merit.
We read concerning the individual that none of those given by the Father to the Son
can ever be taken out of His hand-nothing can obstruct His eternal plans for them.
"I give them eternal life, and they will never perish. No one can snatch them out of My hand."
(John 10:28)
"And we know that God works all things together for the good of those who love Him,
who are called according to His purpose. For those God foreknew, He also predestined
to be conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be
the firstborn among many brothers."
(Romans 8:28-29)
There is, however, no such explicit statement concerning the Church. God's faithfulness
to the Church is inferred from and follows His promises and faithfulness to Israel.
Thus if God can be thought of as terminating His covenant with Israel and replacing
her with another body (the Church) because of unfaithfulness or any other reason,
then He can equally and for similar reasons forsake the Church as a whole.
The Church is in danger- not only from materialism, unbelief, and the
challenge of Islam-but from God's displeasure at arrogance against Israel .
As God pushes Israel towards her final destiny, world hostility, ignorance and
self-righteous hypocrisy will grow ever more strongly, even in the Church.
It is not going to be easy to stand by the Word of God-but in the end it
will be the only place worth standing.
Excerpts from the teaching,
"Towards A Christian Understanding Of Israel
Boast Not Against The Branches"
By Derek White
Published by Christian Friends of Israel-UK
No comments:
Post a Comment