Intro
I apologize for the one-day delay of this post. I had a lot going on this past weekend and wasn’t able to finish it Monday evening. But here it is. So, without further ado. In my last post (catch up here) I talked about God adopting us into His family. I also mentioned an erroneous way of thinking called Replacement Theology. This belief supposes that God rejected the Jewish people and that the Church replaced them. No room for coexisting as people of God. With today’s growing Anti-Semitism in the world, the church needs to be the Jewish people’s strongest supporters. That’s why I feel the need to address Replacement Theology.
The Theology
I’ve already given a short definition of Replacement Theology. But I’m going to expand upon it here. Replacement Theology is the idea that the Church replaces the Jewish people as God’s chosen people. When the Jews rejected Jesus as their Messiah, God rejected them as His people. And God transferred any prophecies and promises that were written for Israel to the Church.
The Text
When it comes to truth claims, there needs to be something to back it up. And when it comes to doctrines of the Christian faith, that something needs to be in the form of Biblical text. So, what Scriptures do proponents of Replacement Theology use to back up their claims? The major ones include Matthew 21:43, Romans 2:28-29, Romans 9:6-8, Philippians 3:3, and Galatians 6:15-16. I intend to go through each of them individually and show where they are skewed to say something they don’t. Then I’ll offer up a more accurate interpretation based on larger context. And context is so important when it comes to interpreting Scripture. False doctrine always crops up the moment you take something out of context.
Matthew 21:43
Therefore I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit. (NIV)
Knowing that Jesus was talking to Jews at the time He made this statement, one could conceive that Jesus was telling the Jews they were no longer God’s chosen and were being replaced. However, let’s back up and find the context. In verse 23, the chief priests come up to Jesus (who was teaching in the temple courts) and challenged His authority. Jesus responded to that challenge and then proceeds to tell two parables. Verse 43 comes after Jesus tells the Parable of the Tenants (verses 33-39). Afterwards He asks the priests what the master would do to the tenants. They answer that the master would kill those wicked tenants (verses40-41). Jesus then not-so-subtly compares those priests to the wicked tenants (verse 45).
When you take in the wider context of the passage, you see that the people losing the kingdom of God were those who were regarded as the Spiritual leaders of Israel. And their chief responsibility was to guide the Jews to God and worship Him in Spirit and in Truth. But they failed. Therefore, God was replacing the “Spiritual leaders” of that day with those who would do what God desired them to do and lead people in accordance with the will of God. And that replacement doesn’t exclude Jews. After all, the early church was exclusively Jewish for a time.
Romans 2:28-29
A person is not a Jew who is one only outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. No, a person is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a person’s praise is not from other people, but from God. (NIV)
Proponents claim that this Scripture teaches that an unsaved Jew is not a Jew at all and therefore has no claim to any blessings or promises of God. But this is not the case at all. To claim that would be to make God out to be a promise breaker (more details in a later section). A major topic found in Romans is that the Jewish law cannot save and cannot give people true righteousness. That’s why Jesus came and died as the perfect Lamb of God to take away the sins of the world. And that’s what this passage is on the heels of. Verses 17 through the end of chapter 2 talks all about the Jews and the Law. Here, Paul is saying that to be a Jew that truly pleases God, you must be circumcised in the heart, not just in the flesh.
As Isaiah 64:6 puts so eloquently, “all our righteous acts are like filthy rags” (NIV). Paul argues time and again that what we do in the flesh is simply not enough. The Law – though good as it is – cannot save us. We need Jesus, whether Jew or Gentile, we need Jesus. That’s all he’s saying here in Romans. To claim anything else is quite a stretch.
Romans 9:6-8
It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel. Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham’s children. On the contrary, “It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.” In other words, it is not the children by physical descent who are God’s children, but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham’s offspring. (NIV)
Romans 9:6-8 really could sound like Paul saying that the church has come in and become “Israel”. Even though they may be Gentiles and not Jewish by blood. However, the broader context here demonstrates Paul’s love for Israel, even though Israel has by and large remained unrepentant and has rejected Christ. In earlier verses (3-5) Paul makes note of the benefits of having received the covenant, the law, having the patriarchs, etc. Paul’s clear that it is of great benefit to be a Jew. So why would he suddenly say, “but the nation of Israel has been replaced by the Church, so there’s no real reason to be proud of your Jewish heritage.” Talk about contradicting yourself!
Here Paul expresses that just being a Jew does not make one saved. And simply being a descendant of Israel or Abraham does not automatically make one an inheritor of all of the promises of God. Paul used the examples of children of Abraham that did not inherit all of God’s promises to Abraham. Ishmael is the best-known son of Abraham that didn’t inherit the promise, but Abraham also had 6 other sons besides him and Isaac. And yet, only Isaac inherited the promises. Going down the line a bit further, Jacob inherited the promises from Isaac while his brother Esau, did not.
Once again, Paul makes no claim that the church replaces Israel. He’s arguing as to why the Law and simply being a Jew isn’t enough to be saved. There’s more to it than that, the Jews need Jesus just as much as the Gentiles.
Philippians 3:3
For it is we who are the circumcision, we who serve God by his Spirit, who boast in Christ Jesus, and who put no confidence in the flesh (NIV)
Again, people misconstrue and twist this passage to make the claim that the Church replaced Israel. After all, the “we” refers to Christians. And these would have been Gentile Christians to boot. Then of course you have the statement of being “the circumcision”. And since circumcision was the physical sign of being a Jew – of being one of God’s people – it could certainly sound like Paul’s making the argument that the Jews are no longer God’s people. In this passage, Paul is merely saying that the believers fulfill the spiritual meaning of circumcision. We don’t need to be physically circumcised to serve God and be counted among His people. By accepting Christ, we become spiritually circumcised.
Furthermore, this passage comes immediately after Paul gives a warning about “evildoers, those mutilators of the flesh”. Paul is addressing a group of Jewish believers spreading the false teaching that Gentiles had to be circumcised in order to be saved – in addition to believing in Jesus. Hence why Paul explains that true circumcision – in regard to serving and pleasing God – comes from Holy Spirit circumcising the heart.
Galatians 6:15-16
Neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything; what counts is the new creation. Peace and mercy to all who follow this rule – to the Israel of God. (NIV)
Proponents twist the phrase “the Israel of God” to make the claim that it’s referring to the Church. Now Paul did use “Israel” in a bit of a broader sense here, but he’s still not saying that the Church replaced Israel. The passage here says much the same as the passages from Romans. Being a Jew, being circumcised doesn’t make one saved or an automatic inheritor of the promises of God. What matters is accepting Jesus as Lord and being made into a new creation. Paul addresses this more than anything else (at least it certainly seems that way!) throughout his many letters.
After all this, I now turn my focus to defend the Jewish position in the eyes of God by bringing out passages that clearly demonstrate God’s ongoing love and faithfulness toward Israel.
The Defense
Contrary to what proponents claim, God has not rejected Israel. The New Testament declares His support and love all over. I’m only going to give you a few examples.
Romans 3:1-4
What advantage, then, is there in being a Jew, or what value is there in circumcision? Much in every way! First of all, the Jews have been entrusted with the very words of God. What if some were unfaithful? Will their unfaithfulness nullify God’s faithfulness? Not at all! Let God be true and every human being a liar. As it is written: “So that you may be proved right when you speak and prevail when you judge.” (NIV)
Paul points out here that even though some Jews don’t believe God, God’s faithfulness to His people and to the promises He made to their ancestors remains. And we can see this throughout the Old Testament as well. Especially in the book of Judges. The Israelites repeatedly turned their backs on God and He continued to honor His covenant and rescue them when they cried out to Him.
Romans 11:1-2
I ask then: Did God reject his people? By no means! I am an Israelite myself, a descendant of Abraham, from the tribe of Benjamin. God did not reject his people, whom he foreknew. (NIV)
“By no means!”, Paul says, did God reject His people. We find a similar phrase in Romans 11:11 “Again I ask: Did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all!” (NIV). Paul dedicates a lot of Romans to defend the Jewish nation while also showing how the Gentiles fit in God’s Kingdom. And he makes it clear that God has not and will not reject His covenant people.
Old Testament Prophecies
In addition to the New Testament passages, the Old Testament prophets prophesied many things concerning Israel that have not been fulfilled. The borders of Israel as promised by God are much larger than anything Israel controlled in its history. And as you’ll see in the next section, assuming that the Old Testament prophecies and promises can be transferred to the church is inherently dangerous.
The Dangers
Choosing to adhere to Replacement Theology brings with it some inherent dangers. They’re not obvious from the surface, but all it takes is a peek under that surface, a following to the logical conclusion that exposes these. Here’s but a few.
God as Promise Breaker
Replacement Theology misrepresents God as one who breaks His promises. The Bible states that “God is not human, that he should lie, not a human being, that he should change his mind. Does he not speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill?”, Numbers 23:19 (NIV). And logically, if God breaks promises like any man, how can we be confident in our own salvation – which is the whole point of Romans 9-11? The claim that Old Testament promises and prophecies have been transferred to the church makes those promises broken promises.
Anti-Semitism
Replacement Theology led to many anti-Semitic policies and actions within the church, which spills out into the rest of the world. This encourages violence against the Jewish nation. And violence against any human is sinful in God’s sight. And God frowns upon encouraging such violence just as much as actually committing the act.
Revulsion Towards Jesus as Messiah
Replacement Theology brings many Jews to revulsion at the idea of Jesus being their Messiah. The Church is supposed to provoke Israel to jealousy to come back to God and embrace their Messiah (Romans 11:11).
Reduced Understanding
Replacement Theology results in there being a smaller number of Jews coming to faith. Which in turn leads to a lack of people more knowledgeable about the language, culture, Mosaic and rabbinic law and tradition that would greatly benefit the Church.
Mocks Old Testament Promises
Replacement Theology actually makes a mockery of Old Testament promises. You can spiritualize some promises, but not all of them. The land that God gives to Israel is a great example. Genesis and Ezekiel lay out the borders of the promised land (much larger than what Israel has ever actually controlled by the way). So, how does this promise get transferred over to the Church?
Reduced Evangelism Among Jewish People
Replacement Theology birthed an even more dangerous theology: Two Covenant Theology. Two Covenant Theology supposes that the Jews and Christians related to God via two different covenants. You’ve got Judaism for the Jews and Christ for the Gentiles (and any Jew that wants to follow Him). This led to a drop in attempts at evangelizing the Jewish communities across the world. Which is worse than Replacement Theology! At least Replacement Theology encourages reaching Jewish people for Christ. Two Covenant Theology says that Jews already have a right relationship with God and don’t need Jesus at all!
Wrapping Up
Coming to the conclusion, I hope you see that Replacement Theology is not only wrong, but it’s dangerous. And I hope you can see that God loves His chosen people now just as much as He did when He brought them out of Egypt. And God’s plans for them are far from over.