I found this critique of Anti-Supercessionism helpful. Here are some good points:
"But Soulen is arguing that blood descent from Abraham was the backbone of the covenantal arrangements with Israel, and this point is simply false. Right from the beginning, the covenant embraced many who were not in anyway related to Abraham by blood. All the male members of Abraham's household were circumcised (Genesis 17:12-14), and in a household that included 318 men of fighting age (Genesis 14:14), this must have been a sizable number of men - far more than the blood descendants of Abraham, which at the time included only Ishmael!"
"When Israel came from Egypt, they came out as a 'mixed multitude' (Exodus 12:38), including thousands of Egyptians who did not want to hang around Egypt after it had been nearly destroyed by plagues. It was never the case that 'the family identity of the Jewish people as the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob' was the foundation of the faith of Israel."
"Within the covenant, those who are not blood descendants of Abraham have always outnumbered those who are."
I think this hits at the fundamental error in Dispensationalism, mistaking the Abrahamic Covenant as an ethnic covenant, rather than a spiritual covenant.
Someone recently asked me what I thought of Supercessionism as a label. There certainly are and have been Supercessionists within the church. That is, there are Christians who believe that the church replaces Israel.
However, "Supercessionism" or "Replacement Theology" is often applied to anyone who is not a Dispensationalist. There are other options besides Dispensationalism and Supercessionism.
Just to clarify my view, the church doesn't replace Israel. The church is Israel. They are different labels for the same group of people.
I'm sure that Mike Vlach will still label me a Supercessionist of sorts (perhaps a Practical Supercessionist?). Whatever.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
How do you deal with the land promise to Abraham then?
I know your type of thinking led to the crusades as it is a logical extension of this way of thinking, but how do you handle it personally. I think the reality of the crusades and their absolute failure sort of killed your view a long time ago.
Folken Family, you can read my post from a few years ago regarding the land: http://dispensationalist.blogspot.com/2007/09/jesus-and-nation-of-israel.html
I have no idea what you mean by linking the crusades with Anti-Supercessionism. Perhaps you could clarify?
You stated, 'the land promised to Israel has been universalized into the earth.'
Once again, in order to avoid yet another problem with your theology, you create an unbiblical scenario..
When I studied under the covenant guys, it didn't take me long to reject there way of thinking simply because it is unbiblical. The solution has to be given by the text; however, you are just as creative as the rest of them in trying to solve all the problems by simply connecting unconnected things.
The crusades were started in order to reclaim the land that belonged to Isreal. The Catholic church was Israel so the land belonged to them and not the Jews.
God said it was an everlasting possession; however, you nullify the word of God in order to fit your optimistic theology.
ZDENNY, God's people will possess the land forever, just as he promised. God does not lie and his promises are never nullified. If you have time, read my series of posts from June-October of 2007.
You do not argue this. You argue that the land promised to Israel is no longer valid because it now includes all the land.
Your argument is not found in the text of Scripture anywhere. You just made it up...again.
I am really coming to believe that the correct conclusion is dispensationlism. At least a person can be honest with the text and understand it in context.
All through the O.T., the nation of Israel lost the land when they fell into sin and gained the land when they repented. We just went through another cycle here in the 1940's when they regained the land.
Your view is the very heart of anti-antisemitism in my opinion that led to the crusades and the very view that is attempting to remove the nation of Israel from the land promised to them.
That land was never promises to them in your opinion.
ZDENNY, antisemitism? Shirley, you can't be serious?
Post a Comment