Before you read this, I suggest you read last week's post on Growth of Replacement theology I.
Christians who believed as the Eastern churches did about joining Passover/Resurrection celebration were known as Quartodecimani, which means “the 14ers,” named after the Jewish day of Passover—the 14th of the Jewish month Nisan. (It included the Feast of First Fruits, which began the next day).
Now, after all the persecutions of the Jews last week, we take you to the worst cut of all: the 14ers (Gentiles and Jews) went from being heretics to being excommunicated (a serious charge in those days; it meant you were on your way to hell; and they were serious about God enough to feel some fear). Now keep in mind, all this was supposedly to present a united front by celebrating Resurrection on the same day as the Western churches--which happened to also be a pagan sexual holiday. So this whole kerfuffle was about the Right DAY. People were on their way to hell, allegedly, because they celebrated Resurrection on the "wrong" Day. That excommunication gave other "Christians" an excuse for some serious prejudice, particularly against the Jews, of course. Some countries even threw out the Jews, like Spain did in 1492. Kicking you out of your property--and taking it for themselves, oh yes--and forcing people to go homeless, they should have seen as un-Christian and demonic as you can get. Hopefully, the excommunicated people believed God would have mercy on them for standing up for the real meaning of Passover over against a pagan celebration, and see them righteous.
Finally, I have to mention a rabbit trail. Here is yet another example of church leaders in the Middle Ages who showed their true stripes: The Old Testament had been translated by Jewish scholars from Hebrew to the Septuagint, done in Greek, useful by nearly everybody, since most people in the heart of the (former) Empire spoke Greek. But St. Jerome, a venerated late 4th century Western Church father, felt it necessary to translate it from Hebrew to Latin—a questionable idea, since Latin was a dying language--because he believed that the Septuagint was corrupted by Hebrew scholars, so he rejected the Septuagint. So here is his quote about how he felt about the Jews, so you can see the real reason why he did it. They were, he said:
"…serpents, wearing the image of Judas, their songs and prayers are the braying of donkeys."
For history buffs, the renowned and venerable Augustine didn’t escape the prejudicial bite of the age: he asserted that the Jews "…were deserving of death."
The problem with that bad decision was, for an extra couple hundred years, hardly anyone who could even get ahold of a Bible could read it, where they could have read it in Greek. After the Roman Empire collapsed, even fewer could read the Latin Bible--but it would not have helped if it were available in Greek, either. The early Catholic church did what they successfully did for over a thousand years--kept the Bible away from the common people.
Mr. Matsen points out that all this produces arrogance, and boasting against Jews. The human heart pretends Christianity, but the fruits tell the real story, as Jesus said--and these were a lot of rotten fruit. Many of these people did not make it to heaven.
Getting away from ancient history to the present, Mr. Matsen then points out another serious weakness of the replacement theory: the church becomes “branches without roots.” Let me explain that one. The church, in the theory, can ignore the Old Testament, since it was “just about the Jews,” about the rise and fall of Israel. But I have a problem with throwing out the Old Testament: if you do that, the symbols and prophecies of Jesus in the Old Testament are gone. Not only Passover, but the special meaning of the tabernacle, the religious feasts—the laws God gave them, which make us see sin in our lives, all gone. Many other laws which seem picayune, like Jubilee, actually prevented inflation, tothers suppressed the homeless count, and they instituted restitution as the best way to handle felons. Israel’s faith (or lack of it), and how their nation was punished for sin, and blessed for faith--all were educational. Then there were the great true stories and brave heroes the kids (and adults) love to hear, all are there. And let's not forget the huge number of other prophecies, some which predicted Israel's future, or what kings they would be under in the future, by name (like Cyrus). Making a good explanation of these prophecies can convince a thinking person about the authority of the Bible. It's also possible to evangelize the Jew when you cite all the prophecies about the Messiah coming true in Jesus in the New Testament. If you're good at that, you may help see a Jew saved, a rare phenomenon.
You can’t call all of this irrelevant. Our roots are in the Old Testament. Do we not believe that ALL Scripture is profitable (II Timothy 3:16), even the Old Testament--which happens to be 70% of the Bible? Do we ignore the fact that much of what we know, in Christianity, was rooted in the Old Testament? In God's Bible, He has written us a letter—a really long letter—answering questions we have all had throughout the centuries: Why are we here? How did we get here? Is there a God? Is He personal to each person? Does He judge? Many of these basic questions are answered in Genesis in the Old Testament. What are His expectations of us, if any? IF we see how God treated Israel when they were bad, and when they were good, we can know how He will treat us. God has the same judgmental principles in the Old and New Testaments.
Let me dwell on that last sentence. Many people get anxious reading the Old Testament because they assume God is a harsh Judge, eager to shed blood in wars and sacrifice. They prefer the loving, easy-going Jesus they picture in the New Testament (a false image; some of that is what their own mind wants, some from their pastors' sweet sermons). Replacement theology, by ignoring the Old Testament, may lead you into a one-sided view of God, the false "easy-going" Jesus. On that line of thinking I have an anxious thought for them: God and Jesus were often the opposite of what you assume--God is loving and compassionate many places in Scripture, especially in the Old Testament, and Jesus exercised harsh judgments in the New. But that was to the Pharisees, which none of us are, right? Don't also forget: Jesus talked more about hell than anybody. Unlike you pastor, if he is as non-confrontative as most.
The Replacement theory has yet another weakness, which will need explanation: It requires that many verses, not just end times verses, be called “allegories:" I.e., having a spiritual application only, and not to be taken literally. Allegories are stories that have hidden spiritual meanings, but you are to follow just the kernel of moral truth it is teaching. For instance, Bunyan’s fictional novel Pilgrim’s Progress is an allegory about the path to salvation. It is not literal: There wasn’t a real guy named “Christian” taking a journey with a heavy bag. In thinking of moral “kernels,” you should be noticing that the bag he lugs around represents his sin. You would also notice that his path to Christianity is in view, and that it is a journey, not a one-time confession.
But I don’t recommend the allegorical line of thinking when it comes to God’s Word. You must read it literally to get all of God’s truth. The Red Sea really did open to free the Jews from Egypt. Jesus really did have a body, really did die, really did rise again. There really were giants in the land of Canaan. Allegorizing often has the expressed purpose of removing the supernatural. Anyway, let’s look at a few verses for examples. In Joel 3:1-5:
“For behold, in those days and at that time, when I restore the fortunes of Judah and Jerusalem, I will gather all the nations and bring them down to the Valley of Jehoshaphat. And I will enter into judgment with them there, on behalf of my people and my heritage Israel, because they (ed. evil nations) have scattered them among the nations and have divided up my land, and have cast lots for my people, and have traded a boy for a prostitute, and have sold a girl for wine and have drunk it. “What are you to me, O Tyre and Sidon, and all the regions of Philistia? Are you paying me back for something? If you are paying me back, I will return your payment on your own head swiftly and speedily. For you have taken my silver and my gold, and have carried my rich treasures into your temples. ...
If we literally interpret the verses, as we should, they say that all the nations that persecuted the nation of Israel will be judged. They "scattered” the Jews, by repeatedly conquering the Jewish land, then exiling or decimating them, and introduced corrupted practices into Israel (“traded a boy for a prostitute…sold a girl for wine…”) God will judge the Gentile oppressors of Jews—like Tyre, Sidon, or Philistia, and God will restore wealth to the literal nation of Israel.
If the passage is interpreted by Replacement theoreticians as an allegory, then we ignore reference to Jewish land, “Judah” or “Jerusalem,” and focus on how Christians, not Jews, have been persecuted, and how God will destroy non-Christian people for what they’ve done. As you can see, you have to ignore what was literally written and look for the "hidden" meaning. I might add, the tendency is to look for your own hidden meaning. This gets into the realm of "your truth may not be my truth," or other such nonsense, and denying the Bible as a source of absolute truth.
Another bad result from wandering off the literal meaning, is that it wanders off into strange places. In a theory fractured off from replacement theory called “British Israelism,” England (and perhaps several countries in Europe) is really the lost 10 tribes of Israel. So today the Queen of England is sitting on the throne of David. So that conveniently means the throne of David has gone on, with her, so it really is perpetual, as God “promised.” (I’ve talked In other blogs about bad results from wandering off the literal meaning).
One other bad result of the belief in replacement theology is that it could weaken the belief in the Millennium. If we take Revelation chapter 20 literally, the Millennium is an actual thousand years and Jesus is king on earth. The Bible says we start out that time with no wicked people, just righteous people. Jesus is a real person, and on the throne of David, in Jerusalem. But there are a massive number of saved Gentiles, and a surprisingly large number of saved Jews. According to Revelation 19 and Romans 11:26, their Jewish eyes were opened to see Jesus as the Messiah. He sets up righteous economic and criminal and civil policies. The most mature righteous people are judges. This isn’t heaven, because we still have a sin nature, but we are in godliness following Jesus. Despite this perfection of the system of justice, of the economy; etc, some people (probably the children of the original group) will still be tempted by Satan at the end, and want to rebel against Jesus, so the Scripture says. They get their day (or their hour) right after Satan is freed at the end of the thousand years, and he stirs them up to a final battle with Christ. Then there is final judgment, and then heaven and hell--permanently.
On the other hand, most replacement theology buffs are amillennialists, who don't believe the thousand years is future. They disagree on details, but many say that the millennium began with the resurrection of Jesus and will last until the second coming. During this time (now over 2000 years, which is not a millennium), living and deceased believers reign spiritually with Christ, Who is in heaven. This is spiritual, not physical. Those dead Christians are souls only, awaiting their physical resurrection and the renewal of all things. See how mystical all this is getting? In amillennialism, Jesus does not get a throne in a physical Jerusalem, despite what Scripture says. Their view of the thousand years has wandered seriously far from the literal meaning.
Here is where I stand: I seriously believe the Replacements want to blow away a future Millennium because of another false theory that is very popular today that they've swallowed: the Pre-Tribulation Rapture. (I have blogs elsewhere against this). It goes like this: Supposedly all the saved people are raptured before the tribulation and, before the Millennium. So most Gentiles are gone. Those who were saved during the tribulation will be the only ones around for the Millennium. Because of Romans 11:26, there will be a revival among Jews whose eyes will be opened, so lots of Jews will be around for the Millennium, but not so many Gentiles. The Replacement theorists, I'm thinking, do not like the result: a Millennium ruled by Jews, under God-sanctioned Jewish laws and sacrifice. (The assumption of Jews regaining sacrifices with God's permission is baloney. Christ was a complete sacrifice; Scripture is clear on that). To me, this majority-Jew idea in the Millennium makes the Replacements disavow a future Millennium. So, in the end, the Replacement theorists don't accept the proper reading of Revelation 20 because they have swallowed a false belief about pre-tribulation rapture. It goes to show you. Just like one lie begets another, one false belief begets another. Oh, if people could only approach the Bible with "a blank slate," without prejudice. Because of this wandering from the literal, and this alone, I cannot abide with the replacement theology. It’s dangerous to wander from the literal meaning, and you can see the strange results above.
But believing literally, instead, we also believe that God will indeed save the souls of all the living Jews at the end of the tribulation. How? First, you need to know that only a small minority of the Jews are still alive--Satan, through the antichrist, has done his job effectively. The few Jews living at the tail end of the tribulation, will have something special and miraculous happen to open their eyes that they will repent and cry for mercy from Jesus their Messiah. It will amaze the whole world. In Christ’s days, the Jews warped God’s laws, they helped to kill Jesus; today they are secular agnostics. Can God turn these people around, even if so many rejected Him in all of history? Well, God saved the Ninevites, the worst of pagans; yet at another time, He did the opposite and killed everyone on earth except Noah's family. He's capable of doing anything, and capable of doing the unexpected. We can’t play judge on God's motives; we need to just focus on loving our Lord and recognizing and eliminating our own sin.
Are there more Scriptural rebuttals to replacement theology? Yes, for instance, God promised material things--land, and throne, to the Jews, and He uses the word FOREVER. So it says in Genesis 12, 13,15, 17, and 28. But when you consider context, those "forevers" have a condition attached that God explains more clearly elsewhere (such as Deuteronomy 7)--namely, they must, in their kings and in judges, and in the majority of their hearts, follow God and His laws, and deny idolatry. The Jews never attained the entire land God promised, because they failed to follow His instruction to kill all Canaanites. They let some of them hang around, and they became a temptation, because their religious festivals and idols were more sexy and attractive. By not obeying "kill everybody," they fell into idolatry.
So is there proof that the word “forever” cannot mean “for sure, no matter what you do?” After all, the Jews had a serious interruption in forever for the land; they had no land and no throne for almost 2000 years. Here is Genesis 13:14-15:
And the Lord said to Abram, after Lot had separated from him: “Lift your eyes now and look from the place where you are—northward, southward, eastward, and westward; 15 for all the land which you see I give to you and your descendants forever.
Note that Abram, or Abraham did not get any of these promises, but his descendants would, at some future time, get them. But wait, they lost it, but after that, yes, they regained it—so only some Jews got this blessing, but none when there was an interruption (like for 400 years when they were slaves in Egypt). When you read the Old Testament, you read how the land and throne got taken away because of their sin. So, that condition is the parameter of God’s promise to Abram. Thus, the covenant is not an “unconditional” promise for all Jews. If they became idolaters, He took away the blessing and suspended the covenant. I have to add that simply because Abram was asleep and God was alone when He made the covenant, did not automatically make it unconditional, as some speculate. God can impose a conditional covenant. The facts of history put the lie to unconditionality on this. God had a greater plan--He will complete His "forever" promise by giving them the land in the Millennium.
That does not make me a cynic about God “playing” with the word ‘forever.’ I stress this above all the rabbit holes I have gone down in this paper; the covenant, to the extent partially filled thus far, will have a final fulfillment for the nation Israel in the future. Some physical Jews will have a Millennium, a Jerusalem with all the blessings of peace and Jesus on the throne. (But not animal sacrifices). God will bless His chosen people (Jews who were obedient and saved) again when Christ comes a second time, and brings in a Millennium. And Christ gets a future throne. As far as land, the Jews got a partial promise in 1948. God will, in the end, add to it to the wide boundaries promised in Genesis; a land much larger than they have ever possessed.
So “forever” doesn’t mean what some people think. I can’t resist bringing up Deuteronomy 31. In verse 6, Moses (note that) says to the people of Israel:
Be strong and of good courage, do not fear nor be afraid of them; for the Lord your God, He is the One who goes with you. He will not leave you nor forsake you.”
Sounds pretty unconditional, right? But only 11 verses later, God says to Moses:
“Behold, you will rest with your fathers; and this people will rise and play the harlot with the gods of the foreigners of the land, where they go to be among them, and they will forsake Me and break My covenant which I have made with them. 17 Then My anger shall be aroused against them in that day, and I will forsake them, and I will hide My face from them, and they shall be devoured….. 18 And I will surely hide My face in that day because of all the evil which they have done, in that they have turned to other gods.
Moses is quoted as saying God would not leave nor forsake them. (How many modern pastors quote this, and ignore the context?) He didn’t proclaim God’s condition: When they turned evil, He did forsake them. This just points out, more forcefully, that God will be with us, too, under a condition: as long as we are actively pursuing faithful works (fruits of the Spirit), and are pursuing a relationship of love and obedience with Him. Many, many New Testament verses say this. God can cut us off. (see other blogs, and see John 15:1-6).
I must add that the word “everlasting” before words like possession and covenant must also be carefully handled. Let’s look at Genesis 17:7-8:
And I will establish My covenant between Me and you and your descendants after you in their generations, for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and your descendants after you. 8 Also I give to you and your descendants after you the land in which you are a stranger, all the land of Canaan, as an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.”
We need to think of “everlasting” like we relearned “forever.” The everlasting possession was always there; but possession of it depends on their being attached to it. He is a jealous God. The condition was, the Jews had to agree to make God their God too. If they forsook that, God will be free to temporarily forsake them.
Here’s some cherished verses I would like to end with. From Ezekiel 36:22-28:
“Therefore say to the house of Israel, ‘Thus says the Lord God: “I do not do this for your sake, O house of Israel, but for My holy name’s sake, which you have profaned among the nations wherever you went….and the nations shall know that I am the Lord,” says the Lord God, “when I am hallowed in y
ou before their eyes. 24 For I will take you from among the nations, gather you out of all countries, and bring you into your own land. 25 Then I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean; I will cleanse you from all your filthiness and from all your idols. 26 I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. 27 I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will keep My judgments and do them. 28 Then you shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers; you shall be My people, and I will be your God.
Praise our Mighty God.
No comments:
Post a Comment