Middle Eastern Catholic bishops are slamming Israel over “Israel’s right to return.” According to the Middle Eastern bishops, Israel has no right to return because Christ abolished the promises to Israel. Those who take this belief make God a liar.
God made a promise to Abraham in Genesis. God made promises of land, nation, blessing, and a blessing on those who bless Israel, but a curse on those who treat them lightly. God sealed His covenant with Abraham while Abraham was asleep. Abraham did not have to do anything for that promise to be in effect. According to 1 Chronicles 16:13-17 this covenant is an everlasting covenant. Christ’s coming could not alter that promise.
The Mosaic Covenant was a separate covenant between God and His people, the Israelites. Under this covenant, the people did have requirements for Israel. It was a conditional covenant. It was not the same as the covenant to Abraham. The Mosaic Covenant showed that we are not able to live to God’s standard, and that we need a savior to take away the sin of the world. Jesus did just that as He fulfilled the Law (Mosaic Covenant).
If Christians take the stand that God has broken His promise to Abraham (Isaac, and Jacob), they are changing the character and words of God. They are usurping God’s place just as Satan did in the garden when he changed and twisted God’s words. King Saul did the same when God commanded that he destroy the Amalekites and all their livestock. He kept some of the livestock and allowed King Agag to live. Samuel came and Saul claimed that he had done fulfilled the word of God. He had not. He only did part of what God said. He was twisting the word of God. He was following himself (and ultimately Satan). He had no remorse for what he had done. He felt he was alright. Parts of the church do just that when they buy into Replacement Theology.
In Romans chapter 11, Paul discusses whether God has replaced Israel. He asks that very question, but he answers himself saying that God has not. He uses Elijah’s words. Elijah accused Israel. God claimed that He had left a faithful remnant. God at times purged Israel, but He always left a remnant. God cannot undo what He has promised.
Paul goes further. He states that Israel has undergone a hardening until the time of the Gentiles is fulfilled, at which time “all Israel” will be saved. Many try to explain what the term “all” means. I cannot answer that will full confidence. I know what the term “all” means. My belief is that this refers to Zechariah’s vision of Christ’s return when Israel sees Him and weeps. At that time they all confess that He is the Messiah. I believe this is the national salvation of Israel, which in my premillennial, pretribulation belief, comes after the time of the Gentiles is fulfilled.
That term “all” is a stumbling block for anyone who believes in Replacement Theology. I have gotten to know several people, including ministers who believe this. I recall sitting in a service once when the minister quoted 1 Timothy 2:5,6 saying, “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.” He stressed the word all. He said, “All means all.” I leaned to my wife and said, “He means all means all except for that little part where Paul said all Israel.” She just told me to shut up. She doesn’t always quite appreciate my brand of cynicism. My feeling is that people who this erroneous belief can believe just about anything.
It also seems with those who buy into Replacement Theology, that they have no problem worshipping a Messiah who does not meet the qualifications of being the Messiah. Christ did not meet all the qualifications for being Messiah. That is why Israel does not believe on Him today. Christ did not bring world peace. Christ did not rebuild the Jewish Temple. Christ also did not regather the Jews to Israel. The time of the Gentiles that Paul referred to is now. The curse of Isaiah 6 (Israel would be blind and deaf) is in effect. They do not understand the Second Coming will be when He ultimately fulfills this. Once the time of the Gentiles is up, that blindness begins to be lifted.
Ultimately, Christians who subscribe to this teaching are doing so even when Scripture does not support it. That is no problem, however, as they have a way of fixing that. It is called allegory. No, this has nothing to do with a former vice president, though that was always my answer in my 8th grade English class when my teacher would ask what allegory was. Allegorical interpretation is a way of not letting facts standing in the way of your beliefs. Mark Twain said, “Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please.” In essence, that is what happens with those who believe in Replacement Theology.
The major problem with allegorizing scripture, is the question of what should be spiritualized and what should be literal. I know of a pastor who is generally considered to be a fundamentalist, but who openly questioned the veracity of Adam and Eve, Jonah, and rules laid down for church leadership. All this is able to be done through the spirtualizing of Scripture. It may not be important, but these stories are important to central Christian beliefs. If Adam and Eve were not real, what about their descendants? If you give credibility to those who discount a real Adam and Eve, what about those who discount a real King David? If David were not real, Christ is an imposter and Christianity is a farce. If Jonah were not real, Christ is a cunning deceiver because He portrayed Jonah as real. If God’s laws for the Church leadership are not standing, then what makes his laws for believers? This would mean the vilest sinner is qualified to be a pastor. Many use this line of interpretation of discounting Hell. What about that?
The truth is, apostasy and unbelief have a hold on the Church. Christians are not perfect. They make mistakes. Sometimes we find ourselves in deep in mistakes. These things become cyclical. That is apparent in replacement theology. Since Israel cannot be in God’s will, you must write them out. They can never be in God’s will. (Oops! What does that mean in the context of Romans 11 where Paul states that for our boasting, God can easily take those branches that he had broken out of the natural tree and graft them back in while breaking off those who had been grafted in previously?) So, in order to write Israel out, you must do something about those pesky verses that get in the way. Premillennialism is built on the idea that Israel is distinct from the church. Got to get rid of that. In order to do that, you cannot take the Bible literally, except when you want to. That means you have to allegorize.
Now, you may be asking yourself if I am saying that those who hold these beliefs won’t end up in heaven. I am not. That is not for me to judge. Those who come to Jesus and claim the blood and follow Him are saved. Christians are not perfect. We have our faults. It just so happens that this fault is directly responsible for the black eyes Christianity have suffered over the past two millennia. You may have read about the Crusades. That little episode is (or should I say episodes are) rooted in replacement theology. The Crusaders not only fought against the Muslims, but they also fought against those “Christ-killers,” the Jews. Well, not only them, but Christians who were living in Constantinople, but that is a different story. During the Inquisition, you had much of the same thing because of Replacement Theology. Just over 65 years ago we had this guy that was putting Jews in ovens and mass murdering Jews over the same. Replacement Theology is dangerous. You must combat it where it is. Do not support it.
I have heard it said that your eschatology does not matter. I guess in the grand scheme of salvation, that may be true. As long as you come to Jesus through the blood, I will consider you a brother. Eschatology does matter though. It defines your interpretation of scripture. On one end, you have an interpretation of scripture that does not alter one’s ability to obtain salvation. On the other end, interpretation gets so out of whack that the salvation experience is either not there or is something opposite what the Bible teaches.
I have found that my method of interpreting Scripture (in a possibly oversimplified description) is to view it as literal unless the Bible says it isn’t, or it is impossible to interpret it literally. That may be oversimplified, but it is my general method, though I do understand the Bible uses dual meanings at times. That is to say that there may be a literal interpretation and a more spiritual application to draw. I just find it difficult to find a spiritual application that destroys the literal application.
