Home > Eschatology > Replacement Theology

Replacement Theology

There are multitudes of Christians within American evangelicalism today that lay the clear charge of ‘replacement theology’ against those who interpret the Old Testament with the New. Among such persons are men like John MacArthur who has come out with his own study Bible, after many years of ministry. What baffles me is the fact that men like MacArthur clearly understand what ‘replacement theology’ teaches, but nevertheless will still lay this charge against Reformed Theologians who teach no such thing.

I know that there are many dispensationalists who have spent their whole life writing against ‘replacement theology,’ but who clearly have misrepresented the Reformed position on the word of God. Now don’t get me wrong, scholars need to reject ‘replacement theology;’ nevertheless I cannot see spending one’s whole life writing against it. I am sure that there are some who hold to the erroneous position known as ‘replacement theology,’ yet I do not know of any. Therefore I believe that the reason this term is used against covenant theology is not so much an ignorance of what covenant theology teaches, but instead is used to discredit covenant theology and build prejudices against it. In my analogy of the situation, I just see it as a strawman argument against what covenant theology believes and represents.

Reformed Theology does not teach ‘replacement theology.’ Reformed theologians teach what is known as ‘expansion theology’ or ‘unity theology.’ Allow me to define both for clarification.

‘Expansion theology’ basically states that God, while initiating his new covenant towards Israel in the person and work of Jesus Christ, is also expanding the house of Israel unto the uttermost parts of the earth, by bringing Gentiles into the fold. This view is clearly taught throughout the Old and New Testament. Most dispensationalists will state that the mystery hid throughout the ages was that God would start a church during which time he would quit dealing with Israel and deal primarily with the Gentiles. But does scripture teach that? or Does scripture teach that the mystery that was hid throughout the ages, but is now revealed, was that God would make the Gentiles fellow heirs and partakers of the same body of Israelites? Let’s examine the scripture where the great mystery was explained by Paul:

 

Eph 3:4-6 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ) Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit; That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel:

 

How dispensationalists get two separate plans out of verse six is beyond me. There are not two separate plans, one for Israel, and another for the Church. Let’s examine several more scriptures to prove this:

 

Eph 2:11-19 Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands; That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world: But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby: And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh. For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father. Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints, and of the household of God;

 

Paul is plain in these verses that Gentiles were at one time alienated from the citizenship of Israel, from the covenants, and from Christ. But now God is taking two peoples, Jews and Gentiles, and making one body of people out of them. Is this not what Christ declared in “John 10:16 and other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.” Did you get what Christ is saying? Jesus declared that he had sheep that were not of the fold of Israel, namely the Gentiles, which he would bring in and there would be one fold and one Shepherd.

We could also move to Romans 11 whereby Paul uses the metaphor of a tree when he speaks of Israel. Here Paul is plain that the Gentiles are being engrafted into the root of that tree.

The term ‘unity theology’ plainly states that there is unity in God’s plan of redemption. Men have always been saved by faith all the way back to Abel. There is unity in the Old and New Testaments and unity in God’s covenant dealings with man. God in the Old Testament had a people for his name and in the New Testament God is expanding that people.

It is clear that those of the dispensational stripe do not know the word of God, for if they did you would not hear them making the claims that all of modern Israel is God’s chosen people. Paul declared in Romans 9:6-7 “that they are not all of Israel who are of Israel…..Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children.”

John MacArthur at his 2007 Shepherd’s Conference, in his rant against the Reformed position concerning Israel and the Church, declared that if we believe in election, then certainly God is going to save all of Israel. Yet this is precisely why we should not believe in the salvation of every single Jew, because we understand that election is centered in God’s good pleasures and not in being born of natural descent from a certain person Ephesians 1:4-5.

Under the Old Testament administration of the people of God, God commanded that every Israelite that would not keep his commands should be cut off. So it is clear that the promises, even under the Old Covenant of Moses were only to the faithful. Can we find evidence in scripture that plainly states that God has cut off natural Israel and is engrafting Gentiles into Israel in order to fulfill the Abrahamic promise of a seed as numerous as the stars? Absolutely. Let’s examine some scripture from Hosea:

 

Hos 1:6-9 And she conceived again, and bare a daughter. And God said unto him, Call her name Loruhamah: for I will no more have mercy upon the house of Israel; but I will utterly take them away.

But I will have mercy upon the house of Judah, and will save them by the LORD their God, and will not save them by bow, nor by sword, nor by battle, by horses, nor by horsemen. Now when she had weaned Loruhamah, she conceived, and bare a son. Then said God, Call his name Loammi: for ye are not my people, and I will not be your God.

 

Listen to what God states here. God plainly declares that natural Israel is no longer his people. God cuts off all the unbelievers because Israel failed to weed them out. So God cuts them off himself. Can we find this type language in the New Testament? Absolutely. Jesus stated in Mat 21:42-43:

 

Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord’s doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes? Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.

 

Notice that natural Israel is again in the context of those of whom shall be cut off. The nation that the kingdom of God was given to is the Church 1 Peter 2:9.

So Hosea is told that natural, unbelieving Israel is cut off, nevertheless the faithful in Israel was still part of Israel according to Paul in Romans 9, whereby he declared: that they are not all of Israel who are of Israel…..Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children, but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, they which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.

But if God cuts off unbelieving Israel, then how could Israel be as the sand of the sea without number? God plainly declares to Hosea that he will engraft foreigners into Israel. Let’s read Hosea 1:9-10:

 

Then said God, Call his name Loammi: for ye are not my people, and I will not be your God. Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God.

 

God tells Hosea that natural Israel shall be cut off, but God will still keep the promises to Abraham of being blessed with a people that is numerous as the sand of the sea, because God is going to bring the Gentiles into the nation of Israel. Paul quotes this portion of Hosea in Romans 9:25-26 while discussing who true Israel consists of. Remember Paul declared that natural Israel is not the true seed of Abraham, but only spiritual Israel or called out Israelites Romans 9:6-7. Paul is showing the Romans that the word of God is not ineffective just because every single Jew isn’t saved. Paul goes on in Romans 9 and shows that Isaac was chosen and not Ishmael. Jacob was chosen and not Esau. So it is not of him that willeth or of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy. Therefore God shows his wrath in vessels fitted for destruction that he might show his glory on those for whom he beforehand prepared to glory, of all that are called of Jews and Gentiles.

 

Rom 9:22-26 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory, Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles? As he saith also in Osee, I will call them my people, which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved. And it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people; there shall they be called the children of the living God.

 

So God declared to Hosea that natural Israel would be cut off and Gentiles would be grafted in. This is the exact language that Paul uses in Romans 11 when he discusses the cutting off of branches on a tree. Paul also declares in Romans 11 that only elect Israel receives God’s grace and the rest are blinded. Romans 11:5-7

 

Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace. And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work. What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded.

 

When Dispensationalists get to Romans 11:26 they cannot understand it because they are not interpreting scripture with scripture. Dispensationalists believe that in the end of this age that there will be a move by God in which he will elect every single Israelite into spiritual Israel. Yet we have already seen that there is a remnant that is being saved and the rest are blinded. Also right after Paul quotes Hosea in Romans 9, in order to prove that God is saving Gentiles as part of his people, then he quotes Isaiah and shows that God is only going to save a remnant of those who come from Abraham’s natural seed.

 

Rom 9:27 Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved:

 

I challenge all my dispensational friends to read the Bible with eyes of understanding and to interpret scripture with scripture. Though there is a modern nation called Israel, nevertheless they reject Jesus as their Messiah and therefore they are not the children of Abraham. Gentiles who believe in Jesus are the true children of Abraham. Also even to this present time there are naturally descended Jews that are being saved. Paul declared in Romans 11:5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace. So every naturally descended Jew that comes to faith becomes part of the church.

I have shown that God has one plan. I have shown that Gentiles are fellow heirs and of the same body as the remnant of Israelites that are being saved. So if dispensationalists want to declare that Israel and the Church are two separate entities, then they do it against God’s very words. If dispensationalists want to declare that believing Jews will inherit the land while believing Gentiles inherit heaven, then they present a false dichotomy that is not present in the scriptures.

  1. March 18, 2013 at 7:17 am

    Reblogged this on My Delight and My Counsellors.

  2. March 18, 2013 at 8:25 am

    Well said, brother.

    • March 18, 2013 at 8:57 am

      Thanks brother. I hope you and your family are doing well. God bless.

  3. March 18, 2013 at 11:01 am

    “I am sure that there are some who hold to the erroneous position known as ‘replacement theology,’ yet I do not know of any.”

    It’s so woven into Christianity’s curriculum, one can hardly escape it once aware of it.

    “Yet this is precisely why we should not believe in the salvation of every single Jew, because we understand that election is centered in God’s good pleasures and not in being born of natural descent …”

    Perhaps, since the Jews have suffered on such a grand scale at the hands of Christians and their theology of replacement, we should not worry so much about their ultimate “salvation” and focus more on working out our own, with fear and trembling…?

    God is not a liar. He will bring them back and redeem them. We should humble ourselves and then repent for all the ghastly atrocities that have been visited upon the Jews, not by God, but by Christians.

    • March 18, 2013 at 11:56 am

      I am sorry that Jews have suffered on a large scale. God plainly declared that they would suffer if they broke covenant.

      • March 18, 2013 at 12:21 pm

        Yes he did say that, and he also promises doom for the nations and people who partake in attempting to destroy them!

        He didn’t ask for Christians, who by his mercy were drawn near to something they never had access to before, to “help” him by murdering any of them. Rather we are to love. And Paul says clearly they are to receive MERCY from us. (Rom 11)

        Christianity has never been assigned the task of paying back the Jews for the fact that the illegitimate Jewish leadership in the 1st century rejected him. It was, after all, a divine appointment that he willingly kept and thousands upon thousands of Jews accepted him.

      • March 18, 2013 at 1:47 pm

        Again, you will never find anything in my article that suggest that anyone should persecute Jews or anyone else for that matter.

        As for God declaring that he would punish those who come against Israel: Again you mistake who Israel or the true seed of Abraham is. Gal. 3:16 declared that the Abrahamic promises are given to ‘seed’ singular and that seed is Christ. Paul goes on to state that all that have faith in Christ are the children of Abraham Galatians 3:29.

      • March 18, 2013 at 2:05 pm

        I would kindly suggest that you re-think your second paragraph since Paul is pointing out that we non-Jewish followers of God are brought in due to the faith of Abraham, prior to being used to create the Jewish people. That doesn’t nullify the covenants God made with the Jews.

      • March 18, 2013 at 2:22 pm

        Why would I rethink that paragraph? I believe that scripture has unity. I believe that there was an eternal plan.

        We see creation Gen 1-2
        The fall Gen 3
        Cains descendants Gen 4
        Seths descendants Gen 5
        Intermarriage between the two Gen 6

        The calling out of Noah and the destruction of all mankind Gen 6-9.

        The tower of Babel Gen 11.

        Well you get the picture. God scatters the nations and calls Abraham out to bring the Messiah through, in order to save men from all nations.

      • March 18, 2013 at 2:27 pm

        In other words the salvation of Gentiles was not an after thought in God’s mind. The names of the saved were written in the Book of Life from the foundation of the world Rev 13:8; 17:8.

        The Ephesians were chosen from the foundations of the world Ephesians 1:1-3.

      • March 18, 2013 at 2:30 pm

        Ahh, ok, I see what you’re saying now.

        I have a different paradigm for sure though. I think it’s impossible to write Israel our of their own story while maintaining the stance that God is faithful and all knowing and that the Bible is his Word. He declares his abiding love to physical Israel i.e., the Jewish people over and over again. Ez 34, 35, 36 and Jer 33, 31, and these are but a small sampling, but I’m trying to respect your wishes about quoting scripture without going against my conviction against cherry-picking verses.

      • March 18, 2013 at 3:06 pm

        Again, I have written Israel out. Paul plainly declares that the promises of God were not ineffective because they are not saving every Israelite. But that the promises were always to the elect or those that are called both Jews and Gentiles Romans 9:6-7. Romans 9:24 “Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles.

        If anyone comes to Christ, then they must be called. This is election. When joined to Christ there is neither Jew nor Greek, bond nor free, male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Galatians 3:28 and if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed and heirs according to the promise Galatians 3:29.

        In other words, if we are joined to Christ: Jew or Gentile, bond or free, male or female: then we are Christians.

      • March 18, 2013 at 2:58 pm

        You see your arguing in order of time, the Gentiles would be brought through the father of the faithful; namely Abraham.

        I am arguing ‘design and purpose.’ Abraham was promised to be the father of many nations and all nations would be blessed through him.

      • Mimi
        March 3, 2014 at 8:57 am

        My family left Spain in the mid 1700s and settled in Central America where the family lit their Sabbath candles,practiced their Jewish traditions under cover while pretending to be Roman Catholic. Jews were not persecuted by true Christians but by false deceivers pretending to be Christians.God has grafted the wild fig into the domestic fig to make one new tree/one new man. The Bible is clear on this point. Ironically, I, whose maiden name means where the fig tree grows-a reference to Israel-was introduced to Jesus by another Jew. There are many Jews scattered across America, Mexico, Central and South America , Scotland and the rest of the world who ignorant of their Jewish roots will be gathered along with their true brothers in Christ-all who have put their trust in Jesus Christ and resettled in Zion.(Don’t tell the fawning John Hagee who out of ignorance, fear or whatever motive refuses to witness to Israel) You cannot have eternal life without Jesus the Way, the Truth and the Life-the author of life. It is all about The cornerstone that holds the building Jew and Gentile together-one new man! Oh and by the way, we true Christians will be persecuted by those false, deluded ”brethren” who will be ”cleaning house ” as a favor to God. This happened during the martyrdom, inquisition, holocaust etc. But regardless, we run the race to gain the crown of life given to those who persevere. We have an amazing God! :-)

      • March 4, 2014 at 11:16 am

        Thank you for visiting my blog and sharing your life history and conversion. I totally agree. Christ is taking Jews and Gentiles and making one new man. There is only one plan of God for Jews and Gentiles alike. Blessings to you.

  4. March 18, 2013 at 11:26 am

    “So every naturally descended Jew that comes to faith becomes part of the church.”

    God calls Israel his “first-born son”, his “servant”, the “apple of his eye” and his “treasured possession” who is engraved on his hands. He says he loves them dearly and will NOT turn his back on them. Yes, the “Old Testament” is full of such language and much of that “Old Testament” is yet unfulfilled. But in order to see his heart on the matter of his Jewish people, one must stop spiritualizing away the references to Israel and inserting them with “the Church.”

    You set up a scenario where God used (actually abused) Israel as a means to get to his true love, us Gentiles. Your theology makes him a capricious liar. You then go on to say the believing Jew becomes part of the church, hence, right with God.

    This is part of the error of Replacement Theology!

    Question: “The great commission” is to make disciples of all nations, not to “convert” Jews to a Gentile identity. The only converting going on in the NT was pagan gentiles converting to belief in the ONE true God of Israel.

    Also, have you ever done a word study on “Church” in the Bible, for there is no such word. It’s a destination created by translators and is actually the word: “ekklesia” which means “assembly”, which is traditional to use too, in a few spots. All assumptions of God and his plans for the Jewish people should be filtered through the lens that he is not a liar.

    • March 18, 2013 at 11:57 am

      I’m sorry that you missed the proper interpretation of God’s word. The first born Son is Christ. The greater Son is Christ.

      Also I never gave scripture that stated that we should not preach to Jews. I actually gave scripture that plainly stated that all naturally descended Israelites were not elect, that God is still saving a remnant and only a remnant will be saved, and finally that the rest are blinded.

      • March 18, 2013 at 12:15 pm

        If we accept the New Testament as God’s word, it’s impossible to ignore the Tanakh since the NT cannot stand alone. In order to interpret scripture with scripture, we must know who all the players are and what God says about them. Exodus 4:22 clearly says Israel is God’s first-born son. It’s how you can understand so much of scripture, including Isaiah 40 where we’re commanded to comfort his people who are receiving double for their sins. (A double portion goes to the first-born).

        Jesus is not the firstborn but the only begotten Son of God. It’s different.

        As to your second paragraph, proclaiming Jesus as Messiah is one thing, converting them is another and insisting on reverse judaizing , or gentilizing Jews, is another.

        Additionally, their “blindness” is neither total nor permanent according to Paul himself. And since it’s cruel to criticize someone for not perceiving the color of your shirt, when they do not have the tools to do so… Well, we’re back to repentance again.

      • March 18, 2013 at 1:40 pm

        I appreciate your comment, but you are wrong on who the Son is in the OT. The greater Son and True Israel is Christ Jesus, not the nation Israel. Remember Jesus showed the disciples, on the road to Emmaus, that all the OT scriptures pointed to Christ.

        My hermeneutic is not Israel centered. Israel is not the main character of the OT. Plus the only reason Israel, as a nation was chosen out, was to bring the Messiah and promises through them. Matter fact, when God scattered the nations at the Tower of Babel, there was no Israel present. The very next chapter God calls Abraham out in order to bring the nations back to him.

        My hermeneutic is Christ-centered. The whole OT, all the types, rituals, sacrifices, etc… pointed to the Messiah Jesus Christ.

        Finally, this is why Matthew could use the scripture in Hosea 11:1. “When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt.”

        Jesus is the true Son and true Israel which was called out of Egypt. Jesus is the second Adam, the Prophet like Moses, true Israel.

      • March 18, 2013 at 1:41 pm

        Also no where in my article do I claim that Jews are to be converted to Gentile customs.

      • March 18, 2013 at 1:44 pm

        Very true, but that is the implication and the historic position of Christianity.

      • March 18, 2013 at 1:51 pm

        Wrong that is the historic position of many claiming the Christian name. I know of no church today, dispensational or not that claims that we are to persecute the Jews.

        I do however, see that most churches in the United States that are dispensational, claim that we are to back Israel against the Palestinians. This is not what scripture teaches. When we do this we are compromising the gospel..Because, as you have stated, we are to preach the gospel to every nation. This includes the Palestinians.

    • March 18, 2013 at 12:07 pm

      Finally before I approve another comment, please, please, O please, answer with scripture.

      You must understand I know the dispensational arguments in and out. I was a dispensational spouting, Scofield carrying dispensationalists for years. Therefore I do know the system.

      Finally you have known shown wherebouts I am in error. I plainly have shown that God is taking Jew and Gentile and making one body of people. If that is ‘replacement theology’ then Paul was a ‘replacement theologian.’

      • March 18, 2013 at 12:23 pm

        Oh see your point, but I’m not a dispensationalist and am not arguing for it.

      • March 18, 2013 at 1:43 pm

        I am glad you are not arguing for the dispensational point, but neither have I argued for the ‘replacement theology’ position.

      • March 18, 2013 at 12:26 pm

        I’m not so much saying anything about making one people, I suspect you may be right about that, and don’t think the dispensationalist position is that compelling. I’m open about it, allowing God to teach me.

      • March 18, 2013 at 1:55 pm

        I am not just right about the one people concept just because I am biased towards that position. But hold that concept because scripture declares it. Its prophesied throughout the OT and Jesus declares it and Paul says it throughout Romans, Galatians, Ephesians, etc…

  5. March 18, 2013 at 8:15 pm

    Very good Hershell…..

    • March 19, 2013 at 4:06 am

      Thanks brother and thank you for visiting my blog. Blessings.

  6. March 12, 2014 at 5:17 pm

    Good article. I think that people don’t read their Bible. When they say that the Old Covenant is not replaced by the New Covenant, they are literally denying Christ and His sacrifice. Apostates like John Hagee have stated that Jesus Christ is not the Messiah… in his effort to pander to Israel. People who don’t read their Bibles… they will believe anything. They know a soundbite “replacement theology”… they are told it is wrong… and have no idea what it means. At most base level, it is unbelieving Jews denying that Jesus is the Messiah. It is the spirit of antichrist at work to rail against “replacement theology”. This article is much more balanced and biblical. (I don’t know what JM said or what he meant… I”ll have to look into it.) However, I see all the time ignorant people who don’t read the Bible rail against “replacement theology”… and they are railing against Jesus and the New Covenant as Judaizers who act like being a Judaizer is being a Christian. Ignorant as a box of rocks… and have never learned any doctrine… dumbed down in their churches… dumbed down by tv evangelists… dumbed down by flouride… I don’t know what explains it really.

    • March 15, 2014 at 6:34 am

      Thank you. I am glad you enjoyed the article. I do agree that those who hold to a dispensational view of scripture have no balance in their interpretive methodology and see no fulfillment with the first coming of Christ.

      God bless you.

  7. Pam Freeland
    July 14, 2014 at 7:03 pm

    “… want to declare that believing Jews will inherit the land while believing Gentiles inherit heaven”. This distinction caught my attention. What I would like to understand better, is what do the two groups believe, either the same or differently, regarding what “heaven” is.
    Does one group, or both believe the future dwelling place of God and believers, i.e. “heaven” (not heavens like space) is a place away from the earth, or is “heaven” a solid physical existence, like here now, but on a new earth of some sort, either renewed or recreated ? Does my question make sense? thanks !

    • July 27, 2014 at 8:37 am

      Thank you Pam for visiting and reading this blog. Both groups believe that heaven will be on this earth, but dispensationalists place a time qualifier on when the Church will actually inherit this earth. In other words, dispensationalists believe that prior to a seven year tribulation Christ will come to take believers with him to heaven. After the seven year tribulation Christ returns with the Church and sets up a thousand year reign. During this time all the promises to Israel will be fulfilled. After the thousand years Christ makes all things new and heaven is moved to earth. Of course, some dispensationalists believe that the new city is never moved to earth, but instead hovers over the earth for eternity.

      Nowhere does the Bible ever mention a seven year tribulation. Dispensationalists come by this doctrine by reading a gap into scripture between the 69th and 70th week mentioned in Daniel 9:24-27. This reading into scripture is what is called in the study of hermeneutics as eisegesis. Eisegesis is an erroneous method of interpretation. We are to never read into scripture what scripture has not declared, but are to use the method known in hermeneutics as exegesis. The term exegesis means to ‘draw out of.’ We are to ‘draw out of’ what the scripture actually states. Also we are to interpret scripture according to the genre in which it was written. We are to interpret poetry (Psalms, Proverbs, etc…), as poetry. The narrative, as narrative, didactic, as didactic, and so forth. The book of Revelation is written in the apocalyptic genre and should be interpreted as such. The book of Revelation is the only place in which a dispensationalists can find reference to a thousand years. The symbolical language in which Revelation is written calls for us to interpret it as symbolical and apocalyptic and therefore the thousand years mentioned in Revelation 20 cannot be literal. Just as Satan cannot be bound by a literal chain. John wrote the book of Revelation and the little epistle 1 John. He did not mean to convey in the book of Revelation that more time is to come after this age, because he wrote in 1 John 2:18 Little children, it is the last time…. If it is the last time or final days, then how could a thousand more years follow the last time? If a thousand more years follow the ‘last time,’ then the thousand years would be ‘the last time.’

      I hope this helps in your study of these things.

      Blessings.

  8. Martha Damsky
    July 20, 2014 at 9:23 am

    wow I am not believing what I am reading here..been reformed/presbyterian all my life..my dad was ordained minister in both denominations..the new testament is the fulfillment of the old testament not the replacement of it..two very very different things..Jesus did not come to start a new religion and the church is not a replacement for Israel..I knew over the last several years something was going off course but couldnt quite figure it out…the recent controversy of the pcus divestment really finally brought it all out to light. so many members all over the US not even being made fully aware the basic tenets of their faith have been altered in their churches. well i recently left pcusa and hoped to go back to the rca but now just going to look elsewhere it seems some kind of strange theological delusion has taken over..

    • July 27, 2014 at 8:08 am

      Greetings Martha and welcome to my blog. You have hit the nail on the head in your assessment of what Jesus came to do. He came to fulfill all that was promised to Israel (the elect of Israel) and to expand Israel to include all nations. After God scattered all men at the Tower of Babel, he immediately calls out Abraham. He then gives Abraham a promise that in him shall all families of the earth be blessed. God’s calling out of Abraham was his plan to save all types of men of which he scattered at the Tower of Babel. The promises of Abraham are to all the spiritual descendants of Abraham and not his physical descendants.

      Unfortunately, dispensationalists have fallen into the error of the Jewish mindset. They hold to the same interpretation of these promises as the Jews did of Christ day. Dispensationalists believe that the promises are to Abraham’s physical seed. But Paul refutes this in the book of Galatians by stating that all those in Christ are Abraham’s seed and heirs according to the promise Galatians 3:29.

      Thank you for visiting and reading this blog.

      • Kirk Natho
        August 20, 2014 at 5:03 pm

        I see this passage slightly different than you. I believe that he is not stating that only we are the true seed of Abraham. Certainly there were true believers prior to the church as I am sure you would agree but the promises given required Israel as a nation to accept the Messiah not simply individuals. His plan is to place them under extreme duress along with jealousy to bring what is left to Him as a whole. Those who took the mark of the beast including Jews are history!

      • September 1, 2014 at 10:50 am

        In response to your fourth comment:

        I see this passage slightly different than you. I believe that he is not stating that only we are the true seed of Abraham. Certainly there were true believers prior to the church as I am sure you would agree but the promises given required Israel as a nation to accept the Messiah not simply individuals. His plan is to place them under extreme duress along with jealousy to bring what is left to Him as a whole. Those who took the mark of the beast including Jews are history!

        First of all I have no idea which scripture you are referring to. You never give scripture or back up your assertions. Throughout your entire comments you have made assertions and haven’t backed up any of them. You have been indoctrinated with dispensationalism, but can’t prove with scripture, how it is right.

        The promises given were never given so that all the nation of Israel would accept him. This is erroneous and false. Paul explains this in Romans 9-11. Not all Israel is Israel, but only those who are called as Isaac and Jacob were. Also in Romans 11:6 God has given the elect of natural Israel, grace. The rest were blinded. So how can you say that God’s plan was that the whole nation receive the Messiah? God is the one who moves on to his elect and saves them. He makes the first move. If he doesn’t give grace to all of them, and he clearly says that he hasn’t, then how can you say that the plan of God was that the whole nation accept Christ?

        On the other hand, Israel as a nation was supposed to cut out, kick out, remove all those who did not believe. This is scripture. Ex 30: 33, 38; 31:14. The unbeliever, the one who would not accept God, was supposed to be cut off. Since Israel as a nation did not cut off the unbeliever, but instead progressed into unbelief, then God cut the nation off. Again promises in the Old Testament were given to spiritual Israel, yes believers in Christ, the promised seed to whom the promises were made.

        What do you do with this verse:

        Mat 21:42 Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord’s doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?
        Mat 21:43 Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.

        The nation that was given the Kingdom is the Church, the true Israel of God.

        1Pe 2:9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:

        You might see scripture different than I, yet you are not applying a consistent hermeneutic to it because you say that he isn’t saying that only we are the seed of Abraham. I never said that only WE were, but all that are in Christ. Abraham is in Christ, Moses is in Christ, David is in Christ…..all those who had faith in God throughout the whole Old Testament were in Christ. Christ died for the sins of all his elect. I have never ever declared that only those on this side of the cross are only the seed of Abraham or heirs of the promises, but all those who were born again from Abel till Christ returns will be heirs. This means that any Jew who comes to faith in Christ, whether now or three thousand years from now, he will be part of the Church. He will not be a separate body, seeing that the Church is one fold. Jews and Gentiles joined together with Christ as their head.

        Notice Hebrews 11:1- begins with faith and works out from there showing that Abel had faith and many others throughout the Old Testament had faith. And in Hebrews 12:1 the writer of this epistle states that we are surrounded by all the Old Testament witnesses who died in faith and are part of true Israel.

        This is one way to test our interpretations of scripture. When we interpret scripture we can check our interpretations against commentaries and see if other commentators have come up with similar conclusions. My interpretation of scripture is in harmony with most commentaries. Those who differ are of the dispensational stripe.

        After the apostles died out, early church fathers rose up defending the Christian faith and these early church fathers stated that the Church is the True Israel of God.

        But let us see if this people [Christians] is the heir, or the former [Jews], and if the covenant belongs to us or to them.—Barnabas 70—130 A.D.

        For the true spiritual Israel, and descendants of Judah, Jacob, Isaac, and Abraham (who in uncircumcision was approved of and blessed by God on account of his faith, and called the father of many nations), are we who have been led to God through this crucified Christ, as shall be demonstrated while we proceed.—Justin Martyr 160 A. D.

        Along with Abraham we shall inherit the holy land, when we shall receive the inheritance for an endless eternity, being children of Abraham through the like faith.—Justin Martyr 160 A. D.

        Since then God blesses this people [Christians], and calls them Israel, and declares them to be His inheritance, how is it that you [Jews] repent not of the deception you practice on yourselves, as if you alone were the Israel. —Justin Martyr 160 A. D.

        All who through Him have fled for refuge to the Father, constitute the blessed Israel. But you [Jews], having understood none of this, and not being prepared to understand, since you are the children of Jacob after the fleshly seed, expect that you shall be assuredly saved.—Justin Martyr 160 A. D.

        God, who introduces, through Jesus Christ, Abraham to the kingdom of heaven, and his seed, that is, the Church, upon which also is conferred the adoption and the inheritance promised to Abraham.—Irenaeus 180 A. D.

        The promise of God, which He gave to Abraham, remains steadfast…For his seed is the Church, which receives the adoption to God through the Lord, as John the Baptist said: “For God is able from the stones to raise up children to Abraham.” Thus also the apostle says in the Epistle to the Galatians: “But ye, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of the promise.”—Irenaeus 180 A. D.

        Many of the present Egyptians and Idumeans who came near to Israel,…shall enter into the Church of the Lord, being no longer accounted Egyptians and Idumeans, but becoming Israelites.—Origen 225 A. D.

        John Nelson Darby developed the teaching that God had two separate plans: One for Israel and one for the Church. John Nelson Darby developed the teaching that God had two separate bodies: Israel and the Church. Scofield, in 1909, popularized this teaching by putting out his Scofield reference Bible. He even admitted that the historic view of Christianity was that the Church is the True Israel of God and that the Old Testament foresaw that the kingdom would be fulfilled in the Church. Here is his comments via his reference Bible:

        “Therefore, in approaching the study of the Gospels the mind should be freed, so far as possible, from mere theological concepts, and presuppositions. Especially is it necessary to exclude the notion —a legacy in Protestant thought from post-apostolic and Roman Catholic theology– that the Church is the true Israel, and that the Old Testament foreview of the kingdom is fulfilled in the Church” (p. 989, S.R.B.).

        I suggest that you read: “Why I left Scofieldism” By William E. Cox (Its only 19 pages)

        Here is a quote:

        Breaking away from the fascinating teachings of The Scofield Reference Bible was one of the most difficult decisions of my entire life. Even after doubts arose in my mind, it took some seven or eight years to relinquish the ready-made theological clothing I had worn since the day of my conversion. For I was saved, at the age of sixteen, in a Baptist church where almost everyone carried a Scofield Bible……

        I got most of Humpty-Dumpty back together with relative ease. I could show, from the Bible, why I believed in such great doctrines as the Virgin Birth, deity of Christ, his literal Second Coming, the inspiration and infallibility of the Scriptures, believers’ immersion, eternal security, perseverance of the saints, the bodily resurrection of all, the judgment, eternal heaven, an equally eternal hell, and many other cardinal doctrines.

        But, try as I would, certain beliefs kept embarrassing me. For I could not find the verse and chapter to support my beliefs concerning national Israel. I had been taught that the Jews would go back to Palestine, rebuild the Temple, reinstitute the blood sacrifices, serve as Christ’s missionaries during an earthly millennium, and be involved in many other related events. I was so determined to find scriptural support for these teachings that oftentimes I became angry with myself for being so lacking in Bible knowledge.

        Finally, after some seven or eight years of searching in vain, God jolted me into reality. It finally dawned upon me that what I sincerely thought were verses of the Bible actually were footnotes put inside the covers of the Bible by a man. I acknowledged, too, that C. I. Scofield was a man. Like ourselves and that he did not belong in the same authoritative category as Peter, James, and John.

        I suggest that you also read:

        The Incredible Scofield and his Book by Joseph M. Canfield

        Will the Church go through the Great tribulation (Go to page and it is the first link on that page-download and read)

      • September 1, 2014 at 10:58 am

        I have no idea why wordpress is not placing the comments and replies in the order of which they were approved and answered.

  9. July 25, 2014 at 2:42 pm

    any thoughts on a somewhat newer strain of thought/theology called “Jewish Roots” or “Hebraic Roots”?
    They are rabidly anti-dispensational, believing it to be anti-semitic because (in that system) God is going to judge Israel in the tribulation period.
    But if they are rabidly anti-dispensational, they are fire breathing, foot stomping, wet-hornet angry when it comes to anything remotely construed “replacement theology.”

    • July 28, 2014 at 6:49 am

      Thank you Wayne for reading and visiting my blog.

      I can’t help you concerning your question as I am not familiar with that particular doctrine. I have plenty experience within dispensationalism having studied and memorized all of Scofield’s notes. I used to be fascinated by Jack Van Impe and could quote all the so-called scriptures by memory that were supposed to line up with their view of eschatology.

      After having taken a course in hermeneutics I realized that what I was doing was basically ripping scripture from context and making it a proof text. This is a poor method of interpretation.

      Blessings and thanks for your question.

  10. Kirk Natho
    August 20, 2014 at 9:55 am

    I see this entire disagreement as a failure on both sides to understand the other’s position, but more importantly a failure to completely reconcile the whole Bible with itself! We are in an interval between the 69th and 70th weeks of the prophecy given to Israel. This interval exists so that Israel will become jealous that they have temporarily lost their place of favor where salvation comes through them. We have access directly through Christ now and the only reason Israel isn’t jealous yet is they have not yet realized that they missed their Messiah. When they realize this during the great tribulation the church will have already been united with their groom, Jesus, and return with Him to fullfill the Millennial Kingdom. In the 70th week of Daniel, salvation for gentiles will once again come through Israel.

    • Kirk Natho
      August 20, 2014 at 10:59 am

      In support of my previous comments I point to Daniel Chapter 9 verses 25-27. The first 69 weeks were from the Cyrus decree until the Triumphal Entry in verse 25. The length of the interval was unspecified but we know so far it has lasted since the rejection of the Messiah in verse 26. Verse 27 is the 7 year period that can only start after the Holy Spirit is removed from earth at the rapture of the Church. Only then can the “man of sin” be revealed and the second half of this 7 year period is known as the great tribulation. We return with Christ as his bride and body when He will rule the Kingdom rather than being subjects of it. Individual Jews who have been saved in this interval will also have this priviledge. The subjects of the Kingdom are those who came to realize that Israel had indeed missed their Messiah and refused the mark of the beast. This will include Jews and proselytes. My conclusion is that you can prove both sides of the argument discussed on this site from scripture but only if you fail to reconcile all of scripture with itself!

      • Kirk Natho
        August 20, 2014 at 11:12 am

        Dispensational Theology is misleading in that it tries to neatly package God’s revealed truths even though many often are additions rather than replacements or at minimum there are no consistant beginning or end to each individual dispensation as they define them. Those who believe that the Church has PERMANENTLY replaced Israel in God’s program, fail to account for the fact that he has promises still to keep exclusively to Israel or he becomes a liar. So in a sense, both are right and both are wrong.

      • September 1, 2014 at 10:44 am

        In response to your third comment:

        Dispensational Theology is misleading in that it tries to neatly package God’s revealed truths even though many often are additions rather than replacements or at minimum there are no consistant beginning or end to each individual dispensation as they define them. Those who believe that the Church has PERMANENTLY replaced Israel in God’s program, fail to account for the fact that he has promises still to keep exclusively to Israel or he becomes a liar. So in a sense, both are right and both are wrong.

        I see that you depart from dispensationalism only in the area of how long a dispensation might last. Yet, you hold to the bulk of everything else that dispensationalism teaches.

        You see the scheme of dividing the scriptures into dispensations or epochs is not the main characteristic of dispensationalism. There are many within the covenant theology spectrum who also recognize that as revelation progressed or was given to man, that God worked with man based upon that revelation. This does not mean that these covenant theologians are dispensational in the classical sense. But what is peculiar or particular about dispensationalism is its distinction between Israel and the Church. Dispensationalism sees or distinguishes between two plans of God: one for Israel and one for the Church. They believe that God has two separate plans: one for Israel and one for the Church. This is the core or heart of the entire dispensational system. Secondly, they try to make salvation be based upon ones natural lineage, instead of God’s grace and mercy. They fall into the errors of the Jews, who thought that they had God’s favor and that God was not the God of the Gentiles also.

        I see that you hold to the core principles of dispensationalism by stressing a separate plan for Israel and the Church and by making salvation hereditary.

        The promises throughout the Old Testament are not to natural Israel, but to spiritual Israel. Spiritual Israel is the Church. It was the Church in the Old Testament and the Church in the New. The Church was present at Mount Sinai when the Ten Commandments were given.

        Act 7:38 This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:

        As for the Church replacing Israel: You have no concept of what the scriptures actually teach. No where do we teach that the Church replaces Israel. We teach unity theology or more accurate expansion theology. Israel is expanding. Lose the dispensationalism and actually read the New Testament. Paul in Ephesians 2:19 is plain that the Gentiles are no longer strangers and foreigners to Israel, but are now fellow citizens. He goes on in Ephesians 3 and makes it plain that the mystery not revealed in the Old Testament is that the Gentiles will now become fellow heirs and partakers with Israel Eph 3:6.

        But you see all the promises to Abraham’s seed was not to every natural descendant, but was to Abraham’s greatest descendant, which is Christ. Only those in the nation of Israel, in the Old Testament, who had faith in this promised seed, were heirs of the Abrahamic promises.

        Gal 3:16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

        The promises were not made to all of Abraham’s descendants, but to one seed, Christ. He is the heir of the land and all the promises given to Abraham. Paul goes on to say that all the promises of God in Christ are yes and amen 2 Cor 1:20 and that all those who have faith in Christ are Abraham’s seed and heirs of the promises Galatians 3:29 Rom 8:17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.

        So how are you going to say that God still has promises to natural, non-elect Israel that he hasn’t fulfilled, when I have shown that the elect of Israel are being brought in by grace Romans 11;6, and those Gentiles who are brought in are of the Israelite body Eph 2:19 and Eph 3:6 and that all who have faith in Christ are the true seed of Abraham and the heirs of the promises given to him Gal 3:29?

        Also how are you going to say that all the promises to natural Israel haven’t been fulfilled when God states that he has fulfilled them? Here is proof that God has fulfilled all that he promised natural Israel:

        Deut. 1:8,Behold, I have set the land before you: go in and possess the land which the Lord sware unto your fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to give unto them and to their seed after them.

        Deut 6:23 And he brought us out from thence, that he might bring us in, to give us the land which he sware unto our fathers.

        Joshua 1:6 Be strong and of a good courage; for unto this people shalt thou divide the land, which I sware unto their fathers to give them.

        Joshua 11:23 So Joshua took the whole land, according to all that the Lord said unto Moses; and Joshua gave it for an inheritance unto Israel according to their divisions by their tribes. And the land rested from war.

        Jos 21:43 And the LORD gave unto Israel all the land which he sware to give unto their fathers; and they possessed it, and dwelt therein.
        Jos 21:44 And the LORD gave them rest round about, according to all that he sware unto their fathers: and there stood not a man of all their enemies before them; the LORD delivered all their enemies into their hand.
        Jos 21:45 There failed not ought of any good thing which the LORD had spoken unto the house of Israel; all came to pass.

        Nehemiah 9:23 Their children also multipliedst thou as the stars of heaven, and broughtest them into the land, concerning which thou hadst promised to their fathers, that they should go in to possess it.

        God gave natural Israel ALL THE LAND which he swore to give them and gave them everything HE SWORE UNTO THEIR FATHERS.

        So you stated that we are to: to completely reconcile the whole Bible with itself!

        Now what are you going to do with the scriptures from Joshua? I pretty well already know. You will ignore them. This is the common method of dispensationalists. If you go to Dallas Theological Seminary, you will find no professors discussing scriptures such as these and will not see them expound Galatians 3 whereby we are told that Christ is the seed to whom the promises were made and all those in him are the true children of Abraham.

        I know a theologian who sat under a professor who graduated from Dallas Theological Seminary. He asked that professor what they did with Galatians 3 at Dallas Seminary? The professor looked down at his Bible dumbfounded and then looked back up and said: “We ignore them. There is never any discussion of them.”

      • September 1, 2014 at 10:41 am

        In response to your second comment:

        In support of my previous comments I point to Daniel Chapter 9 verses 25-27. The first 69 weeks were from the Cyrus decree until the Triumphal Entry in verse 25. The length of the interval was unspecified but we know so far it has lasted since the rejection of the Messiah in verse 26. Verse 27 is the 7 year period that can only start after the Holy Spirit is removed from earth at the rapture of the Church. Only then can the “man of sin” be revealed and the second half of this 7 year period is known as the great tribulation. We return with Christ as his bride and body when He will rule the Kingdom rather than being subjects of it. Individual Jews who have been saved in this interval will also have this priviledge. The subjects of the Kingdom are those who came to realize that Israel had indeed missed their Messiah and refused the mark of the beast. This will include Jews and proselytes. My conclusion is that you can prove both sides of the argument discussed on this site from scripture but only if you fail to reconcile all of scripture with itself!

        You state: My conclusion is that you can prove both sides of the argument discussed on this site from scripture but only if you fail to reconcile all of scripture with itself!

        Both sides of the argument cannot be proved. This violates the laws of logic. There are three options.

        1. Either dispensationalism is right and covenant theology is wrong
        2. or covenant theology is right and dispensationalism is wrong
        3. or both are wrong

        It is certain that they both cannot be right.

        But with that much stated, you haven’t proved either side right. All you are doing is discussing what you think MIGHT happen. But none of what you have stated can be supported by scripture. For instance:

        No such removal of the Holy Spirit from this earth, nor a rapture before a seven year period can be found in scripture. The seven year period is read into scripture by dispensationalists supposedly interpreting Daniel 9:24-27. I have destroyed this false hermeneutic above. And have shown their interpretation to be wrong. Dispensationalists believe that the Holy Spirit will be removed from this earth by misinterpreting 2 Thess 2:6-8. But this is eisegesis. It is reading into scripture what isn’t there. The Holy Spirit is only mentioned once in this chapter and that is in verse 13. Here Paul is expressing thankfulness that God has from the beginning chosen the Thessalonians to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit. So nowhere can we find where the Holy Spirit will ever be removed from this earth. God is infinite. Therefore being infinite, he will always be here as long as this earth exists.

        Secondly no rapture can be found in scripture before a seven year period. Dispensationalists point to 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 to try and prove this, but again they are reading into scripture, for 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 states no such thing. There is no mention of a seven year period or a pretribulation in 1 Thess 4:13-18. One would have to read this into scripture.

        Everything you say above is the common dispensational viewpoint. You state that dispensationalists have missed it, yet you hold to all their views.

    • September 1, 2014 at 10:39 am

      Thank you very much for visiting my blog and reading this article.

      In regard to your first comment:

      I see this entire disagreement as a failure on both sides to understand the other’s position, but more importantly a failure to completely reconcile the whole Bible with itself! We are in an interval between the 69th and 70th weeks of the prophecy given to Israel. This interval exists so that Israel will become jealous that they have temporarily lost their place of favor where salvation comes through them. We have access directly through Christ now and the only reason Israel isn’t jealous yet is they have not yet realized that they missed their Messiah. When they realize this during the great tribulation the church will have already been united with their groom, Jesus, and return with Him to fullfill the Millennial Kingdom. In the 70th week of Daniel, salvation for gentiles will once again come through Israel.

      To answer your comment: I disagree that the entire disagreement between the systems of dispensationalism and covenant theology is because of a failure to understand the other sides position. I was a dispensationalists for many years and as such, I invested all my free time into studying, memorizing, and defending this position. Therefore when I switched positions, I was able to clearly see the errors in Bible interpretation that I had been making.

      First of all the dispensational system was unknown to the Church until Darby began publicizing it in the 1800’s. However, Scofield, who was a criminal and false convert, made it popular through his study Bible references in 1909.

      What made me change positions, you might ask? It was a simple thing called hermeneutics. Hermeneutics is the science of interpretation. This field of study is applied to ancient literature, but more particularly the Bible, which is known as Biblical hermeneutics. The interpreter of scripture must do exactly what you stated. He is to reconcile the whole Bible with itself. Therefore using the principles of interpretation we can rightly interpret scripture by using scripture to interpret scripture. This method was known by the Reformers as the ‘analogy of faith.’ Let me explain the definition of several words before I continue.

      Exegete-an exegete is one who seeks to interpret the text to which he has before him. He does this by concentrating on the interpretation of the text as it was historically understood. In other words, we are to understand the text as it was given to the generation of those who received it. Secondly, it is to be understood in its grammatical setting. In other words the exegete is to examine the particular grammar used in which the scriptures were written. Thirdly, the exegete is to understand the scripture as it pertains to the entire scheme of redemption. Therefore, we could say we are to understand the grammatical, historical, redemption of the text.

      This is does not mean that the exegete does not have hurdles to overcome when he approaches the text. First off the exegete approaches the text with his bias. The exegete might be male or female, so they are biased in areas that pertain to their human characteristics. For instance, a woman living in the twenty first century who has been indoctrinated with the concept of the women liberation movement, might think it okay for a woman to preach. So she would have to overcome that bias in order to understand scripture. We approach scripture with a non Jewish bias, a twenty-first century bias, a cultural bias, and with the effects of the fall still prevalent within traces of the sin nature that we are fighting against. Not to mention the fall also effected or mind. We also approach scripture with our doctrinal biases. We learn from a minister who might have been dispensational and so we turn around and approach scripture with dispensational hermeneutics.

      We are also to understand scripture in the genre in which it was written. Dispensationalists boast of interpreting scripture literally, yet they do not hold to a literal interpretation, but instead, a literalistic interpretation. The difference between a literal interpretation and a literalistic interpretation is that the first interprets scripture while recognizing the genre in which it is written. The second interprets scripture, viewing everything as being literal, even though the genre in which it is written isn’t supposed to be interpreted as implying a literal interpretation. For instance, Isaiah 55:12 states that the mountains and hills shall sing and the trees clap their hands. This is not to be taken in a literalistic way. Just as the thousand years in Revelation 20, is not to be taken in a literalistic way. Neither scriptures are speaking literally, but are symbolic and therefore a literal interpretation would be one that interprets them as being symbolic. The method Dispensationalists use is the same method used by the Jews at Christ coming. This is why they could not receive Christ. They were looking for a messiah who would defeat their enemies and overthrow Rome. A literal interpretation of scripture is to interpret according to genre. We all interpret words literally according to their genre. The Bible was written in many different genres such as: poetry, historical, narrative, apocalyptic, and didactic. The didactic portions of scripture are the instructional portions of scripture and should never be interpreted with any other genre. On the contrary, the didactic or instructional portions of scripture should interpret everything else.

      We are also to interpret the implicit with the explicit. In other words, some scriptures might imply a certain thing, but we cannot make doctrine out of what a scripture might imply, if another scripture explicitly states something to the contrary.

      For instance, if Christ states that the resurrection of the just and unjust occurs at the last day, then we cannot place seven years and then one thousand more years between the two resurrections because we have Christ explicitly stating when the resurrection will occur…….at the last day John 6:40; 12:48. He explicitly states that it will be at the end of the world Matt 13:39, 40….and in verse 49 it is the wicked being raptured and not the church.

      Exegesis- the word means ‘to draw out.’ We are to draw out of scripture what it says within the context of the authors original meaning.

      Eisegesis- this is a faulty method of hermeneutics and is the wrong method applied to scripture by many Bible students. This word simply means ‘to read into’ scripture what is not there.

      Therefore this later faulty method is what I want to address within your comment. You state that: “We are in an interval between the 69th and 70th weeks of the prophecy given to Israel.”

      This is eisegesis. This is reading into scripture. This is the dispensational method of interpreting this portion of scripture. Nowhere in Daniel 9 are we told that there will be a break in the seventy weeks. In order to get that interpretation, you would have to read it into the chapter.

      No such thing as a break between the sixty-ninth week and seventieth week is implied within the text of Daniel 9:25-27. The angel Gabriel spoke to Daniel and told him: “Dan 9:24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.”

      Seventy weeks were determined on Israel to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness. Christ did all this when he died on the cross, was buried, and rose again from the dead. He made reconciliation for sin and brought in everlasting righteousness. Remember that Daniel was constantly receiving visions concerning statues and beasts throughout this book. The statue and the beasts represented nations that would rise to power over the entire known world and in the time of the final world empire (Rome) a stone (Christ) would smite these nations and God would set up a kingdom that would never end and that would last forever (Christ’s kingdom) Daniel 2:44-45.

      Christ appeared on the scene at the beginning of the seventieth week. Remember his ministry lasted 3 ½ years. In the middle of the final week he confirmed a covenant with many for one week and caused the sacrifice and oblations to cease as being acceptable before God.

      Many try to make Daniel 9:27 refer back to the prince to come who destroys the city and sanctuary, thus making verse 27 refer to some future Antichrist. This is eisegesis. It is reading into scripture what is not there. The ‘He’ in verse 27 refers back to Messiah in verse 26, who was cut off, but not for himself. How do I know this? Because the later half of verse 26, where it refers to the prince that shall come who destroys the city and sanctuary, is in a prepositional phrase. In English when a prepositional phrase is present, the next pronoun refers back to the noun that appeared before the prepositional phrase. Therefore, the pronoun ‘He’ of verse 27, refers back to the Messiah of verse 26. The Messiah confirmed a covenant with many for one week and in the midst of the week, he caused the sacrifice and oblations to cease as means of redemption before God.

      Next you say: “We have access directly through Christ now and the only reason Israel isn’t jealous yet is they have not yet realized that they missed their Messiah.”

      Here again you are using a dispensational hermeneutical methodology. You are reading into and assuming things before you approach the scripture.

      First, Paul states that he went to the Gentiles and preached to them, in order that he might provoke some of them to jealousy and hopefully save some Romans 11:14 and he is merely quoting from Moses in Romans 10:19 that Israel would be provoked to jealousy by Gentiles coming into the fold, therefore showing that Israel did know because they were preached to by Moses. Not that the provoking of jealousy would actually produce anything. Paul is plain that the elect of Israel are being saved and the rest are blinded. God isn’t going to save the non-elect. The elect of Israel received salvation by grace Romans 11:5-7. The rest were blinded.

      Next you state: “When they realize this during the great tribulation the church will have already been united with their groom, Jesus, and return with Him to fullfill the Millennial Kingdom.”

      I challenge you to find me some scripture that states that there will be a seven year tribulation or one that teaches a millennium. I have already destroyed your argument for a seven year tribulation by showing that left in context the seventy weeks ran consecutively. There is no gap in the scripture between the 69 th and 70 th. You would have to read that into scripture. Next there is no scripture that teaches a millennium, not in the sense that you are stating anyway. Revelation is written in apocalyptic literature and should be interpreted as such. To make Revelation 20 literal as you would argue that it is, then Satan being bound with chains is literal too. Nevertheless, no spirit being could be bound with an actual chain.

      Also there are multitudes of didactical scriptures (instructional scriptures) that disprove a thousand years after a so-called tribulation. The same John who wrote Revelation also wrote 1 John 2:18 which states: “Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.”

      What did John say? He said that it is the last time. No more time will exist after this one. The fact that Antichrists are on the scene shows us that we are living in the last time. When Christ appears there will be no more time.

      Christ has appeared at the end of the world.

      1Co 10:11 Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.

      This age is the last time or the final stage till the end of this world.

      Heb 9:26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

      Jesus and the apostles contrasted this world with the world to come or this age with the age to come. There will not be a thousand years in between this age and that which is to come.

      Mat 12:32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.
      Luk 18:30 Who shall not receive manifold more in this present time, and in the world to come life everlasting.

      Next you state: “In the 70th week of Daniel, salvation for gentiles will once again come through Israel.”

      My answer: No where does the Bible teach that in the 70th week of Daniel that salvation for Gentiles will come through Israel. I know that this is the common dispensational belief, as I too once held it, and wrote an entire commentary on Revelation based from the dispensational viewpoint. But if one would interpret scripture rightly, they would not end up with that interpretation.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 811 other followers

%d bloggers like this: