Replacement Theology

[Ben Masada]

Replacement Theology

Replacement Theology is as old as Christianity itself, considering that the etimology of the expression acquired its real meaning with the rise of Christianity.

Some people object to the focusing on Christianity for the reason why Replacement Theology originated, because the Jewish People was not the only ancient people with the original claim to be God's chosen People.

It's true that a few other ancient peoples upheld the same claim, but there was never one to rise with the claim that a people had been replaced by another as God's chosen People.

Christianity became the first religious organization to rise with the claim that a change had occurred in the designs of God, which would define the rejection of the Jewish People, and resplacement with Christianity.

The classical NT document, which would give rise to this Christian policy is found in Galatians 4:21-31.

Paul would compare God's Covenant with the Jewish People as Hagar, who was Sara's slave girl, and the Jews as her son, who was rejected even to share with Isaac, the inheritance of Canaan. On the other hand, he compares Christianity to Sara and Christians to her son Isaac.

To conclude, Paul appeals to cast out the slave girl together with her son for the obvious reason that Israel, the Jewish People, would never be an heir with the son of the one born free.

That's the picture of Replacement Theology and not simply a people claiming Divine election. A group of Interfaith Scholars have classified Replacement Theology as a kind of Antisemitism.

Ben

[Jonah]

Hmm. Nietzsche in a kafia. I'm presently snacking of gefilte fish.

Well, no. I'm a Marxist. Bad things do not happen to good people because Homer Simpson is wasting time looking at porn. Evil is systemic.

As for going to the cross, it's not something I would advised Jesus to do. My personal opinion is that it was a corner he painted himself into. It was not optimal, but better than terrorism. uh-hum. I agree with Bruce Chilton and other scholars who specialize in the Jewish-Christian movement that the early historical Jesus did flirt with zealotry which led to the botched temple cleansing. I agree with Chilton that people probably got hurt and some could have even died in the event, and this was a shock to Jesus casuing him to change his mind about a military option...and thus Peter was told to put his sword down in the garden.

I've been to a settlement on the West Bank. Yes, the residents are extremists. The Jewish guide, an Israeli war veteran, who escorted us there had a hard time containing himself while the settlement representative gave us his speech. Our war veteran guide muttered under his breath about the amount of blood ordinary Israelis have had to spill for the extremists.

I was in Israel just before the Gaza pull out. The country was split entirely in two over the issue. Each side wore different colors...ribbons on clothing and car antennas. It was feared the issue would result in severe civil conflict, Jew against Jew.

Our group met with a high ranking Israeli military official who was in favor of the pull out. He feared that even though the pull out would happen, a new wave of terrorism was coming...and it came.

So. You have two myths busted. One, that all Jews and Israelis are a monolithic enslavement to an mythical external promise. And two, that centrist Jews and Israelis are all monlithically secular...unenslaved to the mythical promise. No. The Jewish self-critical capacity is entirely rooted in the Jewish religious tradition, time and time again...in the name of God, 2 Jews = 3 opinons, or 4, or 5.

Hamas got the civilian deaths it wanted for propaganda. Israel will have to learn not to step in it. It's done it now twice in Lebanon and Gaza. And it knows it.

Next.

[bernee51]

Hmm. Nietzsche in a kafia. I'm presently snacking of gefilte fish.

I thought it was a kefiyah.

I never imagined myself as Nietzscheian - but there you go.

I’m presently snacking on a foccaccia with prosciutto, tomato, boccincini and basil – toased of course.

Well, no. I'm a Marxist.

Ya reckon!

Bad things do not happen to good people because Homer Simpson is wasting time looking at porn. Evil is systemic.

The illusion of selfhood is (necessarily) systemic. Attachment to that illusion is unskilful. Such actions lead to what is often (and often correctly) considered evil.

As for going to the cross, it's not something I would advised Jesus to do. My personal opinion is that it was a corner he painted himself into. It was not optimal, but better than terrorism. uh-hum. I agree with Bruce Chilton and other scholars who specialize in the Jewish-Christian movement that the early historical Jesus did flirt with zealotry which led to the botched temple cleansing. I agree with Chilton that people probably got hurt and some could have even died in the event, and this was a shock to Jesus causing him to change his mind about a military option...and thus Peter was told to put his sword down in the garden.

Sounds like a reasonable interpretation of the incidents as they have been reported in the gospels.

So. You have two myths busted. One, that all Jews and Israelis are a monolithic enslavement to an mythical external promise. And two, that centrist Jews and Israelis are all monlithically secular...unenslaved to the mythical promise.

If you are suggesting I subscribed to such myths – you are battling a straw man.

Next.

Was Jesus any more (or less) divine than you?

[Jonah]

LOL. Vowels are a nuisance.

As for the strawman...I would call it a scarecrow. If you're going to pop in Israeli settlements out of the blue to a Jew, it warrants setting the facts straight. Jews are a nervous people.

As for divinity. With Jews, it's been the same shtick forever: A human being is not God. Now, if you mean humanity bears traces of God...well, then that's something else...the "divine spark"...imago dei, and all that jazz. On the Christian side, I like Thomas a Kempis' imitation of Christ...Which is how I navigated the whole Jesus as messiah/christ thing when I was a pastor. I simply Jewishly (William Shatner/Leonard Nemoy style) reverse engineered a Kempis's concept of Christians being "little christs" backwards to Jesus. Jesus was christ in so far as his followers were christ...they all together were christ...kind of like the mouseketeer club. I know it's kind of twisted, but I was doing the best I could under the circumstances of being a crypto-Jew in a clerical collar.

You have a great writing style. I like it.

[bernee51]

LOL. Vowels are a nuisance.

Tell me about it....don't wanna get me started on the trouble I have with my vowels.

As for the strawman...I would call it a scarecrow. If you're going to pop in Israeli settlements out of the blue to a Jew, it warrants setting the facts straight. Jews are a nervous people.

Or a windmill...

I read through my post and can see where a hasty generalization could have been made...I fully admit that adjectives such as 'some' or a 'minority' or 'vocal' could have helped keep the point in order - and not rattled your nerves.

As for divinity. With Jews, it's been the same shtick forever: A human being is not God. Now, if you mean humanity bears traces of God...well, then that's something else...the "divine spark"...imago dei, and all that jazz.

As for divinity - this atheist believes the 'divine' resides in the nature of our being.

On the Christian side, I like Thomas a Kempis' imitation of Christ...Which is how I navigated the whole Jesus as messiah/christ thing when I was a pastor. I simply Jewishly (William Shatner/Leonard Nemoy style) reverse engineered a Kempis's concept of Christians being "little christs" backwards to Jesus. Jesus was christ in so far as his followers were christ...they all together were christ...kind of like the mouseketeer club. I know it's kind of twisted, but I was doing the best I could under the circumstances of being a crypto-Jew in a clerical collar.

I can relate to that - the whole movement, 'the church', was/is the Christ.

Admittedly I am no scholar but my personal view is that Jesus (who ever he was) was taken out of context and made into the Christ by (primarily) Paul.

A side issue....

I an intrigued by this whole Messiah thing - is it something still central to Judaism?

I was under the impression that hebrew scripture held the Messiah to be a national savior who would arrive at the time of the Babylonian exile (hundreds of years before Christianity) and restore the nation of Israel with a capital at Jerusalem.

What exactly (and I know if I ask my Jewish neighbour I will get at least one more version of exactly) does Judaism expect of the Messiah?

[Jonah]

Yes bernee,

I have the same general feeling about the divine in humanity from a humanist perspective. After all, there is the Divine Miss M (Bette Midler).

Yes, you will get different answers on messiah depending on who you talk to. Historically...and generally, there's a difference between the history of the concept in general and the history of messianic expectancy.

The historical roots of the concept are generally connected to the royal interests of the house of David...the idea that a messiah(s) would emanate from that house puts the special mark on the line. But the actual emergence of messianic expectancy beyond the historical origins of the concept really takes place later in the intertestimental period under the oppression of the Greek and Roman empires.

In general, the more conservative the Jewish community, the more literal is the belief in a coming deliverer...a human being "anointed"...not a deity to restore Israel and usher in the era of peace. In the Reform movement, which I am in, the "messiah" is not looked upon as an individual, but the future time of peace...so, all those who work for that are part of the "messiah" or messianic age to come.

There is another complicated thing about the history of messiahs in Judaism. There were two traditions. There was Davidic messiah. But, there was another tradition of a "messiah son of Jospeh". This was a northern tradition. The Davidic messiah was to come from Judah (Judea). But, the messiah son of Joseph was to come out of the north...out of the area of Ephraim (son of Joseph)...the area where Jesus was from in lower Galilee (and Samaria). You see where I'm going. The messiah son of Joseph was seen as a precursor messiah...a helper messiah to the davidic. The Davidic was supposed to be a conquering hero. The messiah son of Joseph was to be a suffering servant who would die. So. You see the themes lining up nicely there...how convenient Mary was married to a "Joseph". Anyway, messianic Jews (who are really Christians using Jewish motif) claim that Jesus was both messiahs.

I have a personal fascination in the case of Rabbi Schneerson of the Chabad Lubavitch movement. He died in the 1994 and the emergent messianism surrounding him has been very interesting. I have found very interesting the speculations of how Schneerson's case may have parallels with that of Jesus.

[Ben Masada]

I was assuming if "christ" was discarded, that would also mean "christianity" is no longer a useful term. And then what?

I guess another way to put the question is if we go through the list of things Spong would discard, what is left?

Okay.

No physical resurrection, but a spiritual one.

Ben: I agree with that one.

No messiah figure, but a calling for the "church" to be messianic perhaps toward the world.

Ben: I can't agree with that one.

No heaven and hell. No afterlife. Eternal life is a qualitative concept.
And then what is the content of that qualitative eternal life? Love of God & Neighbor, huh?

Ben: I agree with that one, except for the eternal life qualitative or quantitative, only God has it. Everyone who is born must die.

What should this religion be called?

Ben: Not Jewish.
[/b]

[Ben Masada]

I was assuming if "christ" was discarded, that would also mean "christianity" is no longer a useful term. And then what?

I guess another way to put the question is if we go through the list of things Spong would discard, what is left?

Okay.

No physical resurrection, but a spiritual one.
No messiah figure, but a calling for the "church" to be messianic perhaps toward the world.
No heaven and hell. No afterlife. Eternal life is a qualitative concept.
And then what is the content of that qualitative eternal life? Love of God & Neighbor, huh?

What should this religion be called?

U T O P I A

[JumpingJackFlash]

Replacement Theology

Replacement Theology is as old as Christianity itself, considering that the etimology of the expression acquired its real meaning with the rise of Christianity.

Some people object to the focusing on Christianity for the reason why Replacement Theology originated, because the Jewish People was not the only ancient people with the original claim to be God's chosen People.

It's true that a few other ancient peoples upheld the same claim, but there was never one to rise with the claim that a people had been replaced by another as God's chosen People.

Christianity became the first religious organization to rise with the claim that a change had occurred in the designs of God, which would define the rejection of the Jewish People, and resplacement with Christianity.

The classical NT document, which would give rise to this Christian policy is found in Galatians 4:21-31.

Paul would compare God's Covenant with the Jewish People as Hagar, who was Sara's slave girl, and the Jews as her son, who was rejected even to share with Isaac, the inheritance of Canaan. On the other hand, he compares Christianity to Sara and Christians to her son Isaac.

To conclude, Paul appeals to cast out the slave girl together with her son for the obvious reason that Israel, the Jewish People, would never be an heir with the son of the one born free.

That's the picture of Replacement Theology and not simply a people claiming Divine election. A group of Interfaith Scholars have classified Replacement Theology as a kind of Antisemitism.

Ben

God's replacement theology has been going on since the beginning of time.
I will give you an example...
Did God not take the throne away from Saul after He rebelled and replace it with the throne of David?
Did not God take the throne of David away from David after he rebelled and replace it with the throne of Jesus?

Did God not replace the garden of Eden with the garden of thorns and thistles?

I LOVE GOD'S REPLACEMENT THEOLOGY.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to Ben Masada in post #1]
We, as Christians, only go by what the Bible says. YHWH in the Hebrew Scriptures always told the Jewish people that as long as they lived up to their end of the deal he would protect them and give them great blessings. They did not continue to listen to YHWH, breaking their part of the covenant. They did not keep listening to YHWH and even turned to other gods.

YHWH said to Israel: "'Obey my voice and I will become your God, and you will become my people; and you must walk in all the way that I shall command you, in order that it may go well with you.'" But they did not listen...they went walking in the counsels in the stubbornness of their bad heart, so that they became backward in direction and not forward, from the day that your forefathers came forth out of the land of Egypt until this day; and I kept sending to you all my servants the prophets....But they did not listen to me...they kept hardening their neck. They acted worse than their forefathers." (Jeremiah 7:23-26)

"Even all the chiefs of the priests and the people committed unfaithfulness on a large scale, according to all the detestable things of the nations, so that they defiled the house of YHWH which he had sanctified in Jerusalem. And YHWH the God of their forefathers kept sending...his messengers, sending again and again, because he felt compassion for his people and for his dwelling. But they were continually making jest at the messengers of the true God and despising his words and mocking his prophets, until there was no healing." (2Chronicles 36:14-16)

Jesus came to Earth to, first, go to the Nation of Israel to tell them the good news of the Kingdom, but they rejected everything he said.

He said to the Pharisees: "Did you never read in the Scriptures, 'The stone that the builders rejected is the one that has become the chief cornerstone. From YHWH this has come to be, and it is marvelous in our eyes'? This is why I say to you, The Kingdom of God will be taken from you and be given to a nation producing its fruits." (Matthew 21:42,43)

He also said: " Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the killer of the prophets and stoner of those sent forth to her---how often I wanted to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings! But you people did not want it. Look! Your house is abandoned to you. (Matthew 23:37,38)

The Apostle Peter also said to Christians in Asia: "YOU are a 'chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for special possession, that you should declare abroad the excellencies of the one that called you out of darkness into his wonderful light. For you were once not a people, but are now God's people; you were those who had not been shown mercy, but are now those who have been shown mercy." (I Peter 2:9,10)

So, there is no "anti-Semitism" going on with true Christians. We just honor what the Bible itself says, in the Hebrew Scriptures and the Christian Greek Scriptures (N.T.). Would you call the Bible "anti-Semitic"?

[TheHolyGhost]

I've got news for both the Christians and the Jews: God's chosen race is the human race. That should settle the issue. Nobody needs to cast out anybody or repace anybody. We're all sailing aboard the same ship.

None of you will be replaced, because none of you were ever it.