Is, Was and Will Be – The Unknown Character of Christ and His Word

Menu
Contact Us

When Was Replacement Theology First Taught?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Audio Download

Hi K____,

Thanks for thinking of me.

I intend to post this for the benefit of my readers, but I do not link to heretical websites, so I will just cut and paste what AI has to say about the events which took place in the year 135 A.D. which this site teaches as the beginning of the doctrine of replacement theology:

“In 135 A.D., the Roman Empire crushed the Bar Kokhba revolt, the second major Jewish uprising against Roman rule, which served as a critical catalyst for the formalization of replacement theology (also known as supersessionism).

Key developments during and after this event included:

    • “Military and Political Defeat: The Romans defeated the Jewish rebels led by Simon Bar Kokhba, who had been proclaimed Messiah by prominent rabbis like Rabbi Akiva.  This total defeat was interpreted by many Gentile Christians as divine judgment against the Jewish people for rejecting Jesus.
    • “Renaming of the Region: Following the revolt, Rome expelled Jews from Jerusalem, leveled the city, and renamed it Aelia Capitolina.  The province of Judea was renamed Palestine after the ancient Philistine enemies, symbolically erasing the Jewish connection to the land.
    • “Theological Shift: In the aftermath, early Christian leaders like Justin Martyr (whose Dialogue with Trypho was published shortly after in 150 A.D.) argued that the Jewish people had been permanently rejected by God.  They claimed the Church had become the “True Israel” and the sole heir to God’s covenants, effectively replacing the Jewish nation in divine favor.
    • “Separation from Jewish Roots: The revolt marked a definitive breaking point between traditional Judaism and Messianic Jews (early Christians). As Christians increasingly distanced themselves from Jewish practices to avoid Roman persecution and association with the rebellious Jews, they solidified the doctrine that they, not Israel, were God’s chosen people.” (End Quote)

I will point out but a very few of the dozens of scriptures in both the Old and the New Testament that conflict with the teachings and doctrines of this web page.

The prophet Ezekiel, the apostles Peter, Paul, and John, and Christ Himself one and all taught:

Rom 2:28  For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
Rom 2:29  But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.

2Pe 3:15  And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
2Pe 3:16  As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, [like the author of this link you sent me] as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

Hey, I fell for the lie of God having a physical and a spiritual elect for all the years I was in Babylon. I respected my leaders, and I believed them. I cannot tell you how shocked I was when the Lord opened my eyes to the fact that “he is NOT a Jew which is one outwardly, but he IS a Jew which is one inwardly…” I remember how confusing it was to me to see Paul telling me, and everyone whom the Lord gives eyes to see, that “Jerusalem which now is… is in bondage with her children and answers to the son of the bondwoman, Hagar and Ishmael”.

The most popular thing in all of orthodox Christianity is to side with the apostate nation of physical Israel and condemn all who refuse to do so as ‘replacement theologians.’ According to the scriptures, the flesh and the physical and the letter have indeed all been “replaced” by “the things of the spirit.” Here are but a few of the dozens of scriptures that conflict with this carnal, fleshly approach to the Word of God:

Rom 2:28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
Rom 2:29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.

The authors of the web page you sent me do not believe this pre-135 AD verse of scripture (Rom 2:28-29). So let us consider another pre-135 A.D. verse of scripture:

Gal 4:28 Now we [Gentile Galatians], brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.
Gal 4:29 But as then he that was born after the flesh [physically descended from Abraham] persecuted him that was born after the Spirit [Isaac was born supernaturally after Abraham was incapable of having children], even so it is now [Those who see Israel as a physical nation, to this day, hate those spiritual Israelites (Eph 2:11-19), who are “inward Jews,” “born after the spirit.”]
Gal 4:30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son [Gal 4:25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.]: for the son of the bondwoman [Jerusalem that now is] shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.
Gal 4:31 So then, brethren, we [Gentile Galatians] are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.

Here is another pre 135 A.D. verse of scripture which is inspired by the holy spirit, which teaches the doctrine of ‘replacement theology’:

Eph 2:11  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;
Eph 2:12  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:
Eph 2:13  But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.
Eph 2:14  For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;
Eph 2:15  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;
Eph 2:16  And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:
Eph 2:17  And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh.
Eph 2:18  For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.
Eph 2:19  Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
Eph 2:20  And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
Eph 2:21  In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:
Eph 2:22  In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.

How about these verses?

Rom 9:3 For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh: [Which profits nothing, (Joh 6:63)]
Rom 9:4 Who are [physical] Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises;
Rom 9:5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.
Rom 9:7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.
Rom 9:8 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.

Paul was a replacement theologian! Let’s look at just one more of the dozens of scriptures which tell us that all the physical types of the old covenant were but mere shadows of the new covenant spiritual realities.

Who, then is the new covenant ‘circumcision?’

Php 3:3 For we [Gentile Philippians] are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.

If only today’s orthodox Christians would “put no confidence in the flesh.” If only this were the attitude of orthodox Christianity, we would not be misconstruing the spiritual meaning of the old covenant statement God made to Abraham:

Gen 12:3 And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee [“Those in Christ”] shall all families of the earth be blessed.

This is a promise made applicable only to “Abraham and his seed”, and as Paul tells us:

Gal 3:16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made…

Who is “Abraham and His seed?” Only those who are granted spiritual vision will be “given eyes to see” and will be able to accept this truth:

Gal 3:16 He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. [Physical Israel is every bit as resentful of Christ and His doctrine today as they were when He was on this earth]

Gal 3:29 And if ye [Gentile Galatians] be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed,

That is ‘replacement theology’! Paul taught that converted Gentiles were the true Jews, the true circumcision, the true ‘son of the free woman’ and the true ‘seed of Abraham’. I submit to you that Paul taught replacement theology long before 135 AD. Replacement theology is a term used to denote how Paul and Christ taught physical Israel was ‘replaced’ by spiritual Israel.

One final scripture which gives the lie to the doctrine promulgated on that carnal-minded web site:

Eze 16:53 When I shall bring again their captivity, the captivity of Sodom and her daughters, and the captivity of Samaria and her daughters, then [and not until then] will I bring again the captivity of thy captives in the midst of them:
Eze 16:54 That thou mayest bear thine own shame, and mayest be confounded in all that thou hast done, in that thou art a comfort unto them.
Eze 16:55 When thy sisters, Sodom and her daughters, shall return to their former estate, and Samaria and her daughters shall return to their former estate, then [and only then] thou and thy daughters shall return to your former estate.

Paul is naturally in complete accord with Ezekiel:

Rom 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles [Sodom and Samaria] be come in.

This timeline of events is reiterated twice in Ezekiel 16:53-55. Yet the carnal-minded Christians of orthodoxy insist that the ‘valley of dry bones’ of Ezekiel 37, refers to what God will do with Israel at the beginning of the millennium. Rather than admit that Paul and Ezekiel both proclaim that physical, natural Israel will return to their God only “when Sodom and Samaria return to their former estate”, they fabricate the theory that no one ever thought such a thing before 135 A.D. It was the apostle Paul who taught that “Jerusalem which now is and is in bondage with her children” signifies Hagar the bondwoman who was cast  out of Abraham’s house:

Gal 4:21  Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?
Gal 4:22  For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.
Gal 4:23  But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.
Gal 4:24  Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.
Gal 4:25  For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.

For these carnal-minded Christians, I have but one question: Will Sodom be restored to God at the beginning of the millennium? I think not! Sodom and Samaria will rise up out of their graves at the great white throne judgment, and that is when all the physical Jews who have never been granted to accept Christ as their Savior will also do so.

Eze 16:53  When I shall bring again their captivity, the captivity of Sodom and her daughters, and the captivity of Samaria and her daughters, then will I bring again the captivity of thy captives in the midst of them:
Eze 16:54  That thou mayest bear thine own shame, and mayest be confounded in all that thou hast done, in that thou art a comfort unto them.
Eze 16:55  When thy sisters, Sodom and her daughters, shall return to their former estate, and Samaria and her daughters shall return to their former estate, then thou and thy daughters shall return to your former estate.

I submit to you that both Paul and Ezekiel taught ‘replacement theology.’

Just some food for thought,

Mike

Other related posts