Supersessionism

[eeyore]

from saturday's post...

Converting God's people
Evangelicals see ad as spreading 'good word,' Jewish leaders say it's 'replacement theology'

http://www.nationalpost.com/todays_paper/story.html?id=440531

i do think we've already said something on this matter in the westminster confession.  personally, i hate the term "replacement theology".  it's more like an "improvement theology" (though i doubt many jews would agree with me).  chapter vii...

V. This covenant was differently administered in the time of the law, and in the time of the gospel: under the law it was administered by promises, prophecies, sacrifices, circumcision, the paschal lamb, and other types and ordinances delivered to the people of the Jews, all fore-signifying Christ to come, which were for that time sufficient and efficacious, through the operation of the Spirit, to instruct and build up the elect in faith in the promised Messiah, by whom they had full remission of sins, and eternal salvation, and is called the Old Testament.

VI. Under the gospel, when Christ the substance was exhibited, the ordinances in which this covenant is dispensed, are the preaching of the Word, and the administration of the sacraments of Baptism and the Lord's Supper; which, though fewer in number, and administered with more simplicity and less outward glory, yet in them it is held forth in more fullness, evidence, and spiritual efficacy, to all nations, both Jews and Gentiles; and is called the New Testament. There are not, therefore, two covenants of grace differing in substance, but one and the same under various dispensations.

[wally]

For their information, "replacement theology" is not proper Christian term. As you point out, eeyore, we do not use it to explain that the salvation is extended to Gentiles.

I get very tired of hearing the arguments given by people who insist that the sharing of how we understand that the salvation is by faith in Christ as "My religion and my religion is the only true religion." Many Christians do not make such claims today. Like people of other religions claiming the uniqueness of their relgions, Christians say that the divine salvation/revelation is through Christ alone. There is nothing sinister about this. Even atheists argue that their ways of reasoning is the right way.

Christians of the past century might be accused of having insisted that Christianity is the only true religion in much the same way that Israelites in ancient history insisted that there was only one God.

[mack]

Looks like the WCF sure rules out any "two covenant" approach that any on the Committee on Church Doctrine may have had. Can't get much clearer than that!

[mack]

The report has been bounced to the 2009 Assembly.

[mack]

"Some debate ensued when a motion was put forward to reconsider Recommendation 3 on pg. 12.1.6.
This being defeated a new motion was presented as follows ; "Given that the World Council of Churches has designated this week as a Week of Action for Peace and Israel, and given that next year marks the 500th anniversary of John Calvin’s birth that the Assembly repudiate any version of Christian Zionism that implies a two covenant theology , that it affirm Calvin’s conviction (based on Paul) that, in the words of the Westminster Confession of Faith (VII,6) “there are not two covenants of grace differing
in substance, but one and the same under various dispensations” After discussion the motion was referred to the International Affairs Committee and Church Doctrine."

Thanks eeyore for your contribution to this year's Assembly. Let's see if we can help people to think theologically and see the links between proselytism to Jews, support for the state of Israel and various other topics tied to a properly thought through covenantal theology.

[al clarkson]

and too bad many Commissioners (Ruling and TEACHING Elders) found this wording a little too "technical" at GA

[mack]

Here is an interesting contribution to this topic from "Spengler" in relation to the tension generated in Catholic-Jewish dialogue over the revised "prayer for the Jews" in the Latin  liturgy for Good Friday which asks that "God our Lord should illuminate their hearts, so that they will recognize Jesus Christ, the savior of all men."

From the Jewish standpoint, the Pro Judaeis offers an unprecedented opportunity, which the Jews have missed. As the head of the Vatican commission for relations with the Jews, Walter Cardinal Kasper, explained, the prayer reflects an eschatological hope for the unity of Israel - the Israel of the flesh and the Israel of the Spirit - in the End Times, not a call for the conversion of today's Jews.

The indicated Jewish riposte would be to observe that the inclusion of the prayer in the Easter liturgy acknowledges that the Jews of today still are the Israel of the Bible - precisely what the "traditionalist" troglodytes and the pro-Palestinian left refuse to acknowledge. Although John Paul II and Benedict XVI hold this position, it never has been incorporated into the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the ultimate authority on Catholic doctrine. The Italian rabbis should embrace the prayer, and embrace every opportunity for dialogue, and nag the Church until it amends the Catechism - to the eternal discomfiture of the "substitutionist" theologians of right and left.

So what, exactly, in the PCC position on this? Hope we find out in June.

[mack]

Its emerging as a hot topic.  Good time for the G.A. to make a statement. Maybe it wouldn't even be completely ignored by the media. Still think that the word "heresy" is a good term to sue in relation to Christian Zionism and John Hagee. Heresy such a novel idea these days - and a great tag to stick on self-proclaimed "orthodox" Fundamentalists.

Christians urged to question Zionism

NEW YORK Antonios Kireopoulos is used to choosing his words carefully. The author is all too aware his brochure, Why We Should Be Concerned About Christian Zionism, cuts to the heart of some of the most contentious issues in US politics.

Mr Kireopoulos, programme director for interfaith relations at the National Council of Churches, said he did not want his words to be misused as ammunition by partisans of either side in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

“We share the conviction with other Christians that Israel has the right to security, but does that come at the expense of Palestinian rights and justice?” he said in his Manhattan office overlooking the Hudson river. “We want to alert Christians in our churches to these issues.”

The brochure by the Greek Orthodox theologian is being distributed among the 45 million US residents who belong to the NCC’s member churches, which include Protestants such as the Episcopalians and Lutherans, historic African-American churches that arose out of slavery, and peace advocates such as the Quakers.

Many observers believe the failure of successive US administrations to reach a Middle East peace deal is because of the influence of Christian evangelicals who overwhelmingly support Israel no matter what its policies. Mr Kireopoulos’s brochure is the latest salvo in an intra-Christian dialogue that seeks to define how far Christian support for Israel should go.

The brochure defines Christian Zionism as a 19th century theological innovation whose central belief is the state of Israel’s supposed role in the end of history and the return of the messiah. Under this ideology, the return of Jews to Israel fulfills biblical prophecy and heralds the final battle between good and evil. Unbelievers and Jews who refuse to accept Jesus will face death under divine judgment while true Christians will achieve eternal life in heaven.

Up to 40m people in the United States are Christian Zionists, according to the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life. The country has about 200m Christians of different denominations out of a population of about 300m.

“Ideological Christian Zionists sometimes claim that they speak on behalf of all American evangelicals. This is not so,” the brochure says. “Many evangelicals in the US do not want to be identified as theological Christian Zionists.”

This ideology “rejects any peace process built on a negotiated settlement towards a two-state solution to the conflict” because it encouraged advocacy “committed to preserving control over all of historic Palestine for Jewish people alone”. It also promoted “fear and hatred of Muslims and non-western Christians”, the brochure says.

One of the best-known Christian Zionists is John Hagee, a pastor who leads Christians United for Israel, a “mega-church” with an estimated 50,000 members. He has close ties with many US politicians and is a regular speaker at the annual conference of the hawkish American Israel Public Affairs Committee. He has also raised funds for settlements in the West Bank, which Israel calls Judea and Samaria.

The issue of Christian Zionist support remains controversial within Israel, where some critics warn against alliances with people who ultimately seek the conversion or death of Jews. Benjamin Netanyahu, the Likud party leader, and Binyamin Elon, a rabbi and right-wing political leader, are among those attacked by other Israelis for receiving funds and support from Christian Zionists.

Partly to counter the influence of such leaders as Mr Hagee, a group of 34 US evangelical leaders sent a letter to George W Bush in 2007, when he was president, reaffirming their belief that a two-state solution matched Christian teachings on compassion and justice.

The National Council of Churches started distributing its brochure in November and reaction had been largely positive, Mr Kireopoulos said.

“We’ve had calls and e-mails from people saying thank you. A pastor in Texas might have more need for it than one in New Hampshire but many are saying it’s helping them in their ministry,” he said. “We’ve also had critiques for supposedly appeasing Muslims or for not supporting Israel and betraying our Christian heritage. But that’s come mostly on the internet.

“We haven’t been attacked consistently or viscerally but then the country is not so focused on Israel/Palestine because of Iraq, Afghanistan and the economic crisis. Perhaps people are more worried about other things.”

The recent Israeli offensive, which killed about 1,300 Palestinian in the Gaza Strip, provoked little open criticism from US politicians and the media. But the new NCC brochure also points to a growing debate about the nature of US support for Israel.

More activists are saying that, as friends, the United States should do more to pressure Israel to realize Palestinian aspirations and make peace. Jimmy Carter, the former president, makes such an argument in his new book We Can Have Peace in the Holy Land: A Plan That Will Work.

A former adviser to Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president, welcomed the NCC brochure, but worried about its effectiveness. “It’s great they are talking about it, but the NCC is considered left wing and not very influential.

“I believe the majority of American churches would care more if they knew how some Christian groups are mobilized with extremist Israeli settler organizations and that their influence extends into the highest reaches of the US government. But we need a lot more outreach to make sure all people of faith are mobilized. ”

[al clarkson]

I take it that is likely the rationale for "Knox 30's" new posting

[mack]

“The profound difference between Paul and the Synagogue ultimately turned round the question of the meaning of ‘Jew’. To Paul, a Jew is not defined by race or tradition, but by the moral qualities which link him spiritually to Abraham ... Israel to Paul is not defined in terms of race or colour, but faith.”   Jakob Jocz, The Jewish People and Jesus Christ (London: S.P.C.K., 1949) p. 312. (Incidentally,  the modern State of Israel sides with Paul at this point by excluding from "the right of return" those who are Jews in ethnic or racial terms but who also happen to believe that Jesus is the Messiah. To be  a Jew one must believe that Jesus is not the Messiah!) 

For Paul, the "Israel of the Spirit" has in some sense superseded "the Israel of the flesh" - even if God, for His own Providential purpose continues to make use of the "blindness" of that same "Israel of the flesh" until the day of a national conversion. Temporarily alienated for the advantage of the Gentiles, they are eternally the objects of God’s electing love because His promises, once made to the patriarchs, can never be revoked.”

How do we imagine the "restoration of Israel' referred to in Romans 11:25-26?  Not all Isarel in the sense of every individual Jew but the whole nation will see the salvation of God - as opposed to the present conversion of individuals. Paul is saying that the new covenant (and human history) will not be complete until it embraces the people of the old covenant and these "two covenants" are seen, unambiguously, to be different dimensions of God's one covenant with the human race in Jesus Christ.

The creation and continuing existence of the modern state of Israel is perhaps, in the providence of God, a step towards the fulfillment which Paul envisages -  but is certainly not to be confused with it. This is what Hagee and Co. get wrong. The in-gathering of the Israel of the flesh may be part of God's means but it is not the end envisaged by Paul. 

[mack]

In what sense do we believe in Christian Supersessionism vis a vis Israel? How about?

"Israel’s mission to be a light to the nations and God’s promise to Abraham that he would be the father of a global family has been fulfilled in Jesus and through Him transferred to the Church.  “Talmudism”, the continuing faith of Israel after the flesh, is an interesting historical phenomenon but not one likely to challenge either Christianity or Islam as a global faith. (Indeed it is very much a minority taste even amongst ethnic Jews). In that sense, Israel has been “superceded” by the Church - which is certainly not to say that God has abandonned the Jewish people or that Israel has ceased to have a mysterious role in the Providence of God. It is just to make an empirical observation that the connection with the God of Israel for the vast majority of the world’s population is via Jesus rather than through   “Talmudism” or the nation of Israel.  Historically, it would seem to be the case that Israel’s place and vocation “to be a light unto the Gentiles” was (at least provisionally) bungled due to lack of faith in Christ – as Paul says in Romans.

God is putting the whole world back together in Christ. Israel’s place and purpose are subsumed in the greater work (as is the Church since our sovereign God can and does also work outside of Church). With the resurrection of Jesus and the breaking in of God’s new kingdom into the world, Israel’s purpose has been eclipsed by the task of bringing all things in heaven and earth under the Lordship of Christ.

The state of Israel was, and perhaps still is, a signpost that points (ambiguously) beyond itself itself to creation's Lord.  But Israel, itself,  is subsumed and transcended in Christ.

This is a hot topic and the heart of the ongoing argument and disagreement between Israel(both synagogue and State) and the church.  Let's hope the Committee on CD doesn't mess it up.

[mack]

Here's the Pope.

In this Torah, which is Jesus himself, the abiding essence of what was inscribed on the stone tablets at Sinai is now written in living flesh, namely, the twofold commandment of love. . . . To imitate him, to follow him in discipleship, is therefore to keep Torah, which has been fulfilled in him once and for all. Thus the Sinai covenant is indeed superseded. But once what was provisional in it has been swept away, we see what is truly definitive in it.

Joseph Ratzinger, Many Religions, One Covenant

[mack]

Apparently the report is actually going to get to Assembly this year!

For once, we might actually have something to contribute to what is becoming a lively discussion in the world! Somebody out there might actually be interested in what Canadian Presbyterians have to say on the subject and I am sure that the document will be well worth reading.

Whatever else is wrong with the PCC, we still have a good CCD. Wonder how long it will be before the Convener gets a call from the Canadian Jewish Congress to pressure Assembly not to say anything that would harm our "beautiful friendship"?

[wally]

Dear friends, finally the supersessionism paper is published and you may find it at http://www.presbyterian.ca/webfm_send/5040.

On page 59 of that long paper, you will find a summary statement that GA is asked to vote on.

Happy readings!