Introduction
Crafting a robust rebuttal to Supersessionism offers a unique challenge because of the wide variety of stances found under the umbrella of Supersessionism. For one, what is Supersessionism? Supersessionism, also known as Replacement Theology, is the belief that the Church has superseded Israel. This article aims to give a concise rebuttal to the core claims of supersessionism without addressing all of the nuances found across its different forms. I state this as a disclaimer that I will not be addressing every aspect of each form of supersessionism, and I do not wish to oversimplify their stance. I have done my best to address the most common arguments and reasoning found in all forms of supersessionism, followed by an exposition of New Testament Scriptures regarding Israel and the Church.
I. The Historical Argument
One of the key arguments supersessionism holds is that the concept of God’s faithfulness to an unbelieving Israel is not found anywhere in Church history until the advent of Dispensationalism in the 1900s. Dispensationalism is the belief that there are distinct periods of time—or dispensations—in which God interacts with humanity in a different way. They also believe in a pre-tribulation rapture, and highlight a distinction between Israel and the Church. Proponents of supersessionism have done an incredible job of cornering this conversation as solely a dispensationalist point of theology. You don’t need to be a dispensationalist to believe in God’s faithfulness to Israel. I would point you to look at the writings on Romans 11, Hosea 3, Zechariah 12, and Ezekiel 36 by,
Charles Spurgeon – “Prince of Preachers” (1834-1892)
Thomas Aquinas – Italian Dominican friar and priest (1225-1274)
Jonathan Edwards – American revivalist preacher, philosopher, and theologian. (1703 – 1755)
Geerhardus Vos – “the father of Reformed Biblical theology” (1862-1949)
John Owen- theologian, and vice-chancellor of the University of Oxford (1616- 1683)
Increase Mathers – Puritan clergyman, and sixth president of Harvard (1639 – 1723)
“It can also designate the termination, i.e., that the blindness of the Jews will last up to the time when the full number of the gentiles will come to the faith. With this agrees his next statement, namely, and then, i.e., when the full number of the gentiles has come in, all Israel should be saved, not some, as now, but universally all: I will save them by the Lord their God (Hos 1:7); he will again have compassion upon us (Mic 7:19).” —Thomas Aquinas
“Until that shall be, the fullness of the church’s glory can never come. Matchless benefits to the world are bound up with the restoration of Israel; their gathering in shall be as life from the dead. Jesus the Saviour is the joy of all nations, but let not the chosen race be denied their peculiar share of whatever promise holy writ has recorded with a special view to them. The woes which their sins brought upon them have fallen thick and heavily; and even so let the richest blessings distil upon them.”
—Charles Spurgeon
“ It is granted that there shall be a time and season, during the continuance of the kingdom of the Messiah in this world, wherein the generality of the nation of the Jews, all the world over, shall be called and effectually brought unto the knowledge of the Messiah, our Lord Jesus Christ; with which mercy they shall also receive deliverance from their captivity, restoration unto their own land, with a blessed, flourishing, and happy condition therein. The thing itself is acknowledged, as far as I can understand, by all the world that have any acquaintance with these things. Christians generally do assert it, look for it, pray for it; and have done so in all ages from the days of the apostles.” — John Owen
Revered theologians throughout the centuries have affirmed that a time was coming by God’s providence that we would see a Jewish state again, and we would see a national salvation of ethnic Israel.
II. How Supersessionists Relate to Scripture
The reason I have not started my writing by listing my strongest arguments from Scripture is because of the manner in which supersessionism interprets Scripture. In the writings of the New Testament, we see the Apostles in their unique authority make allegories or even draw new meanings out of Old Testament prophecies. Supersessionism argues that this sets a precedent to spiritualize or allegorize every prophecy or story. This approach assumes authority to selectively redefine God’s inspired words in ways that change the original author or prophet’s message. This allows the promises of land and deliverance to be spiritualized. Furthermore, in this view, how are we to know when to take the Bible literally or when we are to spiritualize it? For if we were to read the Bible by itself, we would see a future in which God, by His faithfulness, would restore a Jewish state and bring about the salvation of ethnic Israel. The reason we look through historical commentaries across denominational lines and see an abundance of theologians affirming God’s faithfulness to a faithless people is simply because it is what the text states. This is not to say that there are no allegories or symbolism within the text, but we should not assume these forms of writing upon all of the text. When we bypass the primary application of the text, we miss major narratives throughout Scripture. Many great theologians affirmed a literal interpretation of Scripture concerning the nation and people of Israel.
III. Proper Hermeneutics
Common arguments for Supersessionism are made from Galatians 3 and Ephesians 2. It is broadly understood that the proper hermeneutics is to prioritize the text that speaks most directly to an issue rather than secondary texts that may be relevant to the topic at hand but are not explicitly addressing it. Romans 11 is part of a letter to the Roman Church on how to relate to and understand the topic of Israel. So when we shape our theology on Israel, all Scripture is God breathed and valuable for teaching. Yet our focus must be on the text that most directly addresses the issue at hand, which is Romans 11.
IV. Galatians 3:3
“So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.”
This passage is expounding upon what I believe is stated in Romans 11:17, “If some of the branches have been broken off, and you, though a wild olive shoot, have been grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing sap from the olive root.” Both Romans 11:17 and Galatians 3:14 speak of how Gentiles are brought into the Kingdom of God by faith. Does this passage mean that there are now no distinctions between Jewish and Gentile believers? Using this logic, this passage would also imply that there is no distinction between a man and a woman. Referencing back to our earlier topic, proper hermeneutics is to prioritize the text that speaks most directly to an issue. Galatians 3 is speaking to works of the law v.s. faith, explaining how the law is not contradictory to the promise received by faith. This is not an explicit text on how believers are to relate to Jewish people. It can seem like splitting hairs in our Western society, but there is a significant difference between being grafted in, or being joined to Israel, and superseding or replacing Israel. One gives honor and the other dishonor. To be grafted in is a place of humility and acknowledges that we weren’t just grafted into a spiritual idea of Israel but amongst a believing remnant of Jewish believers. They were the first missionaries and pastors; they brought us the good news, the Scriptures, and blessed the nations. Supersessionism is often not mindful of the fact that the historical Church and the Church today are made up of Jews and Gentiles. God kept a remnant for Himself out of ethnic Israel, and He will until the end of the age. So we walk in humility, acknowledging that we are grafted in amongst the believing remnant, not replacing it.
A picture that foreshadows this is the Egyptians in the Exodus. After the works of God, many Egyptians joined the Israelites as they wandered into the desert. They were joined to Israel, and yet Hebrews tells us it was only those who walked in faith who entered God’s rest (see Hebrews 4:1-3). God is not a respecter of persons, and we must all stand by faith. “Consider therefore the kindness and sternness of God: sternness to those who fell, but kindness to you, provided that you continue in his kindness. Otherwise, you also will be cut off.” – Romans 11:22.
V. Romans 11
“I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers and sisters, so that you may not be conceited: Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in, and in this way all Israel will be saved.” – Romans 11:25-26a
Paul wanted zero confusion about this. Israel has experienced a hardening of heart for the sake of the Gentiles, and there is a promise for the future salvation of ethnic Israel. God’s plan is to use the Gentiles to provoke Israel to jealousy, through our love and mercy!
“Again I ask: Did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all! Rather, because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel jealousy.” – Romans 11:11
“so they too have now become disobedient in order that they too may now receive mercy as a result of God’s mercy to you.” – Romans 11:31
More moderate adherents of supersessionism concede this point and find agreement here. Yet they have no answer for why. Why does God promise a national salvation to this nation and not others? Why does God promise to keep a remnant for Himself supernaturally, completely by His Grace? “So too, at the present time there is a remnant chosen by grace. And if by grace, then it cannot be based on works; if it were, grace would no longer be grace.” – Romans 11:5-6. We see no promise like this for any other nation, so why is that? The answer is also found in this chapter, “As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies for your sake; but as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs, for God’s gifts and his call are irrevocable.” – Romans 11:28-29 The Jewish people are “enemies” to the gospel in their unbelief for your sake. The blessing of their rejection of the Gospel is that salvation has come to the gentile world! “But if their transgression means riches for the world, and their loss means riches for the Gentiles, how much greater riches will their full inclusion bring!” – Romans 11:12 and
“For if their rejection brought reconciliation to the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead?” – Romans 11:15. Despite their unbelief, they are loved on account of the patriarchs, for God’s gifts and calling are irrevocable. The subject here is unbelieving Jewish people defined as loved and being given gifts and callings that are irrevocable. So if this favor is on account of the patriarchs, let us look to them.
VI. “Loved on Account of the Patriarchs”
Our Father Abraham.The Patriarch of Israel. God’s faithfulness to an unfaithful people is tied to this man. When we look through the Psalms and the prophets, the promises made to this man anchor God in His faithfulness to these people. Remember that unbelieving Jewish people are considered beloved on this account. You cannot redefine this. “I will establish my covenant as an everlasting covenant between me and you and your descendants after you for the generations to come, to be your God and the God of your descendants after you. The whole land of Canaan, where you now reside as a foreigner, I will give as an everlasting possession to you and your descendants after you; and I will be their God.” – Genesis 17:7-8 God promises Abraham a land as an eternal possession for him and his descendants forever.
The gifts of God are irrevocable.
He promises that He will be their God, to Abraham and his descendants after him.
The callings of God are irrevocable.
The covenant God made with Abraham differs in an incredibly defining way from the Mosaic covenant. The covenant to Abraham is unconditional. Abraham never walks through the slain animals during the covenant ceremony; God does this alone! (Genesis 15:12-21) The Mosaic covenant pertains to the law of sin and death and requirements to stay in the land; the Abrahamic covenant pertains to the gift of the land and God’s calling of this ancient people to Himself.
VII. Conclusion
“Therefore, say to the Israelites, ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says: It is not for your sake, people of Israel, that I am going to do these things, but for the sake of my holy name, which you have profaned among the nations where you have gone.” – Ezekiel 36:22.
To believe that God retains a unique faithfulness to ethnic Israel despite their unbelief is not a new idea or contrary to what the scriptures teach. Rather, we can trace this stream of thought throughout church history and conclude it to be true by taking scripture at its word. We affirm there is no way to the Father except through the Son, and we do not hold the Jewish people above reproach or in any idolized way. We believe God’s faithfulness is not to exalt a people, but to exalt His name. When we see His unwavering pursuit of the Jewish people, we are to be overwhelmed by the immense mercy and enduring love of our God. At the end of Romans 11, after explaining this great mystery, the Apostle Paul’s only response is, “Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable his judgments, and his paths beyond tracing out!“Who has known the mind of the Lord ? Or who has been his counselor? “Who has ever given to God, that God should repay them?”For from him and through him and for him are all things. To him be the glory forever! Amen.” – Romans 11:33-36
