03-13-2010, 12:21 PM
(05-21-2009 04:43 PM)live4Him Wrote: [ -> ]I don't know if this has been covered or not in a previous thread (being new here on the forum). I looked at some of the recent ones and didn't see it so far. I'm not sure what it means completly. I know it means in part that the Church has replaced Israel as God's people. At least I think that's what it means.-----------------
Why is this such a bad thing? This is what I get accused of if I no longer want to be in HR .
Replacement Theology (Gal. 4:21-31)
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a few other ancient peoples upheld the same claim, but there was never one to rise with the claim that a people had been replaced by another as God's chosen People.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.