Posted on 10/07/2004 7:52:49 AM PDT by dukeman
"Replacement theology" has always been the orthodox chr*stian teaching. It is only among Fundamentalist Protestants (aka "Bible chr*stians") that the concept is rejected, and these are a relatively late arrival on the scene.
The unfortunate fact is that "the two testaments" say two completely different and opposing things. They can only be reconciled by the a priori assumption that they are the work of the same G-d and therefore must somehow be in harmony. There are two ways of doing this. The first is classic supersessionism, and the second (based on a high view of the TaNa"Kh) is a sort of "parallel and equal tracks" approach that insists that while salvation is possible only in J*sus, this is applied to Jews when they obey the Torah. There are many ironies in this.
Protestantism began as a rejection of "works" and the human element in "salvation" (essentially, the reformers applied Paul's antinomianism to the "new law" on the basis of a sort of qal vachomer reasoning). Fundamentalist Protestants are historically the greatest champions of "J*sus only" salvation. Yet it is these very same people who are the greatest defenders today of the legitimacy of the Torah! Why? Is this not absurd? Perhaps, but it is no more absurd than the composite chr*stian Bible itself. Fundamentalists merely take both messages and interpret them as being literally true simultaneously.
Another thing to notice is that Paul's original polemic against the Torah has been applied by Protestants from the beginning to the laws, traditions, and rituals of the chr*stian church (again, qal vachomer). We have arrived at the point today where Paul's antinomianism and theology of grace are invoked not against the Torah (Paul's original target) but against the Catholic and Orthodox churches. Why is this? Because the Torah is "in the Bible" and therefore exempt whereas the laws/rituals/traditions of the historical churches are not. And if Paul condemned the laws delivered to Moses from the very Mouth of G-d, how much the more so would he condemn the post-Biblical laws of the liturgical chr*stian churches???
So what it comes down to is this: churches that stress "works" in the form of the traditional Catholic/Orthodox understanding condemn Fundamentalist Protestants for their "J*sus alone" theology of salvation but at the same time condemn them for letting the Jews bypass J*sus. Similarly, Fundamentalist Protestants invoke Paul against rosary beads but not against tefillin, which are authorized by the Bible. Therefore Catholic and Fundamentalist chr*stians actually switch places when it comes to the Jews. Catholics, who insist on the merit of human action, suddenly become "J*sus only" when it comes to the Jews, while Fundamentalists who condemn "all that Catholic stuff" as unnecessary because of "Chr*st's atoning sacrifice" suddenly defend the efficacy of Israel's obedience of the Torah.
Confusing? You bet it is. But the thing that unites the antinomian anti-Catholic element of Fundamentalist Protestantism with its pro-Torah position is THE BIBLE. This is what so many can't seem to see.
If Jews want to encourage the pro-Jewish, pro-Torah element of today's chr*stianity (though I maintain they should simply teach mankind the Noachide Laws instead) they need to get into the "battle for the Bible." The higher view chr*stians have of the Bible, especially the "old testament," the more pro-Jewish they are. Yet the stereotype persists of the "anti-Semitic Bible-thumper" and the "philo-Semitic higher critical liberal" while Jews, even Orthodox Jews, remain aloof on the issue. And need I point out that it is precisely the anti-Torah churches who have seized on Biblical criticism in part to discredit the Torah and make it a "preparation" (G-d forbid!) for "the new and everlasting covenent" while the pro-Jewish chr*stians are the greatest champions of total inerrancy?
You want to KO "replacement theology?" Then stop talking about it. Instead talk about how Israel received the Torah amidts fire and clouds on Mt. Sinai and how Moses wrote down each and every letter at G-d's dictation. Talk about this! Smash the stereotypes!
As "John Adams" says to "Thomas Jefferson" in the musical 1776 when the Continental Congress is tearing his Declaration to shreds, you're the one[s] who wrote it!!!
Who are those people I davnen with on Simchat Torah? "Khazars?"
Probably the ancestors of those people the holocaust never happened to. :-)
Good one!
But you know, the advocates of classical ecclesiology are full of contradictions like that. I once took a course at a college run by a small conservative Protestant denomination that subscribed to the "amillenial"/"the church is Israel" line, and I noticed that the on one page the author said that perhaps the sufferings of the Jewish People throughout history were a punishment for their ancestors' rejection of J*sus, while on another page in the very same book he attacked Jewish claims to 'Eretz Yisra'el because "none of these so-called Jews today can trace their ancestry back more than one or two hundred years."
I'm not kidding!!!
No religious Jew I know believes 'higher criticism' is 'philo-Semitic'. In fact, it is frequently mockingly referred to as 'higher anti-Semitism'.
Jews have nothing to gain from taking sides in internecine Christian disputes. Anti-Semites will always find a reason to be so, and the gulf between understanding and language is too large.
Welcome to FR...why are you reviving this nearly two year old thread?
Maybe you aren't familiar with history. Check the events of 70 AD. Josephus has the Romans murdering over a million Jews in a few hours. Some 100,000 were taken captive. Of course, there were lots of Jews living outside Jerusalem at this time, but the Jewish state and the center of Jewish religion was utterly destroyed. Within a generation of the crucifiction. Just as Christ predicted.
And before I am labeled a wild-eyed antisemite, let me issue the standard disclaimer that some of the dearest people I know are Jewish, and I think Jews are a wonderful people and a credit to any society in which they reside. I think Israel is a valuable ally surrounded by savages that will never deal in good faith.
Unfortunately, that's a pretty tightly kept secret.
Jews have nothing to gain from taking sides in internecine Christian disputes.
Then why are you posting to this thread? Aren't you (at least by implication) taking sides in the internecine chr*stian dispute between supersessionists and anti-supersessionists? Why is that profitable while defending the Torah isn't?
Anti-Semites will always find a reason to be so, and the gulf between understanding and language is too large.
I have three responses. First, Jews constantly take sides in internecine chr*stian disputes, almost always on the side of the more higher critical and liberal chr*stians. Do you recall my complaints earlier this year when the Chief Rabbinate of Israel issued a joint resolution with the Vatican? What purpose did this serve other than to send the message that "Orthodox Jews aren't like those idiotic yahoos who believe a great fish actually swallowed Jonah; rather, we're like the intellectual, non-literal, 'the-Bible-is-full-of-mythology' Catholics"?
Second, I was not aware that defending the Divine dictation of the Holy Torah was "taking sides in an internecine chr*stian dispute." Perhaps someone will enlighten me as to how simply stating the facts about the truth of the Torah and the manner of its dictation and accurate preservation for the past 3300-plus years is "taking part in an internecine chr*stian dispute." Am I, as a Noachide, supposed to hide my beliefs and pose as a world-weary Weimar intellectual? How are Jews going to carry out their mission of teaching the world if they don't speak out on such matters as the veracity of the Torah itself?
Thirdly, while you may dismiss the idea of enlightening the world about the Torah as useless in the fight against anti-Semitism, the point is that Jews weren't put on earth to fight anti-Semitism but to spread the message of G-d (a pretty radical idea, I'll admit!). And besides, for every religious Jew who remains utterly silent in the face of attacks on the Torah there are a hundred secular Jews who call press conferences every time some remark about noses or banks is made. Therefore the invocation of the uselessness of fighting anti-Semitism as an excuse to remain silent on the Torah is useless, as it merely allows secular, anti-Torah Jews to form the public face of Jewry.
The Jews were also decimated by the Babylonians and their Temple destroyed, but I don't hear anyone claiming that God's covenent with them was ended at the time.
Judaism (and Noachism) are based on the Torah, G-d's First and Most Authoritative Revelation. Chr*stianity is based on the a priori assumption that the latter religion is a fulfillment of the prophecies of the former. If chr*stianity were true it would have been authorized by the Torah, not later Prophets. The Torah sits in judgement on the claims of chr*stianity and of every other religion on earth.
And before I am labeled a wild-eyed antisemite, let me issue the standard disclaimer that some of the dearest people I know are Jewish, and I think Jews are a wonderful people and a credit to any society in which they reside. I think Israel is a valuable ally surrounded by savages that will never deal in good faith.
Believe it or not, as much as I disagree with you I understand where you're coming from. You're dealing with the contradictions between "the two testaments" in the traditional way. At least you know they exist!
As a service to all my Catholic brothers and sisters, I would like to reiterate the Catholic truth that the Catholic Church is the New Israel.
And also, to state that the Catholic Church is Christianity; that is to say, all Christianity is Catholicism. That is what Catholics believe, and have always believed.
And your reward for this is joint statements with Orthodox rabbis who wouldn't be caught dead breathing the same oxygen as a pro-Israel Fundamentalist Baptist.
People are funny.
I am commenting on your outrageous assertion that you know better than 3000 years of Torah Sages.
Can you name one acknowledged Torah leader that subscribes to 'higher criticism'? Every prominent traditional Jewish web site has sections devoted to refuting 'higher criticism' and to promoting the Seven Laws of Noah. I can post the links if you've had trouble finding them.
I was not aware that I made any such assertion. Perhaps you could quote it to me?
If you are referring to my belief that Orthodox Jews should speak out when G-d or His Torah are attacked, I can only say that I assume to do so is a qiddush HaShem while to fail to do so is a chillul HaShem. Are these not Torah principals? Or if you are referring to my hasty remark that the Jews weren't put here to fight anti-Semitism but to spread the Word of G-d, I will admit to that being clumsy on my part, since the first duty of `Am Yisra'el is to obey Torah (of which spreading the Word of G-d is one part). However, they most assuredly weren't put here for the single purpose of fighting anti-Semitism, which has become the public Jewish mission of recent decades. If there are any quotations from 3000 years of Jewish sages that attacks on G-d and His Torah are to be shrugged off while disparaging remarks about noses require the mobilization of the entire nation, I'd be glad to see them.
If you're referring to my criticism of the Chief Rabbinate of Israel issuing joint statements with the Vatican, I think the 3000 years of Jewish sages are on my side (or, as I should say, I am on theirs).
Can you name one acknowledged Torah leader that subscribes to 'higher criticism'? Every prominent traditional Jewish web site has sections devoted to refuting 'higher criticism' and to promoting the Seven Laws of Noah. I can post the links if you've had trouble finding them.
Hey . . . I'm a Noachide, remember?
I don't claim that any authentic Jewish sages subscribe to higher criticism--far from it. In fact, I have posted several times to this forum that with the exception of a few "Modern Orthodox," academics, and Sefaradi intellectuals, Orthodox Jews believe in the Divine dictation of the Torah. The problem is that this is so completely unknown outside the Orthodox Jewish community. When I post (as I have done, as you well know) Jewish materials on this site teaching the traditional Jewish concepts I am often assailed by people who simply cannot believe that Jews believe such idiotic things (one of these charges, made by "Thomas Paine," was fairly recent and made in response to my pre-Shavu`ot Jewish chronology thread). The popular understanding is that only "rednecks" believe such drivel. In fact, the TaNa"Kh is more associated in the public mind with Fundamentalist Protestants than with Jews. Witness the phenomenon that the more liberal and "philo-Semitic" the chr*stian is, the more hostile and dismissive they are of the "old testament" and the "old testament" G-d. People read the TaNa"Kh and see old New England Puritans or "bigoted" Bible-banging rednecks or maybe even medieval Catholic inquisitors--they certainly don't see the tolerant, easy-going, free-thinking Jewish People. The fact is that the Jewish People and their G-d have become disassociated in the public mind, and this is a chillul HaShem. It is time for the Jewish People and their G-d to be recognized again as One by the rest of the world.
Despite our past disagreements we have always been friends. I am sorry if I have crossed the line in anything I have said. But I can't see things any other way. I'm sorry.
If you were a Noachide living in a world of "irreverent" Jews and "G-d-fearing" chr*stians, perhaps you would wish for a higher Orthodox profile yourself.
I'd like your opinion on my post #61 on this thread.
(1) I don't like the term "replacement" or the term "supersession" because the classic orthodox Christian view is that through Jesus, Israel is expanded - not replaced.
(2) You say that Scripture is responsible for the fundamentalist schizophrenia on this issue that is the metastasizing Scofieldism of our times, but what I think is responsible is a school of Scriptural interpretation that is fundamentally flawed.
We spoke offline about the annoying tendency of some Catholic and Orthodox interpreters to obviate the literal sense of Scripture with increasingly disconnected mystical-symbolic interpretation.
The opposite tendency exists in hard Protestantism, whereby the the prophetic import of the historical events recorded in the Hebrew Scriptures is ignored or stripped away. The end result is an Old Testament and a New Testament radically disconnected from one another in which the Incarnation essentially sunders God's plan of salvation into two irreconcilable pieces. In this interpretation the Old Testament can either be entirely discarded (replacement) or placed on the "parallel track" (dispensationalism).
In opposition to both extremes of interpretation is the classic Christian position, as articulated by St. Augustine, is: "The new lies hidden in the old, the old is made manifest in the new."
(3) Were it not for the corrosive force of Jacobinical biblical interpretation (higher criticism) the quiet yet ongoing renaissance in lower criticism (i.e. the increasing level of historical knowledge and archaeological discovery of the actual circumstances of the real Biblical personalities - did it make the news that it is now a secular historical certainty that Aaron was a real person and we have identified part of his actual DNA?) would force a renewed appreciation among Christians of the profoundly Jewish nature of Jesus and a more fitting respect for his relatives.
That should tell you something.
If chr*stianity were true it would have been authorized by the Torah, not later Prophets. The Torah sits in judgement on the claims of chr*stianity and of every other religion on earth.
First of all, there are Christian prophecies in the Torah. Second, that being the case, the Torah sits in judgement of contemporary Judaism most of all.
The Jews were also decimated by the Babylonians and their Temple destroyed, but I don't hear anyone claiming that God's covenent with them was ended at the time.
That should tell you something.
It tells me that the destruction of the Temple for however long doesn't imply in the least that Judaism has been replaced with another religion. It also tells me that you accept the authority of your Nazarene "prophet" a priori.
First of all, there are Christian prophecies in the Torah.
Only if you already believe this to begin with.
Second, that being the case, the Torah sits in judgement of contemporary Judaism most of all.
If you insist that the stories and commandments are chr*stological allegories above and beyond their simple literal sense. Then the next thing you know you're saying that it doesn't matter whether or not Adam actually existed so long as he was a "prefiguring" of the Nazarene.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.