Posted on 05/07/2012 2:38:10 PM PDT by wmfights
This section we will attempt a precise definition of supersessionism. Various titles have been used in identifying the view that the church has permanently replaced Israel in God’s plan. As Marten H. Woudstra observes, “The question whether it is more proper to speak of a replacement of the Jews by the Christian church or of an extension (continuation) of the OT people of God into that of the NT church is variously answered.”[i] The most common designation used in recent scholarly literature to identify this position is “supersessionism.” Commenting on this term, Clark M. Williamson writes, “‘Supersessionism’ comes from two Latin words: super (on or upon) and sedere (to sit), as when one person sits on the chair of another, displacing the latter.”[ii] In addition, the title “replacement theology” is often viewed as a synonym for “supersessionism.”[iii]
Several theologians have offered definitions of “supersessionism” or “replacement theology.” According to Walter C. Kaiser, “Replacement theology . . . declared that the Church, Abraham’s spiritual seed, had replaced national Israel in that it had transcended and fulfilled the terms of the covenant given to Israel, which covenant Israel had lost because of disobedience.”[iv] Ronald E. Diprose defines replacement theology as the view that “the Church completely and permanently replaced ethnic Israel in the working out of God’s plan and as recipient of Old Testament promises to Israel.”[v] R. Kendall Soulen argues that supersessionism is linked with how some view the coming of Jesus Christ: “According to this teaching [supersessionism], God chose the Jewish people after the fall of Adam in order to prepare the world for the coming of Jesus Christ, the Savior. After Christ came, however, the special role of the Jewish people came to an end and its place was taken by the church, the new Israel.”[vi] Herman Ridderbos asserts that there is a positive and negative element to the supersessionist view: “On the one hand, in a positive sense it presupposes that the church springs from, is born out of Israel; on the other hand, the church takes the place of Israel as the historical people of God.”[vii]
These definitions from Kaiser, Diprose, Soulen, and Ridderbos appear consistent with the statements of those who explicitly declare that the church is the replacement of Israel. Bruce K. Waltke, for instance, declares that the New Testament teaches the “hard fact that national Israel and its law have been permanently replaced by the church and the New Covenant.”[viii] According to Hans K. LaRondelle, the New Testament affirms that “Israelwould no longer be the people of God and would be replaced by a people that would accept the Messiah and His message of the kingdom of God.”[ix] LaRondelle believes this “people” is the church who replaces “the Christ-rejecting nation.”[x] Loraine Boettner, too, writes, “It may seem harsh to say that ‘God is done with the Jews.’ But the fact of the matter is that He is through with them as a unified national group having anything more to do with the evangelization of the world. That mission has been taken from them and given to the Christian Church (Matt. 21:43).”[xi]
When comparing the definitions of Kaiser, Diprose, Soulen, and Ridderbos with the statements of those who openly promote a replacement view, it appears that supersessionism is based on two core beliefs: (1) national Israel has somehow completed or forfeited its status as the people of God and will never again possess a unique role or function apart from the church; and (2) the church is now the true Israel that has permanently replaced or superseded national Israel as the people of God. Supersessionism, then, in the context of Israel and the church, is the view that the New Testament church is the new Israel that has forever superseded national Israel as the people of God. The result is that the church has become the sole inheritor of God’s covenant blessings originally promised to national Israel in the Old Testament. This rules out any future restoration of national Israel.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[i] Marten H. Woudstra, “Israel and the Church,” in Continuity and Discontinuity: Perspectives on the Relationship Between the Testaments, ed. John S. Feinberg (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 1987), 237. Woudstra believes that the terms, “replacement,” and “continuation” are both acceptable and consistent with biblical teaching. See also G. B. Caird, New Testament Theology (Oxford: Clarendon, 1994), 55.
[ii] Clark M. Williamson, A Guest in the House of Israel: Post-Holocaust Church Theology(Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox, 1993), 268, n. 9.
[iii] Diprose views the titles “replacement theology” and “supersessionism” as being synonymous. He also notes that the title “replacement theology” is a “relatively new term in Christian theology.” Ronald E. Diprose, Israel in the Development of Christian Thought (Rome: Istituto Biblico Evangelico Italiano, 2000), 31, n. 2. In this present work, we will use the titles “supersessionism” and “replacement theology” as synonyms. We acknowledge, though, that these designations may not be entirely satisfactory to those who view the church more as the continuation or fulfillment of national Israel. See Herman Ridderbos, Paul: An Outline of His Theology, trans. John Richard De Witt. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975), 333–34; Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, 2d. ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1999), 1058–59.
[iv] Walter C. Kaiser, Jr., “An Assessment of ‘Replacement Theology’: The Relationship Between theIsrael of the Abrahamic–Davidic Covenant and the Christian Church,” Mishkan 21 (1994): 9.
[v] Diprose, Israel in the Development of Christian Thought, 2.
[vi] R. Kendall Soulen, The God of Israel and Christian Theology, (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996), 1–2.
[vii] Herman Ridderbos, Paul: An Outline of His Theology, trans. John Richard de Witt. (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975), Paul, 333–34.
[viii] Bruce K. Waltke, “Kingdom Promises as Spiritual,” in Continuity and Discontinuity, 274. He also states, “The Jewish nation no longer has a place as the special people of God; that place has been taken by the Christian community which fulfills God’s purpose for Israel” (275). Emphasis in original.
[ix] Hans K. LaRondelle, The Israel of God in Prophecy, Principles of Prophetic Interpretation(Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 1983), 101. Emphasis in original.
[x] Ibid.
[xi] Loraine Boettner, The Millennium (Philadelphia: Presbyterian & Reformed, 1957), 89–90. According to Bright, “The New Testament triumphantly hails the Church as Israel . . . the true heir of Israel’s hope.” John Bright, The Kingdom of God (Nashville: Abingdon, 1953), 226.
If the God of the Bible is all knowing and Jesus is God in the flesh and thus has a divine perspective on the future then one can surmise that the covenant promises made to the patriarchs are suspect if supersessionism/reformed/covenant/replacement theology is correct.
It is interesting to note that the “New Covenant” referred to in the New Testament has little to do with gentile Church. It is also interesting that St Paul preached to the jew first, then the gentile. We gentile Christian have a tendency to disregard the first 3/4 of the Scriptures.
The reformed crowd is long on talk but short of Biblical proof for their position.
BOOM, baby! That particular theory is very well evidenced. Careful though, as this study will bring you smack up against dearly held !!!TRADITIONS!!! (if I may wax a bit Quixotic) that even the 5 solas have not been able to eradicate. It is my position that sola-scriptura should rightly go where it goes - in spite of in-grained belief - and that, my brother, is exceedingly hard to do, as every single faith I have ever run into is laced with the infection of ROME... Even my own.
It is not enough to look at the splinter in the eye of the Protestants.
[Campion:] Nice example of propagating the lies told about Christianity by atheists. [...] The Nazis used Martin Luther they same way they used anyone else who could be twisted to agree with them.
While I agree with you factually, Campion, I have to stand with GiovannaNicoletta. Even your own co-religionists have used this very idea to beat Protestants with, which I am sure you have witnessed by now. I have on occasion replied to them that Luther's antisemitism was largely a result of the times he lived in, and the religion he was unwittingly coming out of - Which I believe is a true statement, and is as such, in alignment with GiovannaNicoletta. And it IS a terrible truth that Christians of all stripes are loathe to admit.
I will deny it, if Campion does not. Anyone willing to research the Nazi regime will have to conclude that the quote you refer to is merely propaganda. They were occultists looking to resurrect the gods of ancient Germany, blending them with a rather mythical view of the Aryans and their gods (largely unknown at the time). Nazi religion is probably the single most state-structured Neo-Pagan effort in modern times. Any mention of Lutheran Protestantism would necessarily be a marriage of convenience.
And even that neo-paganism was a prop for the masses, IMHO, as it was methodically overlaid with imagery of the state, and quite often depicted nazi leaders in heroic poses - Let us not forget that Naziism is technically socialist at heart. Socialists must abhor Christianity, no matter which stripe (Lutherans included) as it is an unlikely means to state religion, which must replace all existing religions in the socialist ideal.
or What was the purpose of the Ekklesia ? Was it a temporal corporation to rule on earth ? No ! Was it to have a temporal head ? No ! It was a gathering of YHvH's chosen people to hear His Word ? and learn to Fear YHvH all their days ? And to teach their children the same ? Yes. ------------- Ekklesia is from the Hebrew Qahal (kop, hey, lamed) How does YHvH define "church" i.e.Ekklesia ?
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
Is it all those called out by YHvH ?
A study of the word "church", in the Koine Greek : Ekklesia.
Was the "church" started at the YHvH commanded
Feast day of Shavuot (pentecost) as some say ?
Did the "church" exist earlier ?
Using the LXX as a guide we see that the Ekklesia
is first used in Deuteronomy 4:10 NAsbU Deuteronomy 4:10 "Remember the day you stood before YHvH, your God
Also see : Deu 4:10, Deu 9:10, Deu 18:16, Deu 23:3, Deu 23:4, Deu 23:9, Deu 31:30,
at Horeb, when YHvH said to me, 'Assemble the people to Me, that I may let
them hear My words so they may learn to fear Me all the days they live on
the earth, and that they may teach their children.'
Jos 9:2, Jda 20.2, Jda 21:5, Jda 21:8, Jdg 20:2 Jdg 21:5, Jdg 21:8, 1 Sa 17:47,
1 Sa 19:20, 1 Ki 8:14, 1 Ki 8:22, 1 Ki 8:55, 1 Ki 8:65, 1 Ch 13:2, 1 Ch 13:4, 1 Ch 28:2,
1 Ch 28:8
which is haQahal The assembly (hey, kop, hey, lamed)
In scripture it is always used to describe
those who have been assembled by YHvH.
It begins in Exodus 16:3 ( the bread from heaven )
and continues to Nehemiah 8:17 (living in Booths) NAsbU Nehemiah 8:17
The entire assembly of those who had returned from
the captivity made booths and lived in them.
The sons of Israel had indeed not done so
from the days of Joshua(Yehoshua)
the son of Nun to that day.
And there was great rejoicing.
AMEN! AMEN! AMEN!
THX THX.
Whether it was propaganda or not, if Martin Luther had not had antiSemitic and replacement theology beliefs, and had not vocalized and publicized his hatred and contempt of the Jewish people, the Nazis would not have had that to use as further justification for their mass murder of God's chosen people.
The antiSemitism and replacement theology continues today in direct and deliberate contradiction to Jesus Christ and His Scripture.
The bottom line, at the end of the day, is that there are people who espouse the same beliefs, whether we want to call it propaganda or not, as the Nazis used as validation for their actions.
Thank you for clarifying exactly what a "church" is and the true history of it.
I don't know that 100% of all REPLACEMENTARIANS are unsaved. I believe many may well be Saved through the Blood of The Lamb and the word of their testimony if they believe Christ came in the flesh etc.
HOWEVER, Giovanna makes a worthy point that DISBELIEVING such as the Scriptures below puts one in OPPOSITION TO GOD ALMIGHTY. He's not usually very pleased with such a stance or with such individuals.
3 I have made a covenant with my chosen, I have sworn unto David my servant,
4 Thy seed will I establish for ever, and build up thy throne to all generations. Selah.
5 And the heavens shall praise thy wonders, O Lord: thy faithfulness also in the congregation of the saints.
6 For who in the heaven can be compared unto the Lord? who among the sons of the mighty can be likened unto the Lord?
7 God is greatly to be feared in the assembly of the saints, and to be had in reverence of all them that are about him.
8 O Lord God of hosts, who is a strong Lord like unto thee? or to thy faithfulness round about thee?
9 Thou rulest the raging of the sea: when the waves thereof arise, thou stillest them.
10 Thou hast broken Rahab in pieces, as one that is slain; thou hast scattered thine enemies with thy strong arm.
11 The heavens are thine, the earth also is thine: as for the world and the fulness thereof, thou hast founded them.
12 The north and the south thou hast created them: Tabor and Hermon shall rejoice in thy name.
13 Thou hast a mighty arm: strong is thy hand, and high is thy right hand.
14 Justice and judgment are the habitation of thy throne: mercy and truth shall go before thy face.
15 Blessed is the people that know the joyful sound: they shall walk, O Lord, in the light of thy countenance.
16 In thy name shall they rejoice all the day: and in thy righteousness shall they be exalted.
17 For thou art the glory of their strength: and in thy favour our horn shall be exalted.
18 For the Lord is our defence; and the Holy One of Israel is our king.
19 Then thou spakest in vision to thy holy one, and saidst, I have laid help upon one that is mighty; I have exalted one chosen out of the people.
20 I have found David my servant; with my holy oil have I anointed him:
21 With whom my hand shall be established: mine arm also shall strengthen him.
22 The enemy shall not exact upon him; nor the son of wickedness afflict him.
23 And I will beat down his foes before his face, and plague them that hate him.
24 But my faithfulness and my mercy shall be with him: and in my name shall his horn be exalted.
25 I will set his hand also in the sea, and his right hand in the rivers.
26 He shall cry unto me, Thou art my father, my God, and the rock of my salvation.
27 Also I will make him my firstborn, higher than the kings of the earth.
28 My mercy will I keep for him for evermore, and my covenant shall stand fast with him.
29 His seed also will I make to endure for ever, and his throne as the days of heaven.
30 If his children forsake my law, and walk not in my judgments;
31 If they break my statutes, and keep not my commandments;
32 Then will I visit their transgression with the rod, and their iniquity with stripes.
33 Nevertheless my lovingkindness will I not utterly take from him, nor suffer my faithfulness to fail.
34 My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips.
35 Once have I sworn by my holiness that I will not lie unto David.
36 His seed shall endure for ever, and his throne as the sun before me.
37 It shall be established for ever as the moon, and as a faithful witness in heaven. Selah.
NO AMOUNT of illogical, unBiblical REPLACEMENTARIAN weasel words can escape the plain message in Scriptures like the above.
imho, folks have to LOVE THEIR OWN ILL-CONCEIVED BIASES
MORE than they Love the Word of God
in order to trash such Scriptures;
in order to cast aspersions on and to trash
ALMIGHTY GOD'S EVERLASTING FAITHFULNESS;
ALMIGHTY GOD'S EVERLASTING CHARACTER;
ALMIGHTY GOD'S EVERLASTING PROMISES TO THE CHILDREN OF ABRAHAM, ISAAC AND JACOB.
I've persistently been shocked these years on FR at the wholesale spiritual, intellectual and Biblical blindness on the part of so many of the REPLACEMENTARIAN folks.
I've come to believe that there MUST BE some demonic forces in high places infecting with such an outrageous dogma from hell. It IS in THEIR interest to, like Satan in the garden assert:
"Did God REALLY say...?"
Only fools listen to such lies from satan.
Only fools assuming they know more than God dare to trash God's EVERLASTING PROMISES to the Children of Jacob.
INDEED.
I’ve begun to believe that on such scores, their Bibles are as rubbery as that of the RC’s.
LUB BROTHER.
Hope your projects are progressing smoothly and with God’s affirmation and support in tangible ways.
My new book sold a few the first week. Praise God. Will see how it goes along.
Amen !
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
Oh, but they absolutely did, as your quote proves! But it is not the incorporation of Lutheranism itself.
The bottom line, at the end of the day, is that there are people who espouse the same beliefs, whether we want to call it propaganda or not, as the Nazis used as validation for their actions.
Again, very true. And had there not been supersessionism within the largely Lutheran Germany, I doubt the citizens could have turned a blind eye to what was going on. However, that may not be entirely the case - Germany chaffed at the impositions placed upon her at the end of WWI, so they may well have turned a blind eye regardless, in an effort to reclaim the glory days and in order to reclaim a right to be a world power. The general idea that Germans have an air of superiority is not far-fetched.
It was the implication that Naziism was an extension of Lutheranism that I took exception to... Unlike the Roman church, whose European crusades decimated the Jewish people right along with Christian 'heretics'... THAT was most assuredly an extension of the religion itself. Do I make the difference distinct in that example?
Nevertheless, I stand with you, as I said, in the statement that Christianity has been an offense against the Jewish people for 1900 years, which is a crying shame, and against the Word of YHWH.
“Godwin’s Law may apply here.”
Godwin’s “law” is used by Godless socialists to discredit the fact that they are, indeed, the heirs to Nazis.
It’s as meaningless in this discussion as elsewhere.
A primary theorist of Replacement Theolgy was Martin Luther, who was, indeed, a vicious anti-semite.
Luther’s book, “Of Jews and Their Lies” was the cornerstone of Nazi “Christian” Theology and actually set forth a multi-step plan for the Final Solution, down to the concentration camps.
Which of the following words, phrases, sentences are unclear?
31 If they break my statutes, and keep not my commandments;
32 Then will I visit their transgression with the rod, and their iniquity with stripes.
33 Nevertheless my lovingkindness will I not utterly take from him, nor suffer my faithfulness to fail.
34 My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips.
35 Once have I sworn by my holiness that I will not lie unto David.
36 His seed shall endure for ever, and his throne as the sun before me.
37 It shall be established for ever as the moon, and as a faithful witness in heaven. Selah.
.
NO AMOUNT of illogical, unBiblical REPLACEMENTARIAN weasel words can escape the plain message in Scriptures like the above.
imho, folks have to LOVE THEIR OWN ILL-CONCEIVED BIASES
MORE than they Love the Word of God
in order to trash such Scriptures;
in order to cast aspersions on and to trash
ALMIGHTY GOD'S EVERLASTING FAITHFULNESS;
ALMIGHTY GOD'S EVERLASTING CHARACTER;
ALMIGHTY GOD'S EVERLASTING PROMISES TO THE CHILDREN OF ABRAHAM, ISAAC AND JACOB.
I've persistently been shocked these years on FR at the wholesale spiritual, intellectual and Biblical blindness on the part of so many of the REPLACEMENTARIAN folks.
I've come to believe that there MUST BE some demonic forces in high places infecting with such an outrageous dogma from hell. It IS in THEIR interest to, like Satan in the garden assert:
"Did God REALLY say...?"
Only fools listen to such lies from satan.
Only fools assuming they know more than God dare to trash God's EVERLASTING PROMISES to the Children of Jacob.
Perhaps that's too big a chunk to wrap y'all's understanding around. Let's try a smaller chunk.
30 If his children forsake my law, and walk not in my judgments;
31 If they break my statutes, and keep not my commandments;
32 Then will I visit their transgression with the rod, and their iniquity with stripes.
33 Nevertheless my lovingkindness will I not utterly take from him, nor suffer my faithfulness to fail.
34 My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips.
Maybe I can try and guess which words are allowing the dogma from hell to infect y'all's weasel-theology thinking.
I wonder if "If" is causing some problems . . . Naw. It's only 2 letters after all. They can probably comprehend "If."
"his?" Naw. They MUST be able to tell the difference between men and women. I hope!
"children?" Naw. Some of them MUST have some children! They probably even know what activity produces from.
"forsake?" Hmmmm Could be. It's a slightly archaic word. However, they probably used it in their marriage vows. They probably understand it.
"my?" Naw. They PROBABLY can tell the difference between yours vs mine. I hope.
"law?" Wellllllllllll they sure seem to exalt in a lot of law type theology. I suspect they have at least a functional understanding of the word.
"and?" Naw. They must understand that common small word.
"walk?" Naw. They probably know the difference between when they are walking vs sleeping.
"not?" Naw. They seem to have negation down pretty well since THEY in THEIR OMNISCIENCE are negating ALMIGHTY GOD'S EVERLASTING PROMISES to HIS buddy Abraham.
"in?" Naw. I suspect they understand that little word. Two letters must be doable even for REPLACEMENTARIANS.
"judgments?" Naw. They seem to have NO TROUBLE AT ALL with judging ALMIGHTY GOD as flakey with HIS EVERLASTING PROMISES.
Verse 33:
"NEVERTHELESS?" Perhaps. Maybe that's the problem. Maybe they don't understand that word. That could explain it.
Maybe I should try and help them. I was an English teacher for 15 years to the Chinese! I realize that a Chinese silk worm might be brighter than a REPLACEMENTARIAN but I'll pretend not, for the sake of argument.
"Nevertheless" means
regardless,
in spite of,
however,
even though, still . . .
I note that--yet it will still be the case that . . .
Soooo, in this Psalm, "NEVERTHELESS" MEANS that ALMIGHTY GOD IS SAYING: "EVEN THOUGH they may well break their side of my Covenant with them . . . and EVEN THOUGH I will discipline them severely for breaking their side of our Covenant,
I WILL NEVER break my side of our Covenant."
"LOVINGKINDNESS?" Naw. Some of them probably manage some of that even though they are pretty harsh with ALMIGHTY GOD--calling HIS EVERLASTING promises worth less than used uhhhh tissue paper.
"WILL?" Naw. They seem, as a group, to understand "will" very well--and to be an incredibly willful lot. They willfully deny the plain meaning of dozens of Scriptures affirming ALMIGHTY GOD'S EVERLASTING PROMISES to the Children of Jacob.
"I?" Naw. They seem to have no trouble proclaiming "I" . . . their own egotistical dogmatic pontifications about GOD'S FLAKEY handling of His EVERLASTING PROMISES. They must understand "I" very well.
"UTTERLY" Hmmmm. That could be a problem. Naw. I don't think it is. They UTTERLY TRASH GOD ALMIGHTY'S CHARACTER AND HIS EVERLASTING PROMISES when they cast him as a liar to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and King David. And they do very well at being UTTERLY IDIOTIC and UTTERLY CLUELESS about dozens of Bible verses affirming the EVERLASTING NATURE OF GOD'S PROMISES to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and David. I think they are quite familiar with "utterly."
"take?" Naw. They take from ALMIGHTY GOD His reputation and character and trash the same as they trash HIS EVERLASTING PROMISES. They have to know "take" very well. BTW, Watch your daughters, men. These characters are great with weasel words and taking.
"from?" Naw. They don't hesitate to TAKE FROM ALMIGHTY GOD His character and His Faithfulness to His Word and Promises. They seem quite happy, also, to take from the children of Jacob THEIR INHERITANCE.
"from?" Naw. I think they understand that concept quite well. They seem quite gleeful in taking FROM the children of Jacob THEIR inheritance.
"him?" Naw. I think they have those tiny words down pretty well. At least I'm going to assume they are smarter than my collie dog--at least in areas having nothing to do with theology or the Bible.
"nor?" Naw. Even though it's likely not used as much as it was in the past, they seem to have negation down pretty well as I noted above.
"suffer?" Hmmmmm In this context and usage . . . they might not understand the meaning. In this passage, it means to allow, or experience. ALMIGHTY UNCHANGING GOD IS saying He will NOT ALLOW nor allow the children of Jacob to experience any loss of HIS faithfulness to them.
"FAITHFULNESS." Hmmmmmm. It would seem that they have no clue about this word. I wonder how their spouses can possibly trust each other to get the right kind of bread at the store--much less to remain faithful sexually. Evidently "faithfulness" has no use or meaning in their construction on reality and relationships.
"to?" Naw. They must know that simple word. My collie seemed to.
"fail." Naw. They accuse ALMIGHTY UNCHANGING GOD OF FAILING UTTERLY IN HIS EVERLASTING PROMISES in their 24/7/365 blatherings.
Verse 34
"covenant?" They CLAIM to understand the word given the label they put on their own theology. However, evidently they think that THEIR Covenants mean something lasting and dependable while ALMIGHT GOD'S don't. Evidently when it comes to "covenant," they have a very rubbery dictionary.
"break?" Naw. They accuse God of breaking HIS EVERLASTING COVENANTS all the time.
"thing?" Naw. They must know that some things are intangible and some are tangible. I doubt they sit in a chair thinking it's NOT a thing.
"that?" Naw. I'm sure they can point and refer to "that over there." At least, I hope so.
"gone?' Naw. They have, in their omniscience and omnipotence pronounced ALMIGHTY GOD'S EVERLASTING PROMISES TO BE GONE for centuries. I think they understand that concept.
"out?" Naw. They seem to have no trouble proclaiming that the children of Jacob are OUT OF their inheritance from ALMIGHTY GOD. I think they understand that one, too.
"lips?" Naw. Given that most seem to have no trouble producing children and pontificating, blathering, I assume they understand the meaning of lips.
I guess that leaves us with general cussedness, cluelessness, willful stubbornness and cheeky arrogance to so tenaciously declare so perversely that ALMIGHTY GOD is too wishy washy to keep even HIS EVERLASTING PROMISES TO HIS BEST BUD.
May God have mercy on their Bible and truth mangling.
May He protect all the young Christians from being infected with such a mentality . . . such a thinking that if God's EVERLASTING PROMISES to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob aren't worth tissue paper in a hurricane, that Christ's promise of Salvation through His Blood might be just as undependable.
BTW, I'd claim that my fingers were in my cheeks . . . but they mostly weren't.
This hideous, damnable deception from hell deserves the MOST FIERCE condemnation possible.
“So, y’all let me know when the pogrom begins, OK.”
Do you have any doubt Obama would instigate a final solution to the Jews in the USA, given the opportunity?
His “Black Liberation” theology is replacement theology, but with blacks in place of Jews.
The problem is a spiritual one and until that is fixed the self-deception will continue and the enmity with God will continue.
” Anyone willing to research the Nazi regime will have to conclude that the quote you refer to is merely propaganda.”
Sadly, as a Christian, I have to see this for what it is: revisionist history. The Nazis enveloped and embraces all forms of German Christianity, and did what they did in the name of my savior Jesus Christ.
This is an anti-Christian site, but it is correct on this issue. The photos are clear.
http://www.nobeliefs.com/nazis.htm
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.