by Cris Putnam
C.E.B. Cranfield is a renowned New Testament scholar and author of several commentaries, including Romans in the prestigious International Critical Commentary series. He is a Cambridge educated emeritus professor of theology at University of Durham in England. He is reformed in his theology. His commentary on Romans is considered one of the very best by scholars of all stripes. From careful exegesis of Romans 9-11 he confidently casts supercessionism (replacement theology) as an unfortunate twisting of Pauline theology. One comment in particular should put a stone in the shoe of the replacement theologian:
It is only where the Church persists in refusing to learn this message, where it secretly—perhaps quite unconsciously! —believes that its own existence is based on human achievement, and so fails to understand God’s mercy to itself, that it is unable to believe in God’s mercy for still unbelieving Israel, and so entertains the ugly and unscriptural notion that God has cast off His people Israel and simply replaced it by the Christian Church. These three chapters [Romans 9-11] emphatically forbid us to speak of the Church as having once and for all taken the place of the Jewish people.[1]
Cranfield is most certainly correct. I really do not know how Paul could have spelled it out any clearer than this: “As regards the gospel, they are enemies for your sake. But as regards election, they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.”(Romans 11:28–29)
[1]C. E. B. Cranfield, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (London; New York: T&T Clark International, 2004), 448.
About Cris Putnam
How come the Jewish faith fails to recognize to this day, that their “Pass-Over” feast was changed from the Full Moon night, to the Waning Moon night in 625 b.c. by an apostate group of Rabbi’s that seized control of the temple? Why does the Jewish faith return to the Gregorian Saturday to celebrate their weekly Sabbath celebrations when it says specifically in the Bible that the weekly day is to be celebrated throughout the year on the same day as the feast was on?
Do you think the prophecy of the re-incarnation of the ancient King David, holds any validity now days?
Yes, the gifts and calling of God is irrevocable. BUT, faith is required. John tells us, “He came unto His own and His own received Him not. But to as many as received Him to them gave He the power to become a child of God.”
Paul’s point is that the door has not closed for the Jew even though they had Him crucified. They can still be grafted in….into the ekklesia, the called out ones, consisting of Jew and Gentile. Paul makes it clear in Ephesians 2:11-18 “11 Therefore remember that you, once Gentiles in the flesh—who are called Uncircumcision by what is called the Circumcision made in the flesh by hands— 12 that at that time you were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.
Christ Our Peace
14 For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, 15 having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace, 16 and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity. 17 And He came and preached peace to you who were afar off and to those who were near. 18 For through Him we both have access by one Spirit to the Father.
At this time in history, the planet Earth has approximately 1000 years left to support human life. There are 144,000 incarnated spirits here in mortal form to assist in the take-back of this planets government. The plan is to establish a true form of justice not yet known to date. Assistance will now come, by way of the Galactic Federation of Planets and the Andromiedan Council, here to implode the artificial Moon above in September of 2015, causing a 2000+ tidal-surge that will wash over the coastal areas of all countries, leaving both North and South America on the new Equatorial Line. After this event, the voting populace will be offered their choice in the 2016 Presidential Election. This will be a “write-in ballot” for the independent party “NationofChange.org” so the recount will convince our Electoral College of the landslide results! Candidates will be David L Kaas/Jessie Ventura for President. If these two are elected to office, then hemp will be legalized immediately for industrial production, hydrogen taken from the H2O molecule will be used to run our engines, and Free Electricity will become the norm. If not, then the worst is yet to come.
Hi Chris, looking forward to checking out your upcoming book.
I am writing in sincerity here because I honestly still do not quite understand this whole issue/controversy regarding “replacement theology” in the first place. I have been a Believer for many years now, but when I read the scriptures myself, and then turn around and here so many of these arguments against “replacement theology”, I just get, well, sorta confused….
What I mean is, on one level I understand the biblical basis for disproving the idea that God has simply washed his hands of “disbelieving Israel”, and has turned His back entirely on the Jewish people, giving Christians an excuse to look down their noses at them (and considering the long history of persecution of Jews by people calling themselves Christians over the centuries, I understand this to be no small point)
However, on the other hand, over time I begun to suspect that much of the energy behind these arguments which target “replacement theology” has a lot more to do trying to reinforce political concepts of the “gifts and calling of God” re: Israel than it does our attitudes about grace, the Law, the partriarchs, the lineage of the Messiah, etc. (All of which are what Paul continually points to in Romans when talking about Israel and their “irrevocable calling) In other words, are all these theological defenses really about debunking a true belief system out there which believes that God has turned His back forever on the Jewish people and they are actually beyond saving, beyond grace, beyond coming to faith in Christ (an incredibly difficult position for me to even imagine, especially if you’ve ever met Messianic Jews…), or, is it really about propagating political Zionism within the Christian Church..?
Perhaps the former was at one point a true problem and required serious attention, but today it seems that somehow these biblical arguments have been subtly hijacked in order to say things that Paul never said, and defend things that the book of Romans never tries to defend…
What exactly are the “gifts and calling of God” that are irrevocable? We all know that if we drove around the streets of say, Hebron today and asked the Jewish people there, the first thing they would undoubtedly say was, “God has given us this land!”… So many Christians today have been taught that if they don’t fully support this idea, that they are guilty of saying that “God has cast off His people Israel”, and thus, guilty of believing in “replacement theology”. It’s like in a lot of Christian circles today, those are the two boxes you are given to choose between, either you support political Zionism and believe that God’s will for the Jewish people has more to do with giving them back the “land” and political autonomy and military hegemony in the region and so on, than it does seeing them just come to faith in Jesus! I don’t accept that false dichotomy, because I don’t find it in the Bible. I don’t know if this is where you’re coming from or not, I’m not assuming either way, but I’m very interested in hearing whatever you might have to say about all of this. Thanks Chris.
For me it’s about the character of God. He made specific detailed promises to the Jewish people and I believe he will keep them and fulfill them as promised. When the replacement theologian spins those promises into metaphors and applies them to the gentile church it casts God in the role of a prankster who really never meant what he said, I find that offensive. So it has little to do with politics and everything to do with the glory of God.
Yes Chris, it is about the character of God. He is faithful to do exactly like He said He would do. The Covenant HE made with the Jews was CONDITIONAL upon their obedience. It’s clear in Deut. 28. IF you obey you will be blessed, then beginning in verse 14 for the rest of the chapter He tells them what He will do if they are disobedient. It was always and will always be up to the Jew to decide whether they want to be saved or lost. God didn’t force any of the Jews to believe in the days of John the Baptist, Jesus or at Pentecost. “He came unto His own and His own received Him not, but to as many as received Him to them gave He the right to become the children of God.” -John 1:11
The problem with the position of eternal security based on being Jewish was the right deception and lie of the false prophets of the OT like Hananiah. The Jews alwasys fostered a belief that they were God’s people because they were Jews. That didn’t work out so well for them in 586 B.C. and 70 A.D. Why? Because the old covenant depended on them being faithful and obedient.
God WAS faithful to His covenant. He chose Isaac over Ishmael, a son of Abraham. He chose Jacob over Esau, a Hebrew. He chose the two tribes over the rebellious 10 tribes. Then when Jesus came, He was faithful to His covenant and chose the Jews who believed in Jesus over the Jews who rejected Jesus. No replacement really, just God choosing and electing those who were faithful and obedient to Him. All of the early believers were Jews. Gentiles were grafted into those believing Jews, the true seed of Abraham. But God’s calling is irrevocable and the Jews may be grafted back in. But it’s up to them. He is willing to gather them as a hen gathers her chickens but they were not willing in the days of His first appearing and most aren’t willing now. But PTL, many are receiving Christ as the messianic movement reveals.
Sorry, God is not interested in a national Jewish nation. Jesus was crucified because He preached the Kingdom of God, not Jewish nationalism. Jesus words to the Jews still stand: “If you do not believe I AM HE, you will die in your sins.” -John 8:24. That is what I preach to the Jew….and the gentile. REPENT, the Kingdom of God has come. Be baptized in the Name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins and you shall be saved.
Peace
Wow, thank you Bob, you explained things a lot better than I ever could. I really liked your last couple of paragraphs especially. “No replacement really, just God choosing and electing those who were faithful and obedient to Him”… That’s what I was trying to get at. To me, the whole attack against “replacement theology” is largely a misrepresentation and mischaracterization of an opposing view. “Gentile church”? What “gentile church”? There’s just the church, like Bob said, all the first believers were Jewish, and we gentiles were “grafted in”, as the scripture says. Is that real and literal, or is perhaps that part of what has been spun into a metaphor..?
If I believe that Jesus is going to literally, physically return at some point, and literally establish His Kingdom on earth, a kingdom that will in fact cover the traditional geographical borders of Israel, a kingdom that will be headquartered from a literal, physical New Jerusalem that will literally come down some day out of the literal blue sky, with 12 literal gates and 12 literal foundations and walls and a literal river of life flowing through the city, and that all of the saints from all throughout history, including Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, the prophets, the apostles, etc., will all be there together, with Jesus sitting on the throne forever….(all of which I do…), then, what exactly am I “allegorizing” about the promises of God regarding Israel..??
So, if that is more or less how you believe God is going to culminate earthly history also, then, how does it really make any sense to try and maintain this bizarre dichotomy between earthly, temporal Israel (defined simply by genetics) and Eternal Israel (defined by faith in Christ, the King of Israel)…?
What do we do with some of the things Jesus Himself said to the unbelieving Pharisees who refused to believe in Him…? He actually looked them in the eye and told them they WEREN’T sons of Abraham, but instead, sons of the devil…(!) Because of their unbelief, He didn’t just tell them they were going to forfeit their rights to the land or something like that, but He flat out tells them they aren’t even real Jews! But of course, no one is going to stand up and accuse Jesus of espousing “replacement theology” or wrongfully swapping the “gentile church” in place of Israel or anything like that…
Of course it’s about God’s glory in the end… But the question is, why would His glory hinge upon restoring political sovereignty to an earthly Israel, when it never mattered before? Which is a more glorious promise to receive from God anyhow, a temporary nation here on earth where you get to plant your flag and fight off all your enemies but at the end of the day you still die in your sins and spend eternity separated from God, or the eternal Kingdom where every citizen is raised to immortality and there is no sin, no pain, no death, no poverty and everything is more beautiful than we can imagine and it never, ever ends…? Which type of fulfillment glorifies God more? Which type of Kingdom was Jesus offering to the Jews when He came to earth? Which type of kingdom was preached to the gentiles by Paul? Which type of Kingdom did Christ die and rise again for? I’d have to say that the most misguided and tragic type of “replacement theology” is not this one which allegedly replaces the Jewish people with the “gentile church”, but the one that replaces the eternal, everlasting fulfillments of God’s promises with ones that only last for but a moment and then turn back to dust…
Cranfield, sadly, is not correct. What Paul spells out clearly in Romans 2:28,29 is that, “…he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.” Paul applies the definitive inwardness of a true Jew to Gentile Christians when he writes to the Colossian church, “In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ.”
And when Paul writes in Romans 9:5, “For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel,” he goes on to declare, “They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed (v.8).” Therefore, he writes to Galatian Gentiles, “Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise (Gal. 4:28).
What these passages spell out clearly is, a) without being circumcised in Christ Jesus, the possession of outward, fleshly Jewishness means nothing, b) an authentic Israelite is not an ethnic child of flesh, but a child of promise, and c) Gentile Christians fulfill Paul’s definition of ‘inward’ Jews, and, accordingly, are “children of promise” who belong to “the Israel of God.”
This response is what brews and continues breeds replacement theology. Some thoughts? Why did Jesus come as King of the Jew? Circumcise the 8th day? Why did he live as one? Why then is His return dependent on when the Jewish people say, “you will not see me again…(English Translatation) “blessed is He who comes in the name of the”, who was He speaking to? Why is He coming back to the Mt. Olives and Jerusalem? Maybe it’s not literal Jerusalem, but spiritual Jerusalem? I wonder where that would be? Why did He wear the tallit, spoke to Jewish people, spoke using Jewish idioms, said in Rm. 3:2 that the Jews were given the oracles of God, the prophets, the writings? Why, with a little study does His feasts speak of first coming and His second coming? Why is the word so centered around these people, their culture, their way of life…maybe they never really came out of Egypt…it was symbolic, why does Hebrews 1:2 that God at sundry times spoke to us by the prophets (who is us?) It’s people like Martin Luther the Reformer who has contributed significantly to this kind of teaching…maybe you need to ask your self…what happened between the death of the apostles and what we know as the start of the church…read the book of Acts 20 and onward and carefully and ask the Spirit of God to teach you, see Paul telling the rulers, “I believe the same thing as they do, except I believe in the resurrection, I believe in the “Way” read it again…why is he making vows, and going to synagogue, Pauls words has been so butchered by any people, even the apostle Peter said, many unstable people have taken his words wrongly, 2 Peter 3:16. I know this kind of teaching has gone on for more than 1900 years , so it has become deeply engrained…and it’s hard to believe that it’s wrong, but just like the book of Romans, God has always had a remmant….pray again and read again and ask the Spirit of the living God to show you.
“This response” had presented relevant portions from the Word of God which define “a Jew” and “Israel.” Instead of responding to these specific scriptures, you accused the mention of them of breeding “replacement theology.” The most pernicious, corrosive and anti-scriptual Replacement Theology is the one teaching that a Jew will always be a “Jew outwardly,” and that Israel will always consist of “the children of the flesh.” Those who believe this have rejected “the Spirit of the living God.”
bag ridd… To quote you, I will say this, “one of the most pernicious, corrosive and anti-scriptural replacement theology is” one that also denies that Israel does not include the children of the flesh. One of your jobs, if you are born again is to make them “jealous” and if you are not biological Jewish, is to recognize that that you are grafted in. When the word says that to them where given the oracles of God, (Rm 3:1-2), this was speaking of the literal group of people and their descendants who left Egypt. Although some non- Jews came out of Egypt, it was to the literal descendants of Abraham, Isacc and Jacob who were entrusted with the word of God…read Rms 9-11 as this article suggests…for Believers of Jesus Christ to behave ambivalent and oblivious to this….is a grave mistake. When Paul speaks of not been “outwardly a Jew” read the whole context again…..for almost 1900 years we aka the church continue on this dangerous path….. And let me close with this….it does not mean that the Jews are better than us, but make no mistake, God Faithfulness to them is a sign that He will be faithful to us, and finally God hates divorce, He is still their husband, (and now ours, if we have been ingrafted in)… Selah….
Romans 9:8 plainly teaches, “They which are the children of the flesh, these are _not_ the children of God: but the children of the promise _are_ counted for the seed.” Paul writes to the Gentiles of Galatia, ”And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise (Galatians 3:29),“ and, “Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.” Both Jews and Gentiles in Christ’s are the “children of promise,” and, as the previous verse observes, “…ye are all one in Christ Jesus (v.28).” Our first job, then, as born-again believers, is to believe this Word of God.
A grafted-in believer is not being attached to an unbelieving, Christ-rejecting, ethnic population, but to the Lord Jesus Himself, the Body of Christ, “…and thou [believing Gentiles], being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them [believing Jews], and with them partakest of the root [Jesus is “the Root of David”] and fatness of the olive tree (Romans 11:17b).” Paul speaks of this spiritual union: “But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ (Ephesians 2:13; cf. 5:25; Acts 20:28).” “For through Him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father (v.18).” So, “God[’s] Faithfulness to them (the Jews/Israel)” is a blessing far, far greater than a mere “sign.” The opening verses of the Holy Spirit’s letter to the Hebrews (1:1-3) declares His faithfulness to be a glorious, fulfilled, accomplished fact. The rest of the letter explains this in great detail.
God, incidentally, could never be the Husband of an unbelieving, ethnic people since He is the Husband of only one Bride, the Church: “For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ (2 Corinth. 11:2).” Accordingly, in the Revelation (21:9c) “one of the seven angels” says, “Come hither, I will shew thee the bride, the Lamb’s wife.”
The “dangerous path” is to _deny_ that God’s perfect work for Israel was completed in the Person of His Son, “…God according to his promise raised unto Israel a Saviour, Jesus (Acts 13:23).” “Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us, looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God (Hebrews 12:1,2).”
This response is what brews and continues breeds replacement theology. Some thoughts? Why did Jesus come as King of the Jew? Circumcise the 8th day? Why did he live as one? Why then is His return dependent on when the Jewish people say, “you will not see me again…(English Translatation) ” until you say blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord,” who was He speaking to? Why is He coming back to the Mt. Olives and Jerusalem? Maybe it’s not literal Jerusalem, but spiritual Jerusalem? I wonder where that would be? Why did He wear the tallit, spoke to Jewish people, spoke using Jewish idioms, said through the apostle Paul in Rm. 3:2 that the Jews were given the oracles of God, the prophets, the writings? Why, with a little study does His feasts speak of first coming and His second coming? Why is the word of God, so centered around these people, their culture, their way of life…maybe they never really came out of Egypt…it was symbolic, why does Hebrews 1:2 that God at sundry times spoke to us by the prophets (who is us?) It’s people like Martin Luther the Reformer who has contributed significantly to this kind of teaching…maybe you need to ask your self…what happened between the death of the apostles and what we know as the start of the church…read the book of Acts 20 and onward and carefully ask the Spirit of God to teach you, see Paul telling the rulers, “I believe the same thing as they do, except I believe in the resurrection, I believe in the “Way” read it again…why is he making vows, and going to synagogue, Pauls words has been so butchered by any people, even the apostle Peter said, many unstable people have taken his words wrongly, 2 Peter 3:16. I know this kind of teaching has gone on for more than 1900 years , so it has become deeply engrained…and it’s hard to believe that it’s wrong, but just like the book of Romans, God has always had a remmant….pray again and read again and ask the Spirit of the living God to show you.
Bridgette,
First, notice that Cris has not replied to my post to him. It’s because he has no answer.
Now to reply to your post:
1. Jesus was born of the Jews because salvation was of the Jews. He lived as a Jew to save Jews who were the first to be saved. Most Jews have been lost and destroyed for their unbelief…sadly. Just like most gentiles will be lost for their unbelief. There is only a remnant.
2. As to His statement that ‘they would not see Him till they say ‘blessed is He who comes in the Name of the Lord’…. Matthew records that statement after His triumphal entry. Luke places this statement before His triumphal entry. I think Luke is chronologically correct, meaning, Jesus was simply telling the Jews that He would no longer go up to Jerusalem until the day He would ride on a donkey as their King. It was then that they all proclaimed, “BLESSED IS HE WHO COMES IN THE NAME OF THE LORD”. This statement of Jesus was made before ‘Palm Sunday’, not after. Focus on what Jesus told Caiaphas at His trial. They would only see Him again when He would come as King on the clouds of glory, not to bring them repentance, but judgment.
3. The Fall feasts will be fulfilled when He returns. BUT the trumpets and Day of Atonement speak of judgment on those who refuse to repent!
4. What happened after Pentecost? I’ll tell you. God revealed the “Mystery of the Fellowship” (See Eph. 2 and 3). This mystery was only revealed after Pentecost that the Jews and Gentiles were to form one union. “He made the two, one.” Paul said that Christians were the true worshippers of God and the true circumcision, Phil. 3:3.
Eternal Security for the Jewish nation is the lie of the false prophets. It is the very lie spoken against by Jeremiah, Isaiah and Ezekiel in their day and John the Baptist, Jesus and Apostles in their day, and now the false prophets in our day.
There are two groups but not like you think. They are the saved and the lost, the wheat and the tares, the sheep and the goats, the wise virgins and the false virgins. Those going to Heaven and those going to hell. That is it. And there is only one Way to enter…it is by the Blood of the Lamb of God. If the Jews in Israel or anywhere do not apply the blood to the doorposts of their lives the destroying angel will not pass them over.
peace
Paul did not say that Christians were the true worshippers of God…NOT TRUE… The early apostles did not see themselves as Christians, they were followers of Rabbi Yeshua, they were were NOT starting something new, they were were being taught how to live the way God had originally intended through His Son, who came to fulfil the law. Paul would be schzephenic, ….why is Paul going to the synagogues, worshipping on Shabbat, making Jewish vows…why is he telling Festus, that he Paul believes the same as the Jews who where accusing him except that he believes in the WAY, the resurrection of the dead….I know that not all biological Jews are born again, or saved, I know that…I know that like Christians today there was a lot of division, I know that the blood has to be applied to their hearts, but let us take things in its context….anyway…as for Palm Sunday, that’s a whole different story…but I’ll stop here…I am not trying to be divisive….I too pursue truth….lets us continue to pursue peace since we have surrender to the great Rabbi Yeshua and be surrendered to His Holy Spirit….there is so much I would to elaborate on but cannot get into right now…..
Devotees of Hebrew Roots hate the term,“Christian,” and King Agrippa didn’t think much of it either: “Then Agrippa said unto Paul, ‘Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian’. and Paul said, ‘I would to God, that not only thou, but also all that hear me this day’… (Acts 26:28,29).” The letters Paul wrote to Gentile believers were to Christian “churches (Romans 16:4,16; 1 Corinthians 7:17; 16,19; etc.)” that made up the Body of Christ: “And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things He might have the preeminence (Colossians 1:18).”
Clearly, ”they were were NOT starting something new,” because Peter had stood up, at Pentecost, and said, “But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; and it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh… (Acts 2:16,17).”
Paul’s letters, moreover, are not about Christians “…being taught how to live the way God had originally intended through His Son.” They teach about God “Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began (2 Timothy 1:9).”
Paul, in no way, then, “believes the same as the Jews who where accusing him,” especially as the Jew who had written, “That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised Him from the dead, thou shalt be saved (Romans 10:9), and, “That I may know Him, and the power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of His sufferings, being made conformable unto His death (Philippians 3:10).”
And Jesus is _never_ portrayed by Paul as “the great Rabbi Yeshua.” His portrayal of Him in his letter to the Christians of Colossus (1:12-23) would enrage any Orthodox Jew: “For by Him [God’s “dear Son”] were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by Him, and for Him: and He is before all things, and by Hm all things consist (vs.16,17).”