top of page

Does Replacement Theology Supersede the Abrahamic Covenant?

Larne Gabriel



In the very beginning of Ronald Diprose’s book Israel and the Church (The Origins and Effects of Replacement Theology)[1] he makes a profound statement;

The absence of Israel in much of Christian theology has a long history. During the formative period of the Christian tradition, the common view was that what was promised to Israel found its ultimate fulfillment in Jesus, the Israelite par excellence. It follows that the Church completely and permanently replaced ethnic Israel in the working out of God’s plan as the recipient of Old Testament promises originally addressed to Israel.”

The consequences of this theology, known as supersessionism, is commonly referred to as Replacement Theology. It has been divisive to the Church and more importantly it has led to devastating actions against the Jewish people for the past 2000 years. Understanding where it originated from and the argument against it is important both to a proper understanding of ecclesiology and eschatology. But the first question that must be asked is just who Israel and the Jews are.


A Unique People Group

Four thousand years ago a faithful man named Abram was selected by God to be the father of God’s Chosen People. He was from Ur in Chaldea (Iraq) and began a God led journey …”to a land that I will show you” (Act 7:3). Once in the land God promised Abram Land, Seed and Blessing (Gen. 12:1-3). “Now the Lord said to Abram, “Go from your country and your kindred and your father's house to the land that I will show you. 2 And I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing. 3 I will bless those who bless you, and him who dishonors you I will curse, and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.” Those promises were reiterated by God to Abram in 14 additional verses.[2] On a mountain in Canaan God shows Abram the land, “Lift up your eyes and look from the place where you are, northward and southward and eastward and westward, 15 for all the land that you see I will give to you and to your offspring forever” (Gen. 14b-15). God ends in verse 17 commanding him to explore that land, “Arise, walk through the length and the breadth of the land, for I will give it to you.

Abram’s seed promise was harder for Abram and Sarai to grasp since they were of advanced age and Sarai was well beyond childbearing years. A year before Isaac is born God changes their names to Abraham and Sarah and in God’s supernatural power Sarah, about 90, is enabled to conceive a child and he is named Isaac.

The last part of God’s promise in Genesis 12:3 is the blessing, not only to those that bless Israel but that the people of God would be a blessing to the whole world. What I find interesting is the dramatic impact that those that identify as Jews have made on the whole earth. As of 2017, Nobel Prizes have been awarded to 892 individuals, of whom 201 or 22.5% were Jews, although the total Jewish population comprises less than 0.2% of the world's population. This means the percentage of Jewish Nobel laureates is at least 112.5 times or 11,250% above average. Various theories have been made to explain this phenomenon, which has received considerable attention[3]. The disproportional amount of innovation from Israel and the diaspora Jews is mindboggling, medicine, physics, water conservation and de-salination, agriculture, technology to name a few[4].  This is more than a fluke of nature but part of God’s 4,000-year-old covenant with Abraham. But the greatest blessing is our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, born a Jew, the Redeemer, Messiah, and Savior of the world, whose shed blood saves us from our sins and gives us hope for an eternity with Him. Diprose adds;

“Personal blessing under the promises was conditioned upon obedience to the God who made the covenant those blessing contained in the covenant with Abraham did not in include eternal salvation. Rather, according to the terms of the Abrahamic covenant, Israel was a whole was to be the special object of God’s love and through them blessing was to flow to the whole earth.”[5]

The next part of the question of who Israel and the Jews are is the name itself. Abraham’s grandson Jacob, whose father was Isaac, was renamed by God to “Israel[6]” ( יִשְׂרָאֵל Yisrael (975b); meaning “God strives”, “God contends”, God persists)[7]. Not only is Jacob named Israel but so are all of his descendants along with its use of identifying a “people group” first seen in Genesis 34:7, and eventually the greater nation/kingdom of the Jewish people. The word is used 2362 times in scripture. Diprose states, “This (Israel) shows that the ethnic identity was closely related to the divine purpose in history of the Jewish people”.[8]  It was not till the Kingdom period that the term “Jew” was used to describe a people group. That name was derived from the various linguistic forms identifying the tribe of Judah. The word Jew is only used 90 times in the Old Testament and 194 in the New Testament (ESV).

For me the most important piece of the reckoning is the dramatic and unique ways God sealed the covenant with Abram. But first you have to understand the culture of that day which I believe is best understood in the words of Dr. Dwight Pentecost in his book, “Things to come: A study in Biblical Eschatology,” where he explains it well;

"…the custom, prevalent in many ancient nations, of slaughtering animals when concluding a covenant, and after dividing them into pieces, of laying the pieces opposite to one another, that the persons making the covenant might pass between them. Thus… God condescended to follow the custom of the Chaldeans, that He might in the most solemn manner confirm His oath to Abram the Chaldean… it is evident from Jer. 34:18, that this was still customary among the Israelites of later times.  Abraham would be familiar with this manner of entering into a binding agreement. Without doubt the large number of animals prescribed by God would impress Abraham with the importance of that which was being enacted, since one animal would have been sufficient for the enactment of the covenant. When the sacrifice was prepared Abraham must have expected to walk with God through the divided animals, for custom demanded that the two who entered into a blood covenant should walk together between the parts of the sacrifice He would recognize the solemnity of the occasion, for the ritual meant that the two who were entering into the covenant were bound by blood to fulfill that covenanted or the one breaking the covenant would be required to pour out his blood in forfeit, as the blood of the animals that bound them had been poured out. However, when the covenant was to be entered into, Abraham was put to sleep so that he could not be a participant in the covenant, but could only be a recipient of a covenant to which he brought nothing in the way of obligations.[9]

But God did something very unique, he first allowed a deep sleep to come over Abram and God told Abram, while he was asleep, about the enslavement of his seed in Egypt for 400 years and return to Canaan (The Exodus). Second, while Abram slept God alone passed between the divided animals and made the covenant proclaiming, Gen. 15:17-21, “When the sun had gone down and it was dark, behold, a smoking fire pot and a flaming torch passed between these pieces. 18 On that day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying, “To your offspring I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the river Euphrates, 19 the land of the Kenites, the Kenizzites, the Kadmonites, 20 the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Rephaim, 21 the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Girgashites and the Jebusites.

Again, Dr. Pentecost concludes, “From the nature of this covenant, it followed, however, that God alone went through the pieces in a symbolical representation of Himself, and not Abram also. For although a covenant always establishes a reciprocal relation between two individuals, yet in that covenant which God concluded with a man, the man did not stand on an equality with God, but God established the relation of fellowship by His promise and His gracious condescension to the man. God is thus binding Himself by a most solemn blood covenant to fulfill to Abraham, unconditionally, the promises concerning the seed and the land which were given to him. It is scarcely possible for God to make it any clearer that what was promised to Abraham was given to him without any conditions, to be fulfilled by the integrity of God alone[10].”

In the end, God alone made a unilateral, unconditional covenant between Abram and his offspring and Himself, that was everlasting. The method for the sealing of this covenant is referred to as a self-maledictory oath (vowing harm to oneself), that people made to confirm their commitment to the covenant stipulations. In this covenant a failure to fulfill the requirements would require God’s blood to prove God’s intent to fulfill His promises[11].

The importance of this action sets the conditions for the land, people and blessing that is specifically given to this clearly identified people group, the children of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the Israelites, and is not transferable to different people group. This unique everlasting, unconditional, unilateral, self-maledictory oath, covenant was sealed to shows the preeminence of God’s plan for His land Israel, Abraham’s seed the Jews and His blessing of His people should be remembered for the discussion ahead.

Dr. Ronald Diprose concludes in the end of the chapter titled “A Unique People”; “Whatever our conviction concerning the present significance of Israel in the divine plan, we are bound to admit that the nation which God called into being through Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, continues to be a protagonist on the world stage. The best explanation for this is her continuing status as God’s elect people. It is because Israel retains her elect status that the Church, in order to not become presumptuous, is obliged to seriously consider the place of this nation in God’s plan.[12]


From what we have seen regarding the Abrahamic Covenant it was an everlasting agreement with the people of Israel, descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. The subsequent Mosaic Covenant does not supersede the one God made with Abram but establishes a bilateral and conditional agreement between God and His people. In this agreement God promises to bless His people if they follow His commands. The Davidic Covenant (2 Samuel 7) is between David and God, unilateral and unconditional in nature that promises that David will be remembered as a great king (7:9). Israel will have a home (7:10). Israel will have a time of peace (7:10–11). David’s dynasty will endure (7:11). A future seed will establish the kingdom (7:12). Solomon will build the temple (7:13). “David son’s kingdom will last forever through what we know now as the Messiah (7:13). God will be a father to Solomon, and when Solomon disobeys, God will not take the kingdom from him as he did with Saul (7:14–15). David’s dynasty and kingdom will endure forever, and the throne of David will be established forever (7:16)[13].





















From “When a Jew Rules the World”[14]

The last major Covenant was the New Covenant, given during a time of apostasy in Judah. The Northern ten tribes of Israel were lost in exile at this point. The prophet Jeremiah warned the people of Judah of God’s coming judgement because of their failure to keep the Mosaic covenant. (Jeremiah did not follow his people in their captivity to Babylon.) In Jeremiah 31:31-34 he writes:  

Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, 32 not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the Lord. 33 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people."

We see in verse 31 above the reveling of the New Covenant, it is made with the house of Israel and the house of Judah as a specific people group, physical descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and followers of Yahweh. This new covenant was fulfilled in the coming of Jesus and His sinless life, His foretold death, resurrection, ascension and promised return in what is now known as the Gospel. There is no mention of gentiles or what became known as the Church receiving the eternal promise made to Abraham or replacing the Jew. We clearly are told by Paul, in his olive tree analogy (Romans 11:17-19), that gentile believers are grafted into the Jewish olive tree as a branch. The Jews are separate yet still the root. In other words, we gentiles have been included in the New Covenant but do not replace the Jews as a people group, yet they still need to accept the Messiah for Salvation in the New Covenant.

One last thought on the importance of these three covenants. In Ezekiel 16:59-63 declaring the words of the Lord and referencing the Mosaic, Abrahamic and New Covenant:”

59 For thus says the Lord God: I will deal with you as you have done, you who have despised the oath in breaking the covenant, (Mosaic Covenant[15])? 60yet I will remember my covenant with you in the days of your youth,(Abrahamic Covenant[16]) and I will establish for you an everlasting covenant.(New Covenant[17]) 61Then you will remember your ways and be ashamed when you take your sisters, both your elder and your younger, and I give them to you as daughters, but not on account of the covenant with you. 62 I I will establish my covenant with you, and you shall know that I am the Lord, 63 that you may remember and be confounded, and never open your mouth again because of your shame, when I atone for you for all that you have done, declares the Lord God.” Moody’s Commentary goes on to explain:

  • Verses 60: “Then He would establish the everlasting covenant, the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34; Ezk 11:18-20, 36:26-28,37:26-28). The unfaithfulness of the people does not change the faithfulness of God (cf. Liv 26:42-45; 2 Tim 2:13; Rm 11:29)

  • Verses 61-63, “When God establishes the new covenant Jerusalem will remember and be ashamed of her sinful past. Then Jerusalem will be restored and even the sisters Sodom and Samaria shall know that I am the Lord…when I have forgiven you for all that you have done.[18]

Clearly a reminder from Ezekiel, regardless of Israel’s unfaithfulness, God’s faithfulness based on His Abrahamic Covenant remains intact in the New Covenant and in the future their sins they will be forgotten as they put their faith in the Messiah based on the Gospel.  

Replacement Theology

By the early second century the leadership of the new Christian Church was well established in the Gentile world. Having moved from Jerusalem in the years leading up to the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD, with any last vestiges completely gone following the Bar Kokhba revolt (132-136 AD). This last act of rebellion against Rome led to the finality of the Great Diaspora with exile, slavery and death to the majority of the Jewish people. The last Jewish Disciple of Jesus, the Apostle John, is believed to have died at the very end of the first century on the island of Patmos or in Ephesus (western Turkey) a place where taught and preached for years. Following his death, the leadership of the Church rested solidly in gentile hands. This was in a very formational Church period, where doctrines, traditions, leadership of “religious” organizations were being established. Without the whole Canon of Scripture being recognized and embraced, some false teaching fell into the church. These heresies are today called by many names, Ebionism, Gnosticism, Adoptionism, Docetism, Arianism, Apollinarianism, Nestorianism and Eutychianism[19]. John MacArthur in, Biblical Doctrine, describes this error in the early Church:

"Erroneous concepts of Jesus arise out of a careless and undiscerning reading of the Bible. Therefore, through such carelessness, compounded by man’s fallen nature and the enmity of unbelievers, the person of Christ has come under attack from the very start. In the early church, error concerning the nature and person of Christ arose even in the first century and challenged the Christological orthodoxy of Bible believers. As with counterfeit currency, the best strategy for identifying falsehood comes through a focus on the truth. Studying what the Scriptures say about Jesus Christ exposes the error of those who seek to deny biblical truths or to offer up a counterfeit Christ."[20]

While the four gospels and various New Testament letters were distributed among the early churches there was no official complete Canon of NT Scripture as we know it today. By the mid-second century 10 of the Pauline Epistles and Luke were recognized as Canon, then by the end of the second century the four Gospels and 13 of Paul’s Epistles, Acts, 1 Peter and 1 John were considered as authoritative text by the leading churches. The 27 NT books as we now know them, were not recognized until 367AD by Athanasius, the bishop of Alexandria. This led to a very tumultuous time that MacArthur seems to identify clearly with the erroneous concepts of Jesus but also in other areas too including the relationship of Jewish covenants and the Church.

Dr. Harold O. J. Brown in his book, Heresies, sees the same problem in the early Church and today:

"It took several centuries for the early theologians to develop the ideas and vocabulary needed to present orthodox beliefs on the Trinity and on the nature of Jesus. When this was done the results were the various major creeds (Apostles, Nicene [AD 325/381], Athanasian, Chalcedonian [AD 451]) created for popular use. But even this is not enough. For though some will generally agree with the particular postulations, the intellectual need to further explain these basics in the extreme leads to heretical thought. And this leads to the subsequent (to AD 451) one thousand five hundred fifty years of repeating heresies. For most, if not all, modern heresies are revivals of or share assumptions with heresies of the first four- and one-half centuries of Christianity.[21]

Dr. Harold O.J. Brown in an article[22] for Ligonier’s website also states:

There is nothing new under the sun,” the Preacher wrote (Eccl. 1:9). According to Professor Klaus Haacker of Wuppertal, Germany, one of the primary sources of error in theology is the desire to say something new.” He continues and makes what I believe to be a profound observation and the elephant in the room no one discusses regarding doctrinal differences. “This shows, I believe, that the religion of Scripture, historic, biblical Christianity, is obnoxious to the Prince of Darkness, so that he makes a point of tempting the professors and priests of Christianity to undermine their own doctrines.

Some influential factions in the early foundational phase of the “organized” gentile church fought against the Jewish roots of the faith in some cases rejecting all of the Old Testament and the New Testament books that were considered too Jewish.[23] This practice of rejecting the Jewishness of Christianity is first recognized in the early second century. This is probably a product of some of Paul’s epistles, particularly Galatians where he rebukes the Judaizes. This rejection of anything Jewish eventually mutated into a hatred of the Jews for rejecting Christianity and killing Jesus.

Without the complete Canon of Scripture or an accepted method of understanding it and the human desire to “say something new” the Jewish roots of Christianity were rejected. Not long after the death of the Apostle John, Ignatius the bishop of Antioch argued in 115 AD that any form of Judaism is incompatible with belief in Jesus as Messiah.[24]  Other early writings like Barnabas’ Epistle, Letter to Diognetus, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertulian, and Origen criticize, diminish or completely reject the nation of Israel’s continued relevance in scripture beyond the time of Christ.[25] Disprose in his conclusion of the chapter titled, “Replacement Theology in Post -Apostolic Times” states:

"However, it is far more significant for Christ Theology that anti-Jewish canons were formulated in the context of Councils (early church) … in which orthodoxy was defined. This reveals a parallel development of Orthodox theology on the one hand and an official anti-Judaic stance on the other. Why is this? I believe that the clue to this unlikely association is to be found in what we have called replacement theology. Our findings have led us to conclude that this concept was not a product of careful reflection on Scripture; rather, Scripture was interpreted allegorically in such a way as to convalidate it…. Among the various effects of replacement theology, three must be mentioned at this point. First, the Church tended to establish its own identity in anti-Judaic terms; the Church is what the Jews are no longer or never have been. Second, Christendom’s way of interpreting the Old Testament, based on prejudice, has made it very difficult for Jews to take seriously the claim that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah of Israel. Third, Christian writers have tended to talk about Israel in the past tense, as may be seen in the convention of terminating histories of Israel with the advent of Christianity or with the fall of the second temple in 70 AD.[26]

We see from above replacement theology was adopted in post-apostolic times and not specifically taught in the New Testament as a doctrine. While some say that the roots of replacement theology are found in the New Testament. This is an area of heated debate that involves the intended meaning of “Israel” and “Church” in the context of tenses, along with their understood interpretation of either a singular or plural meaning. These passages where these are often found can sometimes be considered obscure[27]. MacArthur writes about this;

Conflating the two lead to significant hermeneutical and interpretive problems, in which promises, and directives given specifically to the nation of Israel are spiritualized or allegorized and incorrectly applied to Gentile believers in the church[28].”

We find more than two thousand uses of the word “Israel” in Scripture, seventy alone in the New Testament. The “People of Israel”, “People of God”, “Children of Israel “or “Sons of Israel” used over six hundred times. According to MacArthur in Biblical Doctrine speaking of the Distinction between the Church and Israel he says;

 “Of the more than two thousand uses of the term Israel in Scripture, more than seventy are found in the New Testament. Biblical commentators agree that most of these occurrences refer to ethnic Israel (either the nation as a whole or a group of Jewish people). However, some contend that on certain occasions the New Testament authors apply the name Israel to the church. Yet when the passages in question are studied carefully, it becomes evident that only ethnic Israelites are in view. Consequently, a compelling case can be made to demonstrate that, whenever the New Testament writers use the term Israel, they reserve it exclusively for national Israel.[29]

We also see five times[30] in the Old Testament the Lord speaks of His everlasting love for His people, in reference to the descendants of Abraham. Which alone is a compelling argument that God’s specific love it toward this specific and historical people group in addition to the later believers in Christ that make up His Church of the New Covenant.

I have chosen not to discuss the specific controversial verses that support Replacement Theology for the reasons just mentioned and what I feel are clear in my conclusions below.


For me I have a simple faith, that is based on the plain Gospel, not one that every doctrine is tied to complicated language structure and allegorically meanings. That is not to say there are no hidden truths or an iota, or a dot, in Scripture where the principles of 2 Timothy 2:15 or 3:16-17 need to be applied for interpreting the passage. One of the idioms often heard in scripture interpretation is simple: “If the literal sense make good sense, than seek no other sense, lest you come up with nonsense.[31]” Applying that to the above, we see the only understanding of the phrase “People of Israel”, or other derivatives used in various translations, meaning the physical people and nation that are descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Connected with these are the eternal covenants made with Abraham, Moses, David and Jeremiah (new covenant) used throughout the whole Bible. Having another interpretation based on a detailed examinations of the obscure uses of a few words is missing the main point of what the scripture is intending to convey, that the descendants of Jacob are the people of God and land, forever and separate from the Church. From Romans 11 Paul clearly states we are a branch grafted on to the Jewish trunk and nourished by its root. With the Jewish rejection of Christ there have been and will continue to be consequences for their unbelief until the Lord returns, when all of the remnant of Israel is saved. Those words in Romans 11:25-36 are crystal clear in defining the Gentile church as different from unbelieving Israel. The physical people and nation, each having a unique and special relationship with God.

"25 Lest you be wise in your own sight, I do not want you to be unaware of this mystery, brothers a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. 26 And in this way all Israel will be saved, as it is written, “The Deliverer will come from Zion, he will banish ungodliness from Jacob”; 27 “and this will be my covenant with them when I take away their sins.” 28 As regards the gospel, they are enemies for your sake. But as regards election, they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers. 29 For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. 30 For just as you were at one time disobedient to God but now have received mercy because of their disobedience, 31 so they too have now been disobedient in order that by the mercy shown to you they also may now] receive mercy. 32 For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all. 33 Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways! 34 “For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who has been his counselor?” 35 “Or who has given a gift to him that he might be repaid?”36 For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen."

In Fee and Stuart’s book, “How to Read the Bible for All its Worth” at the end of the first page of Chapter 1 they write;

We are also agreed that the preacher or teacher is all too often prone to dig first and look later, and thereby at times to cover up the plain meaning of the text, which often lies on the surface. Let it be said at the outset-and repeated throughout-that the aim of good interpretation is not uniqueness; one is not trying to discover what no one else has ever seen before. Interpretation that aims at, or thrives on, uniqueness can usually be attributed to pride (an attempt to “outclever” the rest of the world), a false understanding of spirituality (wherein the Bible is full of deeply buried truths waiting to be mined by the spiritually sensitive person with special insight), or vested interests (the need to support a theological bias, especially in dealing with texts that seem to go against that bias). Unique interpretations are usually wrong[32].”

For me this false doctrine of Replacement Theology (supersessionism) did not end with just rejecting anything Jewish but became the full-blown anti-Semitism we have seen in the last 100 years, not to mention the previous 1900 years that were full of exiles, exposition, slavery, persecution, torture, forced conversions, pogroms, inquisitions that culminated with the holocaust in the systematic extermination of 6-7 million Jews. Even today anti-Semitism is on the rise throughout the world. As Christians we owe the Jewish world our deepest gratitude for the roots our faith was birthed in and the deepest regret and repentance for our historical rejection of a people group that is the apple of God’s eye. We are but just a branch of that, but not the tree.

To answer the question of my title “Does Replacement Theology supersede the Abrahamic Covenant”, I would answer with a definite NO after looking at the clear and simple meaning of the passages referring to Israel and the Church in  the Old Testament, the covenants, and the New Testament.

Lastly until the reformation in 1517 all doctrine and teaching were primarily controlled by the Roman Catholics and to a lesser degree the other Orthodox organizations. Common people were both discourage and prevented from reading a generally unavailable Bible. The combination of the development of the printing press and reformation along with the rise of literacy in public education opened new doors for the common man. False, exclusive, and authoritarian self-asserting doctrine dominated the Roman Catholics for centuries leading to corruption, elitism, sin and a false gospel. Sadly, this included Replacement Theology and led to anti-Semitism and persecution of the Jews under the banner as “Christ Killers.” Sadly, that evil tradition continued in the reformation and was expounded on in the late teaching of Martin Luther[33]. As this doctrine permeated the German Lutheran church, its historical tentacles eventually led to the Holocaust.

For me, this simple concepts of God’s everlasting love for a specific historical group of people far outweighs the few and obscure scriptures and their unique interpretations to replace God’s everlasting love through His covenant with Abraham’s descendants, with the Bride of Christ. For me this heretical and false doctrine is a tool of Satan to divide the Church and destroy the people of God’s affection that all the Bible points to both historically and in its eschatological finality.




[1] Diprose, Ronald E., Israel and the Church. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000: (p. 2)

[2] Gen. 12:7; 13:16; 15:4-6; 17:4,6-9,16,19; 18:10,14,19

[3] (confirmed through other sources too)


[5] Diprose, Ronald E., Israel and the Church. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000: (p. 6)

[6] Genesis 32:28 & 35:10

[7] The HELPS Discovery Bible ver. 1.0.2 pre12

[8] Diprose, Ronald E., Israel and the Church. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000: (p. 8)

[9] Pentecost, J.  Dwight; Things to Come: A Study in Biblical Eschatology, Kindle Edition, (location 1489)

[10] Pentecost, J.  Dwight; Things to Come: A Study in Biblical Eschatology, Kindle Edition, (location 1502)

[11] Larne’s “Abrahamic Covenant” paper, CHCC Theology 3. April 10, 2018

[12] Diprose, Ronald E., Israel and the Church. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000: (p. 27)

[13] MacArthur, John; Mayhue, Richard. Biblical Doctrine: A Systematic Summary of Bible Truth (p. 877). Crossway.

[14] Richardson, Joel. When A Jew Rules the World. WND Books. (iPad p. 100)

[15] The Moody Bible Commentary; Moody Publishers, Chicago, IL: 2014 (p.1227)

[16] IBID (p. 1227)

[17] IBID  (p.1227)

[18] The Moody Bible Commentary; Moody Publishers, Chicago, IL: 2014 (p.1227)

[19] MacArthur, John; Mayhue, Richard. Biblical Doctrine: A Systematic Summary of Bible Truth (p. 268-271). Crossway.

[20] MacArthur, John; Mayhue, Richard. Biblical Doctrine: A Systematic Summary of Bible Truth (p. 268). Crossway.

[21] Dr. Harold O. J. Brown; Heresies, Heresy and Orthodoxy in the History of the Church; Hendrickson Publishers, Inc. 512 pages March 1998 (From


[23] Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary, Holman publishers; 2003 (p.202)

[24] Richardson, Joel. When A Jew Rules the World. WND Books. (iPad p. 251)

[25] Diprose, Ronald E., Israel and the Church. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000: (Chapter 3, The Development of Replacement Theology in Post-Apostolic Times)

[26] Diprose, Ronald E., Israel and the Church. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000: (Chapter 3, The Development of Replacement Theology in Post-Apostolic Times, p.96-98)

[27] Diprose, Ronald E., Israel and the Church. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000: (Chapter 2, Replacement Theology and the New Testament)

[28] MacArthur, John; Mayhue, Richard. Biblical Doctrine: A Systematic Summary of Bible Truth (p. 748-749). Crossway.

[29] MacArthur, John; Mayhue, Richard. Biblical Doctrine: A Systematic Summary of Bible Truth (p.748). Crossway

[30] Psalm 103:3; Isaiah 54:8, 55:3, 61:8; Jeremiah 31:3

[31] Unknown but heard frequently

[32] Gordon Fee, Douglas Stuart; How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth; (p. 21-22) Zondervan

[33] Luther, Martin; On the Jews & Their Lies; published 1583

bottom of page