To what extent did Jesus promote supersessionism?

[firedragon]

Well, as I said, it is a never stopping process in Abrahamic religions. Moses cannot stop to be reevised by Jesus, Jesus cannot stop being revisd by Mohammad, Mohammad cannot stop being revised by Bahaollah, Bahaollah cannot stop being revised by Mirza Gholam Ahmad and Mirza Gholam Ahmad cannot stop being revised by .. since no one has to prove anything or give evidence.
No problem at all. The more, the merrier.

So which one is right or are all of them wrong?

Is your decision based on a very well analysed basis?

Though your comment seems related to the OP it is actually irrelevant but lets hear your response.

 

[Muffled]

I believe the New Covenant is in blood so that covers the sacrificial system.

I believe Paul sees the work of the Holy Spirit (Paraclete) as superseding the law.

I believe the biggest problem for Jews is that the covenant with God is a covenant with Jesus.

 

[Muffled]

He told a prominent Pharisee Nicodemus that he(Nicodemus) had to be born again. (John 3:3-5) That means to be Jewish was not enough anymore. Because Nicodemus was born a Jew. If you really wanted to be the children of God; you had to be born again whether Jew or gentile. It's because "they that are in the flesh cannot please God" and Jesus is the "resurrection and the life". So when you are not resurrected you can't please God.

Old Covenant - made for those in the flesh, earthly nation
New Covenant - made for those in resurrection

So the new Covenant exceeds the old as far as heaven from earth.

However, the Jews received the gospel first; then the gentiles. So they had that advantage.

I believe the Gospel is new and that is what the verse is talking about.

“Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again 2 he cannot see the kingdom of God

 

[Muffled]

Are we sure? Does this not lead to being called the least in the Kingdom?(Matthew 5:17-19)

I believe not. That is reserved for those who teach people to sin. At worst it is disinformation and at best hyperbole.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I believe not. That is reserved for those who teach people to sin. At worst it is disinformation and at best hyperbole.

So teaching to relax any part of the Law--something Jesus said not to do--isn't teaching people to go astray?

 

[firedragon]

What is Supersessionism? According to wikipedia;

Supersessionism, also called replacement theology, is a Christian doctrine which asserts that the New Covenant through Jesus Christ supersedes the Old Covenant, which was made exclusively with the Jewish people.

In Christianity, supersessionism is a theological view on the current status of the church in relation to the Jewish people and Judaism. It holds that the Christian Church has succeeded the Israelites as the definitive people of God or that the New Covenant has replaced or superseded the Mosaic covenant. From a supersessionist's "point of view, just by continuing to exist [outside the Church], the Jews dissent". This view directly contrasts with dual-covenant theology which holds that the Mosaic covenant remains valid for Jews.

Supersessionism has formed a core tenet of the Christian Churches for the majority of their existence. Christian traditions that have traditionally championed dual-covenant theology (including the Roman Catholic, Reformed and Methodist teachings of this doctrine), have taught that the moral law continues to stand.

Supersessionism - Wikipedia

I see problems with supersessionism. I'm trying to better understand the concept not just in regards Christianity but Islam and the Baha'i Faith too. It would be interesting to hear to what extent the Founders of these religions taught supersessionism. However, a consideration of Christianity in relation to Judaism is a logical starting place.

You have to understand the theology, not base your understanding on people and what people say.

Islamic theology is not supersession. Islamic theology is it is all Islam. There is no supersession or replacement theology. The Islamic theology is strange sounding to you because Islam is an Arabic word and theology is an English word stemming from Koine and modern greek.

The Islamic theology is that it is all Islam.

 

[shmogie]

Several errors were made.

1. It is not the Islamic view that the Torah and Gospel are corrupted. It is the view of some Muslims but its an uneducated view. The view of the school of Medina, the first madhab of Ibn Anas if you consider that Islamic is that the Torah and the Gospel may not ever have been in writing like the Quran. You associated words. I get what you say, but I completely disagree.

2. The Quran is not seen as superseding the Torah and the Gospel. It is seen as the confirmation of the Torah, Zaboor, and Gospel. You have got the wrong picture from Muslim apologetics but I disagree with your statement about Quran being the supersession because that is not the Islamic view.

Peace.

It is really obvious.

Mohammed had contact with Jews and Christians, 600 years after Christ.

His religion solely came from inside his brain. The Bible, both old Testament and new, clearly shows God, and Christ performing miracles with many witnesses.

These are the credentials of God, the proof of the authority of these Scriptures.

Mohammed did no miracles, the hadiths show him to be pretty blood bloodthirsty, and his theocratic government construct proved to be conquering and very aggressive.

He obviously took from Christianity here, from Judaism there, and created a hybrid religion, that he alone created, by alleging a god spoke to him.

I don't believe him.

 

[74x12]

I believe the Gospel is new and that is what the verse is talking about.

“Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again 2 he cannot see the kingdom of God

It's about the rebirth experience. (Acts 2:1-4) If you don't receive the Spirit you don't understand the things of God nor the kingdom. No one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. (1 Corinthians 2:11) Must have the Spirit to see the kingdom.

 

[Aupmanyav]

So which one is right or are all of them wrong? Is your decision based on a very well analyzed basis?

I am a strong atheist, Firedragon. I do not even believe in possibility of existence of any God / Allah. Yes, my analysis is based on latest of science, as well as on what Buddha and Hindu scriptures said. But as you said, my views are irrelevant for this topic.

 

[firedragon]

It is really obvious.

Mohammed had contact with Jews and Christians, 600 years after Christ.

His religion solely came from inside his brain. The Bible, both old Testament and new, clearly shows God, and Christ performing miracles with many witnesses.

These are the credentials of God, the proof of the authority of these Scriptures.

Mohammed did no miracles, the hadiths show him to be pretty blood bloodthirsty, and his theocratic government construct proved to be conquering and very aggressive.

He obviously took from Christianity here, from Judaism there, and created a hybrid religion, that he alone created, by alleging a god spoke to him.

I don't believe him.

it’s not relevant. Even if Muhammad is completely bogus, yet he had a theology to present and according to his theology I have spoken.

that’s that.

 

[firedragon]

I am a strong atheist, Firedragon. I do not even believe in possibility of existence of any God / Allah. Yes, my analysis is based on latest of science, as well as on what Buddha and Hindu scriptures said. But as you said, my views are irrelevant for this topic.

I understand your argument is based on an atheists point of view. But you spoke of supersession. That’s a theological question. Thus, the argument of replacement theology has to be based on analysis of the so called “superseding theology.

peace.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I believe the Gospel is new and that is what the verse is talking about.

“Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again 2 he cannot see the kingdom of God

So in what way is this an extension of or continuation of the revelation given to Israel in the Tanakh?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I believe the New Covenant is in blood so that covers the sacrificial system.

No where in the Torah does it say to do human sacrifice. It spells out what animals/grains to use. Also, sacrifices were done in the Temple, not on some hill outside the Temple.

 

[Aupmanyav]

But you spoke of supersession. That’s a theological question. Thus, the argument of replacement theology has to be based on analysis of the so called “superseding theology".

I could carry on but abide by the OP which restricts it to Jesus only. Anything other than that will merit a separate topic.
To what extent did Jesus promote supersessionism?

 

[Dawnofhope]

You have to understand the theology, not base your understanding on people and what people say.

Islamic theology is not supersession. Islamic theology is it is all Islam. There is no supersession or replacement theology. The Islamic theology is strange sounding to you because Islam is an Arabic word and theology is an English word stemming from Koine and modern greek.

The Islamic theology is that it is all Islam.

So how important is the nation of Israel in Islamic theology? How about the role of the Jews as God’s chosen people? How about the relevance of the Torah as it exists today? Those are some of the key questions concerning supersessionism.

Part of Islam is what Muslims say and do in the name of Islam. How can you divorce the way it is as opposed to the way it should be?

Part of how I learn about Islam is hearing what Muslims say and do. Another aspect is learning what Muhammad said and did. The Quran is the best starting place as to what Muhammad said.

 

[firedragon]

So how important is the nation of Israel in Islamic theology? How about the role of the Jews as God’s chosen people? How about the relevance of the Torah as it exists today? Those are some of the key questions concerning supersessionism.

Your questions.

1. How important is the nation of Israel in Islamic theology?

In Islamic theology, no nation is more important than another nation. No person is more important than another person. No messenger is more important than another messenger. Read the Qur'an.

2. How about the role of the Jews as God’s chosen people?

In Islamic theology, no one is a "God's chosen people". The notion of a covenant given to Jacob and seed doesn't mean "Jews" and certainly doesn't have the connotation of "God's chosen people". That's being racist. In Islamic theology all people are equal.

3. How about the relevance of the Torah as it exists today?

When you say Torah you mean the Pentateuch, the written Torah or the Oral Torah? In Islamic theology, none of these are "The Torah".

 

[Dawnofhope]

Your questions.

1. How important is the nation of Israel in Islamic theology?

In Islamic theology, no nation is more important than another nation. No person is more important than another person. No messenger is more important than another messenger. Read the Qur'an.

2. How about the role of the Jews as God’s chosen people?

In Islamic theology, no one is a "God's chosen people". The notion of a covenant given to Jacob and seed doesn't mean "Jews" and certainly doesn't have the connotation of "God's chosen people". That's being racist. In Islamic theology all people are equal.

3. How about the relevance of the Torah as it exists today?

When you say Torah you mean the Pentateuch, the written Torah or the Oral Torah? In Islamic theology, none of these are "The Torah".

Thank you for answering my questions. The Jews are not superior to any other race but they have a special role both historically and in the future when it comes to God's Revelation. The starting point for understanding that is the Hebrew Bible. For me the Torah can refer to either the Pentateuch and associated Prophetic books in the Hebrew Bible. The Pentateuch is especially important in regards being a record of Divine Revelation from Moses. Books such as Isaiah, Daniel, Ezekiel and the like are also important. As I understand it, this is very much the same Torah that was around in the seventh century when Muhammad revealed the Quran. The Tawrat or Torah in the Quran is the Revelation of Moses to which Muhammad refers. The answers you have provided are the clearest indication of Islamic supersessionism in this thread so far.

 

[firedragon]

Thank you for answering my questions. The Jews are not superior to any other race but they have a special role both historically and in the future when it comes to God's Revelation.

Well, thats your own theology, not the Islamic theology.

I understand what you say, but should understand the Islamic stand on this. You dont have to accept it, but you should understand it, even if you disagree.

The starting point for understanding that is the Hebrew Bible. For me the Torah can refer to either the Pentateuch and associated Prophetic books in the Hebrew Bible.

I understand that this is what you accept. Thats fine.

But thats not the Islamic stand.

The Pentateuch is especially important in regards being a record of Divine Revelation from Moses. Books such as Isaiah, Daniel, Ezekiel and the like are also important. As I understand it, this is very much the same Torah that was around in the seventh century when Muhammad revealed the Quran. The Tawrat or Torah in the Quran is the Revelation of Moses to which Muhammad refers. The answers you have provided are the clearest indication of Islamic supersessionism in this thread so far.

I understand your point. Yet again, thats not the Islamic theology.

Hope you understand.

 

[firedragon]

The Tawrat or Torah in the Quran is the Revelation of Moses to which Muhammad refers.

Just a clarification.

The Quran does not directly say the Taurat was given to Moses as you have assessed.

Peace.