Fulfillment Theology: Replacement Theology in Nicer Clothes

Note: Supersessionism, also called Replacement Theology, is the theological view that the Church has replaced Israel as God’s chosen people, rendering Israel’s covenantal role obsolete. As we see Israel in the news more and more, theologians are seeking to establish that the modern state of Israel has nothing to do with God’s economy or salvation history. Paul makes the exact opposite case in Romans 11.

Fulfillment Theology is the belief that the promises and prophecies given to Israel in the Hebrew Scriptures are fulfilled in Jesus the Messiah, particularly through the establishment of the Church as the continuation or realization of God's covenant people. While it affirms the Jewish roots of first believers, it often implies that ethnic Israel no longer has a distinct role in God’s redemptive plan apart from faith in Christ. It is the prevailing theology today that claims that modern-day Israel is not a fulfillment of prophecy.

The Messianic Age is a Big Deal

One of the confusing aspects of Fulfillment Theology is its treatment of prophecies from the Hebrew Bible that clearly point to a second coming. Fulfillment Theology typically interprets promises like Zechariah 14:4—where the Messiah stands on the Mount of Olives as he sets up the millennial kingdom—as being symbolically or spiritually fulfilled in Jesus’ first coming, his resurrection, the outpouring of the Spirit, and the growth of the Church. Rather than expecting a literal, future reign of the Messiah in Jerusalem, Fulfillment Theology sees such prophecies as finding their ultimate meaning in the Messiah’s heavenly reign and the global expansion of his kingdom through the Church, thus reinterpreting geographic and national promises in universal and spiritual terms. While Fulfillment Theology affirms the Second Coming, it places less emphasis on Israel’s national role and a Messianic age, focusing instead on Jesus’ present reign through the Church.

However, it would seem that Jesus and the apostles did not teach this.

• Yeshua tells the Jews of Jerusalem he would return when they recognize him as Messiah (Matt. 23:39).

• Yeshua speaks of literally returning from the sky (Matt. 24:30), which points to Daniel 7:13, “There before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven.”

• John affirms this saying, “Look, he is coming with the clouds” (Rev. 1:7).

• Paul calls this “The blessed hope—the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus the Messiah” (Titus 2:13).

Fulfillment Theology typically interprets New Testament prophecies about Jesus “coming in the clouds” not as a literal, future return visible in the sky, but as symbolic language referring to His vindication, ascension, or judgment—particularly in events like the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. or the spread of His kingdom through the Church. N. T. Wright disputes the traditional view, “The ‘coming of the Son of Man’ is not the second coming, but the vindication of Jesus and the judgment of Jerusalem. (emphasis added).” [1]

The Patristics Believed in a Literal Second Coming

However, the Church Fathers (or Patristics) believed in a literal Second Coming.

• “Let us expect, therefore, hour by hour, the kingdom of God in love and righteousness, since we do not know the day of God’s appearing.”

—1 Clement 23, late 1st Century

• “He was truly raised from the dead, his Father having raised him, who in like fashion will also raise us who believe in him through Jesus Christ…for he will come again to judge the living and the dead.”

— Ignatius of Antioch (c. 110 AD) in Letter to the Trallians, 9

• “But I and others…are assured that there will be a resurrection of the dead, and a thousand years in Jerusalem, which will then be built, adorned, and enlarged…for Christ shall come from heaven…” — Justin Martyr (c. 100–165), Dialogue with Trypho, 80.

• “When this Antichrist shall have devastated all things in this world, he will reign for three years and six months…Then the Lord will come from heaven in the clouds…sending this man and those who follow him into the lake of fire.” — Irenaeus of Lyons (c. 130–200), Against Heresies 5.30.

Israel, Not So Important

Fulfillment Theology also downplays the role of ethnic Israel, and a Jerusalem centered, Messianic Age. It teaches:

• The promises made to Israel—including land, temple, and kingship—are fulfilled in Jesus and the Church.

• The Church is seen as the continuation or fulfillment of Israel’s identity, redefined around Jesus rather than ethnic or national identity.

• As a result, ethnic Israel no longer holds a central, covenantal role unless individual Jews come to faith in Jesus.

God has two covenant peoples (not dual covenant—the Abrahamic covenant was not salvific—it did not offer eternal life) Through Abraham, He made a covenant with the physical descendants of Abraham—Israel—and through Jesus, He extended a covenant to the spiritual descendants of Abraham—those who believe by faith. Both groups are anticipated in Genesis 12: the physical nation that would come from Abraham, and the spiritual seed through whom all the families of the earth would be blessed. This is further confirmed in Genesis 17, when Abraham’s name is changed to mean “father of many nations.” Fulfillment Theology, however, redefines God's covenant with the physical seed by merging it into a new identity—the spiritual seed—effectively replacing Israel with the Church. Yet Scripture presents a different picture: the “one new man” is made up of both Jews and Gentiles in Messiah (Ephesians 2:15), and unbelieving Israel still retains significance in God's plan, as Romans 11:29 affirms that “the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable.”

Noted Messianic Jewish scholar David J. Rudolph has engaged deeply with Fulfillment Theology, particularly in its treatment of Old Testament promises and the identity of Israel in the New Covenant. While those who embrace Fulfillment say that the Church has not replaced Israel, Rudolph says, “when the smoke and mirrors are removed, [N. T.] Wright’s ‘redefined Israel’ view is ultimately a form of traditional supersessionism that is in continuity with the tradition of Justin Martyr’s transference theology.” [2]

Paul Henebury agrees, in his scholarly review of God’s Israel and the Israel of God, speaking of Wright’s Fulfillment Theology, he says it has the same effect on Israel as Replacement Theology. “At its ugly historical core supersessionism (replacement theology) is the belief that the Church has taken over the national covenant promises God made to ethnic Israel so that there is no future for the nation of Israel in God’s eschatological plan,” writes Henebury. [3] He continues by correctly calling out that “modern supersessionists,” like N. T. Wright and Gary Burge, “have convinced themselves that they are not supersessionists,” by calling their conclusions Fulfillment Theology, instead of Replacement Theology. A great example, points out, Henebury is Scot McKnight’s claim, “Israel is not done away with; Israel is not superseded; Israel is expanded to include gentiles.” [4]

In this definition, unbelieving Israel is disregarded, even though Paul says God is faithful to his promises to Israel, even in unbelief (Rom 3:1-4), and the calling on national Israel is “irrevocable” (Rom 11:29).

But in the Church Jews are vastly outnumbered by Gentiles. Who cannot see that adding a hundred gallons of water to a drop of wine basically makes it water? It most certainly does not expand the wine! Even so adding mainly Gentiles to “Israel” replaces Jewish Israel with Gentile predominantly. Call them “Israel” all you want. This is not expanding Israel, it is eliminating it. [5]

However, as noted above, Fulfillment Theology, which seeks to redefine Israel as something completely other than what God promised to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, not only deletes the Jewish people but holy and completely changes the nature of the hope of the Church—the second coming of Jesus the Messiah and the establishment of his Messianic Kingdom on earth.

Or maybe there’s something else at play. As I argue in my book When Kingdoms Collide, is it possible that God can be faithful to ethnic Israel and the Church at the same time? God’s covenant with Abraham was not salvific (see Gen 15 and 17)—the only way to gain eternal life is through Yeshua. At the end of the age, we will see mass salvation amongst the Jewish people. Paul says at that time, “all Israel will be saved.”

At the same time “The kingdom of the world [will] become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Messiah, and he will reign for ever and ever” (Rev 11:15). God will have “installed my king on Zion, my holy mountain” (Ps 2:6). This after Yeshua returns to the Mount of Olives from where he ascended (Acts 1:11). If one takes away the significance of national Israel, not only does one turn God into a liar (Jer 31:36), but one makes the Last Days fulfillment impossible. Maybe the text actually means what it says.

WAR UPDATES

I woke up this morning at 4:50 AM. I have a rule never to check my phone if I wake up in the middle of the night. For some reason, I felt like I had to see what was happening in the news. I was surprised to discovered that President Trump had brokered a cease fire. No sooner had I read that, than Iran launched several missiles at Israel—killing four people in Beersheva. The agreement was supposed to go in effect at 7 AM (12:00 PM EST). That is when I decided to go back to sleep. Around 11 AM, Iran shot one or two missiles at Israel and Israel responded. However, before those missions were completed, President Trump spoke to Prime Minister Netanyahu and strongly suggested that he stopped the mission. Netanyahu canceled all at 1 PM. And that's where we are at 5:30 PM Israel time. The war seems to be over. Is it really? As they say, only time will tell.

The results of the war are devastating for Iran and great news for the Middle East.

• For years everyone was afraid of Iran. Apparently, they're not as tough as we thought.

• Their ballistic missile stock pile has been greatly diminished.

• They have lost probably 60% or more of their launchers.

• More importantly, their nuclear weapons program has been decimated.

• Intelligence has yet to reveal if they were able to save any of their weapons-grade uranium. If so, it will need to be dealt with.

• Israel suffered significant physical damage to buildings, but under 30 deaths. Certainly a high price to pay, but without our safe rooms and bomb shelters, and what I believe was angelic protection, it would’ve been much, much worse.

• President Trump comes out looking very strong, by destroying Iranian nuclear capabilities without going to all out war—pleasing both sides of his fractured base.

• Prime Minister Netanyahu probably did not win any friends internationally, but he stood up to our biggest enemy here in Israel and won. While Israelis were firmly behind him in this war, the average Israeli was much more interested in a ceasefire with Hamas, than Iran, who is a bigger threat.

• The Iranian regime is weakened—maybe more than ever in their 46-year reign of terror.

• While neither Israel nor the United States wanted to send in troops to act as a regime change, there is hope that possibly the people of Iran will take back their country.

• The end result is a Middle East with only the remnant of Iran’s proxy terror groups—Hezbollah, Hamas, the Houthis, and a defanged Iran.

• While I don’t have any polling data, I believe the average Israeli would have preferred to have taken out the entire leadership—these are evil people who kill and maim. They should not be leading a nation.

• But we cannot complain. They are the last remaining entity that was calling for our destruction.

• While I do not believe this will lead to a utopian age, it may lead to the peaceful situation that Ezekiel 38 predicts before the war between Gog and Magog, drawing us closer to the great tribulation and the coming of Yeshua.

---

[1] N.T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God, 1996.

[2] David J. Rudolph, “A Messianic Jewish Response,” in God’s Israel and the Israel of God, eds. Scot McKnight and Michael Bird (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Academic, 2023), 108.

[3] Paul Henebury, “Review of ‘God’s Israel and Israel’s God’ edited by Bird & McKnight,” Sharper Iron, October 12, 2023, https://sharperiron.org/article/review-of-gods-israel-and-israels-god-edited-bird-mcknight.

[4] Scot McNight, “The Sport of Supersessionism: A Game to Be Played,” in God’s Israel and the Israel of God, eds. Scot McKnight and Michael Bird (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Academic, 2023), 42.

[5] Henebury, “Review of ‘God’s Israel and Israel’s God’”