{"id":19209,"date":"2017-12-06T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2017-12-06T06:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/sugar-land-bible-church.local\/sermon\/the-coming-kingdom-029\/"},"modified":"2017-12-06T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2017-12-06T06:00:00","slug":"the-coming-kingdom-029","status":"publish","type":"sermon","link":"https:\/\/slbc.org\/es\/sermon\/the-coming-kingdom-029\/","title":{"rendered":"The Coming Kingdom 029"},"content":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"featured_media":0,"template":"","book":[93],"series_event":[470],"sermon_service_type":[474],"speaker":[6],"class_list":["post-19209","sermon","type-sermon","status-publish","hentry","book-galatians","series_event-the-coming-kingdom","sermon_service_type-wednesday-evenings","speaker-dr-andy-woods","no-post-thumbnail"],"acf":{"sermon_title":"The Coming Kingdom 029","sermon_date":"20171206","sermon_month":"12","sermon_year":"2017","sermon_notes":5228,"sermon_slides":5230,"sermon_mp3":5231,"sermon_id":"126172116154","series_or_event":470,"service_type":[474],"speaker":6,"books_of_the_bible":93,"chapter_and_verse":"6:16","sermon_transcript":"Andy Woods\n\nThe Coming Kingdom\n\n12-6-17\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Galatians 6:16\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Lesson 29\n\nLet\u2019s open our Bibles to the Book of Galatians, chapter 6 and verse 16.\u00a0 I just got back from the Pre-trib conference in Dallas, I just got in like an hour or two ago so I\u2019m sort of running on fumes here.\u00a0\u00a0 But as you all know we\u2019ve been doing this study on the kingdom; we\u2019re in Lesson 28 on the kingdom and really just to kind of sum the whole thing up what we\u2019ve covered is the kingdom, as it\u2019s developed in the Old Testament, was offered to first century Israel on a silver platter and what did they do with that offer?\u00a0 Rejected it!\u00a0 And what chapter did that happen in?\u00a0 Matthew 12. So once you get outside of Matthew 12 what starts to happen is we learn of a period of time that we are in now which concerns us where the kingdom has not been cancelled but postponed.\n\nAnd we know and really when we reconvene in January, because I think tonight is the last Wednesday night Bible study of 2017; next week is Gingerbread houses so you don\u2019t want to miss that and then the following two or three weeks after there isn\u2019t anything going on on Wednesday.\u00a0 So I think we reconvene January 10th<\/sup>.\u00a0 I think I said the 3rd<\/sup> last time but it\u2019s actually the 10th<\/sup>.\u00a0 I guess that\u2019s a good thing, in a way, it gives folks a little rest, Yours Truly included.\n\nWe\u2019ve been talking about what is God doing while the kingdom is not here, is what we\u2019ve been getting at.\u00a0 So we\u2019ve been talking about the Matthew 13 parables and we\u2019ve also been talking about the doctrine of the church.\u00a0 The church represents a period of time where God is clearly at work but it\u2019s not the kingdom.\u00a0 And when we reconvene in January we\u2019re going to be finished with this interim time period.\u00a0 And we\u2019re going to get right back to God\u2019s program for the kingdom and I\u2019m going to be showing you exactly how God is going to bring the kingdom to the earth after the age of the church is over.\n\nBut we\u2019ve been spending a lot of time on this interim time period, that\u2019s chapter 11 in my book, and it\u2019s a very important period of time because that concerns us directly.\u00a0\u00a0 One of the things that we\u2019ve been studying very aggressively is not only the church, not the kingdom but the church is not Israel.\u00a0 Does that ring a bell at all?\u00a0 Israel and the church represent different programs of God.\u00a0\u00a0 And I almost was not going to give you this Bible study because it\u2019s a little bit more of an advanced study but I figured you guys could hack it?\u00a0 What do you think?\u00a0 Do you think you guys can hack it?\u00a0 I think you can.\n\nWe\u2019re going to deal tonight with one of the thorniest issues on this whole subject and it\u2019s in Galatians 6 and verse 16. \u00a0What you have to understand, and if you\u2019re new to theology you may not know this, but it\u2019s a big deal; there is a theological war that has been taking place, probably since the 4th<\/sup> century A.D.\u00a0 between two camps.\u00a0 Our camp, and you\u2019ll find this reflected in our doctrinal statement, is what you call dispensationalism. What is that?\u00a0 What does that mean?\u00a0 What it means is God has made promises to Israel which have never been fulfilled.\u00a0 Those promises have been placed on hold, not cancelled but placed on hold.\u00a0 And today God is dealing with a new man called the church; the church is not a replacement for Israel but is, if I could put it this way, an interruption in God\u2019s program for Israel.\n\nWe like to refer to the church sometimes as a parenthesis, breaking up God\u2019s past work and future work with Israel.\u00a0 Sometimes it\u2019s called an intercalation which means an interruption.\u00a0 And that\u2019s basically our model of what the church is.\u00a0 And our view, when you study it in church history, is actually a minority view.\u00a0 Actually most Christians, by way of denominational affiliation do not embrace the model that we teach here.\u00a0 They embrace something called covenant theology, sometimes it\u2019s called Reformed theology, probably the most popular name for it is replacement theology.\u00a0 Have you heard of replacement theology?\u00a0 Anybody here heard of replacement theology.\u00a0 Okay, good, most everybody, that\u2019s unusual.\n\nReplacement theology is the idea that the church has permanently replaced God\u2019s program with Israel.\u00a0 Israel\u2019s cord has been cut because of her unbelief in the first century (that we\u2019ve studied), her rejection of her Messiah and so all of God\u2019s promises to Israel that we think have never been fulfilled, interpreted literally, have now been allegorically or spiritually transferred to the church.\u00a0 So the best thing that could happen to a Hebrew, a physical descendant of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. is they could get saved, and that\u2019s a wonderful thing if a Hebrew gets saved and many do,\u00a0 but other than that there is no future for the nation of Israel. God is finished with the nation of Israel; God is through with the Jew.\u00a0 All of those promises you read in the Old Testament that haven\u2019t been fulfilled yet, people tell\u00a0 us we take them too literally, and they\u2019ve all been transferred to the church.\u00a0 Now the curses they never transfer to the church in this system; they just transfer the blessings.\u00a0 They leave the curses behind for the Jewish people and take all of Israel\u2019s blessings.\u00a0 And this is what is called replacement theology.\n\nSo if you come from a Roman Catholic background likely this is what you\u2019ve been taught. If you come from a Reformed theology background, like Presbyterianism for example, different forms of Lutheranism, basically you\u2019ve been taught this in one way or the other.\u00a0 If you haven\u2019t been taught it the people in charge, believe this, they just haven\u2019t been honest with you to disclose this belief.\n\nSo this is basically what\u2019s called replacement theology.\u00a0 What they basically believe is that the church is the new Israel; the church is the reigning kingdom of God on the earth and any blueprint for a future for Israel as a nation and a Jewish kingdom (which is what we believe here at Sugar Land Bible Church) is coming, they don\u2019t believe that.\u00a0 And probably one the biggest verses in the Bible that is a battleground text between these two different views is Galatians 6:16.\u00a0 In fact, if you get into a discussion with anybody that has any knowledge about these things and they\u2019re presenting the replacement theology view at some point they\u2019re going to bring up Galatians 6:16.\n\nAnd one of the things that\u2019s very interesting is, I\u2019m picking up on this more and more as I\u2019ve been on different websites and listening to what people are saying, is Muslims have picked up on the Galatians 6:16 argument because Muslims don\u2019t like our belief either, that there\u2019s a future for Israel.\u00a0 They look at Israel as an occupier, an illegal occupier.\u00a0 So if you follow the news you know Donald Trump today, or\u00a0 yesterday, made Jerusalem, or indicated that the United States was going to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.\u00a0 And as Bible believers we\u2019re saying of course that\u2019s true, David did that 3,000 years ago.\u00a0 But if you\u2019re a Muslim and you believe that that territory belongs to Allah, you hate our view of a future for Israel, sometimes called Zionism.\u00a0 And even Muslims that are astute are trying to neutralize our view and they have bought into replacement theology.\u00a0 They promote replacement theology.\u00a0 And I\u2019ve been in conversations with knowledge\u00adable Muslims and they\u2019ve pulled out of their hat Galatians 6:16 on me. And you\u2019re kind of shocked that they know that passage is there.\u00a0 Most Christians don\u2019t know it\u2019s there, but the opponents of our belief within Christendom and outside of Christendom know it\u2019s there.\n\nIn my book I don\u2019t really have a lot of treatment on Galatians 6:16 other than a quick footnote showing you where to research this and so what I wanted to do tonight, before we left the subject\u00a0 of the church, we\u2019ve been explaining why the church is not Israel, is I wanted to give you a running start on the whole Galatians 6:16 issue.\u00a0 So that\u2019s sort of the direction I wanted to go this evening.\n\nNow notice what the NIV says.\u00a0 You all know that the NIV is a paraphrase?\u00a0 The NIV\u2026 I\u2019m not necessarily against the NIV in terms of devotional reading and things like that, like I read every night with my daughter the Bible, we read the NIV because she\u2019s eleven years old and I\u2019m just trying to get across to her basic biblical concepts.\u00a0 But the thing you have to understand about the NIV is it\u2019s not a word for word translation; it\u2019s a paraphrase.\u00a0 So the translators are sort of putting into their own lingo periphrastically what the Greek text says.\u00a0 To do the type of detailed study that is a word for word translation you don\u2019t use the NIV; you use either the New American Standard Bible, NASB, or you can also use the version I use, (I left my Bible in Dallas so I don\u2019t have my usual Bible today) so I\u2019m using here today the NKJB.\u00a0 So when you want to do word for word deeper studies that are consistent word for word with the original Greek in terms of an English translation you would for the NKJV, or the NASB.\u00a0 You don\u2019t use a paraphrase.\u00a0 If you\u2019re looking more for a devotional kind of thought for the day the NIV is sufficient. Of if you\u2019re reading to small children who are just learning language the NIV is sufficient.\n\nSo what I want you to understand is the replacement theology crowd has built their whole theology on the NIV\u2019s reading of Galatians 6:16 and that automatically should set off some alarm bells because you know that the NIV is not word for word.\u00a0 So here\u2019s what the NIV says in the Book of Galatians, chapter 6 and verse 16.\u00a0 It says, \u201cPeace and mercy to all who follow this rule\u2014\u201c now let me pause there, the Apostle Paul has gone on missionary journey one, lots of Gentiles got saved on missionary one; you can read all about it in Acts 13 and 14.\u00a0 And then Paul goes back to Antioch, which is at the northern tip of Israel, it\u2019s what we today call\u2026 it\u2019s very near Syria, and he writes within six months to a year to the church he just evangelized in southern Galatia on missionary journey number one and he\u2019s warning them against legalism.\n\nSo when he says, \u201cPeace and mercy to all who follow this rule\u201d he\u2019s talking about salvation by faith alone in Christ alone which he anchored them down in when he evangelized them and planted the churches on missionary journey one, speaking to the Gentile churches, non-Jewish churches, because when he goes on missionary journey number one he\u2019s going outside the borders of Israel.\u00a0 So the NIV reads as follows. \u201cPeace and mercy to all who follow this rule even<\/u> to the Israel of God.\u201d\u00a0 Now the whole debate here is on that underlined word \u201ceven.\u201d\u00a0 It is a translation of the Greek conjunction kai<\/em>, k-a-i, and you\u2019ll notice that the NIV translates the kai<\/em> as even.\u00a0 And that seems to indicate that all who follow this rule, the Gentile churches, are the what?\u00a0 \u201cthe Israel of God.\u201d\u00a0 So replacement theologians love this verse because at first glance, when you read it in the NIV it looks like oh my goodness, replacement theology must be right, the church is Israel, meaning the church has replaced Israel.\n\nSo the model that you find in replacement theology concerning the Israel of God is that the church is the Israel of God.\u00a0 Well, if the church is \u201cthe Israel of God\u201d then the church has taken over Israel\u2019s place. Do you see that?\u00a0 And so the NIV reading translating the kai<\/em> as \u201ceven\u201d supports replacement theology.\u00a0\u00a0 And I want to just give you a couple of quotes because I want to show you how replacement theologians have built their whole house on this verse.\n\nKenneth Gentry, he\u2019s someone I know really well, not personally but his writings, I did both my Master\u2019s thesis and my doctoral dissertation interacting with the writings of Kenneth Gentry.\u00a0 Kenneth Gentry is Reformed to the core; he is a replacement theologian, his what\u2019s called a preterist, he believes that the Book of Revelation already happened in A.D. 70.\u00a0 Can\u00a0 you believe that?\u00a0 And if you\u2019re familiar with Lordship salvation, we did teachings on that, haven\u2019t we?\u00a0 Has anybody heard of Lordship salvation.\u00a0 Okay.\u00a0 He is the brainchild behind Lordship salvation.\u00a0 I mean, John MacArthur did not invent Lordship salvation, Kenneth Gentry is the one that really developed it academically.\u00a0 People like John MacArthur just sort of popularized it.\u00a0 But we\u2019re not here to talk about Lordship salvation, I\u2019m just giving you the background on who Kenneth Gentry is because you might have no awareness\u00a0 of him.\u00a0 He\u2019s sort of an unknown figure but he\u2019s had a huge influence on evangelical Christianity.\n\nAnd he writes this: \u201cThat is, we believe in the unfolding plan of God in history, the Christian Church is the very fruition of the redemptive purpose of God.\u00a0 As such, the multi-racial, international Church of Jesus Christ supersedes\u201d now sometimes replacement theology is called supersessionism.\u00a0 Why is it called supersessionism?\u00a0 Because they believe that the church super-cedes Israel\u2019s place permanently.\u00a0 So Gentry says, \u201cAs such, the multi-racial international church of Jesus Christ supersedes racial, national Israel as the focus of the kingdom of God.\u201d\u00a0 See that.\u00a0 Israel is not the kingdom, we\u2019re the kingdom, we\u2019ve taken Israel\u2019s place.\u00a0 And then look what he says, \u201cIndeed, we believe that the church becomes \u2018the Israel of God\u2019\u201d and look at the verse he\u2019s quoting to support his view, Galatians 6:16.\u00a0 And if you read that in the NIV it sure looks a lot like replacement theology. \u00a0\u00a0[Hans K. LaRondelle, \u201c The Israel of God in Prophecy: Principles of Prophetic Interpretation (Berrien Springs, Mich.: Andrews University U., 1983), pp. 110-11. Italics mine)\n\nHere\u2019s another replacement theologian and he writes, \u201cPaul\u2019s benediction in Galatians 6:16 becomes, then, the\u201d what witness, \u201cchief witness,<\/em>\u201d \u201cthe chief witness in the New Testament declaring that the universal church is the Israel of God, the seed of Abraham, the heir to Israel\u2019s covenant promises.\u201d\u00a0 And you\u2019ll notice that he calls Galatians 6:16 exhibit a, \u201cchief witness.\u201d\n\nSo you read that in the NIV and it sure reads that way, doesn\u2019t it?\u00a0 So some people are like what I like to call NIV positive, they read the NIV all the time and they don\u2019t really know enough to know it\u2019s a paraphrase and as I explained before I\u2019m not totally down on the NIV, I just want you to understand that when you deal with these kind of subjects that we\u2019re dealing with you don\u2019t go to the NIV; you go to either NKJV or NASB.\n\nBut you\u2019ll notice underneath the NIV I\u2019ve got the NASB translation and tell me if you think it\u2019s a little different.\u00a0 The NASB says, \u201c\u201cAnd to those who will walk by this rule, peace and mercy be upon them,\u201d now how is the \u201ckai<\/em>\u201d translated, not with \u201ceven\u201d but with what\u201d \u201cand<\/u><\/em> upon the Israel of God.\u201d\u00a0 Well, my goodness, that changes things a little bit doesn\u2019t it?\u00a0 If the NASB is right then \u201cthe Israel of God\u201d (now who is \u201cthe Israel of God\u201d?\u00a0 Jewish converts) the Jewish converts are Hebrew Christians and they are not equated with the church but they are a subset of the church.\u00a0 They are a category within the church. See that?\u00a0 And if that is true then the church cannot be ever called \u201cthe Israel of God.\u201d\u00a0 The only people that are \u201cthe Israel of God\u201d are Jewish converts within the mostly Gentile church.\n\nSo I tried to put together this little chart here, maybe this will help you, maybe it won\u2019t,\u00a0 but we\u2019re dealing here with the translation of kai<\/em>.\u00a0 When you transliterate if into English it reads like k-a-i.\u00a0 It\u2019s a Greek conjunction.\u00a0 And you\u2019ll notice that some people translate it as \u201ceven,\u201d some people translate it as \u201cand.\u201d\u00a0 Now if you want a fancy name for this the translation of the kai <\/em>as \u201ceven\u201d is called the appositional use of kai<\/em>.\u00a0 The translation of the kai<\/em> as \u201cand\u201d is called the continuative use of kai<\/em>.\u00a0 The Bible version that translates it as \u201ceven\u201d is the NIV.\u00a0 The Bible version that translates it as \u201cand\u201d is either the NASB or the NKJV.\n\nYou say well so what?\u00a0 Who cares.\u00a0 It relates to this concept of the Israel of God.\u00a0 If the NIV is right then the church is <\/u>the Israel of God.\u00a0 See that?\u00a0 If the NASB is right then the church is not the Israel of God, the \u201cIsrael of God\u201d is who?\u00a0 A smaller group within the church.\u00a0 You see that?\u00a0 What difference does it make related to Israel and the church?\u00a0 If the NIV is right then the church is equated with Israel.\u00a0 If you equate the church with Israel then who wins the day?\u00a0 Replacement theology.\u00a0 But if the NASB is right then the \u201cIsrael of God\u201d is a subset within the church which doesn\u2019t favor replacement theology but favors dispensational theology, postponement theology.\n\nSo even before we get into this I want you to see why, what\u2019s at stake here, why there the battle\u00adground lines have been drawn on this verse.\u00a0 And don\u2019t get intimidated by this because I have ten reasons, I think I can do these fairly fast.\u00a0 We might even get out early (if you guys stay in prayer over that).\u00a0 [Laughter]\u00a0 But I want to give you ten reasons why I think it\u2019s very convincing at the end of the day that the NIV is completely wrong here.\u00a0 And the NASB has it right, and if that\u2019s true then we\u2019re not dealing with Paul saying the church is the Israel of God; he\u2019s saying the Israel of God is a Hebrew group within the church, which would favor postponement theology, dispen\u00adsational theology.\u00a0 So let\u2019s go through these fairly fast.\u00a0 I think when\u00a0 you put all ten together you have a pretty convincing case.\n\nNumber 1, The continuative kai,<\/em> that would translate the kai <\/em>as \u201cand\u201d, the continuative kai <\/em>is the most common use in the New Testament.\u00a0 That\u2019s how the word is normally used, almost everywhere it\u2019s used, all the way through the Greek New Testament.\u00a0 Number 2, by contrast, the appositional kai<\/em>, which would translate the kai<\/em> as even, is the rarest use in the New Testament.\u00a0 So you see what\u2019s happened here?\u00a0 The NIV and replacement theology has built their whole house on the rarest use of the word.\u00a0 And they have ignored the most common use of the word.\u00a0 I mean, that in and of itself should send up some red flags as well.\n\nI have this quote here from S. Lewis Johnson.\u00a0 S. Lewis Johnson, he\u2019s with the Lord now, long-time professor of Greek at Dallas Seminary and he wrote what I think is the best article you can find on this.\u00a0 That\u2019s what\u2019s footnoted in my book; it\u2019s called \u201cPaul and the Israel of God\u201d in a book entitled Essays in favor of J. Dwight Pentecost<\/em>.\n\nAnd S. Lewis Johnson writes this,\u00a0 he\u2019s doing a whole study here, a journal article on the Israel of God in Galatians 6:16.\u00a0 He says:\u00a0 \u201cIt is necessary to begin this part of the discussion with a basic but often neglected hermeneutical principle.\u201d\u00a0 Now don\u2019t let that word \u201chermeneutical\u201d scare\u00a0 you; that just means interpretation, that\u2019s all it means.\u00a0 \u201cIt is this: in the absence of compelling exegetical and theological considerations,\u201d now exegetical is you\u2019re trying to get to the meaning of the passage, that\u2019s what exegesis is, or exegetical, so these are big words but don\u2019t let them bother you, they have simple definitions, \u201cin the absence of compelling exegetical and theological considerations we should avoid the rare grammatical usages when the common ones make good sense.\u201d\u00a0 [Paul and the 'Israel of God': An Exegetical and Eschatological Case-Study,\u201d in Essays in Honor of J. Dwight Pentecost<\/em>, ed. Stanley D. Toussaint and Charles H. Dyer (Chicago: Moody, 1986), 187.]\n\nAnd he continues and he says of the replacement theologians use of Galatians 6:16, \u201cAn extremely rare use has been made to replace the common usage, even in spite of the fact that the common and frequent usage makes perfectly good sense in Galatians 6:16.\u201d\u00a0 He\u2019s saying simply this: the replacement theological system is built on, not the most common use of the word kai<\/em> but the rarest use.\u00a0 And that\u2019s not how you build theology.\u00a0 Your theology is only as good as the language it comes from.\u00a0 So when you built theological systems you don\u2019t want to build them on rare usages of words when the common ones fit very nicely, thank you very much!\u00a0 Do you see that?\n\nSo those would be the first two problems with what\u2019s happening with Galatians 6:16; the continuative use of kai <\/em>is the most common use and the appositional use is the rarest use.\u00a0 Our system is built on the continuative use; their system is built on the rarest use.\u00a0 Do you follow?\n\nWhich takes us to number 3; if Paul had wanted to say that the church is the Israel of God or the church is the new Israel, or the church has taken Israel\u2019s place permanently, do you know what Paul could have done?\u00a0 He could have taken that kai<\/em> there and just got rid of it, just dumped it out of the sentence, in which case the sentence would read\u2026 well, this is how it reads in the NIV, we\u2019ve seen that:\u00a0 \u201cAnd to those who will walk by this rule, peace and mercy to all who follow this rule, even<\/u><\/em><\/strong> to the Israel of God.\u201d\u00a0 That\u2019s a translation of the word kai, that word \u201ceven\u201d underlined.\n\nThis is how the NASB reads, \u201c\u2026 peace and mercy be upon them, and<\/u><\/em><\/strong> upon the Israel of God.\u201d\u00a0 That\u2019s what we\u2019re disputing here; which of these Bible translations is correct.\u00a0 And you know what Paul could have done?\u00a0 If he wanted to say the church is the new Israel he could have taken that underlined word translated \u201cand\u201d or \u201ceven\u201d depending upon what Bible translation you\u2019re reading, and he could have just dropped the word out, in which case the verse would read as follows:\n\n\u201cand as many as shall walk by this rule, peace be upon them and mercy upon the Israel of God.\u201d\u00a0 So after the word \u201cmercy\u201d you just get rid of the kai<\/em>.\u00a0 And if you get rid of the kai<\/em> there\u2019s nothing to discuss any more, \u201cthe church is the Israel of God.\u201d\n\nBut the reality of the situation is Paul put the kai <\/em>in there; he could have taken the kai <\/em>out.\u00a0 And what I want you to understand about the Bible is words mean things.\u00a0\u00a0 Jesus, what did He say, \u201cIt is written, man shall not live by bread alone but\u201d on what, \u201cby every word that that proceeds from the mouth of God.\u201d\u00a0 [Matthew 4:4]\u00a0 The fact of the matter is the Holy Spirit inspired Paul to put kai <\/em>in there.\u00a0 Remember what Jesus said in Matthew 5:18, \u201cFor truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished.\u201d\n\nIn our understanding of the inspiration of the Scripture the very smallest strokes of the pen were placed there by divine inspiration.\u00a0 And those strokes of the pen make up the letters and those letters make up the words and those words make up the sentences and those sentences make up the paragraphs and those paragraphs make up the chapters, and those chapters make up the books and those books make up your Bible.\u00a0 It\u2019s what we call verbal inspiration.\u00a0 \u00a0And so since Paul put the kai<\/em> in there we have to pay attention to it because of what Jesus is saying here.\n\nThat takes us to number 4, you see, when replacement theologians, as you read the word \u201cIsrael\u201d in Galatians 6:16, they don\u2019t want the word to mean Israel; they want the word to mean the Gentile church.\u00a0 Galatians 6:16, backing up just for a minute, \u201cAnd to those who will walk by this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the\u201d what? \u201cthe Israel of God.\u201d\u00a0 They want you, when you see the word \u201cIsrael\u201d to substitute in your mind the word \u201cchurch\u201d or the word \u201cGentiles.\u201d\u00a0 That\u2019s what they want.\n\nWe have one problem with that; what\u2019s the problem?\u00a0 In the Bible Israel always means Israel!\u00a0 What does that word Israel even mean?\u00a0 Israel means a physical descendant of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.\u00a0 If a person is not a physical descendant, not just of Abraham, but also of Isaac and also of Jacob, he is not a Hebrew; he is not Jewish.\u00a0 Now sometimes Israel refers to Israel in the faith, sometimes it refers to Israel in unbelief but the reality of the situation is Israel will always mean Israel, every time you study it in the Bible.\u00a0 It\u2019s what you call a technical word.\u00a0 What\u2019s a technical word?\u00a0 It\u2019s a word that means the same thing everywhere it\u2019s used.\u00a0 That word \u201cIsrael\u201d in the Bible never means the Gentiles.\u00a0 It never means First Baptist of Houston.\u00a0 It never means Sugar Land Bible Church.\u00a0 It never even refers to a mixed audience of Jews and Gentiles.\u00a0 It always refers to Jewish people.\n\nIn fact, that word is used 15 times elsewhere in Paul\u2019s writings, and what do you think it means every single time it\u2019s used:\u00a0 Israel!\u00a0 In fact, that word, Israel, is used 72 other times in the New Testament, and guess what it means all 72 other times.\u00a0 Israel!\u00a0 In fact, that word, Israel, is used 1,800 times in the Old Testament, and guess what it means every single time?\u00a0\u00a0 Israel!\n\nNow let\u2019s throw in the word \u201cIsrael\u201d and \u201cIsraelite,\u201d just for fun.\u00a0 The word \u201cIsrael\u201d or \u201cIsraelite\u201d is used 2,500 times in the Old Testament and guess what it means every single time? Israel, without exception.\u00a0 And the replacement theologians want you to believe that Galatians 6:16 is the one exception to the rule.\u00a0 I mean, are you following what tenuous belief this replacement theology is?\u00a0 I mean, why would Israel, in Galatians 6:16, mean something different than it means everywhere else in the Bible, all 2,500 usages. And they want you to believe that Israel means Gentiles there, or church, there in Galatians 6:16.\u00a0 Well, that doesn\u2019t really jibe does it, with the rest of the usages of the word Israel in the Bible.\n\nThat takes us to number 5, Israel is not equated with the church until A.D. 160.\u00a0 We have no historical record of any church father ever equating Israel with the church until a guy named Justin Martyr, that we have a record of, had an extended dialogue with a man, it\u2019s called Dialogue With Trypho, <\/em>you can Google Justin Martyr, Dialogue With Trypho<\/em>, and read the whole thing.\u00a0 He\u2019s an early church father and he is the first man that ever took the term Israel and applied it to the church.\u00a0 No one ever did this before him.\u00a0 And he did not do this until A.D. 160.\u00a0 So let me show you his quote where he does this.\n\nThe quote says, I\u2019ve got a few quotes strung together, he says \u201cAs therefore from the one man Jacob, who was surnamed Israel, all your nation has been called Jacob and Israel; so we\u201d he\u2019s a Gentile, \u201cfrom Christ, who begat us unto God, (like Jacob, and Israel, and Judah, and Joseph, and David,) are called and are the true sons of God, and keep the commandments of Christ\u201d\u2026 \u2018therefore, Christ is the Israel and the Jacob, even so we, who have been quarried out from the bowels of Christ, are the true Israelitic race.\u201d\u00a0 [Dialogue with Trypho<\/em>\u201d 123, 135]\n\nNow you have absolutely nobody ever saying that until A.D. 160.\u00a0 Now here\u2019s a question for you.\u00a0 When was the Book of Galatians\u00a0 written?\u00a0\u00a0 The Book of Galatians was Paul\u2019s fist letter, he wrote 13 letters and most people believe he wrote it around A.D. 49, which means after Paul penned this expression, \u201cthe Israel of God\u201d nobody ever believed that Paul was referring to the church for a century and ten\u00a0 years.\u00a0 Now if Paul had unambiguously communicated that the church has taken Israel\u2019s place you would see an understanding of this in all the church fathers, very early on.\u00a0 But no church father ever believed this; this view didn\u2019t even breathe in the church for a 110 years; I mean 110 years is a long time; that\u2019s like almost half of America\u2019s existence if you go back to our national\u2026\u00a0 you know, the Declaration of Independence, 1776.\u00a0 So I just think it\u2019s really, really odd that if Paul was so clear that the church has become Israel why didn\u2019t anybody pick up on what Paul said for 110 years.\u00a0 I mean, why is Justin Martyr the first one?\n\nWhich takes us to number 6, why would you introduce a sweeping theological point in the conclusion of a letter?\u00a0 Isn\u2019t that\u2019s what\u2019s happening here in Galatians 6:16?\u00a0 Isn\u2019t Paul kind of signing off, see you later, have a nice day, oh, by the way, the church has taken Israel\u2019s place.\u00a0 I mean, it just doesn\u2019t\u2026 you would never do that in a conclusion.\u00a0 If you wanted to make that point you would make it in the body of the letter, wouldn\u2019t you.\u00a0 So look at how Paul structures the Book of Galatians.\u00a0 We\u2019ve studied the Book of Galatians in this church and some of you were around when we did this so you know that the Book of Galatians has three basic parts to it; chapters 1-2, an autobiographical section; chapters 3-4 a doctrinal section, chapters 5 and 6 the application or practical section.\n\nNow if Paul wanted to say the church is the new Israel he wouldn\u2019t have made that point in the practical section; he wouldn\u2019t have made it in the conclusion of the letter.\u00a0\u00a0 Where would he have made that point? Right there in chapters 3 and 4.\u00a0 And you see, this is how Paul structures all his books; he gives orthodoxy (correct belief), you know, like you go to your orthodontist and get your mouth corrected, \u201cortho\u201d means correct, \u201cdoxy\u201d means belief; orthodoxy\u2014correct belief.\n\nAnd then in Paul\u2019s writings you\u2019ll find the word \u201ctherefore\u201d where you have what is the \u201ctherefore\u201d there for.\u00a0 And typically it\u2019s to swing the reader away from orthodoxy to orthopraxy.\u00a0 Here\u2019s how the theology you just learned applies to daily life.\u00a0 So before the \u201ctherefore\u201d he\u2019s giving orthodoxy, after the \u201ctherefor\u201d he\u2019s giving orthopraxy.\u00a0 So right there in chapter 5, verse 1 you\u2019ll see the bit \u201cTherefore.\u201d\u00a0 So 1-4\u2014orthodoxy; 5-6\u2014orthopraxy.\u00a0 If Paul wanted to say the church is the new Israel he would have said in chapters 1-4.\u00a0 That\u2019s my point, not in chapters 5 and 6.\u00a0 He certainly wouldn\u2019t have said it in the conclusion.\n\nEphesians is the same way;\u00a0 Ephesians 1-3, orthodoxy, then you\u2019re going to find the big \u201ctherefore\u201d in Ephesians 4:1, and then Ephesians 4-6 is orthopraxy.\u00a0 The Book of Romans the same way, 1-11 orthodoxy, you\u2019ll get to chapter 12, verse 1, you\u2019ll see the word \u201ctherefore\u201d and then he begins to apply what he\u2019s taught in the orthopraxy section, 12-16.\u00a0 Paul would have never made such a radical statement in the orthopraxy section of a book; he certainly wouldn\u2019t have done it in the conclusion.\u00a0 And the whole replacement theology house is built on Paul\u2019s expression in a conclusion.\u00a0 And you have to watch people very carefully because theologians will do this constantly to you if you\u2019re not aware of it.\u00a0 One of the things that people are terrified of today is they don\u2019t think they\u2019re Christians, they have no assurance of salvation; they\u2019re trusted in Christ and yet someone has convinced them that maybe they haven\u2019t trusted in Christ.\u00a0 And what is pulled out as a Billy club on people constantly is 2 Corinthians 13:5 which says examine yourselves to see if you\u2019re in the faith; prove yourselves, do you now know yourselves that Jesus Christ is in you, unless indeed you are disqualified.\n\nAnd when I was teaching on the doctrine of eternal security I went over that passage and gave you the correct understanding of that.\u00a0 It\u2019s a test there, not to determine whether you\u2019re saved; it\u2019s a test to determine if you as a saved person are walking in fellowship with Christ.\u00a0 But people will pull that clear out of the blue and they\u2019ll hold it over you, maybe you\u2019re not saved.\u00a0 And what I want you to see is that expression (that I just read) is in chapter 13.\u00a0 Where is chapter 13 in 2 Corinthians, the beginning of the book or the end of the book.\u00a0 In fact, let\u2019s turn to 2 Corinthians 14\u2026 oh, there is no 1 Corinthians 14.\u00a0 So you\u2019re telling me you\u2019re building this whole doctrine you have, maybe you\u2019re saved, maybe you\u2019re not in a conclusion of a letter?\u00a0 And this is the kind of games people play.\u00a0 And this is exactly what\u2019s going on in Galatians 6:16.\u00a0\u00a0 [Galatians 6:16, \u201cAnd as many as shall walk by this rule, peace be upon them and mercy, upon the Israel of God.\u201d]\n\nThere\u2019s a verse in 3 John where John at the beginning of the book, since I\u2019m tired I\u2019m just going to go over and read it because I don\u2019t think I could do it from 3 John verse 2, \u201cBeloved, I pray that in all respects you may prosper and be in good health, just as your soul prospers.\u201d\n\nI put:\u00a0 There\u2019s a verse in 3 John, verse2, \u201cBeloved, I pray that in all respects you may prosper and be in good health, just as your soul prospers.\u201d\u00a0 Now when you turn on so-called Christian television what they\u2019re going to teach you from that verse is God wants you to be rich and healthy and if you\u2019re not rich and healthy you\u2019ve missed God\u2019s will.\u00a0 And yet what is this here?\u00a0 It\u2019s the introduction of a book.\u00a0 What he\u2019s saying is hey, how\u2019s it going, hope things are going well.\u00a0 That\u2019s all he\u2019s saying here.\u00a0 And they construct a whole doctrine of prosperity theology from an obscure verse in an introduction.\u00a0 See that.\u00a0 I mean, this is what happens all the time with people that don\u2019t handle the Word of God correctly.\u00a0 That\u2019s what\u2019s going on in 2 Corinthians 13:5, that\u2019s what\u2019s going on in Galatians 6:16.\n\nSo number 6, why would you introduce a sweeping point of replacement theology at the conclusion of a letter?\u00a0 It\u2019s nonsensical.\n\nThis takes us to number 7, there is a twofold repetition of the preposition \u201cupon.\u201d\u00a0 Look again at Galatians 6:16, in the NASV, which is a word for word translation,\u00a0 \u201cAnd those who will walk by this rule, peace and mercy be\u201d now how many \u201cupons\u201d do you see here? \u00a0\u201cpeace and mercy be upon them.\u201d \u00a0\u201cUpon\u201d is a translation of the Greek preposition epi, <\/em>\u201cpeace and mercy be upon them,\u201d Gentiles, \u201cand\u201d what\u2019s the second word here? \u201cupon the Israel of God.\u201d\u00a0 How many upon\u2019s or epi<\/em>\u2019s do you see here?\u00a0 One or two?\u00a0 [No one answers] Be bold you guys, you can do it.\u00a0 Two.\u00a0 Right.\u00a0 Why would there be two upons if Paul is making the church and Israel the same group?\u00a0 There\u2019s two upons here because he\u2019s addressing two groups.\u00a0 He\u2019s addressing the church and then he addresses a group within the church.\n\nI mean, if Paul was equating the church with Israel there wouldn\u2019t be two\u2026 you would not have a double epi<\/em> there.\u00a0 So that takes us to number 8, Paul designates two groups elsewhere.\u00a0 That\u2019s what I\u2019m trying to say here with this \u201cIsrael of God.\u201d \u201cIsrael of God\u201d is a second group he\u2019s addressing within the church that consists of Jews.\u00a0 You say well you don\u2019t believe Paul addresses two different groups do you?\u00a0 Yeah, that\u2019s what I believe. Well, does he do that elsewhere?\u00a0 I\u2019m glad you asked.\u00a0 Look at the verse right before verse 16. Do you all agree that verse 15 comes before verse 16? \u00a0What does he do there, \u201cFor neither is circumcision anything,\u201d that\u2019s group one, \u201cnor\u201d what? \u201cuncircumcision,\u201d that\u2019s group two; Paul addresses two groups all the time, I mean, he did that in the prior verse.\u00a0 What\u2019s the big deal about doing it in verse 16.\u00a0 Earlier in the Book of Galatians he says, \u201cBut on the contrary,\u201d Galatians 2:7, \u201cseeing that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised,\u201d that\u2019s group one, \u201cjust as Peter had been to the circumcised.\u201d\u00a0 That\u2019s group two.\n\nSo what I\u2019m trying to say is the \u201cthem\u201d is group one and \u201cthe Israel of God\u201d is group two within the \u201cthem.\u201d\u00a0 That\u2019s what I\u2019m trying to get at; that\u2019s what I think is being said here.\u00a0 No big point here about how the church has taken over Israel\u2019s place.\n\nAnd you say well why does it matter?\u00a0 If God can revoke His promises to Israel what do you think He can do to your promises?\u00a0 Your promises are not worth the paper they\u2019re written on because God is unfaithful.\u00a0 That\u2019s why this matters.\u00a0 It gets to the character of who God is.\u00a0 Remember the movement, Promise Keepers?\u00a0 We have news for everybody, there\u2019s only one Promise Keeper and that\u2019s God.\u00a0 When we are faithless He is faithful, 2 Timothy 2:13.\u00a0 [\u201cIf we are faithless, He remains faithful, for He cannot deny Himself.\u201d]\u00a0 That\u2019s why this subject of replacement theology is a big deal even though you might not think it is, because it relates to God\u2019s character.\u00a0 I mean, is this a God you can trust or not?\u00a0 If He can say one thing to Israel and yank the promises away He can do the same thing to you, He can do the same thing to me.\n\nThis takes us to number 9, Paul singles out believing Jews elsewhere.\u00a0 What I\u2019m trying to say here with Galatians 6:16, when he makes this statement is he\u2019s singling out believing Jews within the church.\u00a0 You say well does Paul do that kind of thing?\u00a0 Is he singling out believing Jews within the church for special recognition.\u00a0 In fact, he does that quite frequently.\u00a0 Romans 2:28-29, \u201cFor he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. [29] But he is a Jew who is one inwardly\u2026.\u201d So he\u2019s looking at Jews and he\u2019s saying God is pleased not just with Jews but believing Jews.\u00a0 See that?\u00a0 That\u2019s what Paul is doing in Galatians 6:16, he\u2019s targeting believing Jews.\n\nIn Romans 9:6 he does the same thing, he says, \u201cBut it is<\/em> not as though the word of God has failed. For they are not all Israel who are descended<\/em> from Israel;\u201d what he\u2019s saying is what pleases God is not just Israel but Israel in faith.\u00a0 There\u2019s just a lot of Jews that think they\u2019re right with God because they\u2019re Jews.\u00a0 Just like a lot of Baptists think they\u2019re right with God because they\u2019re Baptists.\u00a0 And a lot of Bible church people think they\u2019re right with God because they\u2019re Bible church people.\u00a0 The fact of the matter is nobody is right with God.\u00a0 The only people that are right with God are people in what?\u00a0 Faith!\u00a0 And it\u2019s the same with Israel.\u00a0 So Paul is pretty skilled at targeting believing Jews and that\u2019s what he\u2019s doing in Galatians 6:16.\n\nAnd this takes us to number 10.\u00a0 Why is Paul doing this at the end of a book?\u00a0 I mean, why is he getting to the end of the book and saying \u201cpeace and mercy to all who follow this rule and upon the Israel of God.\u201d\u00a0 Why would he single out Jews within the Galatians churches for special recognition?\u00a0 Why would he even do that?\u00a0 He doesn\u2019t do it in the body of the letter; he does it in a conclusion because he wants to communicate something.\u00a0 He wants to communicate in love for Jewish Hebrew Christians.\u00a0 Why is that?\u00a0 Because when you read Galatians he sounds (pardon me for saying this) he sounds anti-Semitic.\u00a0 Even though he\u2019s Jewish he sounds like he doesn\u2019t like Jewish people.\n\nWhy is that?\u00a0 Because in the Book of Galatians he\u2019s gone on an aggressive war against, not the institutions of Judaism but the abuse of those institutions to teach legalism, because the legalists have come in and they\u2019ve put people under the Mosaic Law.\u00a0 Paul, of course, loves the law of God but he wants people to understand that if you look at the law of God as some kind of stairway to heaven, I\u2019ve got to do X, Y and Z to climb my way to God, that is an abuse of the Law.\u00a0 In fact, God never gave the Law for that reason.\u00a0 God gave the law for the reason of showing us that we are law-breakers.\u00a0 Right?\u00a0 Are you a law breaker?\u00a0 You say well, I don\u2019t commit murder.\u00a0\u00a0 Jesus said if you\u2019ve got anger in your heard towards\u00a0 your brother then\u00a0 you\u2019re already a what? Murderer.\u00a0 You say will I\u2019ve never committed adultery.\u00a0 Jesus said if\u00a0 you\u2019ve got lust in your heart towards sexually someone you\u2019re not married to you\u2019ve already committed adultery.\n\nNow who hasn\u2019t broken that standard, who\u2019s human?\u00a0 God never gave the Law to help us climb ourselves up to God.\u00a0 He gave us the Law to reveal our sinful condition.\u00a0 See that?\u00a0 But you see, these Judaizers came along and they were using the law as a stairway to heaven, trying to climb up to God through legalistic practices.\u00a0 And so Paul has been very aggressive in his condemnation of that practice.\u00a0 And in the process he\u2019s been so radical in condemning the practice he comes across like he hates Jews and hates the institutions of Judaism, which he does not.\u00a0 He doesn\u2019t hate the institutions of Judaism; he hates their abuse.\n\nSo when you read Galatians 1:8-9 he says things like this:\u00a0 \u201cBut even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be\u201d what? \u201caccursed!\u201d\u00a0 Verse 9, \u201cAs we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!\u201d\u00a0 Do you know what the Greek word for \u201caccursed\u201d there is?\u00a0 It\u2019s anathema<\/em>.\u00a0 You say well what is that?\u00a0 That is a condemnation to hell; that is one of the most severe terms you can ever apply to somebody.\u00a0 In fact, when the Protestant Reformation broke out the Roman Catholic Church had a counter reformation where they pronounced on Protestants multiple anathemas<\/em>, condemnations to hell.\n\nAnd Paul is using words like that and think if you\u2019re a Jewish Christian and you\u2019re reading that.\u00a0 You could easily think to yourself, well, Paul doesn\u2019t like Jews.\u00a0 So Paul, at the end of the book, Galatians 6:16, counterbalances what he has just said by affectionately referring to Hebrews Christians within the church as \u201cthe Israel of God.\u201d\u00a0 It\u2019s a term of affection; it\u2019s a term of endearment to make clear that he\u2019s not anti-Semitic.\u00a0 See that?\u00a0 So Burton, in his commentary, says:\u00a0 \u201cIn view of the apostle's previous strong anti-Judaistic expressions, he feels impelled by the insertion of \u2018and<\/u><\/em>\u2019,\u201d that\u2019s the kai<\/em>, \u201cto emphasize this expression of his true attitude towards his people\u201d (emphasis mine).\u201d\u00a0 [Galatians, p.358]\u00a0 He\u2019s counterbalancing his aggressiveness against legalism, misunderstood as anti-Semitism earlier in the book.\u00a0 That\u2019s all Paul is doing.\u00a0 He\u2019s not trying to develop a doctrine that the church is now Israel.\n\nSo why do I think the NASB is right?\u00a0 The continuative kai<\/em> is the most common, the appositional kai<\/em> is the rarest; Paul could have made the point easier by eliminating the kai<\/em>, Israel always means Israel, never Gentiles.\u00a0 Israel is not equated with Gentiles until 110 years later by anybody in church history.\u00a0 Why would you introduce a sweeping theological point in a conclusion?\u00a0 There\u2019s got to be two people there, two groups, because of his repetition of \u201cupon.\u201d\u00a0 That\u2019s number seven.\u00a0\u00a0 Paul singles out two groups elsewhere, in fact, in the prior verse he does that.\u00a0 Paul singles out believing Jews elsewhere.\u00a0 And Paul just puts that statement in the end to show he\u2019s not anti-Semitic.\n\nAnd look at this quote from Robinson in his commentary.\u00a0 He says, \u201c\u201cThe glib,\u201d glib means it rolls off the tongue and it sounds good to an audience, \u201cThe glib citing of Galatians 6:16 to support the view that \u2018the church is the new Israel\u2019 should be vigorously challenged.\u201d\u00a0 And that\u2019s what I just tried to do in the last hour with those ten points.\u00a0 \u201cThere is weighty support for a limited interpretation.\u201d\u00a0 [\u201cThe Distinction Between Jewish and Gentile Believers in Galatians,\u201d Australian Biblical Review 13 (1965): 29-48]\n\nWhat does he mean by \u201ca limited interpretation\u201d?\u00a0 This is the unlimited interpretation; the unlimited interpretation that the replacement theologians want you to believe is Paul is saying that the church is Israel.\u00a0 That\u2019s\u00a0 unlimited.\u00a0 That\u2019s the limited interpretation, that\u2019s the correct interpretation; Paul is singling out a group of Jews within the church.\n\nAnd\u00a0 yet the people who use this verse to support replacement theology read like the \u201cwho\u2019s who\u201d of Christianity.\u00a0 Chrysostom, called \u201cgolden mouth,\u201d or \u201cgolden tongue\u201d in church history because of his oratorical skills said this stuff all the time to people.\u00a0\u00a0 John Calvin, more moderately, Lightfoot, Stott, Guthrie, Martin Luther, Lynskey, Hendricksen, and why did they do it?\u00a0 Why do they keep using this verse over and over again to say that the church has replaced Israel?\u00a0 Because they bought into a theology.\n\nIt is a dangerous thing to buy into a theology before you let the facts of the Bible speak.\u00a0 People that are involved in criminal investigative work and forensics, if they\u2019re good at what they do, they will tell you that they try not to develop a theory on who the bad guy is too early.\u00a0 Why is that?\u00a0 Because they\u2019re going to fall in love with their theory and once you fall in love with your theory what\u2019s the temptation?\u00a0 To make the facts fit your theory, which is not how you put people in jail.\u00a0 You want to let the facts inform your theory, not manipulate the facts to support your theory.\u00a0 Do you see that?\n\nAnd this happens with fallen humans all the time.\u00a0 It happens with Bible readers; we fall in love with some kind of view of something, whether it\u2019s right or not we don\u2019t even know but we think it\u2019s right and we try to make the Bible fit that.\u00a0 And the replacement theology idea was so prevalent people started to say oh, there\u2019s a verse that supports it over here, and they started to quote it, they started to use it, until you actually analyze the verse and you start to see that the verse doesn\u2019t say that at all.\u00a0 So you have to hold onto your ideas real loosely unless you believe they\u2019re supported by the Bible.\u00a0 If you find yourself manipulating the Bible to make it fit your preconceived view (we can all fall prey to this) we\u2019re on dangerous ground.\n\nAnd I\u2019m going to close with this quote by Cranfield in his commentary on Romans.\u00a0 He says, \u201c\u201cThese 3 chapters (Rom 9-11) emphatically forbid us to speak of the church as having once and for all taken the place of the Jewish people\u2026But the assumption<\/u> that the church has simply replaced Israel as the people of God is extremely common\u2026\u201d <\/em>And look at this last sentence: \u201cAnd I confess with shame to having also myself used in print on more than one occasion this language of the replacement of Israel by the Church.\u201d<\/em> [C.E.B. Cranfield: A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans p.448]\n\nNow the reason that quote is interesting to me is what happens to people once they go into print with something and I see this happen all the time with people, when I pray it doesn\u2019t happen to me or you is you go into print and what you said is wrong, so what do you do?\u00a0 What\u2019s your natural tendency?\u00a0 Well, it\u2019s to kind of dig your heels in and what you find yourself doing is defending what you wrote even though what you wrote has been demonstrated contradicts the Bible.\u00a0 And Cranfield\u2026 see, it\u2019s rare when people go into\u00a0 print to reverse what they\u2019ve said because of something called human pride.\u00a0 It\u2019s like getting into an argument with your wife about something and\u00a0 you think you\u2019re right about something and she thinks she\u2019s right about something and lo and behold, the facts come in and she\u2019s right and you\u2019re wrong.\u00a0 So what\u2019s our tendency?\u00a0 Well, we try to manipulate the facts a little bit, don\u2019t we, to win the argument.\u00a0 And it\u2019s difficult to humble yourself and say you know, I had that wrong, I apologize.\u00a0 That\u2019s called pride, that is something that we\u2019re all infected with, pastors and theologians and Christian writers have the same pride because \u201call have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.\u201d\n\nAnd Cranfield here is saying you know what, I had it wrong; I wrote it, I didn\u2019t just write it once, I wrote it on more than one occasion, I was wrong and I\u2019m sorry.\u00a0 And my respect for Cranfield is off the charts because of that, because you never find that today.\u00a0\u00a0 What you find is people digging in their heels defending what they said.\u00a0 And so he\u2019s admitting his error here with this replacement theology language.\n\nAnd so we need to\u2026 I hope tonight\u2019s study is not just an academic thing, it\u2019s more of a heart thing, where we have to really search our hearts and be humbled before the Lord even when we mess up.\n\nSo that kind of concludes the interim phase, the church is not Israel\u2026 Amen!\u00a0 So when we get back together January 10th<\/sup> we\u2019re done with the interim phase and we\u2019ll see how the kingdom comes to the earth.","series_sermon_number":""},"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t