What do you think?
Rate this book
Has the Church Replaced Israel?: A Theological Evaluation
The relationship between Israel and the church continues to be a controversial topic led by this question: Does the church replace, supersede, or fulfill the nation of Israel in God's plan, or will Israel be saved and restored with a unique identity and role? In Has the Church Replaced Israel?, author Michael J. Vlach evaluates the doctrine of replacement theology (also known as supersessionism) down through history but ultimately argues in favor of the nonsupersessionist position. Thoroughly vetting the most important hermeneutical and theological issues related to the Israel/church relationship, Vlach explains why, "there are compelling scriptural reasons in both testaments to believe in a future salvation and restoration of the nation Israel."
235 pages, Kindle Edition
First published October 1, 2010
74 people are currently reading
292 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 42 reviews
March 16, 2024
My basic Bible education was at Moody Bible in Chicago. The theology was dispensational. The church did not replace Israel. Later, having been exposed to R.C. Sproul, I became Reformed regarding the Doctrines of Grace. It had little bearing on my dispensationalism until a friend in my Bible study introduced to me to New Covenant Theology via John Reseinger, a variant of Reformed Theology. NCT didn't change my dispensationalism right away. A pastor friend who was NCT did not consider it a huge deal anyway, although he did believe in what is called replacement theology; that is, the church does replace Israel.
A few years later, my pastor friend, who brought me on as an associate pastor, taught a class titled Continuity and Discontinuity. It was not an easy class, as Reformed and Dispensational theologians debated their cases. I was not inclined to agree with the dispensationalists, but in the end, they made better exegetical arguments.
Reference was made by my pastor to Michael J Vlach. Vlach represents a deep dive into the issue.
This book gives the historical arguments and then dissects the theological assumptions and arguments of both sides. I found it compelling. I have already worked through Vlach's book on the hermeneutics of the argument and am firmly in the camp in the camp of the church that has not replaced Isreal and that God is faithful to His promises to both.
A few years later, my pastor friend, who brought me on as an associate pastor, taught a class titled Continuity and Discontinuity. It was not an easy class, as Reformed and Dispensational theologians debated their cases. I was not inclined to agree with the dispensationalists, but in the end, they made better exegetical arguments.
Reference was made by my pastor to Michael J Vlach. Vlach represents a deep dive into the issue.
This book gives the historical arguments and then dissects the theological assumptions and arguments of both sides. I found it compelling. I have already worked through Vlach's book on the hermeneutics of the argument and am firmly in the camp in the camp of the church that has not replaced Isreal and that God is faithful to His promises to both.
March 9, 2017
Solid writing
Although I hold to a form of the view opposed in this volume (New Covenant Theology/Fulfillment) Vlach does a fantastic job in the first portion of the book fairly representing my view and honestly presenting the case that the view he opposes was the view of the church for the past 2k years, admitting that it was the establishment of the current nation of Israel in the last century that has caused this new innovation in theology, Dispensationalism, to come about (current events are a poor reason to establish theology). The author also does a great job presenting our argument but it is when he begins to attempt to refute them that he shows his lack of grasping a difference of "replacement" and "fulfillment" and begins to construct straw men. I highly recommend this book for anyone wanting to learn more about the view he opposes but also for the great presentation of his own view which he lays out wonderfully and thoughtful (though I still disagree with his conclusions).
Although I hold to a form of the view opposed in this volume (New Covenant Theology/Fulfillment) Vlach does a fantastic job in the first portion of the book fairly representing my view and honestly presenting the case that the view he opposes was the view of the church for the past 2k years, admitting that it was the establishment of the current nation of Israel in the last century that has caused this new innovation in theology, Dispensationalism, to come about (current events are a poor reason to establish theology). The author also does a great job presenting our argument but it is when he begins to attempt to refute them that he shows his lack of grasping a difference of "replacement" and "fulfillment" and begins to construct straw men. I highly recommend this book for anyone wanting to learn more about the view he opposes but also for the great presentation of his own view which he lays out wonderfully and thoughtful (though I still disagree with his conclusions).
September 1, 2021
Vlach always does a good job with his argumentation. Whether you agree with his conclusion or not, you must wrestle with his argument, as he does a good job presenting his case, as well as dealing with every possible angle against it.
September 17, 2019
This book was recommended to us as a good starting point to understand the debate over the present and future standing of Israel in God's plan.
Vlach starts out by defining the terms he will use throughout the book. He understands that not everyone who holds these views appreciates the label of supersessionist and explains in the first chapter why he uses that term over several other popular terms. Then he briefly explains the distinct beliefs that are called supersessionist and what those beliefs say about Israel’s future.
In the next section, he explains the development of those ideas throughout church history.
The third section explains the method of Biblical interpretation that is used to derive this particular doctrine. It is discussed in broad terms as well as dealing with specific verses. He also quotes numerous authors so that we understand from multiple viewpoints just what and how a supersessionist believes.
The fourth section is where he explains why he does not accept their arguments and presents the dispensational view of Israel’s present and future standing in God’s plan. So that we can see why he explains the validity of the historical-grammatical-literary method of reading the Bible. Then he moves on and explains the arguments in favor of the future restoration of national Israel. He brings forward the verses that support this view and uses numerous authors to help us see this view from multiple viewpoints as well.
This is a very detailed, scholarly work. It can seem repetitive, but it will give you a very thorough understanding of both sides of the issue. It is an important issue because it drastically affects our view of large sections of God’s inspired word. As Vlach says in closing, “Based on the arguments presented in this book, I conclude that supersessionism is not a biblical doctrine. As I have argued, the case against supersessionism can be made on two fronts. First, a strong positive case can be made for the salvation and restoration of national Israel. Second, a strong negative case can be offered against the doctrine of supersessionism… I hope that many Christians, too, would embrace the explicit biblical evidence concerning Israel and give God the glory that His electing purposes for Israel still stand. After all, God’s faithfulness to Israel is a testimony that His promises for us will never fail: “For from Him and through Him and to Him are all thins. To Him be the glory forever. Amen.” (Romans 11:36).
Vlach starts out by defining the terms he will use throughout the book. He understands that not everyone who holds these views appreciates the label of supersessionist and explains in the first chapter why he uses that term over several other popular terms. Then he briefly explains the distinct beliefs that are called supersessionist and what those beliefs say about Israel’s future.
In the next section, he explains the development of those ideas throughout church history.
The third section explains the method of Biblical interpretation that is used to derive this particular doctrine. It is discussed in broad terms as well as dealing with specific verses. He also quotes numerous authors so that we understand from multiple viewpoints just what and how a supersessionist believes.
The fourth section is where he explains why he does not accept their arguments and presents the dispensational view of Israel’s present and future standing in God’s plan. So that we can see why he explains the validity of the historical-grammatical-literary method of reading the Bible. Then he moves on and explains the arguments in favor of the future restoration of national Israel. He brings forward the verses that support this view and uses numerous authors to help us see this view from multiple viewpoints as well.
This is a very detailed, scholarly work. It can seem repetitive, but it will give you a very thorough understanding of both sides of the issue. It is an important issue because it drastically affects our view of large sections of God’s inspired word. As Vlach says in closing, “Based on the arguments presented in this book, I conclude that supersessionism is not a biblical doctrine. As I have argued, the case against supersessionism can be made on two fronts. First, a strong positive case can be made for the salvation and restoration of national Israel. Second, a strong negative case can be offered against the doctrine of supersessionism… I hope that many Christians, too, would embrace the explicit biblical evidence concerning Israel and give God the glory that His electing purposes for Israel still stand. After all, God’s faithfulness to Israel is a testimony that His promises for us will never fail: “For from Him and through Him and to Him are all thins. To Him be the glory forever. Amen.” (Romans 11:36).
September 13, 2021
2021 reads: #40
Rating: 4.5 Stars
Michael Vlach presents a very readable and simple case for the distinction between Israel and the church, and in so doing presents a clear case against supersessionism - the view that the church has replaced Israel in God's salvation plan.
Vlach tackles the underlying hermeneutical issues that so fundamentally shape this debate. The heart of the matter is that texts which indicate some sort of fulfilment in the church of Old Testament promises need not necessarily lead to the conclusion that the church replaces Israel.
Vlach steers clear of much of the polemics in this debate and presents the supersessionism fairly, even to the point of distinguishing the nuances within the supersessionist camp.
I was still left thinking that another chapter or two could really have rounded out Vlach's argument well. It is one thing to show the inadequacy of supersessionism and to show that a distinction between Israel and the church is easily defensible, but it is quite another to demonstrate the theological significance of the restoration of Israel and the continued distinction into eternity. Vlach did this in embryo form, especially highlighting the significance of God's covenant faithfulness. I am convinced though that more could be done. Reflecting upon the significance of the land, temple (especially in light of what the New Testament has to say about the fulfilment of the temple), city, king, nation etc. and their role in the future, as well reflecting on Christ as the mediator of the covenant blessings, and reflecting on the interplay of the biblical covenants can do much to build a persuasive case that is immune to the charges levelled against a nonsupersessionist perspective. Readers will have to look elsewhere for sustained theological reflection.
Rating: 4.5 Stars
Michael Vlach presents a very readable and simple case for the distinction between Israel and the church, and in so doing presents a clear case against supersessionism - the view that the church has replaced Israel in God's salvation plan.
Vlach tackles the underlying hermeneutical issues that so fundamentally shape this debate. The heart of the matter is that texts which indicate some sort of fulfilment in the church of Old Testament promises need not necessarily lead to the conclusion that the church replaces Israel.
Vlach steers clear of much of the polemics in this debate and presents the supersessionism fairly, even to the point of distinguishing the nuances within the supersessionist camp.
I was still left thinking that another chapter or two could really have rounded out Vlach's argument well. It is one thing to show the inadequacy of supersessionism and to show that a distinction between Israel and the church is easily defensible, but it is quite another to demonstrate the theological significance of the restoration of Israel and the continued distinction into eternity. Vlach did this in embryo form, especially highlighting the significance of God's covenant faithfulness. I am convinced though that more could be done. Reflecting upon the significance of the land, temple (especially in light of what the New Testament has to say about the fulfilment of the temple), city, king, nation etc. and their role in the future, as well reflecting on Christ as the mediator of the covenant blessings, and reflecting on the interplay of the biblical covenants can do much to build a persuasive case that is immune to the charges levelled against a nonsupersessionist perspective. Readers will have to look elsewhere for sustained theological reflection.
April 13, 2019
Pretty enjoyable book. Insightful and helpful for working through an understanding of replacement theology and the passages that are often used for it’s defense. Those who are very familiar with the subject will find this a good review and the situations will be helpful. However, a new comer to the subject will find this approachable and easy to understand.
March 1, 2023
Great argument by Dr. Michael Vlach for a future for national Israel in the redemptive plan of God.
October 25, 2016
(At the risk of offending someone, I offer this book review)---As a follow up read to the book, "Future Israel" by Barry Horner, I read this wonderful book by Michael J. Vlach. I wasn't familiar with Vlach and, after reading this book this week, I wondered why I had not read this book before. I'm so glad I did. Vlach approaches the issue of Israel's future from a somewhat different angle than Horner. Horner established the Anti-Judaic mindset that has ran throughout church history right down to our present day. Vlach wasn't so much interested in that (although he did have several chapters on the views throughout church history) as he was as wanting to examine the perspective of the Replacement view (titled Supersessionism) and then dealing with the various passages that the Replacement view uses to attempt to bolster their argument. Horner also dealt with other issues, besides the view throughout church history, such as the Hermeneutic behind the Replacement view and other theological considerations as well, but not with the clarity that I believe Vlach did. I believe that Vlach did a wonderful job of graciously presenting the Supersessionism view, while at the same time disagreeing with this view, and gave a fair treatment of how they (the Supersessionist) arrived at their beliefs. He then takes the set of passages that the Supersessionist uses and shows why their Hermeneutic is faulty. He gives attention as well to the theological arguments presented by the Supersessionist. I absolutely loved the last several chapters where Vlach looks at two critical issues: 1) God's plan for the nations; and 2) The Restoration of the Nation of Israel. Vlach cemented in my mind the soundness of the view that Israel will indeed be saved and restored with a unique identity and role in the future and Israel should not be confused with the church. As I said with my review of Future Israel, the book, "Has The Church Replaced Israel?" should be read by every young person who is in Bible college or seminary preparing for ministry. I thought it was excellent and it was a true blessing to me. Bottom line: God made a promise and He will fulfill it. That's the character of God.
October 15, 2017
Unfortunately, Vlach spends much of his book attacking straw men. The book is written to counter the view that the Church replaces Israel and that the Old Testament promises to Israel are fulfilled in the Church. The more common view, I believe, is that the promises to Israel are fulfilled in Christ. Vlach barely addresses this other than to say that this is a Platonic view of prophecy that spiritualized rather than taking a literal reading of scripture. This strikes me as odd considering that the New Testament itself points to Christ as the fulfillment of the Law and the Temple sacrifices.
Vlach's survey of the role of nations in biblical eschatology is fascinating. In that sense I can see God's preservation of national Israel, as he will preserve other ethnic and national identities. And in that scheme of things I can envision great honor being given to Israel for their place in revealing Christ. However, his argument leaves other questions unanswered such as whether or not God will restore other nation states that have disappeared.
Though he argues for the election of national Israel, he leaves unanswered whether or not this is apart from Christ. And if Jewish election only applies to those Jews who are in Christ, then how does this differ from the Church? Rather than saying that the Church does or doesn't replace Israel, it would be more accurate to say that both Jew and Gentile find their salvation together in Christ without losing their national, cultural, and ethnic identities.
Though I would not be dogmatic about it, I can envision Messianic or "completed" Jews continuing to live as national Israel and practice Judaism in the light of Christ. However, there is not a separate path for or covenant with contemporary Jewish people.
Vlach also doesn't address how injustices committed by national Israel today should be addressed. Unfortunately, too often Christian Zionists give Israel a pass when it comes to acting justly with their neighbors.
Vlach's survey of the role of nations in biblical eschatology is fascinating. In that sense I can see God's preservation of national Israel, as he will preserve other ethnic and national identities. And in that scheme of things I can envision great honor being given to Israel for their place in revealing Christ. However, his argument leaves other questions unanswered such as whether or not God will restore other nation states that have disappeared.
Though he argues for the election of national Israel, he leaves unanswered whether or not this is apart from Christ. And if Jewish election only applies to those Jews who are in Christ, then how does this differ from the Church? Rather than saying that the Church does or doesn't replace Israel, it would be more accurate to say that both Jew and Gentile find their salvation together in Christ without losing their national, cultural, and ethnic identities.
Though I would not be dogmatic about it, I can envision Messianic or "completed" Jews continuing to live as national Israel and practice Judaism in the light of Christ. However, there is not a separate path for or covenant with contemporary Jewish people.
Vlach also doesn't address how injustices committed by national Israel today should be addressed. Unfortunately, too often Christian Zionists give Israel a pass when it comes to acting justly with their neighbors.
July 3, 2016
Recently finished reading "Has the Church Replaced Israel" by Michael Vlach. In his conclusion he comments: "In their desire to emphasize the unity of salvation that Jews and Gentiles have experienced, supersessionists have mistakenly concluded that such unity excludes a special role for Israel in the future. But salvific unity does not erase all ethnic and functional distinctions. Gentiles are now partakers of Israel's covenants, and national Israel will be saved and restored with a role of service to the nations."
I agree with this and appreciated the in depth consideration of the many passages that are used by supersessionists. Vlach clearly portrayed the contrary views on these passages and then in following chapters gave his understanding of these texts . I found this a very helpful format that presented positions clearly and gave reasoned biblical answers.
He began the book by looking at three forms of supersessionism and then worked through church history identifying these streams of teaching through various church fathers/leaders.
One of the significant considerations in the book is around the issue of allowing the OT to speak and how God spoke in these texts very specific unconditional promises to Israel as a nation. To see these promises transferred to the church seems to bring into question the reliability of the things spoken to the people it was first given to and even challenges then the character of God in the process - but you need to read the book to dig into this!
I highly commend this book as a clear articulate presentation of a challenging theological debate.
I agree with this and appreciated the in depth consideration of the many passages that are used by supersessionists. Vlach clearly portrayed the contrary views on these passages and then in following chapters gave his understanding of these texts . I found this a very helpful format that presented positions clearly and gave reasoned biblical answers.
He began the book by looking at three forms of supersessionism and then worked through church history identifying these streams of teaching through various church fathers/leaders.
One of the significant considerations in the book is around the issue of allowing the OT to speak and how God spoke in these texts very specific unconditional promises to Israel as a nation. To see these promises transferred to the church seems to bring into question the reliability of the things spoken to the people it was first given to and even challenges then the character of God in the process - but you need to read the book to dig into this!
I highly commend this book as a clear articulate presentation of a challenging theological debate.
February 3, 2013
Excellent, very thorough, the author deals with the very real disagreements between those who believe in replacement theology and those who believe that the church & Israel are two distinct entities and remain such. Vlach deals with best scriptural positions of both. He answers the main question; Does the church replace, supersede, or fulfill the nation Israel in God's plan, or will Israel be saved & restored with a unique identity & role? As with many questions related ti this issue one's hermeneutical assumptions will largely determine where one lands on the relationship between Israel & the church.
C.E.B. Cranfield (scholar & theologian) who believed in replacement theology but who later changed his view says the following (in reference to Romans 9-11); "It is only where the Church persists in refusing to learn this message,--perhaps unconsciously!--believes that its own existence is based on human achievement, & so fails to understand God's mercy to itself, that it is unable to believe in God's mercy for still unbelieving Israel, & so entertains the ugly & unscriptural notion that God has cast off His people Israel & simply replaced it by the Christian Church. These three chapters emphatically forbid us to speak of the Church as having once & for all taken the place of the Jewish people.
C.E.B. Cranfield (scholar & theologian) who believed in replacement theology but who later changed his view says the following (in reference to Romans 9-11); "It is only where the Church persists in refusing to learn this message,--perhaps unconsciously!--believes that its own existence is based on human achievement, & so fails to understand God's mercy to itself, that it is unable to believe in God's mercy for still unbelieving Israel, & so entertains the ugly & unscriptural notion that God has cast off His people Israel & simply replaced it by the Christian Church. These three chapters emphatically forbid us to speak of the Church as having once & for all taken the place of the Jewish people.
May 26, 2019
This is an excellent study on the relation of Israel to the New Testament church. Vlach deals fairly with opposing views and examines a number of key verses.
September 7, 2022
The book is “ok”. I believe two biggest issues with the author is that he seems to equate all references to Israel as “National” only. Next to zero bifurcation between those of faith and those merely circumcised. Scripture seems to make the distinction throughout. One example is Isaiah 50 and giving the Israelites a certificate of divorce because of their iniquities and the next chapter where those who pursue righteousness are blessed and multiplied, and given comfort, joy, and thankfulness. It seems pretty clear that Israel exists in two states and it not merely an ethnic characteristic.
The second issue is that the book is written as supersessionists vs nonsupersessionists but is a veiled dispensational vs covenantal view of Israel. Those that the author engages and critiques are amilennialists. The problem with this is that he gives no serious critique of any postmillennial author. The postmil guy has no problem with the quotations from Zephaniah or Zechariah where the nations come to worship together. He welcomes this scene and expects this scene with zero spiritualization or allegorical interpretation needed.
So in the end it was worth reading but could have been better.
The second issue is that the book is written as supersessionists vs nonsupersessionists but is a veiled dispensational vs covenantal view of Israel. Those that the author engages and critiques are amilennialists. The problem with this is that he gives no serious critique of any postmillennial author. The postmil guy has no problem with the quotations from Zephaniah or Zechariah where the nations come to worship together. He welcomes this scene and expects this scene with zero spiritualization or allegorical interpretation needed.
So in the end it was worth reading but could have been better.
December 26, 2025
The answer here is no -- the church has not replaced Israel, and God's promises to the Jewish people still stand. The author tries to present both sides of the argument fairly and then argues for the dispensational view. The arguments are logical and compelling. Certainly every theological system has problem verses, but overall this approach seems to me to make the most sense of the text.
January 30, 2016
I think this is one of the best out on this topic.
February 1, 2017
Livro bem escrito e sucinto. Os argumentos apresentados são diretos e o autor faz de uma maneira muito acessível.
February 15, 2023
A frustrating book to read. Darrell Bock remains, for me, the most respectable and convincing voice within the dispensational camp.
August 20, 2017
This was a helpful book, giving a survey of the subject, tracing the development of the doctrine of supersessionism in the history of the Christian church, starting from the Early Church fathers. I feel like this book has broadened my understanding of the topic. For example, I had not realised that there were different categories of supersessionism, moving through from punitive, to economic, to structural, with place different emphases on the extent to which the church has become the new Israel. They also have different understandings of the destiny of Israel as a nation with a land and as a people.
The author, Michael Vlach, summarises how the different supersessionist camps interpret Old Testament prophecies in relation to the Jewish people and the land of Israel. He also represents the different ways in which the New Testament use of the terms 'Israel', 'Jew' and 'Israel of God' are thus interpreted by supersessionists as referring to the church and Christians, rather than the promised land of Israel and the ethnically Jewish people (whether Christian or not). Vlach traces the present-day supersessionist hermeneutical traditions from schools of allegorical interpretation and spiritual exegesis of seemingly physical events, prophesied.
Vlach then puts forward counterarguments on each point and attempts to show clearly from the Scriptures that the Jewish people and the land of Israel do have a specific place in God's continuing plan, all for God's glory, in fulfilling His word and demonstrating his delight in the unconditional election of an undeserving people group (as he has done also for the gentile nations).
This was a satisfying read if not an easy one. It is not dense, but requires thought and reference to the Scriptures. Vlach has interacted with theologians who oppose his dispensational position. However, I don't think this would compel one to change one's position on Israel's present and future significance in God's plan, but if you are like me, you may wish to read further by accessing the references in the extensive footnotes to develop your own viewpoint.
The author, Michael Vlach, summarises how the different supersessionist camps interpret Old Testament prophecies in relation to the Jewish people and the land of Israel. He also represents the different ways in which the New Testament use of the terms 'Israel', 'Jew' and 'Israel of God' are thus interpreted by supersessionists as referring to the church and Christians, rather than the promised land of Israel and the ethnically Jewish people (whether Christian or not). Vlach traces the present-day supersessionist hermeneutical traditions from schools of allegorical interpretation and spiritual exegesis of seemingly physical events, prophesied.
Vlach then puts forward counterarguments on each point and attempts to show clearly from the Scriptures that the Jewish people and the land of Israel do have a specific place in God's continuing plan, all for God's glory, in fulfilling His word and demonstrating his delight in the unconditional election of an undeserving people group (as he has done also for the gentile nations).
This was a satisfying read if not an easy one. It is not dense, but requires thought and reference to the Scriptures. Vlach has interacted with theologians who oppose his dispensational position. However, I don't think this would compel one to change one's position on Israel's present and future significance in God's plan, but if you are like me, you may wish to read further by accessing the references in the extensive footnotes to develop your own viewpoint.
November 19, 2013
The role of hermeneutics within Bible interpretation is an extremely important topic. Within Evangelical Christianity, we believe that the Bible is God’s Word; therefore, accurately handling the Word of Truth requires that we read it and interpret it properly. As finite and fallen humans, we are prone to err and many times slip false assumptions into our interpretations of the Bible. As those striving to understand and teach God’s Word, we must read and interpret it using the methods God has laid out before us, for without such methods we are lost in a sea of perspectivalism. Biblical hermeneutics as a discipline deals with the science and art of interpretation. Our hermeneutical approach will greatly influence our conclusions about the Bible’s teaching—acting as a lens that colors the way we perceive a text.
What concerns us today is an ancient debate that deals with the role of hermeneutics in deciding the relationship between the Church and national Israel. In Has the Church Replaced Israel? Michael J. Vlach delves into this discussion, seeking to provide clarity to his readers. The book itself gives a brief explanation of the doctrine of Supersessionism (what is known as “Replacement Theology”), and then explores the prominence of this doctrine throughout Church history—looking into the Patristic, Medieval, Reformation, and Modern Eras. Finally, Vlach explores the hermeneutical and theological arguments that are typically advanced in defense of the doctrine of Supersessionism, and then responds accordingly from a non-Supersessionist (or Dispensational) viewpoint.
Inherent to the study of hermeneutics is the idea of “presupposition.” But what exactly is a presupposition? A presupposition is something that is tacitly assumed at the beginning of, say, an argument or course of action. For example, when studying the Old Testament, it is difficult to ignore the many promises that God gives to His people Israel. When casually reading the Scriptures for, let’s say, devotionals in the morning, when reading Jeremiah 29:11—which says, “‘For I know the plans I have for you,’ declares the LORD, ‘plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future’”—someone might interpret this verse and apply it directly to his or her life. This conclusion reveals the reader’s presuppositions.
He has assumed, at least implicitly, that the Old Testament promises God gave to Israel have been, in some sense, transferred to him—ignoring the many complex disputes surrounding such an interpretation (the reader’s nationality and race, time period, immediate context of the biblical promise, et cetera). These are the types of issues that hermeneutics seeks to discuss: What are our presuppositions? Moreover, what baggage do we bring to a biblical text? And how does such baggage influence our interpretations?
Vlach briefly explores some of the factors leading to the popularity of Supersessionism: an increasing Gentile composition in the early church, the church’s perspective on the two destructions of Jerusalem (in AD 70 and 135), and distinctive hermeneutical interpretations of Old Testament passages. Each of these influences led, says Vlach, to the church’s perception that it was the genuine continuation of the OT faith. The church believed it had inherited the covenants of Israel—the new Israel.
Of perhaps even more influence to the formulation of Supersessionism are three interrelated beliefs regarding biblical hermeneutics: “(1) belief in the interpretive priority of the NT over the OT, (2) belief in nonliteral fulfillments of OT texts regarding Israel, and (3) belief that national Israel is a type of the NT church.” I think Vlach does a fair job presenting the logic behind this approach to the hermeneutics of the Church and national Israel. He then responds with a full-fledged critique of each of these beliefs, saying that they’re either ungrounded or lead to nonsensical implications. I will not here comment on his critiques, but needless to say that his responses were engaging.
To close out the hermeneutical section, he gives a nonSupersessionist hermeneutic that he believes makes better sense of the biblical rationale. His proposed approach flushes out in four beliefs:
1. The starting point for understanding any passage in the Bible, including those in the OT, is the passage itself.
2. Progressive revelation reveals new information, but it does not cancel unconditional promises to Israel.
3. National Israel is not a type that is transcended by the church.
4. Old Testament promises can have a double fulfillment or application with both Israel and the church.
Vlach and others are convinced that this approach to the relationship between the Church and national Israel is the better of the two. Again, I will not give a direct response at this point, but I think that he brings up many noteworthy points that add to the discussion tremendously.
Of great importance to this discussion are the theological reasons one has for holding to a particular view. Since theological conclusions are rooted in one’s interpretation of a text, and since one’s interpretation of a text is rooted in one’s hermeneutical approach, we can conclude that theological inquiry and hermeneutics are directly linked with one another. Theology can be seen as an outpouring of hermeneutics, in a sense. This is important to realize when studying the theological reasons given for holding to Supersessionism versus nonSupersessionism. Our theological defenses for a certain view flows out of our hermeneutical lens. It can be said, then, that hermeneutics is the deciding factor that determines one’s views on the relationship between the Church and national Israel.
In this work, I think Vlach has done a wonderful job outlining the two predominant views on this topic—as well as the various nuances within the camps. It is important to remember, I think, that there are different views about God’s plan for national Israel within both camps. For example, Vlach laid out three different interpretations of “all Israel” (cf. Romans 11:26) that exist within the Supersession camp alone. At this moment in time, I cannot say that I have committed to one particular view. This book has, though, given me much clarity on the issue and I can now explain both views to someone unfamiliar with the topic, and can give strong defenses of both. I see strong reasons for both positions, and this book has piqued my interest enough to eventually (hopefully soon) set out a block of time to really delve into the topic for myself. All in all, this book provided a great entryway into the discussion. I would recommend this book to anyone who is interested in a challenging yet concise discussion on this most important topic.
What concerns us today is an ancient debate that deals with the role of hermeneutics in deciding the relationship between the Church and national Israel. In Has the Church Replaced Israel? Michael J. Vlach delves into this discussion, seeking to provide clarity to his readers. The book itself gives a brief explanation of the doctrine of Supersessionism (what is known as “Replacement Theology”), and then explores the prominence of this doctrine throughout Church history—looking into the Patristic, Medieval, Reformation, and Modern Eras. Finally, Vlach explores the hermeneutical and theological arguments that are typically advanced in defense of the doctrine of Supersessionism, and then responds accordingly from a non-Supersessionist (or Dispensational) viewpoint.
Inherent to the study of hermeneutics is the idea of “presupposition.” But what exactly is a presupposition? A presupposition is something that is tacitly assumed at the beginning of, say, an argument or course of action. For example, when studying the Old Testament, it is difficult to ignore the many promises that God gives to His people Israel. When casually reading the Scriptures for, let’s say, devotionals in the morning, when reading Jeremiah 29:11—which says, “‘For I know the plans I have for you,’ declares the LORD, ‘plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future’”—someone might interpret this verse and apply it directly to his or her life. This conclusion reveals the reader’s presuppositions.
He has assumed, at least implicitly, that the Old Testament promises God gave to Israel have been, in some sense, transferred to him—ignoring the many complex disputes surrounding such an interpretation (the reader’s nationality and race, time period, immediate context of the biblical promise, et cetera). These are the types of issues that hermeneutics seeks to discuss: What are our presuppositions? Moreover, what baggage do we bring to a biblical text? And how does such baggage influence our interpretations?
Vlach briefly explores some of the factors leading to the popularity of Supersessionism: an increasing Gentile composition in the early church, the church’s perspective on the two destructions of Jerusalem (in AD 70 and 135), and distinctive hermeneutical interpretations of Old Testament passages. Each of these influences led, says Vlach, to the church’s perception that it was the genuine continuation of the OT faith. The church believed it had inherited the covenants of Israel—the new Israel.
Of perhaps even more influence to the formulation of Supersessionism are three interrelated beliefs regarding biblical hermeneutics: “(1) belief in the interpretive priority of the NT over the OT, (2) belief in nonliteral fulfillments of OT texts regarding Israel, and (3) belief that national Israel is a type of the NT church.” I think Vlach does a fair job presenting the logic behind this approach to the hermeneutics of the Church and national Israel. He then responds with a full-fledged critique of each of these beliefs, saying that they’re either ungrounded or lead to nonsensical implications. I will not here comment on his critiques, but needless to say that his responses were engaging.
To close out the hermeneutical section, he gives a nonSupersessionist hermeneutic that he believes makes better sense of the biblical rationale. His proposed approach flushes out in four beliefs:
1. The starting point for understanding any passage in the Bible, including those in the OT, is the passage itself.
2. Progressive revelation reveals new information, but it does not cancel unconditional promises to Israel.
3. National Israel is not a type that is transcended by the church.
4. Old Testament promises can have a double fulfillment or application with both Israel and the church.
Vlach and others are convinced that this approach to the relationship between the Church and national Israel is the better of the two. Again, I will not give a direct response at this point, but I think that he brings up many noteworthy points that add to the discussion tremendously.
Of great importance to this discussion are the theological reasons one has for holding to a particular view. Since theological conclusions are rooted in one’s interpretation of a text, and since one’s interpretation of a text is rooted in one’s hermeneutical approach, we can conclude that theological inquiry and hermeneutics are directly linked with one another. Theology can be seen as an outpouring of hermeneutics, in a sense. This is important to realize when studying the theological reasons given for holding to Supersessionism versus nonSupersessionism. Our theological defenses for a certain view flows out of our hermeneutical lens. It can be said, then, that hermeneutics is the deciding factor that determines one’s views on the relationship between the Church and national Israel.
In this work, I think Vlach has done a wonderful job outlining the two predominant views on this topic—as well as the various nuances within the camps. It is important to remember, I think, that there are different views about God’s plan for national Israel within both camps. For example, Vlach laid out three different interpretations of “all Israel” (cf. Romans 11:26) that exist within the Supersession camp alone. At this moment in time, I cannot say that I have committed to one particular view. This book has, though, given me much clarity on the issue and I can now explain both views to someone unfamiliar with the topic, and can give strong defenses of both. I see strong reasons for both positions, and this book has piqued my interest enough to eventually (hopefully soon) set out a block of time to really delve into the topic for myself. All in all, this book provided a great entryway into the discussion. I would recommend this book to anyone who is interested in a challenging yet concise discussion on this most important topic.
July 18, 2025
Well this is a hot topic right now.
I didn’t really like that he spent significantly more time disproving replacement theology rather than arguing for his actual stance on the issue, but this was a helpful discussion of the controversial biblical passages and helped me figure out why I stand where I do on it. My primary conclusion: more people should read the Old Testament and take it seriously.
Reading this book followed by watching a 2 hour video of an “Evening of Eschatolgy” debate moderated by John Paper with Calista made for a weird but very funny night.
I didn’t really like that he spent significantly more time disproving replacement theology rather than arguing for his actual stance on the issue, but this was a helpful discussion of the controversial biblical passages and helped me figure out why I stand where I do on it. My primary conclusion: more people should read the Old Testament and take it seriously.
Reading this book followed by watching a 2 hour video of an “Evening of Eschatolgy” debate moderated by John Paper with Calista made for a weird but very funny night.
April 1, 2018
Vlach's title is somewhat divisive and asks the wrong question. He should be asking questions like does God have one people group or two? How many kingdom's does God have? How many brides? How many bodies? Naturally, he only has one in answer to all these questions. The point is whose who looked forward to the coming of the Messiah and whose looking backward to the coming of Jesus Christ in faith are those who belong to him.
October 10, 2017
Thorough and easy to read explanation of the lasting distinction between the church and Israel. Vlach writes simply and clearly. His resources are extensive and he fairly treats the opposing view.
May 29, 2019
Very thorough and helpful
Enjoyed the book in it's systematic and thorough approach in dealing with replacement theology. I think he was very fair to all perspectives but showed biblically why replacement theology is not biblical.
Enjoyed the book in it's systematic and thorough approach in dealing with replacement theology. I think he was very fair to all perspectives but showed biblically why replacement theology is not biblical.
August 14, 2024
Vlach's work is an excellent layout and evaluation of Replacement Theology. He identifies all key points of Supersessionism, and evaluates them with extreme fairness. His logic and handle of Scripture is impeccable.
September 6, 2020
Great book
This book is very informative. He knows both sides of the argument well. This removes a lot of theological smoke screen.
This book is very informative. He knows both sides of the argument well. This removes a lot of theological smoke screen.
January 20, 2021
Every serious bible student should read this and gain understanding on this issue. Very highly recommended.
May 29, 2023
Well written. Needed especially in this day in age.
August 18, 2024
Pretty typical dispensational arguments. If you’re familiar with the topic, this book won’t add anything new.
March 27, 2012
This is a great resource for anyone doing a study on the identity of Israel in the New Testament, as I was doing. It's also a good critique of supersessionism/fulfillment theology/covenant theology. Vlach starts off by giving you the background of the view that the Church replaces Israel, or rather, the view that the church fulfills the role that racial Israel was supposed to fulfill but failed. Most of these people seem to believe along the lines of what Luther argued, "...the Jews are no longer Israel, for all things are to be new, and Israel must become new." Vlach evaluates their hermeneutics, and critiques their proof passages. One such passage is Galatians 6:16, here is an excerpt: "A second argument against the supersessionist understanding of Gal 6:16 is based on the context of the letter. Paul is defending the concept of salvation by grace through faith against the error of the Judaizers who held that circumcision contributed to salvation. In doing this, Paul singles out Christian Jews in Galatia who correctly believed the gospel of grace and did not follow the error of the Judaizers. Paul, thus, commends these Christian Jews and calls them the 'Israel of God.' As Johnson puts it, ''What more fitting thing could Paul write ,it is said, in a work so strongly attacking Jewish professing believers, the Judaizers, than to make it most plain that he was not attacking the true believing Jews. Judaizers are anathematized, but the remnant according to the election of grace are 'the Israel of God.'"
And again, on Ephesians 2:11-22, "The fact that Gentiles have gone from being 'far off' to 'near,' or from excluded' to 'not excluded,' does not mean they have assumed the identity of Israel. Second, if Paul wanted to say that believing Gentiles were now part of Israel, he could have said that, but he did not. Paul will say that God has made both believing Jews and Gentiles 'one' (2:14) and 'one new man,' but he carefully avoids the title 'Israel.'…..(Quoting C. B. Hoch Jr.)'..They do not become Israel; they share with Israel.'"
Perhaps my favorite parts, were where he pointed out that, although there certainly are shadows and types in the Old Testament, the people of Israel were neither of those things, nor were the promises of material things, like land. Quoting Feinberg, " unconditional promises are not shadows, nor are the people to whom they are given." And also, where he pointed out that material things are not evil, "…we should not assume that physical things are inherently unspiritual. The physical universe God created was deemed 'very good' (Gen 1:31), not something that needed to be escaped or transcended. We should not assume that things like land, temples, and nations are unspiritual. Nor should we think that such things must necessarily be types or pictures of greater spiritual realities in some Platonic fashion."
I have so many quotations, I could go on and on…but then that would defeat the purpose of you buying the book. I'll end with one more quote, "Contrary to the supersessionist position, it is not God's intention for everyone who believes to become part of 'Israel.' Through Abraham, the nation Israel was created as a vehicle to bring blessings to 'all the families of the earth'(Gen 12:2-3), but it has never been God's intent to make everyone who believes 'Israel.' Israel, through the ultimate Israelite, Jesus Christ, is the means for worldwide blessing, but Israel is not an end in itself."
And again, on Ephesians 2:11-22, "The fact that Gentiles have gone from being 'far off' to 'near,' or from excluded' to 'not excluded,' does not mean they have assumed the identity of Israel. Second, if Paul wanted to say that believing Gentiles were now part of Israel, he could have said that, but he did not. Paul will say that God has made both believing Jews and Gentiles 'one' (2:14) and 'one new man,' but he carefully avoids the title 'Israel.'…..(Quoting C. B. Hoch Jr.)'..They do not become Israel; they share with Israel.'"
Perhaps my favorite parts, were where he pointed out that, although there certainly are shadows and types in the Old Testament, the people of Israel were neither of those things, nor were the promises of material things, like land. Quoting Feinberg, " unconditional promises are not shadows, nor are the people to whom they are given." And also, where he pointed out that material things are not evil, "…we should not assume that physical things are inherently unspiritual. The physical universe God created was deemed 'very good' (Gen 1:31), not something that needed to be escaped or transcended. We should not assume that things like land, temples, and nations are unspiritual. Nor should we think that such things must necessarily be types or pictures of greater spiritual realities in some Platonic fashion."
I have so many quotations, I could go on and on…but then that would defeat the purpose of you buying the book. I'll end with one more quote, "Contrary to the supersessionist position, it is not God's intention for everyone who believes to become part of 'Israel.' Through Abraham, the nation Israel was created as a vehicle to bring blessings to 'all the families of the earth'(Gen 12:2-3), but it has never been God's intent to make everyone who believes 'Israel.' Israel, through the ultimate Israelite, Jesus Christ, is the means for worldwide blessing, but Israel is not an end in itself."
September 19, 2013
Has the church replaced Israel? This is a controversial question and a fitting title for a book that addresses this question with “no.” I enjoyed this treatment on Supersessionism, also known as Replacement Theology. Some believe the name “replacement theology” for Supersessionism is inappropriate but the author Michael Vlach does a good job at the outset of the book demonstrating how proponents of Supersessionism themselves have used that term interchangeably. Prior to reading the book I have heard that the author’s doctoral work was on Supersessionism and I suspect some of his dissertation must have been carried over into the book. From what I understand, the advisors for his doctoral work weren’t all dispensationalists which probably helped sharpened his argument. I found this book devastating to the position of Supersessionism. I appreciated Vlach being conscious of theological methods in his evaluation of Supersessionism especially with my favorite portion of the book, part three, where he evaluates the hermeneutics of Supersessionism. Vlach notes that it is not enough to show added referents (Gentiles) to Old Testament promises to the Jews since this does not logically demonstrate the church has replaced Israel. Even before Vlach evaluate the passages that Supersessionists offer (part four), his hermeneutics portion of the book has already laid down the principle in refuting Supersessionism’s appeal to certain passages. For those who are into historical theology, they will also enjoy Vlach’s discussion of Supersessionism throughout church history, which he devotes over fifty pages to. I highly recommend this book to all because of Vlach’s ability to nuance the other side and also for the book’s clarity, organization and positive and negative argument for non-Supersessionism.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 42 reviews