How the Reformation Reinforced Supersessionism
When Martin Luther nailed his 95 Theses to the door of the Wittenberg church in 1517, he did not intend merely to reform the Catholic Church—he wanted to restore the gospel to its original form. But while the Reformation challenged many traditional ecclesiastical practices, it did not significantly shake the idea that the church had replaced Israel in God's plan. On the contrary, certain developments within the Reformation actually reinforced supersessionist (replacement theology) thinking.
Why did this happen? How did Protestant theology deal with Israel's position? And why did it take until the 1800s for new perspectives to emerge that challenged the church's long-held understanding of Israel?
Luther and Disappointed Hope
Luther's early writings show hopefulness toward the Jews. In 1523, he published "That Jesus Christ Was Born a Jew," in which he criticized Catholic persecution of Jews and suggested that if Jews were taught the pure gospel, they might accept Christ.
But when Jews did not convert en masse to Protestantism, Luther's attitude changed drastically. His later writings, such as "On the Jews and Their Lies" (1543), contained very hostile rhetoric and even violent recommendations, including burning synagogues. While such thinking was not unique to his era, Luther's reputation and influence made it particularly dangerous, and his writings were used in subsequent centuries to justify antisemitism.
Theologically, Luther represented traditional supersessionism: he read Paul's texts (especially Romans 9-11) so that Israel's only future was individual conversion to Christ. "All Israel will be saved" (Rom. 11:26) did not mean ethnic Israel to Luther, but the entire people of God—the church.
The Reformation and Israel's Position: Calvin and the Swiss Heritage
Jean Calvin (1509-1564), the other major reformer, developed a systematic theological system in which Israel's position in God's plan was strictly subordinated to the church. His view was based particularly on covenant theology:
-
Israel and the church were not two separate peoples, but one and the same people in different eras. Old Testament Israel was in its "childhood," while the New Testament represented maturity.
-
With Jesus, the external marks of the old covenant (circumcision, sacrifices, Sabbath) had lost their significance.
-
Romans 11:26—"All Israel will be saved"—did not mean national Israel, but all believers, both Jews and Gentiles.
Calvin's covenant theology was influential and formed the foundation for Reformed Christianity (e.g., Presbyterians, Reformed churches). It preserved Israel's theological significance, but only in a spiritual sense: the church was the "new Israel," and Old Testament Israel no longer had a special role in God's plan.
Consequence of the Reformation: Israel's Disappearance from Theology
While the Reformation brought many positive changes to Christian theology, it brought little new to Israel's position. The Catholic and Orthodox churches had long taught that the church was the "new Israel," and Protestant churches essentially continued the same line.
This was evident particularly in the following ways:
1. Biblical interpretation became more systematic - The Reformation emphasized the importance of Scripture, but interpretation often focused on dogmatic theological systems where Israel's role was seen as part of the church.
2. Absence of viable Messianic Jewish communities - Since most Jews did not convert to Christianity, there was no visible model of how Judaism and Christianity could coexist.
3. Theological reaction to Catholicism - Protestant theological emphasis was often on challenging Catholic doctrines, not on reassessing Israel's position.
Where Were the Alternative Views?
While mainstream Protestant theology remained replacement theological, a few exceptions were observable:
-
English Puritans (17th century) began speculating about Israel's national restoration. Thomas Brightman and Joseph Mede suggested that Jews might have a future in their own land.
-
Pietists and revival movements (18th century) emphasized personal faith and new awakening, which led to thoughts that Jews might also have a role in end-times events.
While these were marginal currents, they sowed seeds that began to germinate in the 1800s when theologians and churches began to reassess Israel's position.
What the Reformation Left as Heritage
When we examine the Reformation's impact on the Israel question, three key observations can be made:
1. Supersessionism remained the dominant doctrine - Although Protestantism brought many changes, it did not question the idea that the church had replaced Israel.
2. Israel became a historical, not eschatological question - Israel's position was dealt with primarily in light of past events, not as a future plan.
3. The relationship between church and Israel remained an open question - Although some thinkers contemplated Jews' possible role in the end times, this was not mainstream theology.
Looking Forward
The Reformation's reinforcement of supersessionism set the stage for what would come in the following centuries. However, the seeds of change were already being planted through various revival movements and fresh approaches to biblical prophecy.
Coming Next:
Part 4: New Dawn - Israel's Return to Modern Theology - Beginning in the 1800s, theologians and movements began reassessing Israel's place. How did they understand Paul's teaching? How did 20th-century historical events affect theology?
The lost heritage can be rediscovered. But understanding it requires us to examine history and make a fresh assessment of Scripture's message.
This examination reminds us that theological education must be both faithful to Scripture and aware of how theological traditions develop. As we train leaders for the global church, understanding these historical developments helps them navigate both biblical fidelity and sensitivity to contemporary challenges.
Comments
Post a Comment