Opinions: "The viewpoint which is held by the vast majority
of Christians today and which was the only viewpoint until the
19th century has no historical basis, while your view point which
is barely two centuries old is valid historically speaking......
I'm confused!".
Also: "my opinion is the opinion of most Arab Christians
most of them are Orthodox or Catholic, and you know what the
Orthodox and Catholic teach regarding Israel and the Jews - they
teach what you call 'replacement theology'".
Response: While this common opinion only gets to show support
to one of the most evil ideas that was promoted throughout the
centuries, yet I doubt that many Christians even realizes how
evil it is. However, we do need to hold responsible the silence
of many who witness and ignore this issue.
Indeed many Catholic teachings confuse between what the disciples
and the first believers have always taught, and what many church
fathers in the Catholic Church wanted to promote, some misguided
church fathers dropped what the Apostles Peter, Paul, Timothy,
and John taught to follow Saint Augustine and his errors. It
was Augustine around A.D. 400 who ultimately articulated the
idea, principally in his well-known work, The City of God.
Augustine admitted that at one time he had espoused the prominent
doctrine of "Chiliasm" the sound biblical truth that
was taught by the apostles, the belief in a future millennium,
in which the Church and redeemed Israel will be blessed by the
personal return and reign of Christ on the earth. However, he
had since come to what he calls "more satisfactory"
view that the Church has replaced Israel forever. Jerusalem and
the Temple were destroyed in fulfillment of prophecy, and the
Jews were dispersed throughout the Roman Empire. The question
would be which of Augustine views is more sound the previous
views he espoused? Or his newer one? In other words, which doctrine
is more sound, the original one, or the one that has been used
longer? One would think that the original supersedes, it is closer
to what the apostles taught and to what their master Jesus Christ
taught as well.
The other question would be on what basis did Augustine abandon
the earlier apostolic views? These questions are difficult to
answer by Replacement Theology supporters. In fact they would
support other views held by certain cults like Islam rather then
cling to what the Apostles taught, since Islam and Arab Christians
would agree on their position towards Israel. One thing is clear,
it is not a conviction that depends on research and study of
scripture, but a state of heart plagued with centuries of dependence
on tradition that is clouded with half-truths, taught from father
to son, in the pulpits, and even in school classrooms. This twisted
history and media rhetoric put thick scales in Middle Eastern
eyes, a corrupt history that can be matched with Nazi Germany,
and ironically speaks to Israel, as they are the Nazis themselves.
Arab students are never taught Jewish history, they really hardly
ever look at scripture for themselves, programmed by repetition
of old propaganda and repeated lies to the point that they end
up believing that they have divine truth.
One would think that the Palestinians who live in the midst
of the conflict would be the experts on the situation, but in
reality the opposite is true; their schools are infested with
one sided half truths, their mosques preach hatred from the pulpit,
and their priests call out for the destruction of Israel, Christian
and Muslim alike in Israel are all part of this brain wash. They
have listened for so long to repeated propaganda lies, that these
lies were recorded by repetition into their minds as truth.
They have chose to live in isolation from the Jew, the Jew
on the other hand is so afraid of the Arab that he too is isolated.
You have barb-wired Jewish settlements on the hilltops, and Arab
villages in the valleys, and no one intermingles with no one.
The Arab Christians on the other hand are unaware of their
blinded stand against the Jew, they stand with Muslims on the
same path of struggle, they are unaware, or maybe look the other
way at much of the evidence of repeated history, that Islam hold
an "extreme" position and a different form of Replacement
Theology than their "Christian" brothers, this 'Replacement'
does not only exclude Israel from the land, but the Christians
as well, as Islam has no problem using anyone to oppose an arch
enemy until they reach to power, then any other theology that
could challenge theirs, must be eliminated as well including
the ones who supported them all along. Just like the beast mentioned
in Revelations uses the whore, then turns on her to destroy her.
This, has been proven throughout history, but the only way
Arab Christians can see it, is to study hundreds of historical
events from time immemorial showing the atrocities committed
by Muslims toward the Christian, they overlook the 1.5 million
Armenian Christians slaughtered, the Sudan Muslims killing and
destroying one million Christians and annihilating almost all
Nubian Christians, and the forced conversions of almost every
Christian nation on the East.
During the last seven years alone in the country of Sudan.
The Muslim terror has become fiercest since the coming power
of dictator General Haasan El-Bashi. The Muslims attacked Christian
villages. The young between the ages of 13 and 20 were shot without
judgment. UN reports say that others were burned alive in their
huts. Many churches were closed or destroyed. Sudan is forcibly
Islamized. Males get circumcised. Leaders of animist tribes were
invited by the authorities to a "conference," and then
they were shot. Crucifixion and stoning of Christians and torture
with red-hot iron bars is a horrifying reality, that accompanied
with mass expulsions and starvation with a silent world who have
not shed a tear or raised a voice. The Muslim oil to the West
has become more valuable then Christian blood far away in Africa.
Only future can show that history usually repeats itself that
Islam was able to conquer, not Jewish communities only, but entire
Christian nations as well. Little is remembered by Christian
Arabs that Egypt, Syria, Turkey, and even many parts of Saudi
Arabia, was Christian. The Jews eventually were destroyed or
exiled, and the Christians put to the Islamic sharp sword, given
the choices of Shahadatan or death. The East was lost to Islam,
due to their weakness and alternative beliefs by saints, substituting
apostolic teachings to a world full of icons, lukewarm faith,
and lack of adherence to scripture, and unfortunately, even my
plea would be viewed as a divisive betrayal scheme based on the
old principle of "divide and conquer". The Middle East
is plagued with supposed conspiracy theories that everything
evil must have been generated by Zionist ideas, the same errors
promoted in Communist and Nazi systems, is sadly being promoted
in the East as well.
Regardless that in 4,000 years of history, the Jews have not
occupied anybody else's land nor enslaved or "ethnically
cleansed" any nation on earth, yet they are the most despised
people ever. Where are the Arab and Muslim outcry for mass murder
of Muslim Curds in Iraq, the occupation of Lebanon by Syria,
the destruction of Sudan's Christians, or the 1.5 million Armenians
butchered by Muslim Turkey? Do we hear a peep? No wonder Jesus
said of Israel: "Ye shall be hated of all nations,".
This "Nation" could only mean Israel. Jesus sadly told
his Jewish disciples in Israel, and so it has come about (Matt.
24:9).
Even the ones who are not traditionalist Christians who are
eager for some enlightenment, approach scripture, and instead
of accepting its simple truths that were written to peasants
and shepherds, they instead totally trust the supposed "enlightened
ones", in order to escape the clear and simple statements
presented in scripture concerning all these obvious verses that
God in simple language supports a Jewish return, they would solicit
the aid of these "enlightened ones" who would force
certain interpretations by excluding verses without looking at
the whole context of scripture, and as we should see, the context
of a certain passage is ignored by this school of thought and
not encouraged to see even the whole context of the main theme
of scripture.
The end results of these interpretations are a perfect harmony
with whatever tickles the ears of Yasser Arafat, Hanan Ashrawi,
George Habbash, and the rest of the corrupt political spectrum
of the Palestinian Authorities.
The whole theme of Scripture is the story of the fallen man,
who is in need of redemption with a loving creator that sends
His son through a chosen nation "Israel" whom He had
promised with an everlasting covenant, that by them a redeemer
would come, for some of them who would betray Him, yet in the
end He will come back to them, as He remembers His "eternal"
covenant, and rescues them in Jerusalem from the Gentile world
that attacks His beloved chosen people from every nation and
from every side. Instead, it becomes an Ecumenical movement uniting
the good, bad, and the ugly to look at only "Christ"
and ignore almost everything else. In reality, it is the Ecumenical
Movement that is of recent origin and the one behind the vale
of Satan riding all the way to Mystery Babylon on a back of the
demonic beast of world alliance.
Unfortunately, Satan is always at work as The Lord told us,
to deceive even "The very elect", and "
Christendom" canonized Augustine's evil ideas by establishing
him as an official saint, and theologians throughout the Roman
Empire accepted his false doctrine.
The Chiliasts were branded as holding "aberrant and heretical
views", and Augustinian Replacement Theology with other
false theologies became the "cornerstone" of the Roman
Catholic concepts. In the later developments in the Eastern Orthodox
Church, the European Reformation and the Anglican split, Replacement
Theology continued essentially untouched. It was an important
part of the standard Christian view of Israel, the world, and
prophecy. This view which "evolved" had no basis in
what the Apostles taught, on the contrary, instead of being Biblical
became anti-Biblical as cursing Israel in reality is cursing
God's chosen people since Roman persecution, the Holocaust, and
the Russian Pogroms and the inquisitions used this type of theology
in order to destroy the Jew. How can anyone claim Biblical Christianity
and support this view and not seeing the dangers?
Worse then this, the effect of all of this on Christian attitudes
about Israel was devastating. In actuality, Replacement Theology
disenfranchised Israel from having a continuing covenant relationship
with God. Instead of looking at Jerusalem as the "City of
the Great King," in which Christ will reign for a thousand
years upon His return, they saw Jerusalem's perpetual desolation
as much as a confirmation of Christianity as the destruction
of Pharaoh's army in the Red Sea was a confirmation of Moses.
The Marcion heresy expressed the extreme form of this view.
Marcion proposed that the Old Testament be abandoned, a thing
that many Arab Christians stand for, but that was unacceptable
to the Church and a better way to de-Judaise the Hebrew Scriptures
was to Christianize the Hebrew Scriptures so as to spiritualize
the text and read New Testament concepts into the text. That
view is still prevalent today.
The Bible, however, is consistent, and the great truths of
Scripture are consistent throughout Scripture. This one reference
does not give us license to use this title for the Church, nor
to see the Jewish People as abandoned by God.
To argue that we should follow what certain "Church Fathers"
teach would be in contradiction to what Replacement Theology
advocates teach themselves, since the promoters of this view
would insist to tell a Jews to ignore many errors of there fathers
the Rabbis and seek the Word of God the original Hebrew Prophets.
Replacement Theology's misguided approach to the Bible not
only led millions of Christians astray over the years but it
has, in addition, birthed evil of the most horrific proportions.
Replacement Theology played a role in the persecution of Jews
by the church through the centuries, including the Holocaust."
(quote by Malcolm Hedding), since all the promises and blessings
and Israel's entire inheritance, now belongs to the Church while
Israel gets to keep the curses.
This false interpretation instituted originally by Rome, was
a great stumbling block to the Jews as it prevents them from
recognizing their own Messiah,.
"Remove the obstacles out of the way of my people. "
Isaiah 57:14b.
God has in no way either rejected or replaced Israel and the
Jewish people. His covenant with them is unconditional and non-
transferable. God's covenants and promises were never based on
Israel's good behavior, but were based on God's faithfulness
toward His people. Although the Jewish people have suffered the
consequences of breaking God's Laws, just as all do, they have
not been replaced or rejected. The scriptures make that quite
clear:
REPLACEMENT THEOLOGY - THE OPINION OF THE MASSES
Opinion: "What I believe in is what all Christians believed
in until the 19th century and what the majority of Christians
believe in today!
This form of opinion rooted in blindness more than facts is
glad to pick up any heresies, errors, clutter, evil, or false
doctrine that crept up throughout the centuries. It forgets that
reformation was necessary to keep Christians on track and to
protect the believers of many false teachings promoted by these
"Church Fathers". In this common opinion even Martin
Luther would be wrong since he went against what Church Fathers
promoted in the Roman Catholic Church.
Replacement Theology is still the majority view among professing
Christian theologians, but Premillennialism is by and large considered
a legitimate and vocal minority, at least in Evangelical Protestant
circles.
Such organizations as the Roman Catholic Church and the World
Council of Churches which include both Protestant and Catholic
elements have, for the last half-century, taken positions favoring
the Arab and Moslem enemies of Israel. It is with considerable
reluctance that the Vatican has recognized Israel, and the Church's
primary interest is in asserting its influence in maintaining
its Holy Places in Jerusalem. Similarly, the World Council of
Churches has consistently pled the cause of Palestinians against
the claims of Israel.
Thus, Christianity has, because of its differing theological
views about the future of Israel, had a divided attitude about
Zionism and the revived State of Israel.
Already in Numbers, chap. 14, the option of replacement theology
is presented and flatly rejected.
The option was that God would kill all the Israelites because
of their sinfulness, and He would start all over again from the
beginning. He would not reject the IDEA of a chosen people, but
He would destroy the people descended from Abraham and start
a new people from Moses. This new start with one individual is
rejected. God listened to Moses prayer for His sinful people.
God the Father has surely listened also to the prayer of Jesus.
REPLACEMENT THEOLOGY - WHO IS A JEW?
The very verse that Anti-Zionists and Replacement Theology
advocates use and love to quote to prove their point that God
had no more plans for the Jew, that God replaced them by others,
this very verse in reality backfires:
"For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither
is that circumcision,
which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one
inwardly; and
circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not
in the letter;
whose praise is not of men, but of God." Romans 2:28,29.
While this verse never stated that God is done with the Jew
or replaced them, yet I wonder why can't Replacement Theology
advocates change their title from being called Christians to
Spiritual Jews? At lease that is exactly what this verse that
they advocate calls for? Especially when it is a New Testament
verse intended for Christ's followers?
If this verse meant that we are a new breed of faith, the
question would be is how could a one God dictate more then one
faith?
God has one and only one faith He has called us for. That
is of being Spiritual Jews or Jews at "heart" AND "spirit"
as the Bible puts it in this verse.
It is quite clear from this verse that Paul was telling Christ's
followers who were Jews, that what mattered to God is not being
circumcised in the flesh, but seeking the heart and the spirit
of God, to know the heart of God and follow His ways in obedience
to His Word, To love the Lord your God with all your heart and
with all your might, this is the first commandment.
From the Bible, it is clear what title God wants us to be
labeled as, it is crystal clear that "spiritual" Jew
is what God is after "But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly;
and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit.".
To many, that sounds like a detested title, but to God, He
chose the title of "Jew" for Christ, the apostles,
the prophets before them, and His followers as well. Today's
title as Christians is no where to be found in scripture, and
I agree that we are to follow Christ, yet the Bible states that
we are to be followers of the Messiah who came for the Jew first,
then to the Gentile. I am by no means forcing that we cannot
use "Christians" as title, but argue the point that
the "Church" has not replaced the Jew.
For how long will we deny God His ways?
Replacement Theology advocates will try to persuade people
that now they are God's chosen, since they are the ones after
God's heart, not these abandoned divorced Jews in the flesh.
Instead of loving these Jews by heart and spirit until death,
witnessing to them by God's truth, and setting the perfect example
to them to find their Messiah, instead of all that we are called
to think that God is done with them, and a new era of the faith
have begun; a Christian era with Mary's, icons, and Crystal Cathedrals.
There is no need for God to fulfill His plans for Jerusalem,
or establish David's seat on Zion. These verses too will be ignored,
and hardly ever read. For how long?
What happened to the God who said: "I bring back the
captives of Judah and Jerusalem"?
It is clear then that Israel will be first in unbelief and
in her land when Gentile rule is finished as the following verse
shows:
"For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant
of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits;
that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness
of the Gentiles be come in. And so all Israel shall be saved:
as it is written, There shall come out of Zion the Deliverer,
and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob. (Rom 11:25-26)
Isn't this the will of God who clearly dictated:
"And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the
mountain of the Lord's house shall be established in the top
of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all
nations shall flow unto it. And many people shall go and say,
Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the
house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways,
and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth
the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem. (Isaiah 2:2-3).
Can we make Zion and Jerusalem replaced by the Vatican, and
the seat of Christ now is in Rome lead by His Vicar, the Pontiff's
Maximus?
Where are all the verses about Rome?
This is what we are lead to believe, but does it square with
the scripture?
In reality nothing changed in the Christian world from the
Jewish era, the same verse Replacement Theology advocates use
regarding the "fleshly circumcised" Jew and the "Spiritual
Jew" fits on them, as from time immemorial we have had "fleshly
Christians" (Christians by tradition) and "Spiritual
Christians" (Christians who follow scripture). In fact their
were many wars between the two with millions of casualties on
the "Spiritual" Christians.
Christians who claim to be Christians and hate Jews at the
same time, are in contradiction of their faith, Nazis, KKK, Replacement
Theology advocates, Anti-Zionists and whatever faith that is
anti Jew in reality are not following the prescription set by
God.
In fact anti-Israel advocates will not be able to even enjoy
heaven which it's twelve gates have the names of the twelve tribes
of Israel.
How will we ever get healed?
How is it that we are so blind?
Where are the verses that say "we the Spiritual Jew have
replaced God's plan for the circumcised Jew?"
Doesn't God have plans for them?
Doesn't God have hundreds of verses describing their plan
to become Spiritual Jews as well?
Hasn't God supplied us with ample amount of scripture to show
that He still loves the Jew and has a plan for them?
How could we then be so bent on isolating the vast amount
of scripture by taking one verse or
two, twist them to something else, and shed this sinister
interpretation as a light on all scripture?
Why would God choose the word JEW if God all of the sudden
abandoned and divorced them forever?
By studying scripture and awareness of the cults, one could
see that the most dangerous method that "disguised believers"
use by isolating few verses and derive mountains of new invented
theology.
Today we have The Faith Theology, Jehovah Witnesses, Mormons,
Modern Day Prophets Movement, The Mother Mary cult, The Goddess
Cult, David Koresh, The Hour of Power, and many many others.
They are springing up every day fulfilling what the Bible predicted
that in the later times, many false prophets will arise and deceive
many. The same tactics used by such cults are being used by Replacement
Theology advocates.
From Mat 8, one can see that Christ will rule the earth were
all believers Jew and Gentile will be with him while the rest
of the unbelieving world will be cast out. The believers will
rule the world and Christ will have His seat. The Subjects of
the kingdom are by no means the Jews of Israel, but all the unbelievers
in the world as described in Matt 13:38: "The field is the
world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the
tares are the children of the wicked one".
The good seed are the "Children of The Kingdom"
from the "field" which is "the world".
While the Kingdom of Heaven has nothing to do with regathering
the children of Jacob (Israel) yet they attempt to match them
since both gatherings are from the east and the west.
This kingdom will come as Zecharia predicted in his vision
of the messianic era, foretold that in the end of days,
"It shall come to pass that every one that is left of
all nations that came against Jerusalem, shall go up from year
to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the
Feast of Tabernacles." (Zechariah 14:16-21)
They are getting ready several thousand Christians go up annually
to Jerusalem to worship the King, in 1996, during the Jewish
Succoth more than 5000 such pilgrims participated, from more
than 100 gentile nations.
In light of many interpretations to do away with Israel, Replacement
Theology advocates prefer to interpret the prophecies of Israel's
return were fulfilled already after the Jews came from the Babylonian
captivity. Studying Joel chapter 3, facts are that:
- The Jews were never disbursed throughout every nation until
the Diaspora.
- Currently and since the early twentieth century they have
been brought back to Israel from every corner of the glob, and
almost half of the world's Jews are in Israel.
- Jerusalem today is Israel's capital " I bring back
the captives of Judah and Jerusalem", what is left of this
strange godly declaration is that on Christ's second coming,
there will be a judgment of the nations for disbursing the Jews
and for DIVIDING Israel with her enemies.
On page 124 of "Whose Promised Land", by Colin Chapman
the author emphasize on the title "The Meek...will inherit
the Earth", the author forces a re-translation to one of
the meanings for the Greek word (ge'en) to "land".
Even if this is accepted it still not specific of Israel, and
while it is obvious that this re-translation is intended to make
the Bible fit the Replacement Theology doctrine, however, this
is invalid in light of the rest of scripture which clearly make
Israel a non-Gentile rule of the land , especially when there
will be a rule of the whole world from Israel at the time of
Messiah's rule. Other attempts are made by the author to discredit
the "Israel" rule
REPLACEMENT THEOLOGY - WHO IS "ISRAEL OF GOD"?
The Replacement Theology opinion expressed in Maseehi's website
as well as Al-Bushra and Al-Sabeel often refers to the term "Israel
of God" which is only found in Galatians 6:16, where Paul
writes: "Peace and mercy to all who follow this rule even
to the Israel of God". From this verse, it is argued that
Paul, writing to the churches in Galatia, was saying that the
Church could now take upon itself a title that had solely belonged
to the Jewish people which is contrary to what Paul was saying,
when clearly Paul wrote in the previous verse
"Neither circumcision, nor un-circumcision means anything,
what counts is a new creation".
As to which group this might apply, there are possibly five
candidates mentioned by Paul in this letter:
Gentile Christians tempted to desert to a different gospel(l:6ff)
the Church of God (1:13)
the Gentiles to whom Paul was called to preach (2:7)
the Jewish circumcision believers(2:11-13), and
the Jewish circumcision party (2:11-13).
By process of elimination, the "Israel of God" cannot
refer to the Gentile believers, tempted by the circumcision party,
because it is to them that Paul is warning about being pressured
to be circumcised, the "you" in (6:11,12,13).
So Paul is not calling them the "Israel of God"
as they must be a different group to these "foolish Galatians".
Nor is he referring to the circumcision party themselves. He
has already addressed them as "those who want to make a
good impression" (6:12). We can rule out the Gentiles to
whom Paul goes with the Gospel. Circumcision is of no relevance
to them. Does, therefore, "even the "Israel of God"
mean "the Church of God", the title that Paul employed
in 1:13?
Remember that the letter is written "to the churches
in Galatia", made up of Jewish and Gentile believers. But
the whole thrust of the letter is to expose the folly within
the Church. (3:1) of the Galatian Christians being persuaded
by the Judaising party (2:12) that they should be circumcised.
In order to be righteous(6:12-13).
Why then expose their folly, and then confuse the whole situation
by calling the Gentile dominated church in Galatia "the
Israel of God"?
He was condemning Israel as being "in slavery with her
children". Why confuse the church that he labored so hard
for (4:11), by trading one clear collective noun "Israel",
that of a distinctive ethnic group of people, for the Christian
Church, which is distinctly not the nation of Israel?
There is one other problem in transferring Israel's title
upon the Church from this passage and it is the word "even".
"...even to the Israel of God." (6:16)
The Greek word is "kai" and is usually translated
"and". Thus it would read,
"Peace and mercy to all who follow this rule...(eg, all
you Gentiles who resist the pressure to be circumcised to obtain
righteous) and to the Israel of God", a different group
top those targeted by the circumcision party. This is how the
AV, RV, Douay, NEB, and NASB translate "kai".
We have seen that Paul addresses Gentiles in this passage
as "you". We dismiss the title in question as referring
to "the Church" for the above reasons. Believing Jews
needed to hear this rule also since they had already been circumcised
and might also be tempted to see that it provided for them a
righteousness based on the Jewish law. It makes much more sense,
therefore, to see that Paul refers to them in 6:16 as "the
Israel of God" who are the believing remnant of Israel,
to which Peter and Barnabas belonged (1:11-13) and who themselves
had been led astray (2:11-13). They were "of Israel"
and also "of God".
This is the only reference to this title, and a basic rule
of sound exegesis is that doctrine is developed, not from a single
text (as this is) but from the broad teaching of Scripture.
If we were to try replacing the term "Israel" anywhere
else in the New Testament by the term "Church", the
context would make no sense.
The Amplified Bible cross references this verse with Psalm
125:5, "Peace be upon Israel". Again, to replace the
term "Israel" in the Hebrew Scriptures (sometimes known
as the Old Testament) with "The Church "makes nonsense
in almost every context.
Thus by calling the Church the "Israel of God",
we might infer that God is now working only with the Church and
that we can replace Israel and say that all the promises that
relate to Israel now belong to the Church. How can we understand
Ezekiel 36:8-12 where we read:
"But ye, O mountains of Israel, ye shall shoot forth
your branches, and yield your fruit to my people of Israel....Yea,
I will cause men to walk upon you, even my people, Israel"
(vv. 8, 12).
Is this not clearly a prophecy on Israel? Wasn't Israel's
land replenished? Aren't the Jews walking on her and enjoying
one of the best cultivated lands in the Middle East? What Church
mountains will shoot forth branches and have men walk upon her
including the church?
Part of Christianity has expressed delight with the modern
Israel, while part has been very negative toward Israel's very
existence.
The word "Israel" or "Israelites" occurs
about 75 times in the New Testament. In at least 70 of these
occurrences the name Israel is used in precisely the same way
as it was in the Old Testament. This includes nine distinct quotations
of Old Testament Scriptures. In every one of these New Testament
quotations, the meaning of the name Israel is exactly the same
as it was in the Old Testament.
In perhaps four instances in the New Testament, the apostle
Paul uses "Israel" in a special, restricted sense to
denote only those Israelites who have continued in the faith
of their forefather Abraham and for this reason have acknowledged
Jesus as their messiah (see Romans 9:6-8), but never once in
the New testament is Israel used as a synonym for the Church
as a whole. In Romans 11:25-26 Paul sums up his analysis of the
relationship between Israel and the Gentiles in one comprehensive
statement: "Hardening in part has happened to Israel until
the full number of the Gentiles has come in. And so all Israel
will be saved."
http://www.abrahamic-faith.com/index.html