Talk:Supersessionism

New Covenant theology

New Covenant theology doesn't seem to be an alternative to supersessionism but an example of it. 73.87.154.155 (talk) 11:16, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

It's kind of a middle ground between dispensationalism and covenant theology. So it is an alternative. —Confession0791 ^talk 13:11, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Disagree. I think this is a category error. Dispensationalism is a framework that historically opposes supersessionism, covenant theology (incl. new covenant) is a framework that generally supports it. Dirkwillems (talk) 20:24, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Change the link

I assume it was not supposed to refer to the current political entity State of Israel

הראש (talk) 09:41, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

I think that is referring to the nation of Israel as a people including those Jews living in the State of Israel JamieBrown2011 (talk) 07:47, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

unclear antecedent

Article states, "Islam teaches that it is the final and most authentic expression of Abrahamic monotheism, superseding both Judaism and Christianity." Not sure what "it" is supposed to refer to here—the antecedent from the preceding sentence should be "supercessionism," but I suspect it is meant to refer to Islam itself. Needs clarification. 98.195.219.14 (talk) 00:20, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

The paragraph could probably stand some cleanup, but I think that taken in context it's evident that "it" refers to Islam. But it would be awkward to say "Islam teaches that Islam is the final and most authentic..." If you can think of some better way to phrase it, do so. ButlerBlog (talk) 12:31, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

Orthodox reference mischaracterized

Reference 33 to St John's Orthodox Church on the topic "Did the Church replace Israel?" is cited as an Orthodox rejection of "replacement theology". The source is in fact affirming the classical "supersessionist" position and rejecting the characterization of this view as one of "replacement". The referring sentence, which also ambiguously refers to a "restoration of Israel [that] fulfilled the [OT] prophecies", seems to imply that some Orthodox Christian churches affirm an alternative (i.e. dispensational) view, which the source does not support. Recommend removing the sentence and reference. 2A01:E0A:B74:6430:C105:9F5D:F5:BF1F (talk) 12:48, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

The Eastern Orthodox Church definitely rejects dispensationalism. Very few Christians actually believe in "replacement theology"-- rather, they believe that the church is a continuation of OT Israel. Semantics are getting in the way of the way these references are being presented in the article text. —Confession0791 ^talk 22:31, 22 June 2025 (UTC)