"For the time is coming when people will not have patience for sound teaching," 2 Timothy 4:3

Some Bad Theologies

Out in the Judean desert

Out in the Judean desert

Replacement Theology, Fulfilment Theology, Liberation Theology, Christian Palestinianism, Dominion Theology, Restorationism, Latter Rains, Dispensationalism, Dual Covenant Theology & Marcionism

Wildolive does not exist to advance Christian Zionism as the only theology that matters, but to advocate a complete view of Bible teaching; nothing added and nothing taken away. This must include an understanding and acceptance of God's purposes concerning Israel and the Jews.

Neither does wildolive exist to attack those who hold different theologies. However, there are a number of teachings circulating that are harmful to a proper grasp of God's purposes. These ideas come under different names, opinions vary on the definitions and several theologies blur into each other. Google search on the labels if you want to see the arguments, but this page is intended to introduce the ideas so that you may be forewarned about them. Some of these theologies are advanced by big name speakers!

Emerging threat to faith - particularly for the young

Obviously, Replacement Theology is a primary issue for wildolive because of its damaging effect on the church. However, a much more basic threat to the faith, especially the faith of our young Christians is coming from high profile Christians who have abandoned their faith and are actively publicising their "spiritual deconversion."

Christian Deconstruction Movement - #Exvangelical - a New Reformation

Steve Chalke - prominent English media Christian - spoke in 2017 of updating the church in a New Reformation. Reduced to basics this means rejecting parts of the Bible that conflict with present day beliefs; particularly Genesis issues like Creation and man and woman.

Since then we have seen the emergence of the Christian Deconstruction Movement, which would appear to be a new theology but is actually evangelicals denying the faith they once held.

Rhett and Link are YouTubers with 72 million subscribers to their funny videos. Their Christian faith (one time workers in Campus Crusade for Christ) was part of their appeal to young Christians. But then they posted a number of episodes explaining their spiritual deconversion. Rhett cited His questioning of Genesis as being incompatible with science (meaning, obviously, evolutionary science.) Link expressed similar issues, plus being unable to reconcile the Bible with LGBTQ issues.

Prominent Christian musician John Steingard has a similar story

A famous Hillsong songwriter spoke of his journey asking, "Why is the Bible full of contradictions..." "Science keeps piercing the truth of every religion."

The hashtag "#Exvangelical" leads to multiple deconstructionist podcasts - deconversion stories - and "a new reformation."

All the above was gleaned from "Solid Ground for Sinking Times - The Bible and Creation" a message given by Thomas Fretwall at the Creation.com London Conference 2023. The common thread through all these stories is loss of faith that was compomised by not being based on the foundational truths of the Bible - starting at Genesis 1 "In the beginning God....." but attempting to base Christianity on what the world tells us is true.

Please see Science

Why would people who once wanted to lead others to Christian faith, then work just as hard to destroy that faith in others?

Replacement Theology

More detail here

Put very briefly, replacement theology holds that God rejected the Jews ( Israel) when they rejected Jesus.     From this it follows that the promises throughout the Bible now apply to the Church while the curses apply to Israel / the Jews.  

Actually thousands of Jews accepted Jesus, but the religious leaders rejected Him and recruited a mob to call for Jesus' death. Some will quote the parable of the wicked tenants (Luke 20 v9-19) to support their case for God's rejection of the Jews but, if you read it properly, you will notice that Israel (the Jews) is the vineyard and the tenants are the Religious leaders. Also notice that (v 19) "The teachers of the law and the chief priests looked for a way to arrest him immediately, because they knew he had spoken this parable against them." Consider how this prophetic parable was fulfilled.

Replacement Theology is spiritualised in various ways but it is surprising how often it surfaces if you watch out for it.   Its influence can even be detected in some well respected Bible translations and their section headings.

Consider this . . . .   God made many promises to his chosen, covenant people in the Old Testament.  We Christians trust in the promises he made us in the New Testament and those we appropriate from the Old Testament.   If God can break his eternal promises to his first covenant people we do not have much assurance for the new covenant.  But thanks be to God  

" . . God's free gifts and his calling are irrevocable." (Romans 11 v29)

Ponder this parable from Jesus;   Luke 14 v7 

When he noticed how the guests picked the places of honor at the table, he told them this parable: "When someone invites you to a wedding feast, do not take the place of honor, for a person more distinguished than you may have been invited. If so, the host who invited both of you will come and say to you, `Give this man your seat.' Then, humiliated, you will have to take the least important place. But when you are invited, take the lowest place, so that when your host comes, he will say to you, `Friend, move up to a better place.' Then you will be honored in the presence of all your fellow guests. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted."

Isn't adopting Replacement Theology taking the place of Honour that belongs to God's first chosen and much loved people.  Rather than being humbled when they take their rightful place, isn't it better to honour them and see if we are then called up to a better place when we share God's wedding feast with redeemed Israel.

However, we need to be cautious about criticising serious theologians who hold replacement views. As David Pawson pointed out in his "Replacement Theology - Too Anti Israel" (DP.1207 D from Anchor Recordings)

David Pawson points out that the replacement theologians are correct in some respects, since the Mosaic covenant is, largely, replaced ( or at least reworked ) by the "new Covenant" that Jesus /Yeshua mentioned in Luk2 22 v20,

"This cup is the New Covenant, ratified by my blood, which is being poured out for you."

Was Jesus making a remez (link) to Exodus 24 v 8

Moses then took the blood, sprinkled it on the people and said, "This is the blood of the covenant that the LORD has made with you in accordance with all these words."

The context of this verse shows that the Mosaic covenant was conditional on the obedience of the children of Israel.

The other covenants, especially the Abrahamic covenant in which the land of Israel was allocated, are unconditional and there is no mention of them being replaced.

Even Romans 11, the wildolive passage, talks of branches being broken off and replaced, but read the whole passage to see how they are grafted back in. See also Hebrews concerning The Messiah and the Mosaic covenant.

Here is an interesting discussion on the outcome of replacement theology

Some adherents of Replacement Theology have now rebranded it as "Fulfilment Theology"

Fulfilment Theology

In recent years a new form of Replacement Theology has arrived on the Christian scene called Fulfilment Theology. Like Replacement Theology it ends up contending that, since the time of Jesus, the Jews no longer enjoy a god-given national destiny in the land of Canaan. This time around it is not the Church that replaces Israel and takes over all her promises in scripture but in fact Jesus. He fulfils in His life and redemptive work all the promises that God ever made to the Jews; even the promise that Canaan would be the everlasting possession of the Jewish people! Jesus is the Promised Land. This allows the proponents of this theory to distance themselves from the awful evil (as in the Apartheid State) and anti-Semitic consequences (as in the Christian pogroms of history) of Replacement Theology. However, they end up believing the same thing!

Today many Christians back this thesis and even some evangelicals are beginning to abandon their traditional pro-Israel biblical position in favor of Fulfilment Theology. Also the fact that some leading Christian academics and Ministers have thrown their weight behind it is giving added momentum to its dissemination and acceptance. Nevertheless it remains a flawed theological thesis.

(full Malcolm Hedding article here)

Liberation Theology

Liberation Theology appears to say that Christians should always champion the underdog.

Jesus upheld all the teachings of the Torah about caring for the widow, the fatherless and the foreigner, but he was also very clear in his teaching that his kingdom was not of this earth and that we should ....

"render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to God the things that are God's"

While Jesus' teaching meant we should care for the disadvantaged, he was not advocating political activism. Jesus taught that we should do something - not lobby some government to do it. Also, before championing the "underdog" we should realise that he is not necessarily in the right or worthy of being championed. 

Liberation Theology is effectively harnessed by the Palestinian activists by portraying Palestinians as underdogs, oppressed by the powerful Israelis, and calling upon Christians to fight their cause.  Sadly, many Christians buy into this without noticing that the "Palestinians"  are actually the aggressors who are seeking to destroy Israel, and that their suffering is the outcome of their leaders' obsession with the destruction of Israel at the expense of their own people.   Thus we see Christians siding with Islam in its campaign against the people of our Lord Jesus.   

Exodus 23 v1-3 says   "Do not spread false reports. Do not help a wicked man by being a malicious witness.   "Do not follow the crowd in doing wrong. When you give testimony in a lawsuit, do not pervert justice by siding with the crowd, and do not show favouritism to a poor man in his lawsuit."      (or    "Don't favour a person's lawsuit simply because he is poor."  David Stern's translation )


Clearly something is wrong when Christian ministers teach their flocks like Archimandrite Theodosios Hanna, Greek Orthodox Patriarchate,

“Palestine from the [Mediterranean] sea to the [Jordan] river …. They [the Jews] have no right to live or settle in it … We encourage our youth to participate in the resistance, to carry out martyrdom attacks [terrorism] and participate in removing the occupation…. Martyrdom [terrorist] operations are an excellent and a good way to resist the Zionists.

This support for the underdog comes in part from Communism, Marxism etc and appears to reflect a leftward move in much of the church. See A STATE BEYOND THE PALE by Robin Shepherd. (In Europe) for an explanation of the weird phenomenon of common purpose of leftists and Islamists.

Christian Palestinianism

Replacement Theology and Liberation Theology provide the basis for a large movement within the Church that has recently been tagged "Christian Palestinianism."

Christian Palestinianists wrongly criticize Christian Zionists as unquestioning supporters of a fascist, racist (Apartheid) Israeli Government, but it is the Palestinianists who are supporting the lies of a racist government that is committed to the destruction of Israel and the Jews and creation of Juderein (Jew free) / Apartheid state of Palestine.

Notable western leaders in this movement are Stephen Sizer, Gary Burge, Donald Wagner, Colin Chapman, Tony Campolo, Hank Hanegraaff, and Brian McLaren. Leaders in the Middle East include Elias Chacour and Naim Ateek (founder of Sabeel )

Paul Wilkinson wrote a useful useful in identifying the advocates of Christian Palestinianism and their arguments. It is "Prophets Who Prophesy Lies In My Name" - if you can find it.

Latter Rain Theology

From an article by Thomas Ice
A significant influence within Evangelicalism is the re-emergence of "latter rain" theology, which says that a global revival will take place before Christ will be allowed to return. It teaches that the Acts 2 outpouring of the Holy Spirit was the "early rain" but the "latter rain" outpouring of the Holy Spirit will occur at the end-times
The phrase "latter rain" is taken from Joel 2:23 & 28 .
Be glad, O people of Zion, rejoice in the LORD your God, for he has given you the autumn rains in righteousness. He sends you abundant showers, both autumn and spring rains, as before. The threshing floors will be filled with grain; the vats will overflow with new wine and oil. . . . . . . "And afterward, I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your old men will dream dreams, your young men will see visions.
James 5v7 is sometimes used to back this up;
"Be patient, then, brothers, until the Lord's coming. See how the farmer waits for the land to yield its valuable crop and how patient he is for the autumn and spring rains."

Always read verses in context!   In these verses, the rains are used as illustrations rather than as promises of any sequence of events.
In the context of revelation through the seasonal feasts of the LORD, the latter rains finish around Passover, while the early rains start after Sukkot, and it is Sukkot that speaks of end times and ingathering. Context does not support the idea of latter rains before the last ingathering. Surely the "pour out my Spirit" refers to the process that started at Pentecost.

Latter Rains teaching follows the assumption that the church must have been made perfect, or even that the church must have made itself ready, before Jesus returns for her to take her as His bride.   But does the New Testament give us grounds to expect the Church Age to end with Revival, before Jesus returns?
Revelation 19 v6-8, "Hallelujah! For our Lord God Almighty reigns. Let us rejoice and be glad and give him glory! For the wedding of the Lamb has come, and his bride has made herself ready. Fine linen, bright and clean, was given her to wear." (Fine linen stands for the righteous acts of the saints.)"

Ephesians 5v23, "Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless."

Revelation 19 v9, "Then the angel said to me, "Write: `Blessed are those who are invited to the wedding supper of the Lamb!' " And he added, "These are the true words of God."

But are these scriptures actually saying that the church will be made perfect ready for Jesus return, in order to be his bride, in a latter rains revival?

Scripture talks frequently about believers falling away and the need for staying awake, like the wise virgins in Matthew 25 v1-6, which Jesus used to speak of the time of His return,

"At that time the kingdom of heaven will be like ten virgins who took their lamps and went out to meet the bridegroom. Five of them were foolish and five were wise. The foolish ones took their lamps but did not take any oil with them. The wise, however, took oil in jars along with their lamps. The bridegroom was a long time in coming, and they all became drowsy and fell asleep.
"At midnight the cry rang out: `Here's the bridegroom! Come out to meet him!' "Then all the virgins woke up and trimmed their lamps. The foolish ones said to the wise, `Give us some of your oil; our lamps are going out.' " `No,' they replied, `there may not be enough for both us and you. Instead, go to those who sell oil and buy some for yourselves.'
"But while they were on their way to buy the oil, the bridegroom arrived. The virgins who were ready went in with him to the wedding banquet. And the door was shut. "Later the others also came. `Sir! Sir!' they said. `Open the door for us!' "But he replied, `I tell you the truth, I don't know you.' "Therefore keep watch, because you do not know the day or the hour.

Jesus' parable appears to suggest that the spotless church which Jesus comes for will not be the sum total of those who regard themselves as the church, including those who have fallen away. They will not be brought back in a great End-Times Revival but will be left out. Jesus will take those who stayed awake and ready. Jesus message to the churches, in Revelation, is all about being careful to remain faithful. He also speaks of taking away lamp-stands (churches). But the New Testament does not say even one word about an end-time "latter rain" revival for the church

Latter rain" theology incorporates the teaching that the Church is now spiritual Israel, and can claim the blessings given to Israel. (Replacement Theology)

Restoration Movement, Dominion Theology, Kingdom Now, Reconstructionism......

In "broad brush" terms, these theologies hold that the Church must make itself, and the world, beautiful ready for the return of Christ. The Dominion aspect holds that the Church must take over world government in order to restore the world to Garden of Eden perfection.

Will Christ not return until the Church has made itself ready? Or will He make it ready when He comes? Look again at Ephesians 5v23,

"Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless."

These theologies appear to divert Christians from their call to follow Christ in making disciples, into left wing political activism and obsession with the world's fads such as a social gospel, green activism, Palestinian oppression, Evolution and Global Warming. The temptation is to embrace the "social gospel" at the expense of the Gospel. See also Whither the Church and Unbelief

If political action is going to restore the world, surely we should be able to detect an upward trend by now?

2 Timothy 3 says, "But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God-- having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with them."

David Pawson summarised the trends in Revelation as things first getting much worse, but then getting much, much better. Read his outline in "Unlocking the Bible". The turning point is the return of Jesus - not a revival. A revival would be great, and could come anytime if we get serious enough to plead for God to forgive us and step in; but we can't sit back and wait for a timetabled revival.

Some of these teachings put more emphasis on campaigning against the evils in the world (which will achieve little ) than on pursuing personal righteousness through the redeeming and renewing power of the gospel (which can achieve much ) We have not yet been appointed to judge the world, but we were told to make disciples from the world - changing it one person at a time. (Logs in eyes comes to mind)

No sensible person would criticize Wilberforce for his efforts to stop the slave trade being carried on in "Christian" countries, but that was just one outworking of his faith. God wants us to balance the pursuit of social justice with preaching the gospel of personal salvation and Holy Spirit renewal. Mother Teresa cared selflessly for 40,000 in Calcutta, but she did not preach the Gospel to them - somehow we need to do both.

There was a tendency towards Dominion theology in earlier times, when Christians thought in missionary terms of winning heathen nations for Jesus (Christendom as we understood it) Mission work became based at home and radiating from home, instead of from Jerusalem; spreading white colonial Christianity rather than Jerusalem based (Hebrew rooted) faith.)

It should be noted that Islam is a territorial religion (because it is not merely a religion; but an empire). But Christianity is not supposed to be territorial; being concerned with winning individuals from every ethnic group. Failure to comprehend this distinction has resulted in some of Christianity's darker chapters.

Traces of a Dominion Theology type of outlook can be discerned in missionary hymns.

Jesus shall reign where'er the sun …... His kingdom stretch from shore to shore …...

When shall Thy name, from shore to shore, sound all the earth abroad, and distant nations know and love Their saviour and their God?

Great God! The nations of the earth are by creation Thine; And, in Thy works, by all beheld, Thy radiant glories shine.

But the recent "God of this city" by Chris Tomlin also concerns me. Our God is not the god of our city and our city is home to many who need to be saved from out of our city and brought into the Kingdom of God.

Revolutions in World Mission by J P Jochanan takes a fresh look at missionary outreach, unencumbered by the history of missionary societies. Going back to spreading the gospel by local workers (with support from better off churches) as opposed to sending out British (or American or whoever) "missionaries."

It causes some concern that many missionary societies are sending out "missionaries", presumably at some expense, who are not allowed to evangelise but merely live and work overseas and have to learn to blend in with the culture. When these same missionary societies also engage in libelling Israel it suggests they have completely lost the plot.


The above all tend to be anti-Israel - the following too pro-Israel


Dispensationalism is based is the Authorised Version translation of 2 Timothy 2:15, where the Apostle Paul calls upon Timothy to '... rightly divide the word of truth.'  J N Darby took this verse as justification for his way of 'dividing' Scripture into discrete dispensations. J N Darby found little support for Dispensationalism in Britain but had more success when he took the idea to the USA and teamed up with Scofield, who took Darby's teachings and incorporated them in his "Schofield Bible". This Bible, which was enormously influential in the New World, had a passage of scripture on each page, with Scofield's notes on it below.

Following Darby and Scofield, dispensationalists claim to find in Scripture evidence of seven distinct dispensations during which humanity has been tested in respect of specific revelation as to the will of God.

Outline of dispensationalism by Charles Ryrie.






Genesis 1:3-3:6

Keep Garden



Genesis 3:7-8:14

Do Good


Civil Government

Genesis 8:15-11:9

Fill earth

Forced scattering

Patriarchal Rule

Genesis 11:10-Exodus 18:27

Stay in Promised Land

Egyptian bondage

Mosaic Law Exodus 19:1 - John 14:30 Keep the Law Captivities
Grace Acts 2:1- Revelation 19:21 Believe in Christ Death


Revelation 20:1-15

Believe & Obey



These dispensations are seen by proponents as literally

'providing us with a chronological map to guide us toward the seventh and final dispensation which will be inaugurated by the imminent return of Jesus Christ and the climax to world history.

While the above appear to be a brief way of categorizing Bible periods (the bible in a seven line table) their theology is, of necessity, very crude.   The author has not come across any preaching from Christian Zionists which attempted to use the above "dispensations" to frame teaching.   Respected Christian Zionist teacher, David Pawson taught specifically against Dispensationalism in his teaching on Romans, given at the ICEJ Feast in Jerusalem.   

Dispensationalists believe that God has two separate but parallel means of working - one through the Church, the other through Israel.   Thus there is, and always will remain, a distinction, 'between Israel, the Gentiles and the Church.

Christian Zionist teaching, in my experience, springs from the "wild olive branch" viewpoint advocated by Paul, which emphasizes the gentile believer being grafted into God’s olive tree of Israel. (Israel here being the ongoing people of faith within God’s chosen people; not just those who are genetically Israel, but who may still be in rebellion against God)    Within this olive tree, for now, the Jew and Gentile retain a separate identity but are one in God’s love and purposes.

Dual Covenant Theology

Those who hold this view believe that there is no need to evangelise the Jews and therefore we can save ourselves considerable effort and possible rejection.   Christian Zionists love the Jews, and do not like to think of them being rejected by God, their Father.  We want to go and show love to the Jews, in Israel and wherever else we meet them, and I believe this is a vital part of God’s plan; but can we leave it at that?

God has graciously given us revelation of our roots in Israel, the Jewishness of our Bible and of our saviour.   Starting from this point, we can begin to have worthwhile discussions with Jewish friends. However, there is always the risk, or likelihood, that relations will cool off when we suggest that their Jewish faith is lacking something that we can provide; that we want to evangelise them.  But does that excuse us for saying nothing?  We depend on Jesus, the Jewish Messiah, for our salvation and hope of Heaven; can we trust that they do not?

We know that Abraham trusted God and it was counted to him as righteousness.   Abraham is among those commended in the letter to the Hebrew believers as follows in Chapter 11 v13,

"All these people were still living by faith when they died. They did not receive the things promised; they only saw them and welcomed them from a distance. And they admitted that they were aliens and strangers on earth. People who say such things show that they are looking for a country of their own. If they had been thinking of the country they had left, they would have had opportunity to return. Instead, they were longing for a better country--a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared a city for them."
We know that God entered into a special covenant relationship with Israel at Sinai when He gave them the Torah (means teaching / instruction – not LAW).   But how do these covenants, and the additional instructions from God – forming the rest of the Tanakh, work out in the life of the Jew?   God said, "If you will keep all…." Obey the Torah and all its 613 commandments, you will be right with me.   It is fairly obvious that nobody, Jew or Gentile, is going to achieve that standard, and that the Torah will cause the man of faith to throw himself on God’s mercy for forgiveness.   David was a man after God’s own heart, but he fell well short of Torah standards. David acknowledged his sin, repented and was forgiven and restored.   The Torah included a system of sacrifices for dealing with sins, but the sacrifice had to be offered in trust that God would accept it as a token of his repentance and forgive him.   As Habakuk said,
"the righteous will live by his faith" (trusting) (Habakuk 2 v4)
This is quoted  in Romans 1v17,
"For in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: "The righteous will live by faith."
Anyone who turned the Torah into a system of legalism rather than as a basis for faith/trusting was (and still is) saying to God that, "I can do this without you and your mercy." This is rebellion against God and is not a route to Heaven.  

Concerning the issue of acceptance of Yeshua as the (Jewish) Messiah, we need to consider all the scriptures in the Tanakh that point to the Messiah and ask what God required the Jew to do about them.   At the dawning of the New Covenant, we meet Simeon who said in Luke 2 v29,

"Sovereign Lord, as you have promised, you now dismiss your servant in peace. For my eyes have seen your salvation, which you have prepared in the sight of all people, a light for revelation to the Gentiles and for glory to your people Israel."
Clearly Simeon was a Torah observant Jew who saw in the coming of Yeshua, the fulfilment of God’s promises, both to Israel and to the nations.   For him, acceptance of Yeshua as the Messiah (God’s anointed) was the completion of his Tanakh faith; what he had been waiting for.   The letter to the Hebrews talks of the men of faith having died without having received what they were trusting for.   There appears to be no evidence that pre-Yeshua faith was independent of the promised Messiah, but that the Old Testament saints were looking forward to his coming.   Indeed, David Stern shows in his commentary (page 688) that if the Greek word, "Nomos" in Hebrews 8 verse 6, was translated the same as it is whenever it appears in a Jewish context, it would say,
"But now the work Yeshua has been given to do is far superior to theirs, just as the covenant he mediates is better. For this covenant has been given as Torah on the basis of better promises."
The (Jewish) writer to the Jewish Messianic believers was saying that Jesus / Yeshua’s covenant is part of the Torah, on which all the Old Testament saints trusted.   Therefore, after Yeshua had come, those who chose to reject him were rejecting the Torah.

Coming to the New Testament what do we find about Jewish evangelism?   Jesus and his disciples went around the Galilee, Judea and Samaria preaching that the Kingdom of God was at hand and that people should repent and turn to God to be saved.     He was preaching to the Jews; plus a few Gentiles.   When the Holy Spirit fell at Shavuot (Pentecost) Peter preached his first Holy Spirit sermon to Jews, and three thousand were saved. (accepted Yeshua as the Jewish Messiah)   At this point we start to have difficulty with nearly all of our Bible translations, since they have been translated seeing the text though Greek spectacles.   Typically, the translation refers to "the Jews" as being the others, as opposed to the Christian church.   But the "Church" at that time was formed virtually entirely of Jews; and it was not known as "the church" but as the (Jewish) followers of "the Way" or followers of Yeshua from Natzeret; or the Notzreem.   The "Church" was not just evangelizing the Gentiles at that stage.   The evangelising was of the Jews, by the Jews.   Remember that Jesus gave his great commission to his disciples in Matthew 28 v19

"Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age." And as recorded in Acts 1 v8, "But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth."
The people of Jerusalem,  Judea and Samaria still need to hear of and accept their Messiah  (perhaps more than ever today, since so many in these territories belong to Islam)

David Stern’s Jewish New Testament and its associated commentary are extremely helpful in putting the early "Messianic Community" into its proper (Jewish) context.   In his commentary on 1 John 2 v22-23 (on page 772) he discusses Dual Covenant Theology at some length.   He observes that ecumenical dialogue always attempts to sidestep the challenge of this verse

"No one who denies the Son has the Father; whoever acknowledges the Son has the Father also.")

and John 14 v6, "Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."

One appeal of Dual Covenant Theology is the comfort it gives to Christians who love the Jews and can’t face the thought that they are not going to Heaven unless they accept their Messiah.   (we already face the fact that most of the Gentiles we know are not going to Heaven)   Dual covenant theology lets us off the hook for our, corporate, failure to provoke the Jews to jealousy; indeed for all that Christianity has done to alienate Jews from their Messiah.   

We can not accuse God of unfairly excluding the Jews from Heaven, as many Jews are turning to Yeshua as their Messiah and their saviour.   

We can not escape the conclusion that the Jews who reject Yeshua have a big problem.     

If Jews have another way to Heaven, then Jesus need not have died and is not the way, the truth and the life.      Jesus pulled no punches about unbelieving Jews when he spoke of being the vine –  Paul adopted a similar picture in his olive tree analogy.  

Unbelieving branches were cut off but, praise God, they can be grafted back in (more easily than us wild olive branches) if they do not persist in their unbelief.


See wikipedia and gotquestions.org

Preterists interpret prophecies of the Bible as events that have already happened.


The Book of Daniel refers to events that happened in the 2nd century BC.

The prophecies of Revelation refer to event in the first century AD.

The Law was fulfilled in AD 70 and God's covenant with Israel was ended.

Ancient Israel finds its continuation or fulfillment in the Christian church at the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. (viewed as the Tribulation.)

Preterism teaches that every event normally associated with the end times, Christ's second coming, the tribulation, the resurrection of the dead, the final judgment-has already happened. (In the case of the final judgment, it still in the process of being fulfilled.)

Jesus' return to earth was a "spiritual" return, not a physical one.
The "new heavens and new earth" is a description of the world under the New Covenant. just as a Christian is made a "new creation" (2 Corinthians 5:17)

The justification for Preterism is Jesus' warning in Matthew 24:34 that "this generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled" and his similar warning to the Scribes and the Pharisees that their judgment would "come upon this generation" (Matthew 23:36),
(Isn't "this generation" also translatable as this people?)
Paul warned against those who, like Hymenaeus and Philetus, teach falsely "that the resurrection has already taken place, and they destroy the faith of some" (2 Timothy 2:17-18).
Preterism naturally to replacement theology


Marcion declared that Christianity was distinct from and in opposition to Judaism. Marcion rejected the entire Tanakh, and declaring that the God of the Tanakh was a lesser god, who had created the earth, but was the source of evil.

The premise of Marcionism is that many of the teachings of Christ ( Marcion treated Jesus as being distinct from Christ) are incompatible with the god of the Jewish religion.

Marcion believed that all conceptions of the Gospel other other than his understanding of Paul's teaching, and especially any association with the Old Testament religion, was opposed to the truth. Marcion separated the righteous and wrathful god of the Old Testament, who is at the same time identical with the creator of the world, from a second God of the Gospel, quite unknown before Christ, who is only love and mercy.

Gleaned from Wikepedia


The Ephraimites

Some say that the "Ten lost tribes" of Israel are the present day Christians or Christian Zionists; they say they are Ephraimites.


Hebrew Roots and One Torah

The inclusion of Hebrew Roots might sound strange, on a web site devoted to making known the Jewish roots of the Christian faith, as expounded by Paul / Sha'ul in his letter to the church in Rome.

However, any passage or chapter in the Bible needs to be balanced with the rest of scripture, and it appears that some folks who have realised that we Gentiles are grafted into God's olive tree of Israel have gone too far.

Paul was followed around by the Judaizers or the circumcision faction who sought to take Paul's Gentile converts and persuade them to actually become Jews, rather than just rejoicing that they are grafted in alongside the faithful Jews. Paul spoke against this party many times, pointing out that those who followed them would be forsaking trust in the work of Jesus / Yeshua the Messiah and turning to legalism. The Council of church fathers in Jerusalem considered this issue and wrote guidance about what the Gentile believers should seek to observe. (Acts 15) This advice did not include the following of every Torah command as they apply to the Jews.

It appears that "Hebrew Roots" and "One Torah" preach that Gentile Christians must observe the whole of the Torah. This sounds reasonable, since we uphold the truth of all scripture. However, this fails to honour the scripture passages explaining that Jews and Gentiles of faith, while being united in the body of Messiah, still retain separate identities and callings.

While wildolive affirms the importance of studying and understanding the Torah and even our freedom to celebrate the Moedim (appointed times) within it, wildolive does not advocate Gentiles seeking to become Jews. Wildolive supports Messianic Judaism, and maintains that Gentiles should be free to worship with Messianic Jews, but should not forget who they are and drift into legalistic Judaism.

Concerning the freedom Gentile believers have to celebrate the Modeim of the Torah, wildolive points out that we should also be free not to be enslaved to the "Christian feasts" that were actually instituted by man; often into pagan festivals and dates.

Ron Cantor is concerned that these movements are tarnishing Messianic Judaism and has published a thorough critique, here messiahsmandate.org/one-law-movements


The Millennium ?

None of the above has attempted to address all the different labels applied to groups holding different opinions about the Millenium.

David Pawson's explanation of "The Millennium Muddle" is available from ICEJ and is highly recommended, as are his "Sixteen Surprises in Romans 11" (DP.1206 D) and "Replacement Theology - Too Anti Israel" (DP.1207 D) and "Dispensationalism - Too Pro Israel" (DP.1208 D) which are available from Anchor Recordings.

David Pawson's book, "When Jesus Returns" discusses many of the above theologies in a systematic review of the different interpretations of scriptures concerning the end of this age.

Chuck Missler reveals the importance of the Millenium in his Audio Book - Ezekiel Expositional Commentary - Highly recommended.

Hearing this has prompted a new page devoted to the Millennium


Is even good theology good ?

Please handle these personal observations with care.

For some time now, I have been pondering why ministers don't get it about Israel and our roots in the Jewish scriptures and people. Perhaps theological colleges just don't teach it, or perhaps they hold to some of the theologies discussed above. Bethlehem Bible College (Baptist) is an international leader in Palestinian Replacement Theology and runs the "Christ at the Checkpoint" conference biannualy. It also exerted a strong influence on the British Baptist Union for many years.

A recent exchange with some preachers suggested that they disagreed with me and rejected my sources on the strength of theological principles and Church doctrine; not on scripture.

I am starting to feel uncomfortable about our young people going of to college to study Theology.

What is Theology anyway, and why study it ?

"Theology is the systematic study of the nature of the divine and, more broadly, of religious belief. It is taught as an academic discipline, typically in universities and seminaries. It occupies itself with the unique content of analyzing the supernatural, but also deals with religious epistemology, asks and seeks to answer the question of revelation." Wikipedia

Or, as David Pawson explained, Theology is thinking about God. And we all have our ideas about God. So is studying Theology the process of learning the ideas about God held by others in the past?

God wants us all to learn about him, not just the learned academics; that's why he gave us the Bible. Are Theological colleges actually echo chambers where ideas bounce around, getting corrupted ? Not a good idea considering the number of errors originated with professional thelolgians, and the skeletons in the church's cupboard, I would suggest learning how to study the scriptures properly is better than studying Theology.

Let us not forget that, in spite of Paul's pleading (letter to the Romans), the church rejected Jews very early, cut off our roots, and continues to rejects the possibility that Jews can teach us anything. "If he doesn't accept Jesus as the Messiah he has nothing to say."

Presumably it is the denizens of theological establishments who came up with God's name being "Yarway" or "Yhwh", rejecting previously accepted "Jehovah." Also notice the push to assert that Jesus spoke (only) Aramaic although the people of Galilee, at that time, spoke Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. This suggests efforts to distance us from Hebrew - to the extent of new translations that translate the Greek, "ibraisis" as "Aramaic" where "Hebrew" has to be the obvious translation.

Some of the things I hear in sermons suggest that when folks try to give Jewish details they learned them from Gentiles. And repeated references to Jesus in "Palestine" or "Israel/Palestine" suggest reliance the secular media. (Although references to Palestine could come from theological books dating back to period of the British Mandate for the Palestine portion of the defeated Ottoman Empire)

Updated 04/04/23

Click the banner below to go to the site map and choose another page

Is Mormonism a Christian doctrine or a heretical sect?

This question was not included previously, viewing Mormonism as a non-Christian faith. But there is more evidence that Mormons are presenting themselves as Christians and leading some astray.

Wildolive is grateful to Ed Decker - President - Saints Alive in Jesus - www.saintsalive.com

The Mormons have taught as a foundational doctrine that the creeds of all the Christian churches are abominations in the Mormons' god's sight?
They have taught in their sacred temples for over a century that all Christian pastors are corrupt hirelings of Satan, that you and your church are part of the great and abominable church and the whore of all the earth?
Mormonism teaches a restorationist theology, stating that the gates of hell did prevail against the Church and teaching that all power and authority were lost until God chose Joseph Smith to be his holy prophet to restore all things and lead this last dispensation of time?
LDS church teaches they have the only true church, the only true prophet, the only true priesthood, and the only true scripture? That all others are false? That there is NO personal salvation outside their church?
The god of Mormonism is an exalted man-god who once lived on another planet in some other galaxy. He earned his godhood through his good works and now lives on a planet near the great star Kolob with a harem of his many goddesses, making spirit babies to come to this earth to earn [their own] godhoods?
Apparently Mitt Romney said that Jesus is the Son of God and is his Savior -but the Mormon doctrine is that the Mormon Jesus is the brother of Lucifer, that he became 'savior' by a vote of a council of gods, that He is not the Word become flesh, not God come in the flesh, but was conceived through an act of sex by the Mormon god and one of his own daughters, Mary.
To accept their Christianity, you must concur that Jesus did not die as ransom for our sins on the Cross, but suffered for us in the garden, sweating great drops of blood, placing our personal salvation as conditional upon our works and our obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Mormon gospel, that Jesus' death on Calvary merely gives us all resurrection so that we may be judged for our works and obedience.
Why do the Mormons have over 50,000 missionaries out, primarily targeting Christians weak in the faith? If they are Christians, why do they target other Christians?