Over at www.wscal.edu you can read a book review I did on Michael J. Vlach, Has the Church Replaced Israel? A Theological Evaluation. In this book, Vlach argues against the so called supersessionism. He defines it as “the view that the New Testament Church is the new and/or true Israel that has forever superseded the nation Israel as the People of God.” He argues that Reformed exegetes who hold to these beliefs introduce “change, alteration, or reinterpretation to the original meaning,” of the Old Testament text, and they “do not allow” Old Testament passages “to be the reference points for their own meaning.”
In reality, Reformed Christians see no replacement of Israel because there are not two particulars in the first place. The New Testament assumes corporate unity between Israel and the church. Christ is presented as the representative of the true Israel of the Old Testament, and the true Israel—the church—in the New Testament. The Bible presents a unified history controlled by a wise and sovereign God, who planned the early parts of his Word to correspond and point to the latter parts. Geerhardus Vos states in Biblical Theology that “revelation does not stand alone by itself,” rather it is “inseparably attached” to the activity of Redemption. Revelation is the interpretation of redemption. Because of this, it unfolds itself “in installments as redemption does” (5–6). Hermeneutics therefore should come from a canon that allows the latter parts of biblical history to function as the broader context. Christ and the Apostles of the New Testament interpret the Old Testament in light of redemption. Jesus Christ is the center of history, and the key that unlocks the early portions of the Old Testament promises. The canon does interpret the canon.