There are two classic models for describing the relationship between the ecclesia (church) and Israel. Supersessionism, a view advocated by many of the early church fathers, maintains that the ecclesia is the new spiritual Israel and replaces carnal Israel, the Jewish nation, as the people of God. For centuries, the negative justification for this displacement was that, by rejecting Yeshua, the Jewish people violated their covenant with God, which was conditioned on faithfulness. Texts in Scripture that refer to God’s promises to Israel and Israel’s eschatological role are, therefore, now to be interpreted allegorically in reference to the ecclesia. This ecclesiological perspective has been termed “punitive supersessionism.”

In recent years, a less negative justification for supersessionism has become widespread in New Testament studies: All the promises to the Jewish people are fulfilled exclusively in Israel’s representative, the Messiah Jesus, the quintessential Jew. As N. T. Wright states, “Paul explicitly and consciously transfers blessings from Israel according to the flesh to the Messiah, and thence to the church . . . Gal. 2–4 argues precisely that the worldwide believing church is the true family of Abraham, and that those who remain as ‘Israel according to the flesh’ are in fact the theological descendants of Hagar and Ishmael, with no title to the promises.” This outlook has been termed “economic supersessionism.”