Michael Vlach in Has the Church Replaced Israel?, argues that supersessionists (those that hold that the church replaces Israel) need to prove their position in three areas to be considered a biblical doctrine.
1. “Supersessionists need to explain how God can multiple eternal and unconditional promises and covenants to the nation of Israel and then not fulfill these promises with this specific group.”
2. “It must be shown that the church is now considered the new or true Israel.”
3.”Supersessionists need to show that the church inherits national Israel’s promises and covenants in such a way that we should not expect a future fulfillment of these with national Israel.”
I think that Vlach is correct and supersessionists have failed to provide persuasive arguments especially as it relates to 1 and 3.
Michael J. Vlach, Has the Church Replaced Israel? (Nashville: B&H Academic, 2010), 2.