[My recent talk for Collegiate Reformed Fellowship]
Introduction
For some reason this topic continues to garner interest. This has been a perennial issue, which tells us that it’s an important issue. The causes for interest are complex and varying, but the ongoing interest actually demonstrates the truth of the Bible.
The Bible says that God chose the people of Israel out of all the nations on earth. And while many other (far greater) nations have come and gone (Hittites, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, etc.), there is still a lot of commotion about Israel and the Jews.
Now, I believe that the New Testament clearly teaches that what God began with Abraham’s descendants came to a dramatic culmination in Jesus of Nazareth, such that following His resurrection, God opened the invitation to become His people to everyone on earth, by faith in Jesus Christ. Many of the Jews did not believe in Christ, and just as Jesus foretold, their temple was destroyed, and they were scattered among the nations in 70 A.D. So the Jewish people have muddled on with the Old Testament and various collections of rabbinic traditions for the last 2,000 years.
And yet, as we will see, the New Testament also teaches that the Jewish people cannot shake their covenantal past. Unbelieving Jews have been cut out of the covenantal vine. They are branches shriveled up and dried out on the ground, but that history cannot be entirely erased.
This really is remarkable evidence of the covenantal history of the world. Why haven’t they disappeared and simply blended into the nations?
So what I want to do is walk through the biblical case for understanding the Church as the continuation of what God began in Israel. The Christian Church is the true Israel of God. Then we will cover what the Bible says about the current state of unbelieving Jews. And finally, we will talk about the modern nation-state of Israel and what Christians ought to make of it.
The Church: Spiritual Israel
The New Testament teaches that all who are in Christ are the Israel of God: “But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world. For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature. And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God” (Gal. 6:14-16).
So the Israel of God after the coming of Christ are all those who have been made new creations, and if they are new creations, it makes sense to call the Church the New Israel.
Paul says that this principle was already inherent in the Old Covenant – it was never merely about flesh and blood or circumcision but about a new heart: “Therefore if the uncircumcision [Gentiles] keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision? And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfill the law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law? For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God” (Rom. 2:26-29).
This not something new that Paul is making up. It was a principle that went back to Moses: “Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiffnecked” (Dt. 10:16, cf. Dt. 30:6). And Jeremiah said the same thing (Jer. 4:4). Likewise, later in Romans, Paul says, “For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel: Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, they which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed” (Rom. 9:6-8).
Paul’s argument is that the external covenant was always pointing to true faith, regeneration (circumcised hearts), and the grace and promises of God. Therefore, following this logic, those who have faith and have circumcised hearts (regeneration) by the grace of God are the true recipients of those promises of God to Old Testament Israel. And so in Galatians he says, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise” (Gal. 3:28-29).
So whether Jew or Gentile, the true Israel of God today are those who are in the Messiah Jesus and are Abraham’s seed and the heirs of that promise.
So What is the Status of Jews Today?
Romans 11 is the most comprehensive explanation. And it follows a bunch of Paul’s argument that has been emphasizing the point that true Jews are those who have trusted in Christ. And that naturally provokes the question: “Hath God cast away His people?” (Rom. 11:1). And Paul’s emphatic answer is, “God forbid” (Rom. 11:1). And Paul notes that he himself is an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, from the tribe of Benjamin. So we know he’s talking about this genealogical, ethnic connection.
Paul begins by pointing out that God has always preserved a remnant of His people even in the darkest times – as He did in northern Israel when Elijah felt like he was the only one left (Rom. 11:2-4). And Paul says there is a remnant even in his day (Rom. 11:5).
But why are so many not believing? Paul says because God has given them a spirit of slumber, and they have stumbled over what God has done in Christ (Rom. 11:7-10). But this is God’s plan in order that by their fall, many Gentiles might come to Christ and so provoke the Jews to jealousy (Rom. 11:11). And here Paul begins to hint at God’s plan: “Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness?” (Rom. 11:12).
Paul says that this is part of his enthusiasm for his ministry to the Gentiles that as they come into the Kingdom, he hopes to provoke the Jews to emulation (Rom. 11:13-14). “For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?” (Rom. 11:15).
Here, Paul shifts to a well-known image of the Old Covenant: a vine (Ps. 80, Is. 5, Ezek. 17). He says that unbelieving Jews have been cut out of the covenantal vine, and the Gentiles have been grafted into that same vine. This underlines the point we already made: there is only one Israel of God, and it is made up of Jews and Gentiles who believe in Jesus.
Here, Paul warns the Gentiles not to be haughty or arrogant because he points out that if God removed the Jews for unbelief, He can certainly remove unbelieving Gentiles (Rom. 11:18-22).
So unbelieving Jews are not currently the covenant people of God. They are branches that are withered and dead on the ground. But it also says that if they repent and turn to Christ, God will graft them back into the vine (Rom. 11:23). And Paul says that if wild branches (Gentiles) are able to be grafted into the vine, “how much more shall these, which be natural branches, be graft into their own olive tree?” (Rom. 11:24). Despite the fact that unbelieving Jews are cut out of the vine, there is a remaining natural affinity — how much more could they be grafted back into the vine?
And then Paul says that there is a great mystery here he wants his readers to understand: a partial blindness or hardening has happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles come in. And then it says, “And so all Israel shall be saved,” and Paul quotes two verses from Isaiah that promises that God will take away Jacob’s ungodliness and take away their sins. “As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers’ sakes. For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance” (Rom. 11:28-29).
Some Christians (called “preterists”) believe that this was something that happened in the first century already and there is nothing left of this prophecy to be fulfilled but Jews occasionally believing in ones or twos just like the rest of the nations. But many in the Reformed tradition (myself included) have understood this passage to be talking about a future mass conversion of Jews, specifically because it speaks of Israel being saved after the fullness of the Gentiles have come in (when most of the world is saved) and because it is described as “life from the dead” (Rom. 11:15). It is hard for me to reconcile the “fullness of the Gentiles” coming to Christ before 70 AD and describing the evangelistic results of those first 40 years of ministry as “life from the dead.” It appears to be looking forward to far more dramatic fulfillment.
So where does this leave ethnic Jews today? “As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers’ sakes” (Rom. 11:28).
The Challenge of Dispensationalism
In order to understand the sometimes confusing and challenging landscape of current debates, you need to know what “dispensationalism” is. Dispensationalism is a theological framework that is basically the alternative to historic covenant theology. Covenant theology (the view I have been assuming) teaches that God has worked through a series of covenants that have built upon one another organically, slowly filling out God’s one plan of salvation — there has always been one “vine,” one people, one project, one plan. Dispensationalism teaches that God has had different plans at different times in history that are not necessarily very connected.
So Dispensationalism historically teaches that God is still in covenant with the Jews even to this day, as a sort of parallel track with the church, and all of the promises of the Old Covenant are still in effect for the Jews today. This includes the promise of land and rebuilding the temple and ultimately re-establishing animal sacrifice and Jesus reigning from Jerusalem as King. The Church is simply another, parallel project that God has decided to do, primarily aimed at Gentiles.
This means that for Dispensationalists the modern state of Israel is part of this process, part of this parallel plan. Dispensationalists tend to support Israel on this basis, as a step towards fulfilling end times prophecies. Their support of Israel is deeply theological. They believe they must support the modern nation of Israel as this parallel mission of God.
As I said a moment ago, Reformed and historic Christianity has often held out hope that many of the Jews will turn and become Christians, particularly a mass conversion of them towards the end of human history, but most of Church history has argued that the OT prophesies have been fulfilled or are being fulfilled in the Church. This view is sometimes called “replacement theology” (or “supersessionism”) since the Church is said to “replace” the Jewish nation. This is sometimes called “antisemitic,” but most Christians have believed this throughout history. And besides, if Romans 11 teaches that the Jews will come into the church towards the end of history, they haven’t been fully replaced, they just missed the train that they will eventually get back on. You might called this view “soft-supersessionism.”
The Jews Today
Part of the challenge is that Paul says that the unbelieving Jews are “As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers’ sakes” (Rom. 11:28).
What does it mean to still have God’s “election/calling” on a people, but have that people be cut off from the people of God?
Many people assume that “covenant” always or only refers to the covenants of promise, the covenant of grace, the covenants of salvation, but the Bible also refers to other covenants that God recognizes. Marriage would be the most obvious one: marriage is a public, objective covenant before God, but it is not a “saving covenant.” It pictures God’s saving covenant, but it is a human covenant that God recognizes. Hindus, Buddhists, and atheists can truly enter the covenant of marriage, and God recognizes those marriage covenants.
Covenant theologians have argued from that and other texts that it is possible for humans to make these covenants before God not only as families but also nations. And if that is possible, is it not possible that there is still a “covenantal” status that belongs to the Jews but one that is cut off from the covenant of grace? And if Romans 11 holds out hope for a mass conversion of Jews, that would also put Jews in a unique category of people who still have at least that promise waiting to be fulfilled. Sort of a like a box car that got disconnected from the train, but which, under certain circumstances could get reconnected — it’s the kind of entity that could be grafted back into the vine.
What do we call that? It’s a challenging question. So far to even raise the question gets you called names from two different directions. The Dispies call us antisemitic, and the based bros call us Zionists. Pastor Wilson has cited Galatians 5 where Paul refers to the unbelieving Jews as the Covenant of Hagar, which makes sense, but not too many people seem to understand the point.
Conclusion: Modern Israel
So where does that leave the modern nation-state of Israel and the Jews?
For most Reformed Covenantal Christians, the Jews in Israel do not really have a Divine-right to the land, like the Jews and Dispensationalists think. This view of some kind of Divine-right is often called Zionism. There are Jewish Zionists and Christian Zionists, and they believe very different things, but the thing they have in common is a shared theological conviction that Jews have a right to the land of Israel — even though for some Jews their “Zionism” is more secular and political.
The history of the founding of Israel is messy, but a really simplistic summary would be that the British conquered that land during World War 1, and they decided it was in the British Empire’s best interests to settle the land with friendly people and decided to give it to Jews who wanted to move back. It was settled by a lot of liberal socialists, and up to the present day has a significant presence of progressive, liberal elements. This includes lots of LGBT support, and their fair share of deep state corruption, which could certainly mean all kinds of cross-contamination between our nations. And some Jews/Israelis openly hate Christianity and Christian Civilization.
However, there have always been some conservative Jews who appreciate Christianity (even if they disagree) and there have also been some Christians in the land of Israel since the time of Christ. When my wife and I visited Israel this last summer, we met some of them who believe that there is something of a conservative resurgence taking place, especially as a result of the failures of secularism and liberalism and the ongoing attacks of Islam. For example, lots of babies, families, and a growing rejection of the liberal multiculturalism project.
All this to say, good Reformed Christians could have varying views on the wisdom of establishing the state of Israel, but having been established by Britain, it would seem that the Israeli people have a basic common law right to defend their lives and land. At the same time, given that the Jews were ejected from that land for refusing to accept Jesus as their Messiah, it’s reasonable to wonder how well it will go for them while they continue in unbelief. John Owen was no dispensationalist, but he believed that the Jews would be given the land back once they trusted in Jesus the Messiah.
The modern nation state of Israel is not itself a special nation, although it is inhabited by lots of people who have that historic connection to God’s people. And to the extent that some of them value the Old Testament as a blue print for morality and politics, that creates some common grace commonality. To the extent that they are holding the forces of Islam back from all out war on the West or pushing back against the liberal progressive agenda, they are a semi-friendly, co-belligerent bulwark against those enemies.
Jews need Jesus, and Romans 11 appears to foretell a time when many will accept Him. In the meantime, we must not support Israel blindly, since their leaders may or may not be making good and godly decisions, but insofar as their policies overlap with Christian and American values, we can be thankful for that and work for a more civil and moral world together.
Some Questions & Answers:
1. Is “Judeo-Christian” part of the secular post-war consensus that needs to die?
Yes, a great deal of what has been attempted with the term “Judeo-Christian” is a softening of important distinctions, as part of the ongoing war on the Christian West. And that multicultural lie really must die. At the same time, it seems to me that some folks are over-correcting by forgetting the Jewish-Hebraic roots of Protestantism and embracing various forms of Jew-hate. During the Reformation, when the Protestants went back to the sources, that meant re-learning Hebrew from a bunch of friendly rabbis, and it was that close study of the Hebrew Scriptures that gave the Reformers their robust covenant theology, including Protestant resistance theory and the ground work for modern constitutional republics. And for all that trouble, our Protestant and Puritan forebears were often slandered as “Judeo-Christians” and similar monikers. And for my part, I consider that version of that title a badge of honor.
2. How much Abrahamic DNA or genetic connection is necessary for Jews today to be considered true ethnic Jews?
The fact of the matter is that being Jewish was never a purely ethnic/genetic thing. God traced His promises through the seed of the woman, the line of promise, but it was always about faith and allegiance. It was always about covenant, which often included marriage and biological children, but it also included Moses marrying an African woman, Ruth the Moabitess marrying Salmon, and many gentiles joining the covenant over the centuries. So modern Jews are not ethnic Jews by some amount of genetic connection to Abraham but by allegiance to that severed covenant with Abraham.
3. Why do you take the “futurist” reading of Romans 11 and not the “preterist” reading?
I take the futurist reading of Romans 11 because of two verses in particular: First, in Romans 11:15, Paul says that the receiving of the Jews back into the covenant will be like “life from the dead.” He seems to say that if the Jewish rejection of Jesus has been obviously difficult and awful, the Jewish acceptance of Jesus will be like the resurrection. While some Jews certainly did come to Christ before 70 A.D. it does not appear to me that it was a “resurrection” event that many notices. Second, in Romans 11:25, it says that a partial hardening or blindness has occurred “until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.” I simply do not know how to square that with a first century interpretation. Did the fullness of the Gentiles come in before 70 A.D.? It would certainly appear not since we are still in the process of bringing the fullness of the Gentiles in today. So “all of Israel” means all the nations discipled and a mass turning of Jewish people to the Jesus Christ.
Leave a Reply