The Place Of Israel In The Mind Of The Christian – My Current Thoughts
When one reads the Bible... it is there in which they may meet Jesus in the New Testament...and discover in the Old Testament the great history of the nation of Israel birthed in the working of God. Now in our own time, there is a modern nation of Israel that was brought forth in the ancient land in 1948. In the process of establishing a modern state of Israel, some see a persecuted people being given a land of their own wrought with potential good and conflict... from which various assessments can be made about resolving justice and peace between Israelis and Palestinians. Others see the fulfillment of God’s prophetic plans... plans that reflect a significant relationship to the “Old Covenant” God held with the nation...and the unfolding of the “end times.”
This has raised a significant issue of how those who receive Christ and their Savior and Lord should relate to the modern state of Israel.
BRIEFEST OF BACKGROUND
The issue of the Israel-Palestinian conflict, and underlying beliefs about the nature of support for the nation of Israel, have become a defining part of Christian culture for many in America. This took on particular significance, when in 1948, following World War II, the Jewish people were given a portion of the ancient land to once again form a nation of Israel. This would raise up the joys of seeing a people who faced the horrors of discrimination and genocide now enjoy a homeland of their own. This would also raise up the conflict with Palestinians who considered this to encroach on their own security and now live in encampments. This would lead to a short war in 1967 which brought Israel into greater conflict with it’s neighbor’s...and concluded with Israel gaining control of more land...and establishing a more restricted area for the Palestinians who also lay claim to the land.
All of this brought forth voices, primarily within the American Christian culture, who identified this new Israel as the fulfillment of Biblical prophecy and the ensuing conflict to be a call to stand with Israel. Many recalled the words of God from Genesis, “I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you.” (Genesis 12:1-3) While such views for the support of Israel grew more dominant among the Christian culture of America, they were a strange phenomena to much of the wider and historic Christian cultures...and began to be increasingly questioned by many Biblically committed minds in America as well.
In the more current years of which I am writing, 2018-2021, there has been a fresh emphasis by some Evangelical Christians to declare support for the modern state of Israel to be a defining element to guide Christians in political alignment and voting. [1] At the same time, other Christian leaders are raising their concerns once again that this reflects a misguided use of the Bible to galvanize political power at the cost of further conflict and injustice. Such concerns are also being seen in the younger generation who are only half as likely to accept the state of modern Israel as reflecting justice for Palestinians. [2]
THE CHALLENGES OF BOTH HISTORICAL AND THEOLOGICAL COMPLEXITY
It is important to realize, that broadly speaking, there are two dimensions involved with how one looks upon the current conflict surrounding Israel. The first dimension we might refer to as God’s general call to peace and justice. This involves understanding the conflict over rights to the land and seeking solutions which are just and can sustain peace.... something God supports as caring about the common good of others.
The second dimension we might refer to as the potential for God’s special relationship with Israel and involves understanding if God has revealed that there are prophecies and plans to be fulfilled that relate to the modern state of Israel... possibly based on the original covenant made with Abraham or Moses. Furthermore, if such plans exists, what is the modern state of Israel’s role in the fulfillment of the “end times” ...and what is one’s responsibility for support of the modern state?
Any consideration of the modern Israel-Palestine conflict, by those seeking to be faithful to God and His Word, is best served by recognizing that these two dimensions are distinct as well as intersecting. How one assesses the two dimensions does not simply place them on a “side.” There are many who bear a strong support for the nation of Israel based purely on what they believe reflects God’s general call to peace and justice. There are those who view Israel as bearing a special covenantal role with God who do not believe that such a role justifies support for all matters of land and actions taken by Israel.
It seems that there is one inevitable fact that anyone seeking to understand the conflict between Israel and Palestinians must face... which is complexity. The first dimension, that of discerning what is just and fair, involves a long and complicated history regarding the land and subsequent conflicts. Whenever I have considered exploring the history and nature of the conflict... I am introduced to the challenge of a history that requires one to consider both ancient and modern history over a land that is marred in disputes. The second dimension involves some complicated interpreting of the Bible, particularly the Old Testament prophetic elements as well as how the New Testament speaks of the “old” covenant with Israel in light of God establishing a “new” covenant through Christ.
The more I have come to recognize such complexity, the more I can understand the concerns about the tendency to simplify the whole conflict... whether by religious conservatives who just see a divine connection to Israel...or progressive liberals who just see the plight of Palestinian civilians. Our beliefs about the Israel-Palestinian conflict should be held with a proper perspective which understands that most of us have not invested enough time to truly understand the different historical and theological sides to settle into strongholds of certainty. As one does seek to explore the different “sides” ... they will find that those truly committed to Christ can arrive at different conclusions, and their faithfulness to Christ should be respected. As such, I believe this issue is better engaged as a point of dialogue rather than division within the local church.
Having only begun to explore the vast roads of historical and theological thought, I will only share my current perspective on the theological views regarding the role of modern-day Israel, some general principles I believe should guide our posture, and some resources that should serve further exploration.
THE ROLE OF ISRAEL: A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE ON THE GENERAL BIBLICAL VIEWS
Broadly speaking, there are two general directions that Biblical interpretation and subsequent theological views have taken. One emphasizes how Christ came to bring a new covenant, that in all or most respects, replaces the old covenant. This view sees great significance in the nature by which Jesus became the “new temple” ...and formed a new people, the “Church” as something akin to a new Israel. The old gives way to the new. The once divided distinction of Jew and Gentile is united through Christ. The expectations of Israel are fulfilled in this new people.
The other view may recognize significant changes in God providing a new covenant... in how God brings salvation... but also sees significance in a continued special covenant between God and Israel... along with a special role that the nation and land of Israel play in the fulfillment of God’s plans for the return of Christ. The emphasis is often correlated with the Biblical ideas of “Zion.” Zion is a word that was used to specifically speak of the hill that the city of Jerusalem sits upon, sometimes more broadly to the whole land of Israel...and as pointing to a more ultimate heavenly city.[3] The term “Zionism” can refer to any broad belief in the Jewish people's right to return to their homeland. “Christian Zionism” can broadly refer to Christians who share that belief for any reason. However, the deeper and driving force of such a position lies in the potential religious beliefs that the covenant between God and Abraham, which formed the people of Israel, remains and will be reflected in the great battles described by prophetic parts of the Bible in the “end times.”
So the two views, in their most simplistic forms, are sometimes referred to as a “Replacement” or "Secessionism" view (i.e. those in Christ replace or succeed the original role of Israel) and a Christian “Zionist” or “Restorationist” view (i.e. God has restored the nations of Israel to it’s rightful land to fulfill His plans). To speak of these as two opposite views using such titles is simply to provide a very basic understanding of some central theological differences. The truth is that many Biblical scholars and teachers identify with positions that are more integrated or nuanced.
In general, the focus on the restoration of Israel as a matter of spiritual significance has some foundations of thought in the post-Reformation 18th and 19th centuries, but emerged in the more recent history following World War II. It grew primarily as an American movement spurred more widely by what is known as a “dispensationalist” view and end times narrative. This view interprets a few of the prophetic sections of the Bible as speaking figuratively to tell us about events yet to come...including what is commonly referred to as the “rapture” (the church being taken up into heaven), a period of tribulation, and a thousand-year period in which Christ will return to rule before a final restoration comes. These final stages are believed to include the nation of Israel in both a large number receiving salvation...and a final battle. These beliefs were made widely popular in Hal Lindsey’s The Late Great Planet Earth (1970) and the Left Behind series (1995–2007) ...as well as leading figures of the “Christian Right” who have combined political conservatism with “Christian Zionism,” most famously Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson in the 1980s and 1990s, and more recently Robert Jeffress and John Hagee.
While such beliefs have become increasingly common across American church culture, I believe that it is important to recognize that such beliefs have not been a part of the historic church The early church writers tended to see Christ having fulfilled the role of Israel. [4]
Many of the greatest theological leaders of the Church have not supported the Christian Zionist interpretation or movement. This has been particularly true of the Evangelical theological leaders from abroad, as well those of the Reformed tradition who tend not to accept the newer eschatological (end times) interpretations of the Scriptures. [5]
“Political Zionism and Christian Zionism are biblically anathema to the Christian faith. True Israel today is neither Jews nor Israelis, but believers in the Messiah, even if they are gentiles.”— John Stott (One of the most widely respected theological leaders of the worldwide evangelical movement throughout the 1970s to 1990s) [6]
“I do not see the 20th and 21st century Middle Eastern political events as really in any direct way events as a fulfillment of Daniel, Ezekiel, or Acts 3 or any such thing. I see them as part of the ongoing extraordinary geo-political events.” – N.T. Wright [7]
THE ROLE OF ISRAEL: SOME SCRIPTURAL CONSIDERATION:
It is not hard to see a special role in Israel. When anyone reads the Bible they are drawn to the significance of a people called by God... to a Promised Land... often outnumbered by enemies. When anyone receives Christ...they also recognize that the people of Israel are the source of their savior... a people with whom one shares a common story...akin to an extended family.
As one reads through the entire storyline of the Bible, they may be left with both a strong sense of God’s deep and faithful love for the nation of Israel ...and then in Christ...a confrontation with the religious leaders of Israel, that expressed what we might call “tough love”... and then speaks of Christ fulfilling the promises and purposes of Israel. Are there purposes and prophecies not yet fulfilled? Does the old covenant God made with Abraham still apply to the modern state of Israel? There are many more Scriptures that relate to these questions than can be addressed here...and all could be serve by more extensive study. The following are simply a few thoughts which have helped me in challenging my own previous assumptions about their meaning and implications.
GENESIS12:1-3
When God calls out Abraham to become the father of a new nation... which would later be called Israel... God says, “I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you.” (Genesis 12:1-3) This can certainly seem simple enough.
However, there are two significant issues that I believe so not establish a simple position.
First, all such positions held some level of conditional nature. When Israel failed to be faithful, God spoke against Israel through the prophets, arguably in what were akin to curses against them. God allowed other nations to come ridicule them and conquer them. So even if such a promise were to be applied to the modern state of Israel, it would not imply that every action by Israelis acceptable. There was never a “free pass” that implied they could not be criticized or escape appropriate consequences.
Secondly, the far wider question at hand is whether the modern state of Israel is the bearer of such a promise. As I will note in addressing further passages and summary, I believe that God fulfilled His promise to bless the whole world through Israel...by bringing forth a Messiah through them... who became the Savior of the whole world. In Christ, that blessing has come and a new people... a people of faith that includes Jews and Gentiles... becomes the more ultimate fulfillment of the purposes and promises given to Abraham.
As such, we are called to do good to all people and to take the gospel to both Jews and gentiles (Rom. 1:16; Gal. 6:10). There may be good political reasons to support many of the modern nation-state’s policies, but Genesis 12:3 does not provide a theological reason to do so. [8]
JEREMIAH 32
These words of prophetic restoration, like others, speak of that which simply describes that return of the exiles and restoring of the city that was soon fulfilled... but also of qualities to such restoration than sound more ideal or and complete than what was fulfilled (i.e. there was not complete autonomy, nor a king, nor did it last forever.) As such, some have assumed that there are two fulfillments ...with one at the end of time. Others may see this as simply an ideal description that was fully realize in the historic return of the exiles. Still many see this as having already been fulfilled in a more ultimate way through Christ. While it is possible that Christ will return and be the king of exiles in Jerusalem... it is difficult to how such could be fulfilled in relationship to the literal exiles, by a literal kingly role, and last literally forever... unless one applies such in broadly spiritual terms... in which case... it would seem more fitting to consider how Christ already fulfilled such... having welcomed all to return to God’s kingdom...which he reveals as lasting forever.
EZEKIEL 37-39
In the prophetic writings of Ezekiel, particularly later chapters 37-39, we read of how God spoke of exiles returning and restoration... which may appear to have never been experienced yet... and as such...could suggest a future fulfillment.
As Ian Paul describes in his review of Colin Chapmans booklet “Prophecy Fulfilled Today?” seven major themes that are associated with the restoration from exile, particular in Ezekiel 34 to 37, appears to be understood by the New Testament writers as having been fulfilled uniquely in Christ. These themes include God acting through a shepherd-king, the hallowing of the name of God, enjoying prosperity in the land, cleansing from sin, the gift of a new heart leading to obedience, a covenant of peace, and God’s temple presence among his people. The most pertinent of these relates to the land.
“The promise to bring exiles back to the land looks at first sight as if it has no echoes in the NT. But scholars like N T Wright have argued that Jesus’ use of OT texts concerning the return from the Babylonian exile—taken mostly from Isaiah—suggests that Jesus saw his people as still in a state of exile, and announced that he was going to lead them out of exile. The clearest examples come in his address in the synagogue in Nazareth (‘The Spirit of the Lord is on me…’ Luke 4.18–19, quoting Isa 61.1–2), and his response to the disciples of John the Baptist, in which he describes his healing miracles in the poetic language used by Isaiah to describes the exiles returning to the land (‘The blind receive sight, the lame walk…’ Luke 7.22, quoting Isa 35.5–6).10 It may seem strange to include the words of Jesus about the Son of Man sending his angels to ‘gather his elect’ (Mark 13.27) in this context. But since the word angelos can be translated as either ‘angel’ or ‘messenger,’ it is perfectly possible that Jesus could be speaking about the proclamation of the gospel as a way of gathering the elect into the kingdom of God…
NT writers use OT terminology about the land (in particular the word ‘inheritance,’ kleronomia) to speak about what all believers possess in Christ. Thus Paul in his farewell address to the Ephesian elders, echoing Joshua’s farewell address (Josh 23.1–16), speaks about ‘the word of his [God’s] grace, which…can give you an inheritance among all those who are sanctified’ (Acts 20.32). Peter speaks of how all believers experience ‘new birth into a living hope…and into an inheritance that can never perish, spoil or fade—kept in heaven for you…’ (1 Pet 1.3–4). The Letter to the Hebrews was addressed primarily to Jewish followers of Jesus, who might have been expected to hold onto the hope that promises and prophecies about the land would one day be fulfilled in a very literal way. But the writer gives no hint of any expectation of a literal fulfilment, and instead develops the theme of the land in a completely new direction. He speaks of the land as ‘that rest,’ saying that ‘We who have believed enter that rest’ (Heb 4.3). And traditional Jewish hopes about Jerusalem for the writer are no longer centred on the actual city of Jerusalem: ‘But you have come to Mount Zion, to the heavenly Jerusalem, the city of the living God…to the church of the first born…to God…to Jesus the mediator of a new covenant…’ (Heb 12.22–24). [9]
Chapman also notes that there are aspects which would suggest difficulty in applying this to some modern events, expressing that "the mind boggles at the thought of a descendant of David being installed as king in Jerusalem, the temple being rebuilt and the whole sacrificial system re-instituted." [10]
Matthew 21:43
Jesus said: "Therefore I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit.”
It is possible that Jesus is only speaking of the religious leaders, but I tend to think he is speaking to the special position of Israel which they represent...as he speaks of what was given will be taken...and God gave the nation not these leaders a privilege... and notably he now speaks of it being given to another “people.” [11]
Luke 21:21-24
Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those in the city get out, and let those in the country not enter the city. 22 For this is the time of punishment in fulfillment of all that has been written. 23 How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers! There will be great distress in the land and wrath against this people. 24 They will fall by the sword and will be taken as prisoners to all the nations. Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.
Jesus peaks of the destruction of Jerusalem by Gentiles in which people should flee. I believe it is reasonable to share the common view that this was fulfilled in the coming destruction in AD 70. Jesus’ words here directly relate to the judgment of Israel involving Jerusalem and its temple because of Israel’s rejection of Jesus the Messiah. Earlier with Luke 19:41-44 Jesus predicted the coming destruction of Jerusalem because Israel missed the “time of your visitation.”
2 Corinthians 1:20
For no matter how many promises God has made, they are "Yes" in Christ. And so through him the "Amen" is spoken by us to the glory of God.
As Nick Nowalk notes, “I take this to mean that every promise God has ever made to His people–and remember, the only promises the Corinthians would know were those written down in the Old Testament!–find their fulfillment in Jesus and those who belong to him. Promises about a new temple, the return to the land, the final forgiveness of sins, seeing the face of God and dwelling in His presence forever, and a new creation (all promises made to ethnic Jews in the OT) are all fulfilled in Jesus. We belong to Jesus, and thus those promises are ours. There is no thought here of a “spiritual” attainment by the Church of promises made originally to Israel, while a “literal” fulfillment will yet come to pass (ala classic dispensationalism). It is not a question of reading the Scriptures “literally” or “spiritually” for Paul. It is a matter of reading them with a Christ-centered hermeneutic, self-consciously understanding them as all pointing to Jesus.” [12]
ROMANS
The Biblical Book of Romans is a more formal presentation of belief by the Apostle Paul as he writes to the church at Rome but to pass on as well. In chapters 9-11, as well as other portions, Paul speaks of the relationship between Jews and Gentiles... and seems to speak of both a new covenant fulfilling the old... but also affirms a special role that Israel has. It is difficult to establish a clear intent as to the nature of Israel’s future based merely on this. However, it does seem to me that Pauls emphasis is not on the climatic role that Israel will have but rather on God’s ongoing faithfulness. It would suggest that Paul may be intending to establish a place for both Jews and Gentiles to see that they are part of something new, to which the Jewish lives still have a special place...by way of the history of faith... to which Gentiles should be grateful to have now been included in. Some might see this as implying more of an extension rather than simply a replacement of Israel.
However, there are some points in which it seems to suggest that the significance of their ethnic heritage has been transcended. We read in chapter 2...
“A man is not a Jew if he is only one outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. No, a man is a Jew if he is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a man's praise is not from men, but from God.” - Romans 2:28-29 (NIV)
ROMANS 11:26 “ALL ISRAEL WILL BE SAVED.”
Among the many challenges of understanding how Paul is speaking about Israel in the Biblical Book of Romans, chapter 11, the phrase “All Israel will be saved.” (Romans 11:26) has led to different views. Those who presume that the term Israel here is consistently referring to the political nation of Israel, believe that this refers to a future moment. Others believe that Paul is coming back to his use of the new “Israel of God” (Gal. 6:16) as now represented by those in Christ. I tend to see this latter view as making more sense. First of all, such complete salvation would not fit any precedent in God’s history or ways. He speaks of saving “all” who are in Christ, but nowhere speaks of saving a whole nation. Secondly, on what basis would God save a political nation apart from personal faith in Christ? We know that the old covenant of righteousness could not save...and that a personal faith in Christ in almost inconceivable to truly arise freely in every life. Thirdly, the current state of the new modern Israel has become both more secular and limited in response to Christ (i.e There are now only an estimated 2% who identify as Christians.) [13]
HEBREWS 12:22-24
In the Book of Hebrews, it is believed that the author is writing to Jewish believers the show that the new covenant of Christ is greater than the old...and to find confidence amidst rejection. In Hebrews 12:22-24, the author says:
“But you have come to Mount Zion, to the heavenly Jerusalem, the city of the living God. You have come to thousands upon thousands of angels in joyful assembly, 23 to the church of the firstborn, whose names are written in heaven. You have come to God, the judge of all men, to the spirits of righteous men made perfect, 24 to Jesus the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel.” (NIV)
While even some Zionist may accept this idea of Christ being the fulfillment of what Israel had not fulfilled, it strikes me as going further in speaking of Mount Zion and Jerusalem as now being transcended. While this does not establish that God could not also have something special in mind for earthly Jerusalem, it does seem to imply that these lives have now discovered something more ultimate... what the former had only pointed to...and this at least should give reason to pause in believing that the old city of Zion / Jerusalem is part of the future of God’s plans.
THE NATURE OF THE USE OF “FOREVER”
As some note, the promise of the land to Israel, is described as an “everlasting possession” (Gen. 17:8)... something that lasts “forever.” However, as Chapman also notes, there are substantial examples in which that which God expressed as lasting “forever” did not last forever in the literal form but rather in some more ultimate or enduring fulfillment. If the Davidic kingship (2 Samuel 7:16), the Aaronic priesthood (1 Chronicles 23:13) and the Solomonic temple (1 Kings 9:3) all ceased, though promised "forever", why should not the promise of the land to Abraham be transmuted to some spiritual equivalent, as suggested by Hebrews 11:9-16?
THE NATURE OF THE CONDITIONAL COVENANT
The belief that the people have been given back a land by God faces a problem when one considers that the land was never inherently theirs....but rather conditional only on them embracing their faithfulness to God. The Old Testament clearly states many times from Deuteronomy through Nehemiah that if they are disobedient, they will be expelled from the land. It seems quite a contradiction to presume support for a right to the land when no such commitment to God, let alone their Messiah (“Yeshua” / Jesus.) It would seem fitting to consider on what basis this reflects the actual covenant of God with Israel.
THE NATURE OF “DIVINE RIGHT”
The view of a divine right to the land seems to reflect something that fits American perspective more than a global one. Those who align most with applying a Biblical destiny for this restoration are also those who often view America as having a divine manifest destiny. As Chapman notes, this view does not represent the views of the majority of Christians in the Middle East. It is, in fact, a Euro-American importation. [14]
CONCLUSION: THE CURRENT PERSPECTIVE THAT GUIDES ME
The role of Israel and its promised land involves many choices of interpretation and fulfillment of Old Testament promises, the teachings of Jesus, and other New Testament writings. Having invested only a moderate level of time to re-engage these issues, I continue to believe that there are at least reasonable merits to the different views which have been made. However, at this juncture, I am not convinced that God has intended to convey future events based upon the re-establishment of Israel as a nation or it’s land. I take from Jesus and Paul that there has been a radical fulfillment by Jesus...and with it...a truly new covenant and new nature of God’s people...one which transcends ethnicity and creates the unity of humanity as “one new man.” [15]
DOES THIS IMPLY A CHANGE TO MY FAITH?
None whatsoever. In my early formative years of faith, I was taught beliefs that reflected “dispensational” views and exciting ideas about the end times. However, those have long become secondary and less compelling perspectives beliefs. I find the sense in which Christ has fulfilled the purposes of God more Biblically compelling than the few passages which speak in figurative language... for which the certainty of interpreting future application seems forced. What is perhaps most notable for my view, is that Jesus and Paul do not present any knowledge of a clear purpose or plan for Israel... which strikes me as of being confident that it doesn’t exist or is not intended as a focus.
I found a home in the Vineyard movement of churches in which there was a very intentional shift to focus on the inauguration of God’s Kingdom...participating in what is already at hand... more than when and how the final consummation of the Kingdom will come. I have often appreciated the simple statement Rick Warren has made: “We’re not on the planning committee. We’re on the welcoming committee.”
While this does not nullify any potential form of special relationship or role held between God and the Jewish people...or a re-established nation of Israel...I do not see that these are clearly revealed as part of a plan... particularly one which Jesus and Paul would have expected followers to have understood. I believe that much of what was said to Israel long ago can be understood as having been fulfilled in various forms or fulfilled in Christ.
For those who have been shaped by longstanding beliefs in the prophetic significance of modern-day Israel as I have, I understand that the ideas presented here may seem threatening. My personal encouragement is to step back and allow space to consider the wider views which emphasize how the purposes of God have been profoundly fulfilled by Christ... and extended to us. The truth is that the vast majority of those most deeply committed to Christ have never held beliefs related to any role that a modern Israel might play.
DOES THIS REJECT THE COMPELLING ROLE OF PROPHECY IN THE OLD TESTAMENT?
Not at all. To believe that the modern nation of Israel may not be a part of fulfilling God’s future plans is not to downplay the significance of prophecy. The prophecies spoke of the Babylonian captivity lasting 70 years, and it did. Then Ezra and Nehemiah and Zerubbabel led the Jews back. Then after 490 years, when Jesus was born, it is arguably the fulfillment of what had been prophesied in Daniel 9 and other Scriptures. However, in the coming of Jesus as the Christ... the Messiah... there is a fulfillment of the blessing that came through Israel. (Genesis 12:3).
The clear shift we find is to that of a focus on those who receive and honor his Son. For as we read in the Biblical Book of Hebrews,
“In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe. The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven.” (Hebrews 1:1-3)
DOES THIS DISHONOR THE JEWISH PEOPLE...AND ENCOURAGE ANTI-SEMITISM?
I believe that the original nation of Israel rejected Christ...the cornerstone of the new temple... and Christ as the new temple and the new Israel is not simply a replacement... but the faithfulness of God to bless the world. The great truth is this: It is God who fulfills the need for relationship and restoration ...not “Christians.” The history of Israel was never simply the history of the Jewish people...but a history that represents us all. They were no different based on their ethnicity. They have represented our human nature. They have represented our self-righteous religious nature. It should be clear that “Christians” hold no superiority. It is Christ who is superior above all.
In this way, it is absolutely vital to grasp that such a view bears no place for Anti-Semitism. Every follower of Jesus is now joined into the Jewish story and has been saved by an ethnically Jewish savior. We must consider the nature of our support for the Jewish people as equals in moral and spiritual nature.
In addition, our hearts should understand the Jewish people’s vast history of struggle and resilience worthy that should be honored. Many who hold strongly Zionist beliefs suggest that those who do not are prone to fuel Anti-Semitism. The assumption is that those who believe that God had “moved on” from a covenant with Israel will not stand with her as a nation...and will give way to the world’s common hostility. However, what one believes about whether the modern state of Israel has a special place and plan with God, should not change one’s fundamental compassion and care for the nation and its people.
Regardless of theological interpretations, it is incumbent for each of us to stand personally and socially against anti-Semitic sentiments of any kind. Even those who share deep Zionist beliefs and strong political support, must not assume that they have a personal respect for the Jewish people. The truth is that many Israelis view Christian support as more selfish than sacrificial. They understand that such Christian support often flows from a desire to expedite beliefs about the “end times,” which may include great suffering and judgment upon Israel.
Nathan Sharansky provides a more helpful way to check our judgments using what he refers to as the “3D Test of Anti-Semitism.” The 3D’s of the new anti-Semitism are: demonization, double standards and delegitimization. As another notes, “It is possible to find examples of all three D’s in the writings of the anti-Zionist movements. The accusations of racism and apartheid, along with Nazi comparisons, serve to both demonize and delegitimize the state of Israel. Perhaps the most obvious element is the shocking double standards applied to Israel. To speak of supposed Israeli “apartheid” whilst simultaneously ignoring the well documented gender, sexual and religious apartheid existing throughout the Middle East is to apply a double standard. To condemn Israel as one of the chief human rights violators in the world without condemning the rampant human rights violations by surrounding nations is a double standard. To claim that it is due to Israeli actions that we have no peace, without highlighting the many rejected peace offers made by Israel, without discussing the Khartoum Summit’s infamous “three No’s:" No peace with Israel; no negotiations with Israel; no recognition of Israel, and without addressing the charters of both the Palestinian Authority and Hamas that call for Israel’s destruction, is a double standard.” [16]
DOES THIS MEAN CHRISTIAN BELIEFS CAN BE SEPARATED FROM THEIR JEWISH ROOTS?
Not at all. Gentile followers of Christ should be those who grasp that Jewish lives are part of a shared sacred history... from which we can and should learn if we hope to understand God’s revelation in the historic Scriptures including the teaching of Jesus. If someone believes that Christ has fulfilled the various types of religious forms woven into the life of Israel through God... Gentile followers in the Jewish rooted Messiah should value what the various Jewish forms were. We should relate as those with a shared history...and source of understanding...even if there lies a significant distinction on the fulfillment of that history.
IN CONCLUSION...
I look upon the provision of a modern state of Israel as a beautiful provision that serves the God-given good of providing security and dignity. This has a special value for a people who suffered such insecurity and disgrace... and a people with whom I share a deep sense of meaning in both their history and land. This land, and Jerusalem in particular, has been a place long unsettled... by conflict and conquering... and still cries out for peace.
I believe that the call to pray for the peace of Jerusalem is not contingent of my understanding of any special plans God may have in the future...but on a peace that reflects the greater “shalom”... the deeper Hebrew vision of peace...which always exists in God’s will...and will ultimately come in the return of Christ. So my prayer for Israel is not that it will fulfill it’s role in ushering in a climatic war to bring the end of times... but that the only true source of Shalom... of peace... which is Christ... will be received.
Notes:
In the May 2018 ceremony marking the opening of the US embassy in Jerusalem, the latter two were included and prayed and thanked God for making the state of Israel possible and Trump for having the courage to acknowledge Jerusalem as the capital of the Jewish people. “Father, we are…grateful as we think about [the founding of the state of Israel in 1948], when you fulfilled the prophecies of the prophets from thousands of years ago and regathered your people in this promised land,” intoned Jeffress, while Hagee identified Jerusalem as the city “where Messiah will come and establish a kingdom that will never end.” - Mimi Kirk "Countering Christian Zionism in the Age of Trump," Middle East Report Online, August 08, 2019. - here
A 2017 poll by Lifeway Research, for example, demonstrated the generational divide. Only nine percent of older respondents considered the “rebirth” of Israel in 1948 as an injustice to Palestinians, while 62 percent disagreed and 28 percent said they weren’t sure. Among younger evangelicals, nineteen percent said that Israel’s creation was an injustice to Palestinians, 34 percent disagreed, and almost half weren’t sure. - Mimi Kirk "Countering Christian Zionism in the Age of Trump," Middle East Report Online, August 08, 2019. - here
Another extensive perspective on the politicizing and generation change is: Meet the Group Trying to Change Evangelical Minds About Israel - By ADAM WREN March 10, 2019 - hereExamples of that which alludes to a more ultimate city.
Psalm 125:1
Those who trust in the LORD are like Mount Zion, which cannot be shaken but endures forever.
Revelation 14:1 Then I looked, and there before me was the Lamb, standing on Mount Zion, and with him 144,000 who had his name and his Father's name written on their foreheads.Two examples from the early church leaders...
Justin Martyr – “Jesus Christ ... is the new law, and the new covenant, and the expectation of those who out of every people wait for the good things of God. For the true spiritual Israel, and the descendants of Judah, Jacob, Isaac, and Abraham (who in uncircumcision was approved of and blessed by God on account of his faith, and called the father of many nations), are we who have been led to God through this crucified Christ.” - Circa AD 160. English translation from the Dialogue with Trypho xi, in The Ante-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, eds. Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, vol. 1 (Eerdmans, repr. 1987), p. 200.
John Chrysostom (on Galatians 6:15-16)
“Observe the power of the Cross, to what a pitch it hath raised him! not only hath it put to death for him all mundane affairs, but hath set him far above the Old Dispensation. ... Tell me not then, he says, of circumcision, which now availeth nothing; (for how shall it appear, when all things have undergone such a change?) but seek the new things of grace. For they who pursue these things shall enjoy peace and amity, and may properly be called by the name of "Israel." While they who hold contrary sentiments, although they be descended from him and bear his appellation, have yet fallen away from all these things, both the relationship and the name itself. But it is in their power to be true Israelites, who keep this rule, who desist from the old ways, and follow after grace.” - Circa AD 395. English translation from The Commentary and Homilies of St. John Chrysostom, Archbishop of Constantinople, on the Epistles of St. Paul the Apostle to the Galatians and Ephesians, translated by the Rev. Gross Alexander, in volume 13 of A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, ed. Philip Schaff.Other notable thoughtful Biblical scholars and teachers who are challenging the Zionist assumptions:
Colin Chapman (US leader who served in the Middle East) - Whose Promised Land? (A Review of Colin Chapman Whose Promised Land? by Theo Todman - here)
Don Wagner (US author)- Anxious for Armageddon
Gary Burge (US evangelical scholar) - Whose Land? Whose Promise? – combines the experiences of Christian Palestinians under Israeli occupation.
Stephen Sizer (UK)- Christian Zionism and Zion's Christian Soldiers?
An open letter to President Bush by a long list of leaders from the evangelical community - theologians, pastors and NGO directors – expressing support for a wo state solution.
Ilan Pappe - The Idea of Israel: A History of Power and Knowledge (A Summary by Colin Chapman can be found here)
Colin Chapman - Prophecy Fulfilled Today? Does Ezekiel Have Anything to Say About the Modern State of Israel? (Summarized here by Ian Paul.)John Stott was an English Anglican presbyter and theologian who was noted as a leader of the worldwide evangelical movement. He was one of the principal authors of the Lausanne Covenant in 1974. In 2005, Time magazine ranked Stott among the 100 most influential people in the world. Upon his earthly death, Billy Graham released a statement saying, "The evangelical world has lost one of its greatest spokesmen, and I have lost one of my close personal friends and advisors.” Stotts clear denial of Zionist beliefs is found in another statement: "I myself believe that Zionism, both political and Christian, is incompatible with biblical faith.” - From book endorsement of Christian Zionism: Road-Map to Armageddon? By Dr. S. Sizer, May 2008
N. T. Wright and Mark Kinzer: A Dialogue on the Meaning of Israel - here
This point is made pointedly here: Is It True That God Blesses Those Who Bless Israel and Curses Those Who Curse Israel? from Robert Rothwell Feb 05, 2021 – The Teaching Site of R.C. Sproul - here
Does the State of Israel fulfil biblical prophecy? by Ian Paul, June 1, 2018 - A good summary of the work of Colin Chapman. - here
Colin Chapman, page 236 on Ezekiel 37:25-26).
John F. Walvoord seeks to limit the meaning of this passage to simply the religious leaders not entering the kingdom of God (here), but I find it unconvincing that it does not represent a larger shift in the sense of a “people” which Jesus is referring to.
Corinthians On Israel And The Church, Nick Nowalk, October 27, 2009 - here
This phrase “All Israel will be saved” is deemed to refer to the Church by Justin Martyr, John Chrysostom, Martin Luther, John Calvin, William Hendriksen, John Wesley, Jon Courson, The Disciple Study Bible Handbook and only to Jewish believers in Christ by John MacArthur, Charles Ryrie, Henry Morris, and the Bible Knowledge Commentary.
Michael Marlowe notes, “The phrase has become controversial because the traditional interpretation conflicts with principles of interpretation associated with Dispensationalism. Dispensationalists are interested in maintaining a sharp distinction between "Israel" and "the Church" across a whole range of theological matters pertaining to prophecy, ecclesiology, and soteriology. They are not comfortable with the idea that here Paul is using the phrase "Israel of God" in a sense that includes Gentiles, because this undermines their contention that "the Church" is always carefully distinguished from "Israel"
The traditional Protestant and Catholic approach to this matter is quite different, however, because in these traditions "Israel" is often interpreted typologically. The Church is understood to be a "Spiritual Israel," so that many things said in connection with Israel in Scripture are applied to the Church. For instance, the words of Psalm 122, "Pray for the peace of Jerusalem: they shall prosper that love thee," are understood as in Matthew Henry's commentary: "The peace and welfare of the gospel church ... is to be earnestly desired and prayed for." This is in keeping with the method of the apostles, as for instance in Galatians 4:26, where the apostle Paul speaks of "the Jerusalem that is above." Therefore when Paul speaks of "the Israel of God" in 6:16, the meaning of this expression is readily grasped. Rather than seeing a contrast, a deeply meaningful typological relationship is perceived.” - From The Israel of God - (Galatians 6:16) - by Michael Marlowe, Dec. 2004 here
A thorough study of this text which concludes supporting that this refers to future work of Israel is - Who is the “Israel of God” in Galatians 6:16? by Brian Collins, a graduate of Bob Jones University, September 7, 2020.I found this expanded up in a dissertation: “More Desired Than Our Owne Salvation”: The Roots of American Christian Affinity for the State of Israel by Robert O. Smith, B.A., M.A., M.Div.; Baylor University which can be found here
N.T. Wright, undoubtably a compelling voice in this debate, surmises the picture this way...
“One of the specific things on which the New Testament insists, again and again, is that in the life, death and supremely the resurrection of Jesus the promised new age has dawned. The return from exile has happened. ‘All the promises of God’, says Paul in 2 Corinthians 1.20, ‘find their “yes” in him.’ This is in fact the great Return, even though it doesn’t look like people had thought it would. Instead of Israel as a political entity emerging from political exile, we are invited in the gospel to see Israel-in-person, the true king, emerging from the exile of death itself into God’s new day. .... Lift up your eyes, says Paul in Romans 8, and see how the promises to Abraham are to be fulfilled: not simply by a single race coming eventually to possess a single holy strip of turf, but by the liberation of the whole cosmos, with the beneficiaries, the inheritors of the promise, being a great number from every race and tribe and tongue, baptized and believing in Jesus Christ and indwelt by his Spirit....To suggest, therefore, that as Christians we should support the state of Israel because it is the fulfilment of prophecy is, in a quite radical way, to cut off the branch on which we are sitting.” - N.T. Wright (From “The Holy Land Today” here)Is Anti-Zionism The New Anti-Semitism? by Thomas Fretwell Jun 14, 2018 - here
Recommended Resources
(Some books I have only read summaries or point by point reviews)
Top Choices
The Holy Land Today by Tom Wright - here (Online Article)
I may not be ready to agree on everything that Wright says about some aspects of atonement or the future, but I have found Him to have the most acute grasp of the whole relationship between the role of Israel and Jesus. I find the general force of his views provide the most cohesive sense of the Scriptures. This article is only a summary of deeper theological work but will allow one to grasp the case.
Colin Chapman - Whose Promised Land? (Book)
Colin Chapman is Lecturer in Islamic Studies at the Near East School of Theology in Beirut, Lebanon. The author of several books, including Christianity on Trial, Islam and the West, and The Case for Christianity, he has lived and worked in the Middle East for sixteen years during various times since 1968. This book has been respected as a thorough and deeply thoughtful analysis of both the history, theology, and current implications related to the modern state of Israel. Though originally written in 1983, it has been updated several times with the last being 2002, following the events of 9/11.
An extended and supportive summary of Colin Chapman Whose Promised Land? by Theo Todman - here
Colin Chapman booklet: Prophecy Fulfilled Today? (Grove Biblical booklet) – Available here
Other
Is It True That God Blesses Those Who Bless Israel and Curses Those Who Curse Israel? from Robert Rothwell Feb 05, 2021 – The Teaching Site of R.C. Sproul -here
Video of Dialogue: From N. T. Wright and Mark Kinzer: A Dialogue on the Meaning of Israel - here
A series of studies on Israel And The Church by Ichthus, A group at Harvard, provides extensive studies of different Biblical books including Philippians , Galatians, Corinthians, and the Gospels.
Colin Chapman - “Premillennial Theology, Christian Zionism, and Christian Mission” - here