Does the Church Replace Israel?
In my recent article contrasting Dispensationalism (DP) and Covenant Theology (CT), I attempted to provide a look at both systems from an unbiased perspective. Obviously, it's difficult when you feel strongly towards either side. There was a point that I didn't hit that I should have (Amanda reminded me). It has to with how CT views the relation of Israel and the church.
Many DP like to build an argument against CT by stating that CT states across the board that the Church has replaced Israel, and thereby Israel (ethnic that is) no longer has any mark upon them as different than gentiles. While it is true in one sense, it's not the full picture on how CT views this relation. David Holwerda, in his fantastic work Jesus & Israel: One Covenant or Two? correctly articulates the CT perspective on "Israel" (pgs. 56-7).
"Who then is Israel? The answer is never simply a matter of ancestry. Consequently, the central issue is the New Testament is not really Jew versus Gentile. Instead, Israel is the people chosen by God and called to respond in faith and obedience. Israel is the People on whom the Lord sets his love (Deuteronomy 7:7).
Such also is Matthew's teaching. Jesusa literal descendant of Abraham, himself a Jew, is the Israel who is the object of God's love. He is chosen by God and responds in perfect obedience, fulfilling the law and the prophets (Matthew 5:17) and all righteousness (3:15). Since Jesus is the corporate representative of Israel, God now recognizes as Israel all who respond in faith and obedience to the presence and will of God revealed in Jesus. Of course, the first to so respond are in fact Jews. Jesus' condemnation of Israel is not a blanket condemnation of all Jews but only of those who do not believe. The crowds that follow him do not receive from him the same radical judgment as is pronounced on the leaders of the nation. Instead, Jesus has compassion on the crowds as 'sheep without a shepherd' and declares his disciples that 'the harvest is plentiful' (Matthew 9:36-38). So long as they do not reject Jesus, the possibility of becoming Jesus' disciples remains open to the people. Will they accept the definition of Israel and the fulfillment of the promises revealed in Jesus? Will they comprehend the mystery of the kingdom? That was and continues to be the only question that decides the identity of Israel: Not ancestry but faith, not human achievement but God's gift, calling, and election, acknowledged in Jesus, son of Abraham, son of David, Son of God."
Israel Fulfilled By Jesus
I think the NT clearly teaches that where Adam and Israel failed--Jesus succeeded. The first five chapters of Matthew (written to a Jewish audience) strive to teach that Jesus is in fact "Israel" which is "one who has striven with God and prevailed" (Gen 32:38). Chapter one teaches that Jesus is the true seed of Abraham (cf. Gal 3:16), chapter two teaches that Jesus will accomplish the greater exodus which is deliverance from sin for his people (2:15), chapter three teaches that John the Baptist was the "herald" that came to make way for the King (3:1-2), chapter four is Jesus "wandering in the wilderness" and defeating Satan unlike Israel's wanderings (and he uses passages to rebuttal Satan only from the time of Israel's wandering in the OT), and finally chapter teaches that the Mosaic Law pointed forward to Jesus and he has perfectly fulfilled that anticipatory role (5:17-20).
So, it would technically be more correct that Jesus has replaced ethnic Israel in God's redemptive plan, but even this isn't completely correct. Even though the latter is true, Romans 11 does teach that God is indeed to remain faithful to ethnic Israel in some sense; but it's important to note that the covenant faithfulness God displays revolves around soteriological promises centered in his son and not real estate.
The "Spiritual Israel" Concept
CT also teach that the New Covenant, as the final revelation of God in history, allows for a "spiritual Israel." By this it means that if Jesus is the True Israel than all those who are "in him" will receive his inheritance. Paul tells the Romans: "The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, heirs also, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him so that we may also be glorified with Him" (Rom 8:16-17). Paul also taught the Galatian Christians that: "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's descendants, heirs according to promise" (Gal 3:28-29).
Probably the verses that speak most overtly to this issue are in Galatians 6 and Romans 9. Paul teaches the Galatians that those who are a "new creation" by the work of Christ comprise the "Israel of God" (6:16), and in Romans 9 after wrestling with God's apparent covenant unfaithfulness Paul can say confidentally: "But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel; nor are they all children because they are Abraham's descendants, but: 'THROUGH ISAAC YOUR DESCENDANTS WILL BE NAMED.' That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants" (Rom 9:6-8).
What Does This Mean For Me?
It's hard for us to imagine how controversial and paradigm-breaking these statements were in the first century. We take for granted that there no longer is a Jew/Gentile controversy, debates over whether one should be circumcised, or experiencing persecution for believing that Jesus Christ is sufficient for our salvation. But we must remember that it is a big deal, and it is a great truth that is to be treasured for all eternity. It is God and God alone who justifies, and we must praise for his grace. It should drive us to take seriously our commission to make disciples of all the nations.
"What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory, even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles." (Rom 9:22-24)
Mar 29th 2007
What seems so clear is so divided amongst believers who have studied these topics.
I just have a couple questions:
Why does John MacArthur believe in dispensationalism?
And is it possible to have some semblance of both in one's theological view? -Paul
Mar 29th 2007
I enjoyed this article, especially as an extension of your previous article and our discusssions last night and this morning.
Quickly, please elaborate of the following section of your article:
"So, it would technically be more correct that Jesus has replaced ethnic Israel in God’s redemptive plan, but even this isn’t completely correct."
Are you saying that God initially sought to show is favor on ethnic Israel but then turned to showing his favor on Christ Jesus after Israel failed to follow God in full obedience? I hope strongly this is not what you are saying. I imagine moreso that the semantics you chose add a degree of confusion to what you are asserting. Please clarify.
Mar 29th 2007
@Paul: John was asked this question, and he has answered. As for your second question, I appreciate some DP for their emphasis on discontinuity where CT fails, but it also goes the other way as well. I don't think anyone would say: "I'm a DP and CT." They are mutually exclusive regarding the relation between Israel and the Church.
@Perry: Yes, I had some word smithing around that. Jesus has replaced ethnic Israel as the locus of God's revelation, but I do think Rom 11 leans to something to happen in the future. Again, this is highly debatable.
Mar 29th 2007
I thought this was a great article, in that it was more explanatory then the previous.
@Chris-Do you have any good links on this topic as far as a beginners crash course, of sorts?
Mar 29th 2007
@ Chris: Thanks for the reply. Please, though, give a yes or no. I agree, Jesus has replaced ethnic Israel as the focus of God's attention BUT do you believe God has changed his mind/plan of redemption to accomadate this or was it his plan from the beginning. I know where you stand but I think it would be good for the discussion to clarify.
Mar 29th 2007
Just so you know guys, the @ is usually used in threads to refer to people other than the author. So if Perry wanted to ask a question to Mike he would use it, but not if Perry wanted to ask me a question. It's assumed that undirected questions are being made to the author.
@Mike: Besides the last article I would go to those three links I posted below the article.
@Perry: Jesus has always been the focus of God's attention, and God never changed his mind on anything (lest I be an open theist). The point is that with the advent of Jesus that the NT writers portray Jesus as succeeding where Adam and Israel failed. That quote above succinctly summarizes that position.
Mar 31st 2007
@Perry - Duh Perry. Learn how to use the @.
Thanks for clarifying.
Apr 4th 2007
So Chris,
Who is "all Israel" in Romans 11?
Apr 4th 2007
@Daniel: It is the eschatological "fullness" AKA the remaining elect individuals (not national election) that will be brought to the Messiah.
Apr 9th 2007
What do you think of the possibility that "all Israel will be saved" ties back with 10:13--"all who call upon the name of the LORD will be saved"?
Apr 9th 2007
@Daniel: Well, in Rom 10 it's Paul's exposition that Christ is the teleos of the Mosaic Law (10:4), and that salvation is given to one who lives righteousness of faith (10:5). That verse you mentioned is in the context that: "For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek..." There is a soteriological "even plain" between Jews and Gentiles with the advent of the Messiah.
On the other hand, Rom 11 has to do with Paul's lesson to Gentiles to not become boastful against the "root." In contrast to Rom 10, this chapter has both past, present, and future implications for Paul (natural branches added, wild branches grafted in/natural broken off, natural will be grafted back in).
Did I answer your question?
Jan 9th 2008
the all israel will be saved is not about people but the land. this has to do with the kinsman redeemer.. christ is coming back to reclaim the earth, remember adam and eve lost the earth to satan.
Jan 9th 2008
@Mike: How can you back up that claim? It is clear from the passage that Paul is talking about salvation and not real estate.
Jan 23rd 2008
i would like to point out that "Mike" with a capital M and "mike" with a little m are two different people. I should probably start adding an S. to my posts.