The Narrow Path Ministries

Scripture has many verses talking about the scattering of Israel to the nations (note the plural). My dispensationalist Sunday school teacher claims that this did not happen until 135 AD, and thus, in his reasoning, this scattering does not apply to the Babylonian exile since the captives were exiled to one nation, namely Babylon. Reasoning further, he claims that God's promise to restore them from these various nations is to be fulfilled in the future--not something that was accomplished when some of the exiles returned to their homeland. His argument seems to ignore the exile of the Northern Kingdom (Israel) into Assyria, and in Jeremiah we read of Jews fleeing to Egypt. Any comments on this? In the wilderness God threatened His people with exile if they failed to obey and live by the Mosaic Covenant, and He talked about scattering them to the nations (plural). If indeed He didn't scatter them to the nations (plural), then all this would be an empty threat to that generation.

How would you counter the dispensational reasoning here?

How would you counter the dispensational reasoning here?










They certainly seemed to be scattered when Assyria took almost all the tribes and then they were further dispersed and you could add Babylon onto Assyria and then you have "nations."
However they were clearly scattered at 70AD & 135AD and I think the restoration of modern Israel is part of God's purposes.

...and I think the restoration of modern Israel is part of God's purposes.

Art (Aaron) Katz, as you may know, was a converted Jewish man who loved his people, and believed that Romans 11:26 "... all Israel will be saved" means that all Jews will be saved, through the ministry of Gentile Christians.

Yet Art believed that God had nothing to do with the formation of the modern, secular state of Israel in 1948.

Yet Art believed that God had nothing to do with the formation of the modern, secular state of Israel in 1948.

Paidion






OK but if one believes Islam is an end time beast that beheads the martyrs and persecutes Christians which I do
then its' unlikely Israel's rebirth is happenstance.

Scripture has many verses talking about the scattering of Israel to the nations (note the plural). My dispensationalist Sunday school teacher claims that this did not happen until 135 AD, and thus, in his reasoning, this scattering does not apply to the Babylonian exile since the captives were exiled to one nation, namely Babylon.

You have made a good observation. The Northern Kingdom of Israel was dispersed among the possessions (conquered nations) of Assyria. Isaiah wrote: “Truly... the kings of Assyria have laid waste all the nations and their lands" (Isa.37:18). Notice, in the biblical manner of speaking, the Assyrian Empire (later conquered by Babylon), encompassed "all the nations."

Similarly, Judah was dispersed among those nations conquered by Babylon. Why does your teacher think "Babylon" refers to a single nation? Technically, Babylon was a city, not a nation. However, all the areas conquered by Nebuchadnezzar, which included very many nations, were part of the Babylonian Empire, and were thus called "Babylon."

The Jews were indeed scattered through "the nations" in the Babylonian exile. In speaking about it, Ezeliel wrote: "Yet will I leave a remnant, that ye may have some that shall escape the sword among the nations, when ye shall be scattered through the countries. And they that escape of you shall remember me among the nations whither they shall be carried captives" (Ezek.6:8-9; cf., 12:15)

In a letter written by Jeremiah to the exiles in Babylon, God promised: "I will gather you from all the nations and from all the places where I have driven you..." (Jer.29:14). Notice that God referred to their present captivity in Babylon as being driven into "all the nations." Similarly, God later said, "I will make a complete end of all the nations to which I have driven you" (Jeremiah 46:28). Thus, He refers to "all the nations" with respect to the Babylonian exile.

We know He cannot be speaking of the present diaspora, because, in both the passages in Jeremiah, cited above, He also refers to them being in "captivity" (29:14; 46:27). It would be absurd to speak of the Jews in America (or Europe, South America, Australia, etc.) today as being "in captivity." The Jews were in captivity in Babylonia, but have not been in captivity for a great many centuries now.

OK but if one believes Islam is an end time beast that beheads the martyrs and persecutes Christians which I do then its' unlikely Israel's rebirth is happenstance.

Interesting that you should say this! For when Art Katz was visiting us and I told him that second-century Christians taught that the Beast (or Antichrist) would be a Jewish person from the tribe of Dan, he was visibly disturbed. He said that he believed that the Beast would be a Muslim. Did you ever notice that in Revelation, Dan is not included in the list of 12 tribes?

Interesting that you should say this! For when Art Katz was visiting us and I told him that second-century Christians taught that the Beast (or Antichrist) would be a Jewish person from the tribe of Dan, he was visibly disturbed. He said that he believed that the Beast would be a Muslim. Did you ever notice that in Revelation, Dan is not included in the list of 12 tribes?

Paidion







Yes I was aware of Dan, I think I heard because Dan practiced idolatry or some kind of evil it disappeared. Of course at the time of second century Christians, Islam had not been created yet but I think the tension between Ishmael's decendents & Isaac's plus Jacob and Esau's was always there even before Islam. In the 70AD destruction most of the Roman soldiers were from areas around Israel, which would actually mean they were arabs.