About Israel... How are Amils affected

[SteveF]

SteveF wrote:
When you use the word “Israel”, I’m going to assume you mean the true spiritual Israel in the same sense that Paul used it in Rom 9 “….For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel,….”


Hmm. Paul's use of the word "Israel" really is the topic I'm analyzing in a separate writing. The question in this forum then is to answer a curiosity on the role of the idea of "Church as Israel" on Eschatological views.

I find it difficult to answer your question without making the distinction. This may be a poor analogy but if you asked "how important is the concept of heaven to a Christian's understanding of the afterlife?" then there needs to be a distinction how the word heaven is used differently in the bible. Similarly, the word "Israel" is used in several different ways (and context) in scripture.

SteveF wrote:
One thing that comes to mind is the Kingdom passages mentioned in Isaiah. If the Church is not spiritual Israel then it's difficult for me to see how these passages can apply to the present Church age. Also, other passages like Jer 31:31-34 likely couldn’t apply to the current age either.

It seems then that you essentially equate Church, kingdom of God and Israel. I see these as three different topics.

Amillennialism is about the Kingdom of God. Therefore I see the scriptures that discuss the Kingdom in relation to Israel as directly related to your initial inquiry.

steve wrote

To ask a question about how much a particular eschatological system may depend upon this fundamental premise (as if to hint that the system may be compromised if only we can show that the church is not Israel) strikes me as similar to asking, "How much does the Calvinist doctrine of limited atonement rely upon the assumption that Jesus died on the cross?"—as if to imply that all we need to do to disprove limited atonement is to show that the Bible does not teach that Jesus died on the cross!

Of course, all Christian views of the atonement depend upon the belief that Jesus died upon the cross, but the fact of Jesus dying on the cross is so fundamental to all Christian belief that to suggest that it might not be true would naturally distract respondents from the other question of its relation to the doctrine of limited atonement.

That's a good point Steve.

Mike, it seems that approaching this subject from this particular angle may not work. I am making too many assumptions in my replies. Since you've never considered the Church as Israel (just like I didn't at one time), I would recommend understanding the postition first. It's been a while since I've heard Steve's lectures called "What are we to make of Israel?" but I think he might hit on this issue....I can't remember for sure. Anyway, you could always start a thread and ask "Why do many Christians see the Church as Israel?"

Your fellow student in Christ
SteveF

I just remembered as I finished typing this, you might want to check out Steve's "Kingdom of God" series as well.

[mikew]

I find it difficult to answer your question without making the distinction. This may be a poor analogy but if you asked "how important is the concept of heaven to a Christian's understanding of the afterlife?" then there needs to be a distinction how the word heaven is used differently in the bible. Similarly, the word "Israel" is used in several different ways (and context) in scripture.

OK. Make whatever distinctions you like if you can just provide some passages about the Church as being Israel in prophetic fulfillment. The passage you provided, Jer 31:31-34, is pertinent to the topic.

In Jer 31:31-34 the New Covenant was prophesied. This verse poses interesting questions. But does this passage prophesy anything into the future or was it solely fulfilled in the first century?

SteveF wrote:
One thing that comes to mind is the Kingdom passages mentioned in Isaiah. If the Church is not spiritual Israel then it's difficult for me to see how these passages can apply to the present Church age. Also, other passages like Jer 31:31-34 likely couldn’t apply to the current age either.

It seems then that you essentially equate Church, kingdom of God and Israel. I see these as three different topics.

Amillennialism is about the Kingdom of God. Therefore I see the scriptures that discuss the Kingdom in relation to Israel as directly related to your initial inquiry.

Are there some prophetic verses that explicitly connect Israel with the kingdom then? I know that in Acts 1:6 there was the expectation for the kingdom to be restored to Israel. (This likely would be connected with prophecies of David's seed reigning on David's throne.)

Mike, it seems that approaching this subject from this particular angle may not work. I am making too many assumptions in my replies. Since you've never considered the Church as Israel (just like I didn't at one time), I would recommend understanding the postition first. It's been a while since I've heard Steve's lectures called "What are we to make of Israel?" but I think he might hit on this issue....I can't remember for sure. Anyway, you could always start a thread and ask "Why do many Christians see the Church as Israel?"

Well, its not that I haven't considered the idea of the Church as Israel. Its that I haven't seen how such idea is derived from scriptures yet.
It seems you are saying that the Church as being Israel was the starting assumption for the amillennial viewpoint rather than a way of interpreting prophecies spoken about Israel.

[SteveF]

In Jer 31:31-34 the New Covenant was prophesied. This verse poses interesting questions. But does this passage prophesy anything into the future or was it solely fulfilled in the first century?

I agree that this scripture applies to the first century Jews (House of Israel). The thing is, something happened a few years after the Resurrection. Gentiles started getting added to the Church.

As Romans 11 spells out, us “unclean Gentiles” (Acts 10-11) were grafted into the olive tree. There aren’t two trees. One for the Jews and one for the Gentiles. Rather there is one tree (Israel) and we have been granted the blessed privilege of being adopted into the household of God. The Messiah came for the House of Israel, but now we are included. Through Abraham's seed (Christ) all the world is blessed.

Ephesians and Galatians expound on this:

Eph 2:11 Therefore remember that at one time you Gentiles in the flesh, called "the uncircumcision" by what is called the circumcision, which is made in the flesh by hands--
Eph 2:12 remember that you were at that time separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world.
Eph 2:13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.
Eph 2:14 For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility
Eph 2:15 by abolishing the law of commandments and ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace,
Eph 2:16 and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility.
Eph 2:17 And he came and preached peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near.
Eph 2:18 For through him we both have access in one Spirit to the Father.
Eph 2:19 So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, Eph 2:20 built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone,
Eph 2:21 in whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord.
Eph 2:22 In him you also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit.


Gal 3:14 so that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promised Spirit through faith.
Gal 3:15 To give a human example, brothers: even with a man-made covenant, no one annuls it or adds to it once it has been ratified.
Gal 3:16 Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, "And to offsprings," referring to many, but referring to one, "And to your offspring," who is Christ.


Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
Gal 3:29 And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to promise.

Gal 6:16 And as for all who walk by this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel of God.

Therefore it's not that the Church (btw...the word ekklesia (Church) was also used to refer to the congregation of Israel in the OT (septuagint) at times) is replacing Israel but rather we simply have the privilege of being added in and being a part of the Kingdom. Col 1:13

Something to consider...Hypothetically, if the Church had always remained exclusively Jewish wouldn't it be natural to consider the followers of the Messiah to be the true Israel? The only difference is, we (Gentiles) are now included. I know it's more of a conjecture but I thought I would through it in.

I know there are others that could do a better job of explaining it, but I hope this helps somewhat.

Are there some prophetic verses that explicitly connect Israel with the kingdom then? I know that in Acts 1:6 there was the expectation for the kingdom to be restored to Israel. (This likely would be connected with prophecies of David's seed reigning on David's throne.)

It's my understanding that all of the classic Kingdom passages in the OT were understood to be referring to an Israeli Kingdom


I wrote

Hopefully this won’t digress into a discussion on whether the Church is spiritual Israel or not.

Oh well, it was bound to happen...

God Bless...
SteveF

[mikew]

I agree that this scripture applies to the first century Jews (House of Israel)... snip...

Ephesians and Galatians expound on this... snip...

Something to consider...Hypothetically, if the Church had always remained exclusively Jewish wouldn't it be natural to consider the followers of the Messiah to be the true Israel? The only difference is, we (Gentiles) are now included. I know it's more of a conjecture but I thought I would through it in.

I know there are others that could do a better job of explaining it, but I hope this helps somewhat.

You presented the basic argument I would expect on this issue. This should be helpful for consideration by those who were curious about an argument for the Church being Israel. I defer to a later time to address the question.

Are there some prophetic verses that explicitly connect Israel with the kingdom then? I know that in Acts 1:6 there was the expectation for the kingdom to be restored to Israel. (This likely would be connected with prophecies of David's seed reigning on David's throne.)

It's my understanding that all of the classic Kingdom passages in the OT were understood to be referring to an Israeli Kingdom
I wrote

Hopefully this won’t digress into a discussion on whether the Church is spiritual Israel or not.

Oh well, it was bound to happen...

Sure. Its hard to resist. I didn't realize how many potential obstacles existed in connection with the question of my OP. But I also asked the question without really having an verses in mind, like from Isaiah, that spoke specifically of events upon Israel. Though, there was described a series of events in Dan 9 that are more clearly about Israel.

Another problem that arises here is that the Book of Isaiah, as were other books of the Bible, was prophesied to the hearing by Israel. We can forget that the Hebrews were the caretakers of the prophecies and often were the key topic of the prophecies.

[Mellontes]

I agree that this scripture applies to the first century Jews (House of Israel)... snip...

Ephesians and Galatians expound on this... snip...

Something to consider...Hypothetically, if the Church had always remained exclusively Jewish wouldn't it be natural to consider the followers of the Messiah to be the true Israel? The only difference is, we (Gentiles) are now included. I know it's more of a conjecture but I thought I would through it in.

I know there are others that could do a better job of explaining it, but I hope this helps somewhat.

You presented the basic argument I would expect on this issue. This should be helpful for consideration by those who were curious about an argument for the Church being Israel. I defer to a later time to address the question.

Are there some prophetic verses that explicitly connect Israel with the kingdom then? I know that in Acts 1:6 there was the expectation for the kingdom to be restored to Israel. (This likely would be connected with prophecies of David's seed reigning on David's throne.)

It's my understanding that all of the classic Kingdom passages in the OT were understood to be referring to an Israeli Kingdom
I wrote

Hopefully this won’t digress into a discussion on whether the Church is spiritual Israel or not.

Oh well, it was bound to happen...

Sure. Its hard to resist. I didn't realize how many potential obstacles existed in connection with the question of my OP. But I also asked the question without really having an verses in mind, like from Isaiah, that spoke specifically of events upon Israel. Though, there was described a series of events in Dan 9 that are more clearly about Israel.

Another problem that arises here is that the Book of Isaiah, as were other books of the Bible, was prophesied to the hearing by Israel. We can forget that the Hebrews were the caretakers of the prophecies and often were the key topic of the prophecies.

Steve F. put it much like I would have put it. By the way, Steve, I am in Oshawa. Is there any way to private message me?

And slightly off on topic although still concerning Israel, here is another question: Wasn't the promise of the resurrection originally addressed to old covenant Israel?

[Paidion]

Here's the way I see it and I'm a PRE-millenialist:

All through the history of Israel there were some people who truly submitted to Yahweh, and obeyed His commands. They were usually in the minority. They were called "the remnant".

In the days when the Messiah walked this earth, "the remnant" were his disciples. I don't mean just the twelve, but ALL who were His disciples. On that special day of Pentecost, there were 120 of His disciples gathered. They were the remnant.

As long as Israel existed, the true Israel was the remnant, and this was the case in Jesus' day.
Paul spoke of the true Israel in Romans 9, 10, and 11. In chapter 11, he uses the figure of an olive tree to represent true Israel. But "not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel" (Romans 9:6) In Romans 11, Paul speaks of such people as "branches which were cut off", and he speaks of gentiles who have responded to the gospel and have become disiples of the Messiah ad "branches which were grafted in". So it's not that Israel ceased to exist, and that the entity we now call "the church" replaced it. Rather the true Israel CONTINUED, though branches were broken off and others were grafted in during the growth of this "olive tree".
So, we gentiles who belong to the true church today, that is, disciples of Christ, have been grafted into the true Israel. Unbelieving Jews who become disciples of Christ, the true Messiah, are among those who were cut off, and grafted in again. For Paul say that if they do not persist in their unbelief (or faithlessness), they will be grafted in again.

[mikew]

And slightly off on topic although still concerning Israel, here is another question: Wasn't the promise of the resurrection originally addressed to old covenant Israel?

The offer of resurrection seems to come from Genesis. The early Genesis passages contain ideas applicable to all mankind. Genesis describes the situation where mankind was outside of the Garden unable to reach the Tree of Life in order to live forever. (Gen 3:22-23)

So mankind saw the requirement for eternal life required man to be perfect (to be like Adam in the Garden) in order to have eternal life. Then since everyone was dying off, the natural extension of thought was that this life must come through a resurrection.

This isn't exactly conclusive evidence but is something to consider.

[mikew]

As Romans 11 spells out, us “unclean Gentiles” (Acts 10-11) were grafted into the olive tree. There aren’t two trees. One for the Jews and one for the Gentiles. Rather there is one tree (Israel) and we have been granted the blessed privilege of being adopted into the household of God. The Messiah came for the House of Israel, but now we are included. Through Abraham's seed (Christ) all the world is blessed.

It isn't fully relevant but there are two or three trees. Rom 11:17

11:17 But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive, were grafted in among them, and became partaker with them of the root and of the richness of the olive tree

The wild olive branch came off a wild olive tree. So the analogy implies that there was a Gentile tree, but not of saved Gentiles. But yes it appears you were saying there wasn't a separate tree (in addition to the Jewish follower's tree) for saved Gentiles.
And you would sort of have to say that the branches representing Jews would have to be grafted on to something else in interim or would have died otherwise.

Here's an analysis I just made: http://www.biblereexamined.com/RomansOliveTree.htm
I have another analysis on my website but its good to relook at a matter.