On a forum I frequent someone asked:“Lets say hypothetically Israel the nation was wiped of the map. What would that mean to everyone?”
This is my answer to that question:
It should mean nothing to those who look to the truth of God's word instead of to the world's political map.
Israel as nation WAS wiped off the map for almost 2000 years - and was restored in 1948.
Their long absence from the map is one of the reasons for the creation of replacement theology. With Israel gone, the church needed to give meaning to the many scriptural promises made to Israel, so they assumed that the church had replaced Israel in God's plans.
They overlooked the clearest meaning that Israel's existence did not depend on man's political "realities", but on God's promise. And HIS promises are kept and fulfilled according to HIS timing.
So even if the present day political nation of Israel is wiped off the map again, it would merely mean that Israel will be restored to the land again at some future point in accordance with the prophetic promises given by God.
We should not confuse today's political nation of Israel with the Israel of God. God's Israel takes into account people descended from Abraham, Isaac and Jacob no matter where they live. Despite the creation of the nation state, the majority of Israel remains in exile. One day that exile will end and God's Israel will be totally returned to the land He promised them and they AS A COMPLETE NATION will recognise their Messiah, Jesus and will enter the new covenant through faith in Him.
8 comments:
Quote
It should mean nothing to those who look to the truth of God's word instead of to the world's political map.
Well you got that bit right, but unfortunately from there it descends into the same old dispensational nonsense that most of the church seem to embrace through sheer ignorance.
Does anyone want to know the truth ? , then try reading Hebrews 11.
" But as it is , they desire a better country, that is a heavenly one"
" for he was looking forward to the city that has foundations , whose designer and builder is God."
The writer to the Hebrews, yes , the Hebrews, makes it quite clear that the " promised land" that the faithful patriarchs saw was not , repeat , not, the land of Palestine, but indeed it was the land of promise, the promise of Christ, the Kingdom of God. Of course , logic would conclude that unless one knows Christ, one is hardly likely to grasp the concept that the promised land is a spiritual land .
Congratulations.
With one out of context statement from Hebrews you cancel out the word of ALL of the OT prophets and you make Paul a liar in Romans and worst of all you make GOD a liar. It is HIS promise that you are denying
And did you never understand who the book of HEBREWS was addressed to?
And no I am not a dispensationalist. In some ways dispensationalism is almost a misguided as Calvinism(addressed elsewhere on my forum). But at least they have the advantage of not maligning God in the way Calvinism does, and they have more of a grasp of what the gospel is about.
What I have written about is not dispensationalist doctrine. It is BIBLE and appears throughout the bible.
Also it is interesting that you use the term “Palestine”. I ask you where did that term come from?
And what name did GOD give to the land you term “Palestine”.
I would advise that you be more cautious of exposing your ignorance and bigotry. BUt most of all if I were you I'd be more hesitant to portray God as a liar.
Yep, same old rhetoric , lets see, if one cannot deal with the text , a number of counter options come to mind.
1 , accuse respondent of labeling God a liar [ usually effective in scaring off any would be dissenters]
2 accuse respondent of ripping said text out of context.
3 accuse respondent of not reading bible.
4 accuse respondent of placing too much emphasis on man made theologies [ exceptions made for David Pawson man made doctrines].
5 last but not least , accuse respondent of being anti semetic.
So instead of hurling abuse and insults , why don't you give the viewers at home the benefit of you insight and knowledge and kindly explain what this passage means.
Hebrews 11 is not a discourse about the future of Israel so should not be treated as one. It is about FAITH and how saints of the past expressed their faith by steadfastly trusting God and God’s promises.
It is an encouragement for us to take the same approach - to believe God at His word and to deny what is contrary to His word.
Abraham did not live to personally inherit the land that God promised to him and his descendants, but he maintained faith in God’s promise to the end. He did not doubt God.
One day that promise WILL literally be fulfilled and Abraham will see it.
Abraham will also inherit his part in the eternal Kingdom (related to the new heaven and new earth) that will replace the earthly Kingdom after Jesus’ millennial reign and after the judgement.
The reality of the future new heaven and new earth does not nullify God’s earthly promises expressed through all of the OT prophets and reaffirmed in the NT by Paul and John.
God’s relationship with Israel as an individual elect nation will not end until the sun and moon no longer shine and until the waves of the ocean no longer roar (Jer 31 will confirm ALL of this as well as their restoration to the land and their entry into the new covenant). Interestingly the new earth has no sun and no sea – so only then will it be possible for Israel not be seen as an individual nation before God.
But while this earth remains God will remain faithful to His promise to bring a remnant of Israel into the new covenant and to return them to ALL of their promised land.
As for “accusations”:
1) that you have labelled God a liar (you clearly deny the faithfulness of God’s promise to Israel and deny the truth of His words to them)
2) you ripped things out of context (your appeal to a couple of verses in Heb 11 at the expense of EVERY OT prophet’s words is proof that you have done that)
3) that you do not read your bible (you may have read it but do you believe what it actually says? Or do you prefer to interpret it to conform to what you’d like it to say?)
4) you rely on man’s theology (since what you promote is contrary to scripture I’m being kind to suggest that man is the source)
5) Did I say anything about you being anti-semitic? (maybe you think that was what my question about your use of the term "Palestine" was about - so I ask, why use such a term and where did that term originate? Is it a term God applies to the land?)
Now as for the suggestion that I follow “David Pawson’s man made doctrines, I can assure you I have accepted NOTHING that David Pawson has taught until convinced through study of scripture. IN most cases I strongly resisted what he taught, or doubted what he taught – but later had to change my mind when I found his teaching was in line with scripture.
Unlike many other teachers he strongly encourages his listeners to go to scripture and make see what scripture says on the topic of his teachings – to search ALL of the scriptures and not merely rely on a few quoted verses.
If I can't find his teaching supported by scripture I don't accept his teaching on that matter.
So if the “viewers at home” are genuinely interested in the truth. I suggest they likewise search the scriptures (and not individual “texts”) to see what God’s word says. And read what scripture ACTUALLY says without trying to reinterpret it to fit a preconceived doctrine.
"God’s relationship with Israel as an individual elect nation will not end until the sun and moon no longer shine.... Interestingly the new earth has no sun and no sea – so only then will it be possible for Israel not be seen as an individual nation before God."
Onesimus, to go off on a fun tangent: the sun and the moon will actually never disappear, so we can be certain that the Jews as well will never cease to be an individual nation before G-d. That the sun and moon will disappear, unfortunately, is a common misconception. Let's see:
"The city does not need the sun or the moon to shine on it, for the glory of G-d gives ti light, and the Lamb is its lamp." (Revelation 21:23)
"There will be no more night. They will not need the light of lamp or the light of the sun, for the L-rd God will give them light."(Revelation 22:25)
"The sun will no more be your light by day, nor will the brightness of the moon shine on you, for the Lord will be your everlasting light, and your G-d will be your glory. Your sun will never set again, and your moon will wane no more; the Lord will be your everlasting light, and your days of sorrow will end. Then will all your people be righteous and they will possess the land forever." (Isaiah 60:19-21)
Notice that none of these verses actually says there will be no more sun or moon. (Reread them carefully.) They say that the New Jerusalem will not NEED their light, for sun and moon will be outshone by G-d's glory. The third passage says that at the time when G-d's people will possess the land forever, the sun won't set and the moon won't wane, yet neither will dominate the sky because of G-d's brighter light.
The emphasis isn't on the elimination of sun and moon, but on their being overshadowed by the greater light of G-d. The sun is local and limited, easily obscured by clouds. G-d's light is universal, all pervading; nothing can obstruct it.
As far as not having the sea, we do read that there will be rivers (and all rivers need to flow into something) - so, there may still be large bodies of water and "the roar of the waves" may go on. And of course, there's a "sea like crystal glass" in Revelation 4:6 which in another place is called "river of life" (Revelation 22:1). Another commentary I read says that the sea is "symbolic for the unbelieving masses." (and much in the mystic Book of Revelation is very symbolic).
You’ve definitely given me something to investigate further Gene.
I see that Rev 21:26 mentions “the nations” so there is still some national distinction in existence, and if I’m correct the term “the nations” is almost synonymous with “the gentiles”, maybe you can correct me on that?
Yes, you really have given me food for thought and reason to study this more.
You are right, Hebrews 11 is about faith, and the summation of that chapter is the crux of the essence of their faith.
vs 39
And these all , having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise:
Ah ha , the promise, was it the promise of the land, or was it the promise who was Christ?
The issue here is most definitely one of faith, because as this chapter demonstrates ,it is those of faith who were looking forward to the promise, the promise of their salvation. And in the same way that Christ fulfils the typology of the temple, the Passover, the High priest and the Holy of Holies , He also fulfils the type that was the promised land.There is no " land" promise that has yet to be realised, because it has been perfected in Christ.In fact , long before Christ , God honoured His promises to Israel.
Joshua 21:43
And the Lord gave unto Israel all the Land which He sware to give unto their fathers, and they possessed it , and dwelt therein.
And the Lord gave them rest round about , according to to all that He sware to their fathers : and there stood not a man of all their enemies before them ; the Lord delivered all their enemies into their hand.
There failed not ought of any good thing which the Lord had spoken unto the house of Israel; all came to pass.
Wow, where are there any outstanding promises that God made to Israel that are still to be met?
Your very obvious problem here is that because you don't acknowledge the existence of Israel that is spiritual in nature , you automatically appropiate all those OT prophecies to national Israel.Remember that the spiritual Jews recognised the Messiah and saw the "land " as the coming Kingdom of God, while the carnal Jews, the very ones whose cause you so passionately promote, are as blinded now as when God pronounced judgement on them in Isaiah 6:8-13, it is these Jews who without faith can only see an earthly homeland, albeit about three thousand years to late.
Anonymous asks:
“Wow, where are there any outstanding promises that God made to Israel that are still to be met?”
_________
Have you never read the OT prophets?
Maybe it’s time you did. And read what they actually SAID and don’t reinterpret, “spiritualise” or allegorise it all to fit what you want to believe.
YOUR very obvious problem is that you start with the assumption that the church is “Israel that is spiritual in nature” and therefore you “automatically appropriate all those OT prophecies to” the church”. But the text of scripture gives absolutely no justification for taking that approach.
Interestingly I received the following quote in my mail this morning. It addresses the very thing anonymous is guilty of.
“What I protest against is, the habit of allegorizing plain sayings of the Word of God concerning the future history of the nation Israel, and explaining away the fulness of their contents in order to accommodate them to the Gentile Church. I believe the habit to be unwarranted by anything in Scripture, and to draw after it a long train of evil consequences.” - J.C. Ryle (1858)
Post a Comment