A New Frontline Is Out: A Future for Israel

What, I, as well as others outside of the core dispensational camp is how to equate, "God loves his people", and the current state of Israel. We get this broad conflation of the current state of Israel with the promises in Scripture to a select group of those descended from Abraham, and everyone wants to skirt the issue. I have yet to hear anyone even broach this subject. I continue to struggle and ask, how does a secular state of Israel, made up of 25% Arab's, living in a land that is near the land that God gave Abraham is equivalent to the Israel that God gave His promises to.

• Who are the Jews who live in lands promised to Abraham, but not part of the secular state of Israel?
• Are the Arabs who are part of the secular state of Israel, part of the promises? Arabs are in government and set laws for the state of Israel?
• Are the Jews outside of Israel part of the promises to Israel?
• Are those that live in Judah part of the promises of Israel?
• Are those Jews that are converted to Judaism and living in Israel, part of the promises of Israel?
• Is the secular state a representative of the group of peoples that are to receive the promises?
• Should the secular state of Israel seek to destroy the Arabs that are in the lands promised to Abraham to receive those promises given to them in the OT?

I think what is interesting, is the way that we should bless Israel pre-secular state of Israel and post state of Israel. Prior to the establishment of the modern secular state of Israel it was often viewed as a general conversion of Jews around the world, not a future state of Israel. This has grown post setup of the state. At least through my preliminary read.

Of course, today, at least the Reformed crowd that I interact with, don't see the church replacing Israel, but really see them one and the same.

In this issue we do NOT equate the state of Israel with the promises to Israel in the OT. We do believe that the promises will be fulfilled, of course. The articles focus on what the Bible says, not current events.

Also, check out our podcast, I released the first one last Saturday with Ken Rathbun, our Associate Editor for this issue. More will come in the next few weeks. I’ve interviewed most of the authors. Hope you find it helpful

I think what is interesting, is the way that we should bless Israel pre-secular state of Israel and post state of Israel.

This is an interesting question.

If one is already persuaded that Israel and the church are “one and the same,” then it’s a lot less interesting. Just live the life of the church and you’re blessing “Israel.” @dgszweda, is that a fair summary of your view?

If you see a present or future for an “Israel” that is distinct in any way from the church (which does not require embracing full-on dispensationalism), the question is more interesting. What would “I will bless those who bless you” mean from AD 138 (Hadrian bans all Jews from Palestine) to the middle of the 20th century? During this stretch, there was no Israel in a geo-political sense.

I personally don’t think it’s a stretch at all to say that the ethnic group in the Bible still exists even when exiled from the territory they were given, though not organized as a “nation,” per se. So, think of “Israel” as “the people of Israel” or “the descendants of Jacob,” and the question is not particularly hard to answer.

It’s not a conclusion I attach absolute certainty or top priority to, but I have found it to be far less problematic overall to read the Bible in a way that points to there being both a present and a future people of Israel distinct from the church—though there are a couple of NT passages that emphasize similarities and use some analogy/metaphor along those lines.

As for dispensationalism as a system, I think systems are necessary and important, but they’re sort of like your hammer or needle-nose pliers: really useful, but not always the right tool for the job.

Everyone has a theological system.

Don, thanks for the clarification. I will look at it.

Aaron, I fall a bit into the middle. I see both sides of the argument, and I find value in both sides.

I see merit on both sides of that also, just more problems on one side than the other. But I don’t feel like the view I prefer quite snaps perfectly into place either. With all the solutions I’ve seen, there are stress points that feel make it feel like it’s a strain and must not be quite right. (Reminds me of trying to find shoes that fit!)

That said, I’m more confident of the ‘what’ than the ‘how it all fits together’ aspect on future Israel. For my part, I have high confidence that there is an ethnic and geo-political Israel in the future in Scripture—but lower confidence on how certain passages of Scripture fit that. There really aren’t many ‘problem passages’ for that view, though.