If Israel has
been chosen to perform a special role in the Divine plan,
what promises have been given to Israel that will enable
that ancient people to fulfill that role?
The Apostle
Paul is clear on the great privileges that God has granted
Israel. He wrote in Romans 9:4: "who are Israelites, to
whom pertain the adoption, the glory, the
covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God,
and the promises." Paul nowhere intimates that
these great privileges have been annulled, forfeited, or
cancelled. As a matter of fact the three chapters of which
this verse is a part (Romans 9-11) have as one of their
purposes to emphasize that God has not cancelled
His promises to Israel or transferred them to some other
people! What says Paul in Romans 11:1? "I say then, has
God cast away His people? Certainly not! For I also am an
Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of
Benjamin. God has not cast away His people whom He
foreknew."
Specifically,
what are those promises to Israel? Well, they ultimately
are derived from those to "Father Abraham" in Genesis
12:1-3. To sum them up, they are basically the promises of
a people, a land and a blessing. The
Book of Deuteronomy and the later prophets unite on the
affirmation of these promises to Israel. Chapters 28 and
29 of Deuteronomy clearly delineate the dire consequences
if Israel disobeys the Lord–there will be drought, exile
and suffering–to name only a few of the judgments. But
even if the promises of judgment are fulfilled, that does
not cancel the promises of Israel’s future blessings
–found in Deuteronomy 30. As we will emphasize again in
this brief article, to view the promises of Israel’s
judgement as having been literally fulfilled while
attempting to spiritualize and then transfer the promises
of her blessings to the Church involves an inconsistent
hermeneutic.
As an example
of many such illustrations of this principle, consider
just the prophets Hosea and Micah. In Hosea 3:4 there is a
promise of judgement on Israel which already has been
literally fulfilled: "For the children of Israel shall
abide many days without king or prince, without sacrifice
or sacred pillar, without ephod or teraphim." If that
verse has had a literal fulfillment in Israel’s history of
the last two thousand years, what about the next verse
embodying a promise of blessing for Israel?: "Afterward
the children of Israel shall return, seek the LORD their
God and David their king, and fear the LORD and His
goodness in the latter days." If Israel was punished
literally, they will be blessed literally! Or consider the
dual promises of judgment and blessing in Micah 3:12-4:2:
"Therefore because of you Zion shall be plowed like
a field, Jerusalem shall become heaps of ruins, And the
mountain of the temple like the bare hills of the forest.
Now it shall come to pass in the latter days That
the mountain of the LORD’s house shall be established on
the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the
hills; And peoples shall flow to it. Many nations shall
come and say, ‘Come, and let us go up to the mountain of
the LORD, To the house of the God of Jacob; He will teach
us His ways, And we shall walk in His paths.’ For out of
Zion the law shall go forth, And the word of the LORD from
Jerusalem." The promise of the destruction of Jerusalem
and the Temple was literally fulfilled. Why would anyone
then spiritualize the promise of restoration and blessing
for Jerusalem and the Temple in the very next verses?
Now, someone
may say that although the Old Testament prophets may have
stated that, now in the New Testament the Church is the
so-called "New Israel" and the Church really spiritually
receives those future promises of blessing to Israel. But
this cannot be proved from the New Testament either.
Already we have referred to that great chapter on Israel’s
future, Romans 11. Throughout that chapter the word
"Israel" refers to the Jewish people. Therefore, when Paul
affirms the future blessings for Israel in 11:26-27, why
would he then inject the word with a different meaning?
"And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: "The
Deliverer will come out of Zion, And He will turn away
ungodliness from Jacob; For this is My covenant
with them, When I take away their sins" (Romans 11:26-27).
Paul actually
bases his theology of literal blessings for a literal
Israel on Old Testament prophecies (Isaiah 59:20,21 and
Jeremiah 31:33,34).
Why should the
plain and natural sense of a text be jettisoned? In Luke
1:31-33 seven promises were given to Mary. Five of them
have already literally been fulfilled. Why is someone
authorized to say that the remaining two will not also be
literally fulfilled? Indeed, Christ shall receive the
throne of His father David, and He shall rule over the
house of Jacob forever, literally.
Perhaps we need
to pay closer attention to the words of a layman who
understood the nature of language very well, the poet and
novelist Robert Louis Stevenson:
I cannot
understand how you theologians and preachers can apply
to the Church Scripture promises, which, in their plain
meaning apply to God’s chosen people, Israel; and which
consequently must be future. The prophetic books are
full of teachings which, if they are interpreted
literally, would be inspiring, and a magnificent
assurance of a great and glorious future; but which, as
they are spiritualized, become farcical… as applied to
the Church they are a comedy.