Let me first start off by saying, I don’t believe the Church replaces Israel. I don’t know how anyone comes to that conclusion. The first question that should come to mind is replaces Israel how? Or replaces Israel with whom? So I don’t believe that at all. However I do believe something radically different than my Dispensational brethren and thus the premise of this post. What is that belief? I believe that two people became one people at Pentecost! I will explain why I think that in a brief second. What I mean is that at Pentecost Christ took believing Jews and believing Gentiles (which I believe are the elect of God predestined and foreknew by the Father before the foundation of the world expressed clearly back in Ephesians 1) and them one people and named them the Church. This church is the mystery Paul talks about in Ephesians 2 which was hidden in the past but now revealed. Peter also uses the same language in 1 Peter 2.
What does that say of ethnic Israel today? Well for one, they are in the same category as other nonbelievers. The covenant that they possessed (the one that made them a nation in Exodus 20) has been eradicated and a new and gracious covenant has been put in its place and it is not based on ethnicity but on faith (Hebrews 7-10 clearly states this, not to mention Galatians 3). So what Israel received by ethnicity God now offers by faith. The Sinaic covenant has been replaced and the covenant ratified by Jesus Christ is now the only way to God. Let me explain why I think there are only one people of God.
Ephesians 2:11-22 (emphasis mine)
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— 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. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. 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 15 by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, 16 and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility. 17 And he came and preached peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near. 18 For through him we both have access in one Spirit to the Father. 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, 20 built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, 21 in whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord. 22 In him you also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit.
and……
Ephesians 3:1-6
3:1 For this reason I, Paul, a prisoner for Christ Jesus on behalf of you Gentiles— 2 assuming that you have heard of the stewardship of God’s grace that was given to me for you, 3 how the mystery was made known to me by revelation, as I have written briefly. 4 When you read this, you can perceive my insight into the mystery of Christ, 5 which was not made known to the sons of men in other generations as it has now been revealed to his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit. 6 This mystery is that the Gentiles are fellow heirs, members of the same body, and partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel.
My Thoughts….
So here are my thoughts on this subject. Once again this is not a harmful jab at my brethren but it is a jab none the less. One thing that my Dispensational brethren are very fond of saying is that “we interpret the Bible literally”. So I want to apply that “literal” hermeneutic to this epistle. Once again, the Ephesians upon reading this letter has no clue what dispensationalism is, but neither did anyone else to a about hundred and something years ago. So lets take a time capsule back into the 1st century after attending seminary and hold a conversation with some of the elders in Ephesus.
Dispensational:Hey I am from the 21st century and have found this time capsule that allows me to go back in time. I can only stay 1 hour due to limitations. How are you?
Ephesian Elder: I am doing great, wow Christianity has made all over the world? That is amazing, we never knew it would get so big! Praise God what Paul said we now know to be true. We are even more encouraged.
Dispensational: Yeah Israel has become a Nation again we can see God ushering in His Kingdom. God promises to His special people are unfolding before our eyes!!!!!
Ephesian Elder: ????? I am puzzled what do you mean special people?
Dispensational: You know, we are just a parenthesis in God’s plan but His promise to bring Israel, back in the land and give them all the past promises and “save them all” is unfolding.
Ephesian Elder: Where did you hear that from? Paul just wrote us a letter and he says we now partake int the commonwealth and the ALLLLL of the promises because of what Christ did on the cross. There is no more dividing wall, no more hostility, and we are no longer two people but one and Christ is the head. We are being built up into one holy temple of God.
Dispensational: No, no, no! God is going to rapture the Church and then do something special with His chosen people. You must be greatly mistaken or you are taking Paul’s letter out of context. Haven’t you read the Old Testament.
Ephesian Elder: Oh yes I have read it and all of the promises are found in Christ. He is the “true Israel” of God, He succeeds where they fail. He is the true seed of Abraham and faith in Him makes us all one people my dear friend.
Dispensational:Well…, I have to go, but I think you are greatly mistaken. My system says that we are in the Dispensation of the Church age and the Kingdom Age is soon to come.
Ephesian Elder: ???? What does that mean?
Above is a short hypothetical conversation that I think would occur if my brethren were to take a time capsule back into the first century. I don’t see how from the plain reading of Ephesians we get two distinct people when Paul constantly uses the word “one”. Let me show you.
v. 14 – For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one
v. 15 – that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two
v. 16 – and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility
v. 18 – For through him we both have access in one Spirit to the Father
Now unless one means two in this epistle I have a really hard time agreeing that there are still two distinct people in God’s plan. God in Christ has made one people and they are His elect and gave them one name and that is The Church! This organism now is how Christ will make Himself known to the world (John 17). There is no more us vs them and Gentiles are no longer aliens but sons and heirs of God through faith as He promised Abraham back in Genesis. This great mystery has been made evident to all of the rulers and authorities in the heavenly places. Peter puts it this way:
9 But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light. 10 Once you were not a people, but now you are God’s people; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.
You see we are longer dogs as Jesus called the Samaritan woman. No, my friend we are children (John 1:13) of God and heirs to the promises of God. We are now as Peter says “a holy nation” (ethnic Israel was under the Old Covenant), “a royal priesthood” (the Levites were under the Old Covenant) “a chosen race” (ethic Israel was the race through the physical seed of Abraham under the Old Covenant). Why? “That we may proclaim His excellencies” (which if you read the Torah was the very reason God chose Israel). The church isn’t a mishap in God’s plan but as Paul writes in Chapter 1 of Ephesus this was “before the foundation of the world”!
In closing. This is my take as I use the plain literal meaning to interpret the scriptures. God’s plan was to redeem the world through Christ. Israel was given the privilege under the Old Covenant, but we are given the obligation under the New, to proclaim God’s excellencies. No longer are there two people but one people, and Christ is the head. No more hostility, no more gentile vs Jew but one people under one Covenant ratified in Acts 2. I am thankful that I am no longer a “dog” (LOL) but a child and heir to all of the promises of God found in Christ Jesus. Amen that God has allowed us to be witnesses of His long veiled mystery!
Trouble L!! The conversation was funny but oh so true as I have had many times. The common dispensation rebuttle is that their system tells them to say is that “ephesians is dealing with the church and that is not part of their eschatological system. Two different topics they say. Hal Lindsey seems to ride a lot on that whole “Israel became a nation thing too.” Good write bro. Very Legitimate points that will make many angry and possibly even accuse you of heresy since their system is being quesitoned. We have come along way like many by simply questioning what we have been taught over the years if it does not add up. God Bless
Then let me be the first to say: “HERETIC!”
There, got that out of the way.
So you mean to tell me that salvation is by faith alone? That by some miracle we (the gentiles) have been grafted in to the chosen of God? O, I’ve heard that before. Let me see, where was that…oh yeah, Romans.
That Paul, what a nut. You know I only trust the red letters.
Now, all kidding aside, I do believe that there are some specific apocalyptic issues that deal with Israel and the Jews. As the Bible says they are blind or have a veil. But true too, is that so did I until God lifted it from the metaphorical tomb opening and called “come forth!”
So do I believe the events of the nation Israel such as becoming a nation again and so forth are significant? Absolutely. but there can be no doubt that the Church has as much a part of God’s plan as Israel proper from the beginning “according to His good pleasure”.
Interesting use of time relevance, can the same discourse be used for Christ’s future coming, what would the Ephesians Elder say to the futurist?
Well since the book of Ephesians was written before 70 A.D he probably would have more questions. Not saying I believe in the Preterist system but from your own perspective the temple would have still been standing thus He would still be waiting a future return.
Lionel, thanks for your post. There has been some confusion on what’s going on with Israel and the Church, and there really needs to be some type of dialogue. So thanks for opening it up.
I will say that I don’t know anyone who argues from this text that Paul is not dealing with the uniting of two previously estranged groups, Jews and Gentiles, into one new body, the Church. To my knowledge, both dispensationalists and non-dispensationalists agree on that note. God, through Christ, is bringing Jews and Gentiles, i.e., all ethnic groups, into one new community. To that we all praise the Lord!
I don’t think, though, that dispensationalists mean, when they speak of a “parenthesis”, that the church is a “mishap” in God’s plan. What they would say, however, is that the Church is in some way a “mystery” that was not revealed until this letter in progressive revelation. Yes, God’s plan was always to bless Gentiles as well as Jews, but it was not until this time that God had revealed that that blessing would come through their being united in equality in Christ.
Now remember that this passage is dealing with the unity of believing Jews and Gentiles in the Church of Christ (theological, not denominational). But what about passages like Romans 9-11, which notes that though the remnant of believing Jews have come to faith in Christ and are experiencing the blessings of God in Christ, Paul’s heart was still for the whole of national Israel. Paul argues that God has been pouring out mercy on the Gentiles for this time during which Israel has been hardened. When the fullness of the Gentiles are grafted in, God will remove the hardening and will save all Israel.
I know this is a debated passage, but “literal interpretation” would suggest that Israel, the larger entity, not the remnant (note the “mystery” language– how would the salvation of the believing remnant be a mystery?!), will one day believe in the Gospel and be saved. So there is some type of distinction at least here in this passage between the remnant that we would say is included in the Church and the whole of Israel yet to believe. The issue of timing is at least in the future, but that’s all that we can say from that text (By the way, the idea of national Israel being saved in the future is not an exclusively dispensational idea, as Schreiner and Moo agree with that much in their commentaries).
All of this is to say that the point of Ephesians 2-3 is clear, but it is only a portion of revelation. This is the enjoyable part of studying the Scriptures, man. We come at it from different angles and, hopefully, can reach some type of agreement or consensus. Thanks for the jabs, though, man (Prov. 27:6).
Hey Ron,
First thanks for the comments brother. Very gracious (as expected) and somewhat thorough. I know you can add more and I will give you a chance by asking you a question.
If there is now only one people of God and all of these people are brought together by faith in Christ under the New Covenant (Hebrews 8, Jer 31) then how is that most of my dispensational brothers continually speak of two people? I am saying that “all the promises of God are found in Christ” and the two are now one under one Gracious covenant.
The next question is what exactly does a parenthesis mean then? I take this to mean that it was Israel (the Church) then Israel again where the promises made under the Old Covenant will continue under the new and if they do continue shouldn’t they apply to the “true people of God” which are those brought under Christ by faith in the promise?
Curious on how this works in the scheme of progressive dispensationalism. Thanks.
To answer your first question, dispensationalism (for anyone who knows dispensationalism, this is treading on thin ice, since there may be as many flavors of dispensationalism as there are baptists) sees a distinction between national ethnic Israel and believing ethnic Jews. The believing ethnic Jews have been joined together with believing Gentiles to form the Church. The national ethnic Israel that remains are, for now, outside of the camp. This is consistent with Paul’s mention of a hardening on Israel in Rom. 11. The main question is this: does national ethnic Israel’s current position outside of the camp and the Gentiles’ inclusion in God’s spiritual blessings mean that the covenants to national Israel have either been nullified or amended? Do they still have any claim to the promises and covenants of God?
It is obvious that the terms of the New Covenant were given to “the house of Israel and the house of Judah” (Jer. 31:31). Are “house” and “remnant” synonymous? Dispensationalists would say no, but “remnant” is only part of the “house”. Unless there is a change in sense here, “house” has yet to be fulfilled. Again, this would be consistent with Paul’s mystery in Rom. 11. Thus, though there is one Jew/Gentile people in Christ called the Church, there still awaits a day when the remaining house of Israel will believe in Christ and be saved.
I personally would say that within the people of God there are different nuances. There are significant similarities despite these differences (this continuity is how application is possible at all), but the differences are real. There is enough similarity to say that there is one people of God, but there is also enough distinction to say that different people had different functions within the purposes of God.
Sorry to take so much time, but to answer your second question, I don’t know too much about the ideas of the Mosaic Covenant in the future, but I do know that most dispensationalists do not take “parenthesis” to mean a disconnected part of God’s plan. I think that it is dealing with the emphasis in God’s plan, as God had primarily been dealing with the Jews, then he turned primarily to the Gentiles, and then he would turn again to the Jews. But parenthesis shouldn’t mean disconnection. Rather, God’s plan had always been to bless Jews and Gentiles, and, as Rom. 9-11 teaches, God had chosen to pour out his blessing on Israel, culminating in the birth and ministry of the Christ. Her unbelief was a part of God’s plan to extend mercy to the Gentiles, while maintaining a remnant of believing Jews. When he has grafted in the fullness of the Gentiles, he will again have mercy on Israel for her faith and salvation.
In sum (because this is much longer than a blog comment should be), I believe that national Israel is right now in unbelief and are not functioning as the people of God today as such. God has kept for himself a remnant as he did in the days of Elijah. But God’s gifts and calling are irrevocable. He will fulfill his promises to the nation through the person and work of Christ. They will one day believe in the Gospel unto salvation. There are more facets to it all, of course, but that’s the basic gist of it. Note that I’m not talking two ways of salvation, but one way of salvation by grace through faith in Jesus. I’m still working through the implications of progressive disp.
Very good explanation ronjourlocke.
Ronjour you said:
It is obvious that the terms of the New Covenant were given to “the house of Israel and the house of Judah” (Jer. 31:31). Are “house” and “remnant” synonymous? Dispensationalists would say no, but “remnant” is only part of the “house”. Unless there is a change in sense here, “house” has yet to be fulfilled. Again, this would be consistent with Paul’s mystery in Rom. 11. Thus, though there is one Jew/Gentile people in Christ called the Church, there still awaits a day when the remaining house of Israel will believe in Christ and be saved.
Now I am even more troubled, maybe you can answer DJ, does this verse not apply to the chruch in Hebrews 8:
For he finds fault with them when he says:
“Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord,
when I will establish a new covenant with the house of Israel
and with the house of Judah,
9 not like the covenant that I made with their fathers
on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt.
For they did not continue in my covenant,
and so I showed no concern for them, declares the Lord.
10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel
after those days, declares the Lord:
I will put my laws into their minds,
and write them on their hearts,
and I will be their God,
and they shall be my people.
11 And they shall not teach, each one his neighbor
and each one his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’
for they shall all know me,
from the least of them to the greatest.
12 For I will be merciful toward their iniquities,
and I will remember their sins no more.”
13 In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.
If not then nothing else in the book of Hebrews applies to the church either correct? The writer of Hebrews takes Jeremiah 31 and applies it to the Church or the Body of Christ.
The covenant in Jeremiah is realized in Christ correct? What do I do with these verses?
Lionel, I’m a little confused by your math. You start off by saying that you don’t believe that the Church has replaced Israel and yet you end up effectively with the church as replacing Israel.
you said – “Now unless one means two in this epistle I have a really hard time agreeing that there are still two distinct people in God’s plan. God in Christ has made one people and they are His elect and gave them one name and that is The Church!”
According to that statement two now have become one, which appears to be the opposite of your opening statement. You sound a little “Kingdom/Dominion Nowish”. But I believe that Israel the Nation or House as ronjour put it, is still very much in play which Paul explains in Romans 11. We know that salvation is only through Christ Jesus and Israel will/can not escape that!
To answer your question, I’m not sure where it’s been said or implied in the above posts that the writer of Hebrews 8 wasn’t addressing Jewish Believers.
God Bless!
I Ain’t Nobody!
DJ,
In what ways have I said the Chruch replaces Israel. Or better yet who was Israel that the church needed to replace them. The Church was ALWAYS GODS PLAN! So the church no more replaces Israel as Israel was “a beliving people of God”. You see God destroyed those for what reason? Unbelief. How many of the adults were truely followers of God? Well all we see is about 4. Aaron, Moses, Caleb, and Joshua. The rest were left to die and the writer of Hebrews says in Chapter 4 that this was “unbelief” a lack of faith which means they did not trust God for salvation. So the church doesn’t replace Israel in any sense. Israel was a picture of an unbeilieving people of God the church is purchased by Christ. We need to look at this from an elect non elect perspective. Just because they were saved physcially doesn’t mean they were saved spiritiually. They always rejected God as seen by the rejecting of thier Messiah. Christ came for the elect not Israel.
Grace be unto you Lionel,
Maybe I’m misinterpreting something. From reading your post you appear to be saying that Israel has been fulfilled in Christ?
“Ephesian Elder: Oh yes I have read it and all of the promises are found in Christ. He is the “true Israel” of God, He succeeds where they fail. He is the true seed of Abraham and faith in Him makes us all one people my dear friend.”
No doubt about it, all are one in Christ, but are you saying that Israel is no longer a distinct people still at play in the future plan of God?
If so, that looks like a flavor of replacement to me, but I could be wrong.
I Ain’t Nobody!
Before we continue let me ask you a few questions.
1. From Eternity Past what was God’s plan as it relates to redemption?
2. What do you mean by replace? Replace how? Or in other words who was God’s special people whom Christ died to redeem? Israel or the Elect?
3. What does Paul mean when he says “but a Jew is one Inwardly” in Romans 2
4. What does Peter mean when he says “you are a chosen nation” in 1 Peter 2 (same language that applied to Israel)
5. Finally, what does Paul mean when he says “and to your offspring who is Christ” in Galatians 3?
Lets start from there because I would rather wrestle through the scriptures that made me draw this conclusion.
What conclusion? You never answered my questions! Maybe an answer could have clarified my confusion.
1. From Eternity Past what was God’s plan as it relates to redemption? – God’s plan was to reconcile sinful man through the work of a sinless Christ.
2. What do you mean by replace? Replace how? Or in other words who was God’s special people whom Christ died to redeem? Israel or the Elect? – Israel and the Elect.
3. What does Paul mean when he says “but a Jew is one Inwardly” in Romans 2 – He is referencing the differences between circumcision of the Spirit and the law. Refuting those that boast in their unbelief.
4. What does Peter mean when he says “you are a chosen nation” in 1 Peter 2 – He is referencing the fact that now gentiles as a wild olive tree have been grafted into the cultivated olive tree and are now partakers in the riches of God through Christ Jesus.
5. Finally, what does Paul mean when he says “and to your offspring who is Christ” in Galatians 3? – What verse is this found or what version of bible?
I Ain’t Nobody!
Oh my bad. That is exactly what I am saying. Not that the Church replaces Israel but Christ is the fulfillment of Israel. Those promises were types and shadows (Tabernacle, Law, Passover, Feasts, Sabbath, and Promised Land and Levitical Priesthood are all fulfilled in Christ). I am referring to Galatians 3:16 the NASB says seed the ESV renders it offspring. However the verse is saying the promise was to Christ not the many.
So you do believe that there are two distinct people group in God’s plan the Israelite and the Elect. I am getting this from you answer in question 2. I believe the one people language in Ephesians, Peter and Galatians refutes such a statement.
Can you explain what you meant in your answer to Hebrews 8 the fulfillment of Jeremiah 31. Thanks.
Thanks Lionel!
My understanding is that the oneness language in Ephesians, Peter and Galatians refer to our oneness as the Elect in Christ.
I believe the writer is speaking to Jewish Believers and in verse 8 explains that Christ’s priestly abode is seated in a heavenly tabernacle as administrator of a new (unconditional) covenant vs. the old (conditional) covenant.
I Ain’t Nobody!
So that would mean the entire letter is to the Jewish believers then correct. The letter is only addressed to the recipents of the letter thus you would have to say that all of it is addressed to them and every imperative in it ony applies to those Jewish believers correct?
I also agree that it talks about our election in Christ but that election is based on a New Covenant. Christ says “this is the New Covenant in my blood”. If that New Covenant is only for Jewish Believers we have some serious problems.
How is that any different than the letters Paul wrote to Ephesian, Galatian or Corinthian Believers… weren’t those letters only addressed to those Believers? Though that’s not to say that the information in the letters aren’t for all Believers which you already know. I fail to see the point of the question.
The writer of Hebrews went to great lengths to explain what was a precarious situation for Jewish Believers. Wouldn’t their situation be much different from the Gentiles in that Jesus… Messiah had been crucified? So now you’re (the Believing Jew) torn between two worlds, the one you’ve known as a Jew (the Law) and the one of faith! I would think that’s a little different than Gentile Believers.
I don’t believe I’ve insinuated that the New Covenant is only for Jewish Believers.
I Ain’t Nobody!
It is only different if you are saying that the application of that verse is only for Jews. That is what it sounded like when you said:
I believe the writer is speaking to Jewish Believers and in verse 8 explains that Christ’s priestly abode is seated in a heavenly tabernacle as administrator of a new (unconditional) covenant vs. the old (conditional) covenant.
I believe that the Holy Spirit was speaking to all believers and that the application of this is what abolishes the Old Covenant (including the 10 Commandments) and sets up the New Covenant where both Jew and Gentile our made into one people and a new organism is formed which is the Church, thus “there is no Jew nor Greek” all who are in Christ is the True Israel.
Quite an interesting viewpoint… thanx Lionel!
I Ain’t Nobody!