Many in contemporary Christianity would have us think so. To not support the modern nation of Israel in any way is to invite God's curses they say. Then Genesis 12:3 is often brought in for the heavy artillery: "I will bless those who bless you, and him who dishonors you I will curse, and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.” It is on this passage that many of today's Christians promote a backing of almost anything that the modern state of Israel does, especially in regards to the land. It is rather a peculiar and erroneous view since Israel, as it stands now, not only rejects Christ but also prevents the proclamation of His name and persecutes His Bride. There is much more, so much more, that I wish to speak on this issue and I will in the future but for now I simply defer to Jamin Hubner of RealApologetics.org and a contributor to Dr. James White's blog at aomin.org. Jamin's full article on this topic can be found here.
To wet your appetite here are a few quotes: "But, why should we be surprised at these facts? The Old Testament describes the New Covenant with the terms “house of Israel and the house of Judah” (Jeremiah 31:31), and this includes the whole church. Grudem correctly summarizes, 'it seems hard to avoid the conclusion that the author views the church as the true Israel of God in which the Old Testament promises to Israel find their fulfillment.'”
"So, what’s the point? The point is that there has, is, and always will be one chosen people of God. The covenantal administrations throughout redemptive history differ. That’s clear. But it is even more clear that there is continuity in God’s saving work. It is a serious stretch – the stretch of Darby that ignored centuries of church history – to assert an absolute dichotomy, let alone a stark contrast between the Jews and the New Covenant Christians. Since Christ has come, all believers are, as the Scriptures say, 'the offspring of Abraham, heirs according to the promise.'”
"Therefore, it is unfounded to suggest that God started a new program and people in isolation from Israel with the beginning of the New Covenant. God 'grafted in' a new branch into the existing tree, not planted a new tree altogether."
"What is unbiblical is (a) equivocating modern Israel with Old Testament Israel, and (b) instructing the church to embrace (if not enforce) part of a covenant (e.g. promised blessings) without supporting the rest of the covenant (e.g. promised curses). The former (a) has largely been addressed in the first half of this work. The latter (b) needs further elaboration."
Concerning another proof-text of Dispensationalists in Gen. 48:3-4: "First, the question is not whether 'forever' means 'forever' or if 'everlasting' means 'everlasting.' The question is whether 'descendants' in these Old Testament texts mean 'ethnic Jews and them only.' Because, as it was already demonstrated, Paul (and countless other non-Zionist conservative scholars) teach that all believers since the work of Christ are “offspring of Abraham, heirs according to the promise.” Jew or not, all believers are members of one “household.” Indeed, “there is neither Jew nor Gentile…for you are all one in Jesus Christ.”
It is a very good article and I encourage you to read the whole thing here. Far be it from me to support the Christ rejecting nation of Israel in whatever she does. The land is not hers but the Lord's: “The land shall not be sold in perpetuity, for the land is mine. For you are strangers and sojourners with me" (Le 25:23). Soli Deo Gloria!
For His Glory,
Fernando
No comments:
Post a Comment