• Home
  
  
• Origins of IFBs
  
  
• About Me
  
  
• Whats New?
  
  
• Articles by Topic
  
  
• IFB Church Directory
  
  
• Links
  
  
• Comments
  
  
• Email Me

Prophecy Made Simple

Israel and the Church
What is the Relationship between the two?

by Larry Harriman

The relationship of Israel to the New Testament Church has always been an interesting, yet challenging topic amongst Christians since the early days of the church.

Some Christians went so far as to try and wipe out any reference to Judaism from their Christian faith. Others embraced the Jews as their own spiritual forefathers and incorporated Jewish customs especially Jewish worship songs into their worship.

Still other Christians, physical Jews, made their own Jewish version of Christianity - these would be known today as Messianic Jews. They accept Jesus as their Messiah and believe the same Gospel we do, but they still practice the old Jewish Customs like the Passover and Feasts in the Old Testament.

They believe like Dispensational Premillennialists, that only they (physical AND spiritual Jews) are the chosen people of God.

While not all Historic Premillennialists will explain the progression of the church exactly as I do - they will all agree that the church is redeemed of all ages. The Dispensationalist rejects this as it contrary to one of the core beliefs of his systematic theology.

In this article I will show why I believe based upon the totality of scriptures that the Dispensational concept of two peoples of God and two separate plans is not Scripturally sound. I will show throughout this article that the Church is, and always has been the redeemed of all ages.

So without further introduction, lets delve into this all important topic of the relationship of Israel to the New Testament Church...

I could quote from many Dispensationalist authors but I have chosen two of the most respected of modern Dispensational authors - Charles Ryrie and J. Dwight Pentecost. I especially admire the work of Charles Ryrie for his balance and his acceptance of the fact that there have been and still are today Godly, conservative, Bible Believing Christians who disagree with the Dispensational Systematic approach to the Scriptures. Dr. Pentecost for the most part is balanced as well, but he is a little harder on those who do not accept the Dispensational Systematic theology he holds so dear.

I want to clarify a term before we go further. When I use the term 'Dispensationalist' throughout this article I am referring to Classic and Revised Dispensational Premillennialists. Progressive Dispensationalists reject the idea of two peoples of God and believe the Church is comprised of the redeemed of all ages. For more information on the various schools of prophetic thought see my article on Introduction to Prophecy.

Charles Ryrie wrote a book which was published in 1966 under the title "Dispensationalism Today". He revised it over the years and the version that I am working from for this article was shortened to just "Dispensationalism" and was published in 1995. This is as the title says "Revised and Expanded" and in it he deals with the new Progressive Dispensational movement.

The book is really not just for teaching the layman Dispensationalism, but it is an avid defense of Dispensationalism. Dispensationalism has in the last 20 to 30 years come under great attack. In fact the Progressive Dispensationalist movement, influenced by Historic Premillennialists like George E. Ladd, has presented the greatest threat to Classic Dispensationalism since it conception in the 19th century.

J. Dwight Pentecost wrote what would be the defining book of his career as Professor at Dallas Theological Seminary. Published originally in 1958, "Things To Come" has become a one stop manual for the modern Dispensationalist. In fact his work, unlike Charles Ryries's, was not just a defense of Dispensationalism, but it was also a handbook for the movement to answer tough questions that Dispensationalists disagreed about amongst themselves.

So what is Dispensationalism according to Charles Ryrie and Dwight Pentecost? Ryrie gives the answer to us in clear and concise terms in his book "Dispensationalism":

"The essence of Dispensationalism, then, is the distinction between Israel and the church."
(page 3, "Dispensationalism")

"The nature of the church is a crucial point of difference between classic, or normative, dispensationalism and other doctrinal systems. Indeed, ecclesiology, or the doctrine of the church, is the touchstone of dispensationalism(and also of pretribulationalism)."
(page 123, "Dispensationalism")

Pentecost, in "Things to Come" gives his definition of a Dispensationalist mingled in with what a Pretribulationist is:

"Pretribulation rapturism rests essentially on one major premise-the literal method of interpretation of the Scriptures. As a necessary adjunct to this, the pretribulationist believes in a dispensational interpretation of the Word of God. The church and Israel are two distinct groups with whom God has a divine plan. The church is a mystery, unrevealed in the Old Testament. This mystery program must be completed before God can resume His program with Israel and bring it to completion. These considerations all arise from a literal method of interpretation."
(page 193, "Things To Come")

According to Ryrie, the distinction (or really separation) of Israel and the Church is "the touchstone" and "the essence of dispensationalism". But how does he define this "distinction" between Israel and the Church?

"The distinctiveness of the character of the church as the Body of Christ is twofold. It is distinct because of who are included within that body(i.e., Jews and Gentiles as fellow heirs) and it is distinct because of the new relationships of being in Christ and of Christ's indwelling the members of that body. Both of these distinctives are unique with the church and were not known or experianced by God's people in Old Testament times or even during the earthly lifetime of our Lord..."

"The inclusion of Jews and Gentiles in the same body is a mystery, the contents of which is "that the Gentiles are fellow heirs, and fellow members of the body, and fellow partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel"(Eph 3:6) It is a mystery that "in other generations was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed to His holy Apostles and prophets in the Spirit"(vs.5).

The amillennialist tries to undermine the importance of this declaration by insisting that the word as in verse 5 shows that this mystery was partially revealed in Old Testament times and therefore is not distinctive to the church age. Even if the as could be so construed, that does not mean that the body composed of Jews and Gentiles was in existence in Old Testament times."
(page 124, "Dispensationalism")

In the future I plan on writing a rebuttal of Charles Ryrie's book in full, but for the purposes of this article we will deal with his and Dwight Pentecost's beliefs concerning the church.

We can gather from the quotes above that Dispensationalists believe the New Testament Church was a mystery - completely unknown in the Old Testament. They also say that the church is "distinct" from Israel. We can see that Dispensationalists believe their conclusions are the only natural conclusions one can come to if they interpret the Bible using the "literal method".

Now that we have established what the Dispensationalist believes about the relationship of Israel and the Church - we will move into what I believe as a Historic Premillennialist and contrast that with the Dispensational Positions.

The most powerful argument that Dispensationalist has in his arsenal is that his is the most "literal method" of interpreting the Scriptures. In reality the Dispensationalist interprets the Old Testament literally and then uses the Old Testament to interpret the New Testament.

George Ladd, who was a Historic Premillennialist, said this about Dispensationalism:

"Here is the basic watershed between a dispensational and a non-dispensational theology. Dispensationalism forms its eschatology by a literal interpretation of the Old Testament and then fits the New Testament into it. A non-dispensational eschatology forms its theology from the explicit teaching of the New Testament."
(page 27, "The Meaning of the Millennium - Four Views")

Another way you could say it is that Dispensationalists interpret the New Testament with the Old Testament while a non-dispensationalist, such as a Historic Premillennialist, interprets the Old Testament with the New Testament.

While I do not always agree with Ladd, I agree with him that the Old Testament prophecies many times where fulfilled in a way that was not seen in the context of which they were written. In other words, many Old Testament prophecies had a contemporary meaning and were a 'type' of something to come in the future.

The Dispensationalist is confronted with this truth as many passages that were directly addressed to Israel in the Old Testament are applied to the New Testament Church.

I have previously quoted from the book "The Meaning of the Millennium - Four Views". This is an excellent book for anyone wanting to see what the various prophetic schools believe. It has 4 scholars, George Ladd(Historic Premillennialist), Herman Hoyt(Dispensational Premillennialist), Loraine Boettner(Postmillennialist) and Anthony Hoekema(Amillennialist) give short essays on their various positions. Then it has each one give a brief rebuttal to the others positions.

Even Herman Hoyt an avid Dispensationalist, in a rebuttal against George Ladd admits that Old Testament Prophecies are applied to the New Testament Church:

"Even though "the New Testament applies Old Testament prophecies to the New Testament church"(pg.23), it does not do so in the sense of identifying the church as spiritual Israel. It makes such application merely for the purpose of explaining something that is true of both."
(page 43, "The Meaning of the Millennium: Four Views")

But Hoyt, like most Dispensationalists, will contend that even though Old Testament prophecies are applied to the New Testament Church this does not make the New Testament Church the same as spiritual Israel.

Dispensationalists will contend that they do interpret the New Testament literally as well, but that it is interpreted in light of the Old Testament. I say based on my experience growing up as a Dispensationalist that Dispensationalists come to the Bible with a preconceived notion that the Old Testament was written strictly and only to physical Jews. They believe that we may glean principles from the Old Testament, but that the Old Testament does not apply to the New Testament Church.

I do not believe the Dispensationalist consistently uses a literal method of interpreting the Scriptures - especially in the case of the relationship of Israel to the New Testament Church. It is the purpose of this article to prove from the Word of God that Dispensationalism has a faulty view of the relationship of Israel to the New Testament Church. In coming articles I will give examples of how Dispensationalists are selective as to where they apply their "literal method".

And now after much introduction about what Dispensationalists believe I will seek to articulate what I and many other Christians (not just Historic Premillennialists) believe.

To understand the relationship of Israel to the Church we must understand what we mean by "Israel" and what we mean by the "Church".

Israel

"Israel" biblically speaking can refer to a nation as well as to an ethnic group of people also known as "Jews". Israel, much like the New Testament Church today, had true believers and false professors. Paul explains this concept in his epistle to the Romans:

"1 I speak the truth in Christ--I am not lying, my conscience confirms it in the Holy Spirit-- 2 I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. 3 For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, those of my own race, 4 the people of Israel. Theirs is the adoption as sons; theirs the divine glory, the covenants, the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises. 5 Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God over all, forever praised! Amen. 6It is not as though God's word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel. 7 Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham's children."
Romans 9:1-7(NIV)

"1 I ask then: Did God reject his people? By no means! I am an Israelite myself, a descendant of Abraham, from the tribe of Benjamin. 2 God did not reject his people, whom he foreknew. Don't you know what the Scripture says in the passage about Elijah--how he appealed to God against Israel: 3"Lord, they have killed your prophets and torn down your altars; I am the only one left, and they are trying to kill me"? 4And what was God's answer to him? "I have reserved for myself seven thousand who have not bowed the knee to Baal." 5 So too, at the present time there is a remnant chosen by grace."
Romans 11:1-5(NIV)

The Apostle Paul speaks of his sorrow for his "brothers", those of his "own race". Who does he say his "brothers" and his "own race" are? They are "the people of Israel". He goes on to say that "it is not as though God's word had failed". In other words God kept his promises to Israel and just because the nation as whole rejected their messiah their was still "a remnant" of Israel who did believe and accepted their Messiah. This was the true, believing, spiritual Israel.

At this point the Dispensationalist (as well as Messianic Jews) are applauding because they still believe that the people of Israel are the chosen people of God. These passages make it clear that God has not rejected his people.

Some who reject Dispensational Theology say that we (the New Testament Church) have replaced Israel. That cannot be true according to Romans 9 and Romans 11. My contention with the Dispensationalist is not that I believe we (the New Testament Church) have replaced Israel, it that we have been added in with Israel. In other words, saved Jews are still the chosen people of God, but we are added in with them. There are not two "chosen peoples of God". There is one - this is evident from the scriptures.

Ephesians chapter 2 is a terrible blow to the Dispensational argument that there are two peoples of God and that we have nothing to do with the covenants and promises made to Israel:

"11Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth and called "uncircumcised" by those who call themselves "the circumcision" (that done in the body by the hands of men)-- 12remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. 13But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near through the blood of Christ. 14For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace, 16and in this one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility. 17He came and preached peace to you who were far away and peace to those who were near. 18For through him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit. 19Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and aliens, but fellow citizens with God's people and members of God's household, 20built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone. 21In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord. 22And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit. "
Ephesians 2:11-22(NIV)

In Ephesians chapter 2 Paul clearly explains the relationship of Israel to the Church. Paul says that we (previously unbelieving Gentiles) "were...excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise". Then Paul states at the end of the passage that we "are no longer foreigners and aliens, but fellow citizens with God's people and members of God's household".

Paul also tells us that Christ "abolished...the law with its commandments and regulations.". This follows right in line with Hebrews chapter 7 where we read "For when there is a change of the priesthood, there must also be a change of the law."(vs.12) and "The former regulation is set aside...". In chapter 8 we hear the conclusion of this matter "By calling this covenant "new," he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear."(vs.13). The Mosaic Law and Covenant are done away with for Gentiles AND Jews. Christ was the fulfillment of the Law. After he fulfilled it, he abolished it and we are now under the New Covenant and Law of Christ.

The Dispensationalist will say that Israel (believing Jews) and the Church (believing Gentiles) are two peoples of God and together make up "God's household". In the Dispensationalist mind set, the bringing together of believing Jews and Gentiles in one body is only temporary - for this dispensation (or the "Church Age") and later in the millennial Kingdom these distinctions will be in place again. Some Dispensationalists have even said that eventually the Jews will be the earthly people of God and the Gentiles will be the heavenly people of God. The problem is that this concept can never be found in any New Testament passage. Paul is clear that the divisions that the Mosaic Law and Covenant made are abolished in Christ and that God has made "out of the two" - "one new man".

The Dispensationalist likes to use the phrase "His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two" to make their claim that this "one new man" is the church, unforeseen in the Old Testament and a mystery. Was this really unforeseen?

"23What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory-- 24even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles? 25As he says in Hosea: "I will call them 'my people' who are not my people; and I will call her 'my loved one' who is not my loved one," 26and, "It will happen that in the very place where it was said to them, 'You are not my people,' they will be called 'sons of the living God.'" 27Isaiah cries out concerning Israel: "Though the number of the Israelites be like the sand by the sea, only the remnant will be saved. 28For the Lord will carry out his sentence on earth with speed and finality." 29It is just as Isaiah said previously: "Unless the Lord Almighty had left us descendants, we would have become like Sodom, we would have been like Gomorrah.""
Romans 9:23-29(NIV)

Clearly, Paul tells us in the book of Romans that the Prophets foretold a day when the Gentiles would be saved. The Jews thought they would always be the majority people of God - really the only people of God since Abraham. But God revealed that would not always be the case.

Dispensationalists again will also latch on to the phrase "one new man". The say the grouping of the Gentiles together is a "new" and therefore separate entity from spiritual Israel. This however is refuted in Romans chapter 11 where it says we were "grafted in" in the olive tree. God did not make a new tree, he grafted us into the existing tree. Now, is the olive tree representative of only Israel? No, while it includes Israel (believing Jews) it also includes believers before Israel, the root in essence is Adam - the first believer.

The Bible is the story of the "Sons of God" - the people of God (the redeemed of all ages) - that is what the Church is. At a certain point in time, God chose to show his glory and work through the seed of one man - Abraham. His children would become a nation and represent God on earth. So from the time of Abraham to the time of Christ most of the elect (redeemed, household of God) were physical Jews. Although there were some exceptions of Gentiles being brought in like Rahab and Ruth.

After Christ, the Gentiles (non-physical Jews) were brought to belief by God in mass numbers. Now a shift took place in the household of God, it was restructured. Physical Jews had made up the majority of the household of God for many centuries, but now non-physical Jews (gentiles) would make up the majority and only a "remnant" of Jews would be saved during this period.

Does this mean that the physical Jewish people have no special place with God? Absolutely Not! They still are special to God and he will bring an entire generation of physical Jews to himself in the latter days. Another way to say this is that amongst God's spiritual people(Jews and Gentiles) there is not distinction, and no separate plan. But amongst the physical peoples of the earth (physical Jews and Gentiles) God has and does deal with them differently.

I realize at this point that this is confusing, but you must separate the physical from the spiritual. No one can deny that God has blessed the physical Jewish people and watched over them providentially throughout the centuries. I do believe the scriptures are clear that God will bring to himself an entire generation of physical Jews in the last days.

But, the fact that God will bring an entire generation of physical Jews back to himself does not justify the notion that God has two separate spiritual peoples with two separate plans. We will rule and reign together, believing Jews and Gentiles together in the millennial reign of Christ. We have a common spiritual destiny - we are one spiritual body.

Here is the final equation based on the Bible:

The Church = The elect of God from the foundations of the world
(Pre-Israel believers + Israel believers + Post Israel believing Jews and Gentiles).

Other articles on Prophecy:

Introduction to Biblical Doctrines concerning the end times
A Historic Premillennial Timeline