How Should Adventists View Modern Israel?

[CGMedley]

The West Bank. Gaza Strip. Palestinian state. How should Adventists view modern-day Israel?

The Adventist Review staff offers an indepth look into this prophetic nation. The insights may surprise you.

http://www.adventistreview.org/issue.php?issue=2007-1531&page=8

[John317]

The article contained, in part, the following paragraph:

Israel Field president Elofer agrees that handling the question of so-called “replacement theology” is a delicate one: “Today it is not rare that Jews come to me and ask me, ‘What does your church believe about Israel? Have they been rejected and replaced by the church or not?’ If we say the traditional answer to this question, we have no chance to be listened to in Israel.”

Is the "traditional answer" true or not? If it is true, and I believe it is, then shouldn't we be telling the truth (as winsomely as possible, of course) no matter what and leaving the results with God? It doesn't mean we ought to give emphasis to this before people are prepared to hear it, but neither should we prevaricate. We shouldn't be compromising the truth for the sake of some so-called advantage for our church. That is exactly how history records the early church began to allow false doctrines to enter in. Let's learn that lesson from the past and stick to Bible truth, even if it's unpopular or inconvenient.

[Gerr]

Paul raised the question back in his day.

"I say then, has God cast away His people? CERTAINLY NOT!" Rom 11:1. From the standpoint of salvation, they have not been rejected. Through faith in the Messiah they can be grafted in again. From the standpoint of a nation as His chosen people, their "70 wks" probation has expired. Israel as a nation rejected the book of Daniel because to accept Daniel is to accept the fact that Jesus was/is the Messiah. Paul says that because of unbelief only a "remnant" of Israel will be saved.

Gerry

[John317]

Exactly right. Any Jew can be saved just as any non-Jew, by placing faith in the Messiah. God certainly hasn't rejected Jews as individuals.

As far as salvation is concerned, there is no difference between Jew and Gentile. "Therefore know that only those who are of faith are sons of Abraham... There is neither Jew nor Greek... for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise" (Gal. 3: 7, 28, 29; compare carefully Romans 9: 6-8).

[Ron Amnsn]

If we teach that the Jewish people no longer have covenant status with God, then are we not teaching that God is a covenant-breaker -- a God whose word cannot be trusted?

Romans 8 and 11 both quote from Jeremiah 31 when talking about the promise of the new covenant. If we read the rest of Jeremiah 31 we see that God was very clear that the new covenant did not include a rejection of the physical Israelites as a nation:

Quote:

Thus says the LORD, Who gives the sun for light by day And the fixed order of the moon and the stars for light by night, Who stirs up the sea so that its waves roar; The LORD of hosts is His name:

"If this fixed order departs From before Me," declares the LORD, "Then the offspring of Israel also will cease From being a nation before Me forever." Thus says the LORD, "If the heavens above can be measured And the foundations of the earth searched out below, Then I will also cast off all the offspring of Israel For all that they have done," declares the LORD.

(Jer. 31:35-37)

Have the heavens been measured, have the foundations of the earth been searched out? No. Then we know that God has not cast off the offspring of Israel for what they have done. God's covenant with Israel anticipated that they would disobey and contained provisions for their restoration.

In Jeremiah 33 God says specifically that His covenant with Israel will last as long as there is day and night:

Quote:

Have you not observed what this people have spoken, saying, 'The two families which the LORD chose, He has rejected them'? Thus they despise My people, no longer are they as a nation in their sight. Thus says the LORD, 'If My covenant for day and night stand not, and the fixed patterns of heaven and earth I have not established, then I would reject the descendants of Jacob and David My servant, not taking from his descendants rulers over the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. But I will restore their fortunes and will have mercy on them.' (Jer. 33:26-27 NASB)

Since we still have day and night, we know that the descendants of Jacob have not been rejected. The covenant 'for day and night' was given to men after the flood:

Quote:

While the earth remains, Seedtime and harvest, And cold and heat, And summer and winter, And day and night Shall not cease. (Gen. 8:22 NASB)

The Gospel of John (written decades after Christ's death) makes it clear that at the time it was written the believers did not think that the Jewish nation had been rejected:

Quote:

But one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said to them, "You know nothing at all, nor do you take into account that it is expedient for you that one man die for the people, and that the whole nation not perish." Now he did not say this on his own initiative, but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus was going to die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but in order that He might also gather together into one the children of God who are scattered abroad.(John 11:49-52 NASB)

Does that sound like John thought the Jewish nation had been rejected by God? No. It sounds like John believed Jesus had died to redeem the Jewish nation and those who would join themselves to the Jewish nation (as in Paul's metaphor of the olive tree of Israel in Romans 11, which was an allusion to Jer. 11:16).

Christian tradition likes to teach that God rejected the Jews because the Jews rejected Jesus. The Scriptures teach otherwise. Indeed, there were a few of the Jewish leaders who rejected Jesus, but look at the verse immediately preceding the above quote: "If we let Him go on like this, all men will believe in Him," (John 11:47 NASB) Other passages in the Gospels and Acts that show there were many Jews who accepted Jesus.

[Woody]

Quote:

If we teach that the Jewish people no longer have covenant status with God, then are we not teaching that God is a covenant-breaker -- a God whose word cannot be trusted?

Look ... I am no authority on this. But from my look on this ... God has not rejected any covenent with anyone. Has He not EXPANDED his promise to include all peoples who accept him. Thus there is neither Jew nor Greek. There is neither male nor female. All are equal in the sight of God. Thus ALL are included in the promise.

[Gerr]

So then, when the 70 wks that was cut out for the Jews ended, what ended?

Gerry

[John317]

Perhaps this will help:

1) God's promises to the Israelites as a nation were conditional. They were conditioned upon obedience. See Deut. 28: 15 and onwards. After God's promises to Israel, beginning in Deut. 28: 1 to 14, God says, "BUT it shall come to pass, IF you do not obey the voice of the Lord your God... that all these curses will come upon you and overtake you..."

2) God never said that no matter what the nation of Israel did, the nation would be His special, covenant people. In fact, the words of the Old Covenant are: "Now, therefore, IF you will indeed obey My voice and keep My covenant, THEN you shall be a special treasure to Me above all people..." Ex. 19: 5. It was conditional.

3) On the other hand, the Abrahamic and New Covenant are unconditional. That is why it is a better covenant. It is not based on our human promises but on God's promise alone. We receive it by faith, the same as Abraham received it by faith. Israel shares in the New Covenant the same as the non-Jew, and in exactly the same way. There is no difference. God promised Abraham unconditionally, "In your seed [Christ] all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because you have obeyed My voice" (Gen. 22: 18; cf. Galatians 3: 16). God was to give Christ for the salvation of the world regardless of anything the world would do.

4) The Bible contains indications that God abandoned Israel as a NATION as His special people:

a) Jesus said, "See! Your house is left to you desolate [forsaken, abandoned]" (Matt 23: 38; cf. Lev. 26:31).

Jesus' parable of the wicked vinedressers who kill the son of the owner of the vineyard, at the end of which, says Jesus, the owner "will come and destroy those vinedressers and give the vineyard to others" (Luke 29: 16). In this parable, it is obvious that the son symbolizes Jesus and the owner of the vineyard the Father. The vinedressers, of course, represent the Jewish nation, just as in Isaiah 5: 7, where it says, "For the vineyard of the Lord of hosts is the house of Israel."

c) Galatians 6: 14 and James 1: 1 refer to Christians as "Israel" and as "the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad," showing that the early church was already beginning to consider the Christian church as God's new Israel.

d) Romans 9: 6-8-- "For they are not all Israel who are of Israel, nor are they all children because they are the seed of Abraham; but 'In Isaac your seed shall be called.' That is, those who are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God; but the children of the promise are counted as the seed."

e) At the end of the 70 week (or 490 year) prophecy of Daniel 9: 23-27, a probationary period of time for the Jewish people, Stephen was murdered and the gospel went quickly to the gentiles (See Acts 7 and 8). Before that, the disciples had been told to preach only to the "lost sheep of Israel" (Matt. 10: 6; 15: 24).

[Gerr]

Quote:

If we teach that the Jewish people no longer have covenant status with God, then are we not teaching that God is a covenant-breaker -- a God whose word cannot be trusted?

Look ... I am no authority on this. But from my look on this ... God has not rejected any covenent with anyone. Has He not EXPANDED his promise to include all peoples who accept him. Thus there is neither Jew nor Greek. There is neither male nor female. All are equal in the sight of God. Thus ALL are included in the promise.

If the Old Covenant was not done away with, there would have been no need for the New.

Gerry

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

“They’re very neat and well-groomed. They don’t smoke, they don’t drink. They are excellent, diligent workers and completely honest. I trust them with my eyes closed. I bring them to a work site and don’t have to come back to check on them. Their word is golden.”

Wow! Do our neighbors in other countries think this about us?

Quote:

“Maybe it is not the case in the United States, but recently a survey has been done in all the European countries, asking the question ‘Who is the biggest threat for the peace of the world?’ The majority of the people answered ‘Israel,’ not Iran, not terrorism, not [Osama] bin Laden, but Israel. This answer demonstrates a very high level of anti-Semitism, because rationally Israel is threatening no one, just defending [itself] against dozens of Muslim countries around who would like to see only one thing, its destruction,”

WOW! We had a member here for quite sometime from the UK that believed Israel was a greater threat to world peace than the Muslim countries. IMO, he had some legitimate points too although I was not completely convinced.

[nuff sed]

It takes two to enter into a covenant. God's covenant with the Children of Israel was conditional as evidenced when he spoke to them from the two mountains. He told them what they could experience if they followed Him. Then He passed over to the other mountain and told them what would happen if they didn't. The Children of Israel broke the covenant, not God.

I believe that every live Jew that you see today is a miracle. Jews have knowledge, intelligence,beauty..etc. etc. and why is that? Because God left them just enough to keep them alive throughout the ages to show the world that he means what he says. Peoples have tried to destroy the Jews all through history but God gave them just enough 'spark' to keep them going. The Jews have every opportunity to be saved......but not as a nation. "IMO" we have no reason to think that we are "honoring God" by supporting Israel as a nation. They can be 'saved' just like you and me on an individual basis but not because of 'what they were"...or think that they still are.

[Woody]

Just to set the record straight ... I should not be credited with that quote.

[nuff sed]

Sorry, It was Ron Ammundsen

[Ron Amnsn]

So then, when the 70 wks that was cut out for the Jews ended, what ended?

Gerry

Let's look at the prophecy of the seventy weeks in Daniel 9:

"Seventy weeks have been decreed for your people and your holy city, to finish the transgression, to make an end of sin, to make atonement for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the most holy place. So you are to know and discern that from the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah the Prince there will be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; it will be built again, with plaza and moat, even in times of distress. Then after the sixty-two weeks the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing, and the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. And its end will come with a flood; even to the end there will be war; desolations are determined." (Daniel 9:24-26 NASB)

Which part of that talks about the end of any covenant with Israel? It talks about what Messiah would do, and that Messiah would be cut off. But I don't see anything there that even implies that a covenant would end. Everything in this prophecy agrees with the covenants given to Israel.

[Ron Amnsn]

1) God's promises to the Israelites as a nation were conditional. They were conditioned upon obedience. See Deut. 28: 15 and onwards. After God's promises to Israel, beginning in Deut. 28: 1 to 14, God says, "BUT it shall come to pass, IF you do not obey the voice of the Lord your God... that all these curses will come upon you and overtake you..."

It is true that the promises were conditional. But the covenant with Israel was not conditional. The curses were part of the covenant and were designed to bring Israel back to obedience. As long as the Jews suffer from the curses of the covenant, they must still be IN the covenant. If the covenant had been revoked, then the curses would also be revoked.

[olger]

There is all kinds of Biblical evidence that national Israel was filling its cup of rebellion and paving the way for Spiritual Israel. Some random thoughts:

1) God is not a racist. Some people think that he is obligated to save the Jews come what may -- in spite of their choices. This is a Calvinistic idea at heart. The promises to national Israel were conditional (as has been stated).

2) God is the creator of all peoples and wants to be the Redeemer of all peoples. His statement that "all Israel shall be saved" anticipates the New Covenant of spiritual Israel.

3) The seed of Abraham are those who individually choose to be governed by God, both jewish and gentile alike. This clarifies many an otherwise baffling prediction concerning Israel and its restoration.

4) Ron the tone of Daniel 9 is set in Daniel's intercessory prayer, as it is a prayer of confession and repentance. In answer to this selfless prayer, the Lord reveals a 490-year probationary period for national Israel. There is tremendous theological linkage between Daniel 9 and Acts 7. Compare Daniel 9:15 with Acts 7:36; 39.

In addition, you will notice something helpful in Acts 7. Nine times, Stephen refers to Israel as "our fathers." Count them. Beginning in verse 51 however, Stephen switches to "your fathers." Why the shift? This is parallel to God's response to Daniel (your people [Daniel 9:24]). Heretofore, God referred to national Israel as "His people."

Up until verse 51, there is full identification between the believers and literal Israel. But things are happening behind the scenes. There is a 490-year wheel rolling down through time and it completes its journey on this day in Jerusalem. From verse 51 on, there is an apocalyptic shift. The die has been cast, the probation is ended. Spiritual Israel is the new Israel.

5) Paul's comments regarding "Israel after the flesh" clarify the distinction between two Israels (1 Cor. 10:18, as does Galatians 4).

Regards,

olger

[Ron Amnsn]

2) God never said that no matter what the nation of Israel did, the nation would be His special, covenant people. In fact, the words of the Old Covenant are: "Now, therefore, IF you will indeed obey My voice and keep My covenant, THEN you shall be a special treasure to Me above all people..." Ex. 19: 5. It was conditional.

If those words as you interpret them are actually the essence of the covenant God made with Israel, then it would indeed look rather hopeless for the Israelites. But the actual content of the covenant was written on the tablets that were placed in the Ark of the Covenant. The essence of the old covenant is contained in the promise at the beginning of that covenant -- "I am the Lord your God" (Exodus 20:2), which is an awesome promise because he is an awesome God.

I think what God was saying in the verse you quoted was, "I am offering to make a covenant with you as a people. I'm not going to force it on you, but if you will agree to listen to my voice [in Hebrew the literal meaning of "obey" is "listen attentively"] and accept my covenant, then you will be my people ..." By responding, "All that the LORD has spoken we will do," the Israelites were agreeing to enter into a covenant with God and agreeing to listen to God's voice speak that covenant. The people hadn't yet heard the terms of the covenant but they were willing to enter into the covenant with God, whatever it would be. Then on the day the covenant was given from Sinai, the people did indeed hear the covenant spoken in God's own voice and they did listen attentively with the intention of obeying, which is the full meaning of Hebrew word translated as "obey" in the verse you quoted. So on the day when God spoke the covenant from Sinai the Israelites completely fulfilled (for all time) the conditions of the verse you quoted. They listened and accepted the covenant. The covenant itself was not conditional. It contained promises that were conditional.

Notice also that the verse you quoted does NOT say, "If you disobey the terms of my covenant, then that covenant will be revoked." God is a covenant keeper.

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

Seventy weeks have been decreed for YOUR people and YOUR holy city,

Which people? Whose people? Which city?

Seems like a very strong implication to me. When one adds to it the teachings of Christ and those of Paul it is clear this prophecy was directed at the Jewish nation.

[Ron Amnsn]

3) On the other hand, the Abrahamic and New Covenant are unconditional. That is why it is a better covenant. It is not based on our human promises but on God's promise alone. We receive it by faith, the same as Abraham received it by faith. Israel shares in the New Covenant the same as the non-Jew, and in exactly the same way. There is no difference. God promised Abraham unconditionally, "In your seed [Christ] all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because you have obeyed My voice" (Gen. 22: 18; cf. Galatians 3: 16). God was to give Christ for the salvation of the world regardless of anything the world would do.

The reason the New Covenant (or re-newed covenant) is better than the first covenant, is because originally the Israelites were responsible for writing God's Torah on their hearts (Deut 6:6ff), which they often failed to do. Under the New Covenant God himself takes responsibility for writing God's Torah on our hearts (Jer. 31:33) with his Spirit as promised in Ezekiel 11:19-20 and 36:26-27.

Yes, the Abrahamic covenant is unconditional in the sense that it was a promise given to Abraham, and there is nothing that his descendants could do that would cause God to revoke the promise given to God's friend Abraham. When Abraham is resurrected he will expect to see the promise fulfilled exactly the way God promised it to him.

Also in the Abrahamic covenant:

"I will establish My covenant between Me and you and your descendants after you throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and to your descendants after you. I will give to you and to your descendants after you, the land of your sojournings, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God." (Gen 17:7-8 NASB)

"This is My covenant, which you shall keep, between Me and you and your descendants after you: every male among you shall be circumcised.

So, when Abraham is resurrected, what will he think if the land of Canaan is inhabited by the non-circumcised while his circumcised descendants are living in exile? Is God faithful to his covenants?

Actually, the scriptures plainly teach that the New Covenant is given to the house of Israel and and the house of Judah (see Jer. 31:31 and Heb. 8:8). Those who join in the New Covenant are joined to the Israelites (see Romans 11). Nowhere does scripture mention or imply that there is some "spiritual" Israel that has separated itself from physical descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

If the New Covenant has displaced the Old Covenant, why don't all your neighbors know the Lord? "They will not teach again, each man his neighbor and each man his brother, saying, 'Know the LORD,' for they will all know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them." (Jer 31:34 NASB)

[Ron Amnsn]

4) The Bible contains indications that God abandoned Israel as a NATION as His special people:

Christianity contains many traditions saying that God abandoned Israel as a nation. This is the basis of "Replacement Theology".

Where is the "It is written" or "Thus saith the Lord" showing that God has permanently abandoned Israel as a Nation?

[Ron Amnsn]

a) Jesus said, "See! Your house is left to you desolate [forsaken, abandoned]" (Matt 23: 38; cf. Lev. 26:31).

The desolation of the cities and sanctuaries was a part of the Covenant with Israel as indicated in Lev. 26:31 which you refer to. If Jesus was speaking of the whole nation rather than just the corrupt leadership, it confirms that the consequences of Covenant still applied to Israel as a nation after Jesus' resurrection.

[Ron Amnsn]

Jesus' parable of the wicked vinedressers who kill the son of the owner of the vineyard, at the end of which, says Jesus, the owner "will come and destroy those vinedressers and give the vineyard to others" (Luke 29: 16). In this parable, it is obvious that the son symbolizes Jesus and the owner of the vineyard the Father. The vinedressers, of course, represent the Jewish nation, just as in Isaiah 5: 7, where it says, "For the vineyard of the Lord of hosts is the house of Israel."

In Isaiah 5 it plainly says that the nation of Israel is the vineyard of the Lord.

You are saying that Israel is the vinedressers.

That is an important difference.

In the parable that Jesus told in Luke 20, the vineyard wasn't destroyed or abandoned. It was those who were supposed to be caring for the vineyard who were going to be replaced. The vineyard itself continued to be owned by the same owner of the vineyard.

[Ron Amnsn]

c) Galatians 6: 14 and James 1: 1 refer to Christians as "Israel" and as "the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad," showing that the early church was already beginning to consider the Christian church as God's new Israel.

When Paul and James were writing, the twelve tribes of literal Israel were still scattered among the nations where they had been dispersed. Only a handful Jews had returned from the Babylonian captivity at the time of Ezra and Nehemiah. The majority had remained in the nations where they had been dispersed.

The terminology "the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad" shows rather that the writers realized that the Covenant promise of restoration after captivity was yet to be fulfilled.

When Paul went to the Gentiles, he went first to the Jewish synagogues and preached the good news to the Jews and to the Gentiles who were meeting with the Jews. Those who believed did not distance themselves from literal Israel like modern Christians do.

The scriptures don't say anything about "God's new Israel", that is an invention of Replacement Theology.

[olger]

Jesus chose 12 men for a good reason, Ron. Why not 7, or 10?

oG

[Ron Amnsn]

d) Romans 9: 6-8-- "For they are not all Israel who are of Israel, nor are they all children because they are the seed of Abraham; but 'In Isaac your seed shall be called.' That is, those who are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God; but the children of the promise are counted as the seed."