This article, very briefly, covers a short portion
of the final prophetic history of Israel, from the time
Christ was baptized, about the year A.D.30, to
roughly the time all hell broke loose in Judah, about
A.D.66. That was the time Rome invaded the holy
land, and brought to a final end the Jewish System.
By the end of that war, God fulfilled all promises to
Israel which, on the one hand, would have been a
glorious and everlasting kingdom in return for
loving Him and obeying His commandments, but
instead, judgement and national annihilation for
rejecting the Son of God, and the offer of the
Kingdom. In the Old Testament books of prophecy,
they had been forewarned. That warning was very
explicit in the so-called "Palestinian Covenant."
(Deuteronomy 30:)
Three and a half years after Jesus was baptized and anointed Messiah, the nation rejected and crucified Him, just as God knew they would. Some forty years later the hammer of justice fell, the nation was destroyed as promised, and a deluded people who call themselves Jews have been without a country, wandering all over the world for almost 2000 years, persecuted and harrassed almost everywhere. All the while they cling tenaciously to the Law which now is a curse to anyone who tries to live under it. With the help of the Satan-driven United Nations, they "restored" for themselves a nation in 1948 and called it "Israel," , but did God have anything to do with it? What's worse, many Christians are spellbound by some bizarre movement lately that would turn back the clock, and make everyone and everything Jewish again, albeit under innovative labels such as "Christian Jew." Refusing to believe what the Bible says, they run with itching ears to theological shysters who preach a glorious future for a non-existent "race" of people. That "race" was once a proud and blessed race, but now they are no longer Jews, but merely unbelieving Gentiles, no longer under the umbrella of God's protection as before. The great shame of Christianity is that, instead of witnessing the truth to them, we are actually encouraging the spiritual suicide of millions.
DON'T FIX WHAT AIN'T BROKE
The first thing we notice in commentaries on the book of Romans, even by those Bible teachers who claim to be conservative and/or fundamental, is the puffed up attitude that if one has been to a Bible college, or a seminary, and has studied Greek for a year or two, he is automatically capable of translating the Bible for himself, and is able to do a better job of it than anyone else, even better than those men who translated the KJV Bible. With a Greek dictionary or lexicon in hand, he feels he has virtually no peer in the department of Bible corrections. The "KJV Commentary," (the term "KJV" here should be taken with great reservation, or a large grain of salt), jumps right into the Book of Romans with it's own modern view of what some verses ought to say:
By the way, the scholar implies that the Greek doulos has only one translation which is "bondslave." That is false. In Strong's Concordance, the Greek "doulos" means, "a slave, literally or figuratively, involuntary or voluntary; frequently therefore in a qualified sense of subjection or subserviency: bondservant."
If involuntary, then the correct translation is slave; if voluntary, the correct translation is servant. Jesus Christ didn't force Paul to labor for Him against his will, so he was not a slave. Therefore, the proper term, as it is given in the KJV, is servant. The work of modern translators exposes a great deal of either sloth or incompetence on their part. Translating from Greek to English requires greater expertise than some Bible experts seem to posses. Most of us are happy to leave the KJV just as it is, and we're all the better for it. Paul was "called," but not coerced. Slaves respond to a whip; not so readily to a "call."
AND DECLARED TO BE THE SON OF GOD WITH POWER, ACCORDING TO THE SPIRIT OF HOLINESS, BY THE RESURRECTION FROM THE DEAD" (ROM. 1:3-4):
The same scholars of the "King James Bible Commentary" seem to devote so much time and energy seeking out and correcting errors in the KJV which aren't really there that they overlook the meaning of much that is there. Not that they are lacking in proper piety. In fact, all their material reeks with pious platitudes, extolling the "goodness" and the "greatness" of God as though they really believe it, something which they no doubt remember from childhood Sunday School lessons. That's well and Good. But they are refusing to pass along the knowledge of God that also ought to be taught to others. "And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also" (2 Tim. 2:2). Note how the pious scholar missed the entire point of Romans 1:4. He writes,
Those modern translations rewrite this verse to focus on all the "tremendous" power God required to declare Jesus the Son of God, i.e., "And declared with power to be the Son of God..." Too many Bible expositors, even those who ostensibly interpret according the KJV, fall in line with this trivialized translation, often ignoring completely the fact that at His resurrection, Jesus was declared to be the Son of God possessing power. There are sufficient other Scripture verses which prove that this rewrite is false and misleading. "And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth" (Matt 28:18).And we surely ought not to miss the passage in Ephesians: "And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power, Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come" (Eph. 1:19-21)
The power God needed to declare Jesus the Son of God was really no big deal to God, and He made no issue of in His Word. He had already been declared to be the Son of God twice. Once when He was baptized, and again at the mount of Transfiguration, and in neither case was the "tremendous" power to declare Him Son of God stressed, or even mentioned, revealing that this would be a pointless redundancy, like repeating endlessly that "God is good." Any Christian who has graduated beyond first year of Bible milk and who has to be reminded again and again of the extent of God's power is having serious problems with his beliefs. The writer of Hebrews says, Get past that and get on with it! There is a great deal more in the Bible than milk and cookies. "For every one that useth milk [is] unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe." (Hebrews 5:13)
The Lord Jesus Christ rose from the dead possessing power. It was His own prediction come true. Remember that just before the Transfiguration, Jesus told His disciples that not all of them would be dead before they saw Him in His kingdom. Before he rose from the dead, one of the disciples, Judas Iscariot, had committed suicide. In Matthew chapter 28 He announced to His eleven disciples after His resurrection, "All power is given unto me..." and in Ephesians 1:19-23 we find again the message that the power given to Him at His resurrection is great, it is above all other powers on earth and in heaven, and exercised against world powers in favor of His own who believe.
"FOR I AM NOT ASHAMED OF THE GOSPEL OF CHRIST: FOR IT IS THE POWER OF GOD UNTO SALVATION TO EVERY ONE THAT BELIEVETH; TO THE JEW FIRST, AND ALSO TO THE GREEK" (ROM. 1:16).
It is very important to understand that the Gospel went to the Jew first. And this happened in the first century, A.D., up to the time of the war in the year 66. First, the covenant which God the Father had made with the ancients of Israel was confirmed to the Jews, beginning with the anointing of Jesus Christ as the Messiah at His baptism, and continuing for seven years thereafter. Daniel prophesied that the covenant would be confirmed for one week of years. But three and a half years later, in the midst of the week, after Israel rejected Christ, the Gospel, which before was the preaching of the glorious promised Kingdom of heaven, now took on a slightly different aspect, being a new Kingdom which Israel the nation lost and which would go to another nation. It was not preached to the Jews only, but to the Gentiles also. However, for a time it was preached to the Jews first. At one point Paul became disgusted with the stubborn unbelief of some of the Jews: "Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles" (Acts 13:46). This may have marked the end of the seventh year - the one week - after Christ's baptism; we don't exactly know, and it doesn't matter. After the rejection and crucifixion of Christ, the exact end of the seven weeks became irrelevant. Israel itself had nullified the covenant, and had lost the kingdom which was promised to it, and which was to be confirmed and delivered within those seven years.
"FOR HE IS NOT A JEW, WHICH IS ONE OUTWARDLY; NEITHER IS THAT CIRCUMCISION, WHICH IS OUTWARD IN THE FLESH: BUT HE IS A JEW, WHICH IS ONE INWARDLY; AND CIRCUMCISION IS THAT OF THE HEART, IN THE SPIRIT, AND NOT IN THE LETTER; WHOSE PRAISE IS NOT OF MEN, BUT OF GOD" (ROM. 2:28-29). This is an important passage. It identifies the real Jews in Paul's day. They were not only the natural born descendants of Abraham, but the faithful remnant who were faithful to God the Father and also (consequently) believed on Christ. In the time of Christ, it was no longer of any benefit to be a Jew outwardly if one was not a Jew inwardly (of course, it was never of any benefit to be a Jew if one was not faithful to God the Father). One of a number of verses which attest to that is John 5:23: "That all men should honor the Son, even as they honor the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him." In general, "Jews" today do not believe that the Lord Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and Saviour of mankind. Christians, particularly Bible scholars of the futurist persuasion, in their confusion, somehow see them as "God's faithful remnant," or "God's protected and cherished race," or "the apple of His eye," or something like that. That is contrary to Scripture. If they do not believe in His only begotten Son, they are none of His. After the demise of the Jewish system in A.D.70, if they do believe, then they are not Jews, but Christians. Biblically speaking, believing Jews are Christians who have surrendered their nationality for a greater and more lasting kingdom, whereas unbelieving Jews are the enemies of God. So where is that "protected and cherished race?" Scofield reveals a great deal of Scriptural ignorance when he offers that God is "wonderfully preserving the race of Israel to this day..." Tell that to someone who has seen what happened in Nazi concentration camps! Nowhere in the Bible does it say that God will preserve any race of people who tenaciously hold on to the idea that they can worship the Father and reject the Son. In fact, the Bible specifically says that they have placed themselves under a curse: "For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith" (Gal. 3:10-11). It is a grave, unscriptural error to preach that the unbelieving "Jew" is cherished and being protected above and beyond any other unbelieving Gentile. It is also the most vicious form of anti-Semitism imaginable. Who knows how many people might have turned to Christ in the past 2000 years if they hadn't been encouraged to remain "Jews." The truth is, since the end of the war in AD70, there is no Israel, and there are no Jews. We see positive evidence of this in the Book of Romans.
"WHAT ADVANTAGE THEN HATH THE JEW? OR WHAT PROFIT IS THERE OF CIRCUMCISION? MUCH IN EVERY WAY: CHIEFLY, BECAUSE THAT UNTO THEM WERE COMMITTED THE ORACLES OF GOD." (ROM. 3:1-2)?
This passage should not be construed to mean that it is speaking of our day, and that the Jew today still has the advantage, being of the race to whom were committed the oracles of God. The Jews were the most privileged people on earth. But in spite of all those advantages, they still failed miserably. Paul was speaking of his day, not ours. The Jews in his day had many advantages. Although God had virtually "disowned" them by concluding them all in unbelief, (Rom. 11:32), yet He did not cast them away. The effort to bring them back into the fold (not into old Israel, but into the family of God) through the preaching of the Gospel was without equal. It was "to the Jew first."
FOR WHAT IF SOME DID NOT BELIEVE? SHALL THEIR UNBELIEF MAKE THE FAITH OF GOD WITHOUT EFFECT" (ROM. 3:3)?
Somehow, Bible scholars have turned the situation around, and have made the unbelieving part of Israel the manipulators of God's intentions. They teach that, because of the unbelief of Israel, God had to "pack up His bags and leave, hoping for a future day when He can come back and try again to offer them the Kingdom. In this verse Paul reveals that the unbelief of some didn't change God's plan one bit.
Those who believe that God still has a future planned for Israel as a priesthood nation in the end times would be hard pressed to explain why He is letting millions and millions of Jews die in unbelief during the time of the Church, while intending to force salvation upon an arbitrarily selected generation of Jews after the Rapture of the Church. Are all Jews of all time saved anyway, or what? There is no logical consistency here, even though many evangelicals preach and believe this, while others believe some muddled variation of it. The idea creates some sticky logical problems for futurists. Consider this possibility:
All mankind of all time and in all the world should believe on Christ Jesus. True or False? True, of course. Everyone, even the unshakable believer in Futurism, agrees. That is the for which we should all be working and praying. The problem with this, however, is that if successful, it would make all mankind Christian. So why is that a problem?
Well, what would happen when the time of the "Great Tribulation" and the "Millennium" finally came. There would be no Jew available to go into either. The anti-Christ would have no one to persecute for crucifying Christ, the crime for which dispensational scholars everywhere still hold Jews blamable, and the Millennial Kingdom would remain vacant of Jews for a thousand years. There would be no 144000 Jewish "super - evangelists," leading countless millions of Gentiles to Christ, as we have been taught.
The "Great Tribulation," according to futurists, and also the "Millennium," are designed especially for the Jews. But with all Jews having been converted to Christianity, and now full-fledged members of the Church, where is God going to find enough Jews to make the "Great Tribulation" worthwhile? The solution? Limit the number of Jews that would respond to the Gospel of Christ? No other solution to the futuristic dilemma appears viable (dispensationalists talk about Israel still being "partially blinded, but not so blinded that salvation is impossible, only more difficult." That appears to be their solution) . What should be the perfect situation has actually become a confused mess. If this were God's idea, He would be caught with a plan which He hadn't thought through carefully enough, because throughout the New Testament, and even the O.T., God worked tirelessly to bring all mankind to the saving knowledge of truth. Following the dispensational futuristic plan, He couldn't do that
"And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned" (Mark 16:15-16). Jesus said, "preach the Gospel to every creature." That would certainly include Jews. It was God's will, therefore, that all men everywhere be saved. Of course, not everyone has accepted the Gospel, and that, ironically, seems to be the salvation of dispensational prophecy. Futurism, therefore, could not survive except for the unbelief of some men. What a legacy! Should dispensational futurists be proud of who they are?
MOREOVER THE LAW ENTERED, THAT THE OFFENCE MIGHT ABOUND. BUT WHERE SIN ABOUNDED, GRACE DID MUCH MORE ABOUND: (ROMANS 5:20)
While this verse is not directly concerned with prophecy, yet the way a number of modern translations render it causes some expositors to say things which are totally at odds with real Scripture and the character of God. The NASV: "And the Law came in that the transgression might increase..." Hal Lindsey, following this lead, writes, "...the Law was given to make man sin more...now I realize that it sounds almost blasphemous to say that God gave something to man that would actually make him sin more. But that is exactly what the Scriptures say" (The Road To Holocaust, p 151).
Embracing new and sophisticated things leads man in many directions, not always where God wants him to go. God never gave man anything that would make him sin more. The NASV translators couldn't have understood the nature of God when they produced this piece of nonsense, and Mr. Lindsey revealed extreme carelessness in choosing translations to quote from. The KJV's English is older, but much more accurate "That the offense might abound" is not at all the same as "that the transgression might increase." The KJV can be paraphrased somewhat like this: "the Law came in to make better known to the sinner the offensive nature of the sin committed." Mr. Lindsey is right in one respect. To say that God would give something to man to make him sin more is indeed blasphemy. "Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:" (James 1:13)
FROM PENTECOST TO THE HOLOCAUST - THE FINAL YEARS OF ISRAEL
Chapters 9, 10, and 11, if studied with an open, unbiased mind, and interpreted honestly and literally, reveal the ultimate fate of Israel in greater detail than any other book of the Bible. Paul tells us what happened, how it happened, and why. I present several points which may help as we study Romans.
1. From the time God established the nation, Israelites were not born sinners, as are Gentiles. They were from birth the people of God. They were a special people to God.
2. They were the children of the ancients with whom God made certain covenants containing marvelous promises of a great Kingdom.
3. The generation of Israelites, alive when the Lord Jesus Christ came to earth, was a special generation. It was to this generation that God had planned to fulfill the promises. The Kingdom would have been set up just for them and those following, The temple would not have been destroyed, Israel would have continued indefinitely as God's priesthood nation in a more glorious way than ever before. Contrary to popular belief, the crucifixion of Christ was not in the original plan - not ostensibly - that is. Temple worship, with animal sacrifices and all, would have continued. All nations of the world would have traveled to Jerusalem to worship God. Israel would have been sitting "at the head of the table" so to speak. That's the good news.
4. The bad news is that, if they hearkened not to the voice of their God, the generation would receive the ultimate judgement promised to a disobedient nation. It would bring about the demise of Israel. "But if thine heart turn away, so that thou wilt not hear, but shalt be drawn away, and worship other gods, and serve them; I denounce unto you this day, that ye shall surely perish, and that ye shall not prolong your days upon the land, whither thou passest over Jordan to go to possess it. I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live" (Deut 30:17-19):
5. Israel didn't listen, as we all know. In the fulness of the time, when the Messiah came to confirm the covenant with Israel, and deliver the Kingdom, the nation rebelled, and even crucified the Son of God.
6. The whole course of events took a new direction. We might say that God put plan B into action (although plan B was the real plan, and was made ready even before the foundation of the world).
7. First He took away the special status that Israelites have enjoyed from their beginning as the children of God. He concluded all Israelites in unbelief, and made them the same as Gentiles (Rom 11:32).
8. Whereas Israel had always worshiped the Father, now that was no longer sufficient. Anyone who worships the Father, but rejects the Son, has neither the Father nor the Son. "That all men should honor the Son, even as they honor the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him" (John 5:23). "Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: but he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also " (1 John 2:23). "Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son" (2 Jo 1:9).
9. So, after God concluded Israel in unbelief, all people in the world, Jews and Gentiles alike, were sinners. The Jew was as if he had never been a Jew; spiritually speaking, he would have to be born all over again. He must now come to the Father through faith in the Son, just as the Gentile. The Jew must be "born again."
10. A part of Israel was stubborn, and in spite of all the miracles which they saw Jesus do, refused to believe. This part of Israel was blinded. That blindness was fatal, and would last until Israel was completely destroyed. The blinded part of Israel did not escape.
11. The great effort of the Apostolic Church was to get the Gospel out to every Jew in every nation of the world. This was done during the 35 or forty years between Pentecost and the war of A.D.70
12. This was the war in which the temple, the city, and all the blinded, stubborn, unbelievers of Israel were desolated. That was the event which we refer to as the "holocaust." It was the time of Jacob's troubles. Those were the worst days that Israel had ever experienced. They were also the final days, therefore Israel, as such, would never experience such a time again.
13. During those days a remnant of Israel was saved. Paul makes it clear that this remnant was saved according to the election of grace. In other words, if the Jew received the Gospel, and believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, he was saved, and became part of the remnant of Israel.
"NOT AS THOUGH THE WORD OF GOD HATH TAKEN NONE EFFECT. FOR THEY ARE NOT ALL ISRAEL, WHICH ARE OF ISRAEL. NEITHER, BECAUSE THEY ARE THE SEED OF ABRAHAM, ARE THEY ALL CHILDREN: BUT, IN ISAAC SHALL THY SEED BE CALLED. (ROM. 9:6-7).
If we take note of this passage, we will find that Paul defines "all Israel" as that part of Israel which was of faith. In the old times "all Israel" descended from Abraham through Isaac, because these had faith in God. Now, in Paul's day, an Israelite, if he was to be part of "all Israel," must also have faith in the Son of God. "Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son" (1 John 2:22). Notice that these were not simple unbelievers who didn't know any better; John calls them liars. These were the apostate, unregenerate, blinded Jews. It is important to remember that being a descendant of Abraham didn't necessarily make one a Jew. So, later, when we find that, "All Israel shall be saved," we must consider the biblical definition of "all Israel" as given to us by Paul. This definition seems to evade some commentators, who somehow see "all Israel" as a future generation of Jews saved in the "tribulation," incongruous as that may be.
"EVEN US, WHOM HE HATH CALLED, NOT OF THE JEWS ONLY, BUT ALSO OF THE GENTILES? AS HE SAITH ALSO IN OSEE, I WILL CALL THEM MY PEOPLE, WHICH WERE NOT MY PEOPLE; AND HER BELOVED, WHICH WAS NOT BELOVED. AND IT SHALL COME TO PASS, THAT IN THE PLACE WHERE IT WAS SAID UNTO THEM, YE ARE NOT MY PEOPLE; THERE SHALL THEY BE CALLED THE CHILDREN OF THE LIVING GOD. ESAIAS ALSO CRIETH CONCERNING ISRAEL, THOUGH THE NUMBER OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL BE AS THE SAND OF THE SEA, A REMNANT SHALL BE SAVED" (ROM. 9:24-27):
"Osee" is the Greek name of the prophet, Hosea, and this quote is taken from Hosea 1:10. While it may appear that the people who were "not my people" were primarily Gentiles Hosea, in fact, is speaking of Israel, not Gentiles: "Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God" (Hos. 1:10).
A REMNANT SHALL BE SAVED
Dispensational futurists anticipate that one day in the far off future (they believe that the day is now "very near") Israel will, enmasse, repent and turn to their Lord for salvation during the "Great Tribulation," and then "all Israel' will be saved. That is a statement that goes nowhere. Just who is "All Israel?" The dispensational definition is nebulous, and quite confused. They say that "all Israel" doesn't mean that the "rebels" of Israel will be saved. The Bible scholar writes, "...we must understand this expression [all Israel] to mean Israel as a company, rather than every Jew without single exception. No one is ever saved without a personal relationship with the Saviour" (The King James Commentary, p 1437). Precisely! But when have we ever seen Israel "as a company" having a personal relationship with the Saviour. That has never happened, and certainly not since the nation was obliterated by the Romans. Those who have a personal relationship with the Saviour have abandoned their national identity and heritage as Israelites, and have become Christians. To be a Jew, he must live by the Law which, after the time of Christ, is a curse, and in no wise compatible with Christianity. Jewism and Christianity are not compatible terms. There is no such thing, for example, as a "Christian Jew." A "Jew" who is Christian is not a Jew. People who call themselves "Jews" do not believe in Christ. By Paul's definition, they are not Israel. The vast majority of "Jews" today are not Christian. Therefore, they are not Israel. How, then, is "all Israel" to be saved in the future?
The question of how is all Israel to be saved in the so-called future "Tribulation" is one of many contradictions and logical problems dispensational theologians face as they try to interpret Scripture in accordance with the haphazard guidelines handed them by their predecessors. "All Israel" is not some arbitrarily selected generation of Jews out of millions of Jews who have lived and died in unbelief in the past 2000 years. and who happen to be living when the Church is "raptured.." If they represent "all Israel," then they all must, somehow, become believers. But human nature, being what it is, if that particular "race" of people has been living in unbelief for 2000 years, it is not likely that some random generation is going to repent and believe. The nearest thing to massive conversion, I suspect, came in the first days of the new Church when several thousand men were saved after the Holy Spirit came upon the disciples on the day of Pentecost. Normally, however, there was more rejection than conversion.
As always, however, dispensational technicians have a "fix" for any problem their mixed up theology creates, including this one. They merely put their own spin on the Scriptures. Dr. Pentecost writes: "...this covenant {Palestinian Covenant] has the guarantee of God the He will effect the necessary conversion which is essential to its fulfillment...The new covenant guarantees Israel a converted heart as the foundation of all her blessings..." (Things To Come, pp 98,116).
Dispensationalists, with enough presence of mind to realize that if Israel is in unbelief now, she no doubt will be in unbelief when the "Tribulation" comes, but cannot receive the promised blessings, while in unbelief, paves the way by "guaranteeing" her conversion. By guaranteeing Israel's conversion, God will then be able to fulfill His "unconditional" covenant, and everyone will be happy. The problem is, the Bible never talks about a "guaranteed conversion." A guaranteed conversion is the same thing as forced salvation, and, as far as anybody knows, God has never worked that way. Conversion is guaranteed, and so is salvation, to anyone who accepts it, but that is the catch; it must be accepted. That order cannot be reversed. Israel did not accept it, thus there was no guarantee.
Paul reveals that all Israel surely would be saved, but he explained who all Israel was. Paul also made it abundantly clear that all Israel was saved in his day, during the forty years between Pentecost and the holocaust.
GOD DID NOT CAST AWAY HIS PEOPLE - AND YET HE DID
"He came unto his own, and his own received him not. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name" (John 1:11-12): This happened in the land of Judah. Follow the logic closely: If they became the Sons of God (people of God) after they received Him, then before that they could not have been Sons of God. But we know that Jews have, from the beginning, been the people of God. When or how did they become "not the people of God?" The answer is clearly given in Romans 11:32, when God had concluded them all in unbelief. Modern translators again widely missed the mark when they state, as in the NASV, that "For God has shut up all in disobedience that He might show mercy to all." This can only be interpreted to mean that God somehow closed up everyone in some kind of "sin trap," causing every one to sin so that He can show them all forgiveness and mercy for those sins. Such translations are ungodly, and interpretations based on them are total nonsense. The Jamieson, Faussett, and Brown, for example, says this: "'...hath shut them up to unbelief' - that he might have mercy upon all - i.e., those all of whom he had been discoursing; the Gentiles first, and after them the Jews..." (page 1173). Another bizarre interpretation comes from the Wycliff Bible Commentary: "Paul's conclusion is that God imprisoned them all in disobedience in order that he might have mercy on all. Each all in this verse refers to both Jew and Gentile. God shuts up men for the purpose of setting them free..." (Page 1219).
Such are the ridiculous visions of scholars who profess the use the King James Bible, but believe something else entirely. Even a cursory examination of a couple of verses preceding verse 32 reveals that the first "all" were the Jews, and the second "all" were both Jews and Gentiles. Paul is writing to Gentiles: "For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief" (Rom. 11:30): "Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy" (Rom. 11:31). The normal, unbiased eye cannot mistake the fact that, since he was writing to Gentiles, then "their," and "these," and "they," cannot be Gentiles, they were Jews. If you trace backward to verse 26, you can easily see that. The statement of Wycliff, that "God shuts up men for the purpose of setting them free," begs heaven for any kind of sane explanation.
"For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all" (Rom. 11:32). The word, "concluded," does not mean "shut up." The simplest interpretation is that "God had made up His mind." And unbelief does not mean "disobedience," it means "unbelief." God had made up His mind that all Jews would henceforth be in unbelief. They would not necessarily be unbelievers, they would now be just like unsaved Gentiles. They would no longer be the children of God from birth. They could return to the Father, but only through faith in Jesus Christ, just like everyone else. There would henceforth be no difference between the Jew and the Gentile. "And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith" (Acts 15:8-9). "Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference" (Rom. 3:22): "For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him" (Rom. 10:12). "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved" (Rom. 10:13).
Gentiles are not born "God's children," or "God's people." After God concluded all Israel in unbelief, neither were Jews. But God would call them His people again, after they came to Him through faith in His beloved Son. Out of all the people of Israel, only a remnant was saved.
"FOR THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE JEW AND THE GREEK: FOR THE SAME LORD OVER ALL IS RICH UNTO ALL THAT CALL UPON HIM" (ROM. 10:12).
Commentators often fail to point out the fact that the distinction between Jew and Gentile became nonexistent when God concluded all Israel in unbelief. Unrepentant Jews have been unbelieving Gentiles ever since. They lost their national identity - and their nation some 2000 years ago. Today they have no identity, except that of a Gentile. If people, particularly Christian scholars ever recognized that, and stopped encouraging "Jews" to be something no one can be any more, who knows? There would probably be much less anti-semetism in the world. At least, they would be removed from the curse spelled out in the Bible:
"For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith" (Gal. 3:10-11).
"BUT I SAY, HAVE THEY NOT HEARD? YES VERILY, THEIR SOUND WENT INTO ALL THE EARTH, AND THEIR WORDS UNTO THE ENDS OF THE WORLD" (ROM. 10:18).
Often we hear that one of the signs of the end being near is that by radio, and television, and other modern means of communication the Gospel will soon be heard in all the world. But Paul here reveals that the words of the Gospel have already gone out to the ends of the earth. The world that Paul spoke of was the world where dispersed Israelites lived. The Church was chiefly concerned with bringing the Gospel to every Jew in the then known world. Along the way, of course, many Gentiles received the Gospel and were saved.
"If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and [be] not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, [and] which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;" (Colossians 1:23) "BUT I SAY, DID NOT ISRAEL KNOW? FIRST MOSES SAITH, I WILL PROVOKE YOU TO JEALOUSY BY THEM THAT ARE NO PEOPLE, AND BY A FOOLISH NATION I WILL ANGER YOU" (ROM. 10:19).
That foolish nation was the nation of Gentiles. "I SAY THEN, HATH GOD CAST AWAY HIS PEOPLE? GOD FORBID. FOR I ALSO AM AN ISRAELITE, OF THE SEED OF ABRAHAM, OF THE TRIBE OF BENJAMIN. GOD HATH NOT CAST AWAY HIS PEOPLE WHICH HE FOREKNEW. WOT YE NOT WHAT THE SCRIPTURE SAITH OF ELIAS? HOW HE MAKETH INTERCESSION TO GOD AGAINST ISRAEL, SAYING, LORD, THEY HAVE KILLED THY PROPHETS, AND DIGGED DOWN THINE ALTARS; AND I AM LEFT ALONE, AND THEY SEEK MY LIFE. BUT WHAT SAITH THE ANSWER OF GOD UNTO HIM? I HAVE RESERVED TO MYSELF SEVEN THOUSAND MEN, WHO HAVE NOT BOWED THE KNEE TO THE IMAGE OF BAAL. EVEN SO THEN AT THIS PRESENT TIME ALSO THERE IS A REMNANT ACCORDING TO THE ELECTION OF GRACE" (ROM. 11:1-5).
Bible teachers seem to have great difficulty with the concept of who are "His people." Hal Lindsay, in his book, The Road To Holocaust, taking his cue from a modern translation, states, "I say, then, God has not rejected His people, has He.... A critical question is, "To whom exactly does 'His people' refer....Even the way the question is worded reveals that God still, in a very special sense considers unbelieving Israel to be 'His people'....He emphasizes their continuing special relationship by calling the unbelieving nation 'His people.'" (pp 166-167).
This is pure imagination speaking, and it directly contradicts written Scripture. In the first place, nothing is said in Romans, or anywhere else, that from the New Testament times on - particularly after Christ died for the sins of the world (Israel included), that any nation of unbelieving people has any special relationship with God. They cannot be "His people" if words in Scripture have any meaning at all.
When God says that He had not cast away "HIS PEOPLE," He makes it clear that He had not cast away "HIS PEOPLE." He made no reference to all of Israel. Unbelievers, no matter what nation they are from, are not His people, and never in the history of man have they ever been His people. All knowledgeable Christians, even dispensational futurists, understand that no one has ever been saved through unbelief. This applies to "Jews" as well as Gentiles. If anyone is an unbeliever, how can he be part of "God's people?" He cannot. The Scriptures are very clear:
"That all men should honor the Son, even as they honor the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him" (John 5:23).
"Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: but he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also " (1 John 2:23). "Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son" (2 John 1:9).
Seeing only through futuristic eyes, Mr. Lindsey writes, "The whole focus of these three chapters [Romans 9, 10, and 11] is concerned with the plight of that mass of Israelites who are in this present age unbelievers...Romans chapter eleven spells out how the LORD will solve this dilemma." (IBID, p 167). Chapter eleven does indeed spell out how the Lord solves the dilemma of unbelieving Israel, but not in the way that Mr. Lindsey assumes.
Who are the people which God foreknew? Paul says that they were His people. In view of John 5:23, they could be none other than those who believed in the Son of God. God knew who they would be. They were the remnant that Paul was speaking of. Paul, himself, was part of that remnant. As long as there was an Israel, there was always a remnant of Israel, people of faith, even in its darkest days of apostasy. So, likewise, in Paul's day there was a remnant of faithful Jews.
There was one difference: this was a remnant according to the election of grace. They were saved by grace through faith in Christ. A WORD OF CAUTION! New translations such as the NASV confuse the truth with, "In the same way then, there has also come to be at the present time a remnant according to God's gracious choice." This in reality eliminates salvation by grace, and instead, would have God "graciously choosing" a group of Israelites to become a remnant. Are modern translators and dispensational futurists promoting the idea that God is in the habit of "graciously choosing" people for salvation, just as they believe that He will give Israel a "guaranteed converted heart," in order that there will be a "remnant" available to go into the "Great Tribulation," and then "Millennial Kingdom." This is a clear perversion of truth, and perpetuates confusion in the Church. It is common biblical knowledge that God never forces salvation upon anyone. It is not true that the remnant in Paul's day believed because God made them a remnant. God recognized them as a remnant because they believed.
Mr. Lindsey quotes Romans 11:1, then offers an unusual bit of logic: "I say, then, God has not rejected His people, has He? May it never be! For I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin...If God has rejected forever His people on a national basis, then He has rejected me also, since I too am from that nation."(IBID p 168). Mr. Lindsay takes Paul's meaning of this verse and turns it completely around, equating membership in national Israel with salvation by faith in Christ. Scriptures make it clear that God did not cast away His people, because only those people who believed on His only begotten Son were genuinely His people. Even though all Israelites had been concluded in unbelief, and were in the state of being lost, the faithful would not remain so. and for a period of forty some years the Gospel would be preached to every Jew in the world, and all be given the opportunity to accept or reject Christ. God indeed did not cast away His people. At the same time, neither did He force upon them a "guaranteed converted heart."
THE BLINDING OF ISRAEL
There is a great deal of confusion among Bible scholars concerning the "blinding" of Israel. We skip ahead a few verses to Romans 11:25: "FOR I WOULD NOT, BRETHREN, THAT YE SHOULD BE IGNORANT OF THIS MYSTERY, LEST YE SHOULD BE WISE IN YOUR OWN CONCEITS; THAT BLINDNESS IN PART IS HAPPENED TO ISRAEL, UNTIL THE FULNESS OF THE GENTILES BE COME IN." It is commonly believed that Israel is "partially blinded" to this day, and will continue to be blinded until the "fulness of the Gentiles be come in." This latter expression is misunderstood to mean that when the "full number" of Gentiles are brought into the Church, then Jesus will come and take up His own (rapture), and at that point the blindness of Israel will be lifted. The KJV Commentary tells it this way: "The spiritual blindness of Israel is not only to be understood as partial and not total, but also as temporal and not eternal. This blindness holds sway over the nation Israel until the fulness of the Gentiles is come. According to Acts 15:14, God is visiting the Gentiles today to call out a people for His name. Luke 21:24 says, 'Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.' This means that when the complete number of Gentiles has entered the kingdom of God, the spiritual blindness on the nation Israel shall be removed." (Page 1437)
This view raises some questions which, to my knowledge, no one has been able to adequately answer:
Even if there were an Israel today, why on earth would God keep them blinded? What would be the purpose?
Acts 15:14 is completely misrepresented. The verse says, "Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name." It is understood by futurist scholars to have reference to the present-day Church. Concerning the present-day Church, God did not visit the Gentiles first. There are more than ample Scriptures to show that He visited the Jews first. "He came unto his own..." (John 1:11) "These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not. But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." (Matt. 10:5-6). "But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel." (Mt. 1524)
Scholars misunderstand Acts 15:14, which says that "God at the first visited the Gentiles. The first time God ever visited anyone to take out of them a people for His name was thousands of years ago, when He visited Abraham's family in Ur of the Chaldees. Abraham and his father Terah were Gentiles. They are the Gentiles which God at the first visited to take out of them a people for His name.
The fulness of the Gentiles is not "the full number of Gentiles come into the Church." That term has reference to Gentiles, not the Church. In the next two verses, Paul clearly reveals that when he says "Israel was blinded in part," he means that part of Israel was blinded, and part was not. "WHAT THEN? ISRAEL HATH NOT OBTAINED THAT WHICH HE SEEKETH FOR; BUT THE ELECTION HATH OBTAINED IT, AND THE REST WERE BLINDED (ACCORDING AS IT IS WRITTEN, GOD HATH GIVEN THEM THE SPIRIT OF SLUMBER, EYES THAT THEY SHOULD NOT SEE, AND EARS THAT THEY SHOULD NOT HEAR;) UNTO THIS DAY" (ROM. 11:7-8). Some of the Israelites "obtained it," the rest were blinded. This passage lays to rest the accepted "scholarly" discombobulated tale that all Israel is "partially blinded."
When Paul says, "in part," he means that only part of Israel was blinded. Here Paul divides Israel into two segments: Those who believed, and became the election; and those who refused to believe, and became blinded. Verse 7 is quite clear on that. The elect obtained salvation, "the rest were blinded."
When scholare are pressed to explain why Israel is "partially blinded," they offer no coherent answer other than that this blindness makes them harder to win over to Christ. But this is the height of ungodly foolishness, and it makes Bible scholars seem even more stupid when, at other times, they piously preach that God wants all men to be saved. If God wants all men saved, why on earth would He place a stumbling block in the path of anyone who could be saved? And why those who supposedly are His own special people, if such they are?"
Dr. Pentecost writes the following piece of confusion concerning the blindness of the Jews: "Paul says that the blindness is in part. This reveals the fact that the blindness is not universal so that no Jew can believe today. The possibility of an individual's salvation exists, although the nation has been judiciously blinded....it is to be noted that there is a definite time when the blindness will be removed from the nation. Paul says that 'blindness in part has happened to Israel, until...the fulness of the Gentiles be come in..." (IBID p 303).
THE "FULL NUMBER" OF THE GENTILES
Dispensational futurism teaches that Israel is still blinded, and will remain blinded until the time of the rapture of the Church. The way they arrive at this conclusion is quite interesting. Where Paul states that the blindness will continue until the "fulness of the Gentiles be come in," as given in the KJV, a number of scholars reject that in favor of the modern translation of "until the full number of the Gentiles be come in." This translation, apparently, is to be preferred by those who have a special agenda to propagate. The usual interpretation is that the blindness will be removed when the "full number of the Gentiles' has come into the Church. What constitutes "full number" is not elaborated upon, but many Dispensational devotees assume that it means when Christians have brought in all the Gentiles that can be saved into the Church, so that there are no more Gentiles to be saved, then that plan of God will be finished, and He will come and rapture the Church, so that the Anti-Christ can be revealed, opening the way for the "Great Tribulation."
Dr. LaHaye writes of the 144000 Jews: "As a result of their preaching, an innumerable multitude will respond from every nation, tribe, people and language."(Revelation Unveiled, p 156). And again: "...during the first part of the Tribulation the greatest soul harvest in all history will take place. In fact, it is this writer's belief that more people will accept Christ during the early months of the Tribulation...than have been converted in the nearly two thousand years of the Church Age" (IBID, p 153).
Hal Lindsey endorses this same sentiment: "Israel's partial hardening of heart is said to continue 'until the full number of Gentiles has come in.' (11:25 NIV) The original Greek literally says, 'until the FULLNESS of the Gentiles has come in,' but the New International Version correctly interpreted the word 'fulness' in the light of the context...this idea of filling out the full number of saved Gentiles during this age definitely is what is meant by the statement, 'until the full number of Gentiles has come in.'" (Road To Holocaust, p 202).
We respectfully disagree. Mr. Lindsey deserves great respect for his accurate portrayal of the dangers of Islam, and the ominous signs of America's coming troubles with Muslims, but his futuristic views concerning Israel and the Jews are completely off the wall. The idea that the 144000 Jews are going to be great evangelists in the future "Great Tribulation," and that they will win more souls to Christ during the seven year Tribulation than the Church had been able to do in 2000 years is totally fictitious.
The rapture, as they believe, takes place only after every Gentile that can be saved will be saved, and brought into the Church, then the Tribulation begins, and then the 144000 Jewish "Apostle Pauls" will preach the Gospel world wide, winning more Gentiles to Christ than the Church was able to do in 2000 years. But this raises a big question: if all the Gentiles that could be saved had already been saved, where are the 144000 Jews going to find all those countless millions of unsaved Gentiles to witness to?
THE END OF ISRAEL'S BLINDNESS
We've heard the time predicted when Dispensational scholars think the blindness of Israel will end. It might be of interest to see what the Bible itself has to say about that. It may surprise these scholars to know that the time is definitely spelled out in the Old Testament, and that time is not what they say it is.
Isaiah 6, verse 9: "And he said, Go, and tell this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not." Verse 10: "Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert, and be healed." Verse 11: "Then said I, Lord, how long? And he answered, Until the cities be wasted without inhabitant, and the houses without man, and the land be utterly desolate," Verse 12: "And the LORD have removed men far away, and there be a great forsaking in the midst of the land." Verse 13: "But yet in it shall be a tenth, and it shall return, and shall be eaten: as a teil tree, and as an oak, whose substance is in them, when they cast their leaves: so the holy seed shall be the substance thereof."
Notice particularly verses 11 and 12. Isaiah was told that the blindness would continue until the cities be wasted without inhabitant, and houses without man, and the land be utterly desolate, and the Lord have removed men far away, and there be a great forsaking in the midst of the land. At first glance this may seem to be the "Great Tribulation" which Dispensationalists predict is to happen after the rapture of the Church, but it is not. This was the time when Rome invaded Israel, and destroyed the city, and the temple in AD70. At that time they carried off over a million Jews as prisoners of war. Dispensationalists would deny that, but pay attention to the details of their story of the dispensational "Great Tribulation, which goes something like this:
The Church is raptured. The Anti-Christ is revealed. He makes a "firm" seven year covenant of peace with Israel. After three and a half years he breaks the covenant, sets himself up as God in the temple, defiling the Jewish house of worship. This angers the godly Jews and goads them into an armed rebellion. Thus begins the serious half of the Tribulation. The war continues for some three and a half years, the Jews fighting valiantly against the overwhelming odds of the ten nation confederacy of the Anti-Christ. But just as they are about to lose the war, Jesus returns with "ten thousands of His saints," (the Raptured Gentile Church, some presume), defeats the Anti-Christ and his armies, and rescues Israel. The Lord Jesus Christ then goes about setting up the "Millennial Kingdom." Could this be the time that Israel's blindness is removed? Could this be what Isaiah was talking about? Not at all. As we can see, this story is quite different from the one given by Isaiah..Dispensationalists try hard to make Isaiah's holocaust something other than the obvious AD70 event.
A Bible scholar of the KJV Commentary Camp makes an attempt to place this event given by Isaiah in the time of the Babylonian Captivity, but notice how he overlooks an important point in God's answer to Isaiah's question of how long will the blindness continue: "God's answer; that he would continue to preach the message until the cities were desolate and only a remnant survived, indicated that his message would be pertinent to Israel up until the time of the Babylonian captivity..." (page 779). His effort to obscure the truth is lame at best. The point he overlooked is that the Bible says nothing about the blindness of Israel ending at that time. In fact, it says nothing at all about Israel's blindness in those days. The scholar had crafted a neat solution to this difficult problem, but his solution, designed to bolster futurism, was totally erroneous.
I don't believe that Isaiah chapter 6 is about the Babylonian captivity, because the Bible says nothing about Israel's blindness being removed at that time And neither is Isaiah's description the same as the future "Great Tribulation given by futurists." . We saw in Isaiah's prophecy that "the cities be wasted without inhabitant, houses without man, and the land be utterly desolate, men carried far away, and the land utterly desolate." This is not the picture given us of the future "Great Tribulation." It is, however, an accurate description of the time when tribulation in the land of Judah was great, the time of Jacob's trouble, two thousand years ago, in A.D.70. This is the only disaster experienced by Israel which fits Isaiah's prophecy to a T. The blindness of Israel ended then.
HOW WAS THE BLINDNESS REMOVED?
Paul writes: "What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded" (Rom. 11:7). The election became the Church, but what happened to the rest? "And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness" (2 Thes. 2:10-12). They ALL were damned; All the blinded Jews perished. The blindness of Israel ended because all the blinded Israelites perished. Question: If all the believing Jews became the Church, and all the unbelieving Jews perished, who was left? The answer is, of course, no one. The nation of Israel vanished along with the Israelites, in A.D.70.
KILLING TWO BIRDS WITH ONE STONE
We now have all the information we need to determine the true meaning of "fulness of the Gentiles be come in." "Fulness," depending on the context in which it is used, does not necessarily mean "full number," as we have been taught by modern scholars. The Oxford Dictionary offers an excellent clue: "completeness, perfection; complete or ample measure or degree." This is most often the Scriptural meaning of the word. Only rarely does it mean "full number." For example, to translate fulness in any of these verses below as "full number" would result in nonsense:
"Let the sea roar, and the fulness thereof: let the fields rejoice, and all that is therein" (1 Chron. 16:32). "In the fulness of his sufficiency he shall be in straits: every hand of the wicked shall come upon him" (Job 20:22). "Thou wilt show me the path of life: in thy presence is fulness of joy; at thy right hand there are pleasures for evermore" (Psalm 16:11). "And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace" (John 1:16). "And I am sure that, when I come unto you, I shall come in the fulness of the blessing of the gospel of Christ" (Rom. 15:29). "But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law" (Gal. 4:4), "That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him" (Eph. 1:10): "Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all" (Eph. 1:23). "And to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fulness of God" (Eph. 3:19). "Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ" (Eph. 4:13): "For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell" (Col. 1:19); "For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily" (Col. 2:9).
"Fulness, then means, "full stature," "full power," "dominance." This was the status of the Gentiles world when Israel fell. Whereas before, in the sight of God, Israel had been in it's day, man only imagines that the Day of the Gentiles began in the times of Babylon. Scripturally, The day of Israel continued from it's beginning until AD70, or until the time of Christ. "Saying, If thou hadst known, even thou, at least IN THIS THY DAY, the things which belong unto thy peace! but now they are hid from thine eyes" (Luke 19:42). "Be come in" is a phrase which speaks of a beginning, not the culmination of the Church. "Fulness of the Gentiles be come in" could be paraphrased, "The full stature of the Gentile world begins." without doing damage to God's Word. When the day of Israel went out, the day of the Gentile came in. They never ran concurrently. We are living in the times of the Gentiles, and will be until the end of the world.
Jews were blinded because they rejected the truth, primarily the truth that Jesus Christ was the Son of God incarnate. They were guilty because they personally saw Him, saw the miracles that He did, and heard Him preach, yet refused to believe. People today who mistakenly think they are "Jews" are not blinded the same way that their guilty ancesters were. They are just like any other Gentile, blinded only by the god of this world. Most Dispensational Bible scholars believe that Jews are still guilty of crucifying Christ, and that they will recognize their guilt during the "Tribulation," and repent of it. That is an unscriptural concept. Whatever they are guilty of now has nothing to do directly with what happened 2000 years ago.
"What mean ye, that ye use this proverb concerning the land of Israel, saying, The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge" (Ezek 18:2)? "As I live, saith the Lord GOD, ye shall not have occasion any more to use this proverb in Israel" (Ezek 18:3). "The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him" (Ezek 18:20).
UNTO THIS DAY
Careless reading of the Bible has prompted many to assume that Jews are still blinded because Paul uses the phrase, "unto this day." Nothing can be farther from the truth. When Paul wrote the Epistle to the Romans, the Jews were blinded, and those were the days Paul was talking about. By "this day," he was speaking of that day - his day and time, not ours. That generation of Jews, guilty of rejecting the Messiah, and crucifying Him, was blinded, and later destroyed in the holocaust of A.D.70. "Jews" today are not judicially blinded. The truth is, as we have seen, there are no Jews today. When God concluded all Israel in unbelief, He turned all Jews back into Gentiles, from which they came (Abraham, the father of all Jews, was a Gentile), and now there is no difference between Jew and Gentile. The Bible never says that Israel would ever be re-instated, or that the Jewish nationality would ever resume again. The whole world today is composed of only two classes of people, spiritually speaking, Christians and Gentiles. The "Jewish race" may have been a viable term when the nation existed, but it was never an ethnic term, it was strictly a religious designation.
"I SAY THEN, HAVE THEY STUMBLED THAT THEY SHOULD FALL? GOD FORBID: BUT RATHER THROUGH THEIR FALL SALVATION IS COME UNTO THE GENTILES, FOR TO PROVOKE THEM TO JEALOUSY. NOW IF THE FALL OF THEM BE THE RICHES OF THE WORLD, AND THE DIMINISHING OF THEM THE RICHES OF THE GENTILES; HOW MUCH MORE THEIR FULNESS" (ROM. 11:11-12)?
Those who strongly adhere to Dispensational teaching see in these two verses a future restoration of the whole nation of Israel, Jews in large number, coming to Christ in the "Great Tribulation" period. "Fulness" to some of them means, their "full number," and that, as we have seen, is false. The NASV offers "their fulfillment," and who knows what they mean by that. I doubt if Jews in general have been fulfilled in the last 2000 years. The NRSV offers "their full inclusion," and that, in a sense, is correct - those who accepted Christ were "included" into the Family of God. Did the NRSV scholars have any idea that they were at least partially right? Judging from some of their other silliness, we have reason to doubt. And, of course, Futurists live up to their title at every turn: "'...how much more their fulness,' or large-scale conversion, will bring riches to the Gentile nations and glory to God. Thus Paul begins to lay the groundwork for the proof that Israel's rejection is not permanent. She will be restored to God" (King James Commentary, p 1436). That is another example of a poorly thought out remark. The Israel's "large-scale conversion" is supposed to take place in the future "Tribulation." That is supposed to happen after all the Gentiles that could be saved have been saved and raptured. So how is Israel's "large-scale conversion" expected to bring riches to the Gentile nations which will be by then largely devoid of Gentiles?
Somehow, Futurists believe that when Israelites see Gentiles "feasting on bread from the banquet table of God and enjoying the salvation which could have been theirs, they will be convinced of their apostasy and foolish rejection of Jesus as their Messiah..." (IBID. p 1436). And that, presumably, will bring about full-scale repentance. But just when and how is this scenario supposed to take place? If the Gentiles are in heaven feasting at the table of God, how are the unbelieving Jews, down here on earth in the Tribulation, supposed to see them? Once again, we see reasonable biblical exegesis take a back seat to ecstatic imagination. Provoking the unbelieving Jews to jealousy was a goal set to happen in that first century, in Paul's day. The unbelievers of the Jews didn't see their believing counterpart eating fried chicken at a heavenly banquet table. "For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost" (Rom. 14:17).
A Jew who has been disowned by God, then repents and comes back to God through faith in Jesus Christ, has returned from the spiritually dead, and come to his fulness. So "fulness" here simply means salvation of the Jew, regardless of number. Naturally, the more the merrier, but the Bible places no premium on number. All we know is that a "tenth," a small part, a remnant, came back.
The "fall of them," and the "diminishing of them" mean roughly the same thing. The fall of them refers to the national disobedience, the diminishing of them means that God disowned them as His people (Rom. 11:32). But what would their "full number" have to do with anything? The Dispensational forced interpretation says that the nation of Israel has been set aside, but that after it is received again---we suppose that means their fulness, or full number---a greater revival will take place than ever in history. The problem is that no where in the Bible does it say that the nation will be received again, nor is anything said about any future revival.
Their "fulness" means the salvation of a remnant of Jews during the forty years between Pentecost and the holocaust. Paul spoke of the remnant, and Isaiah prophesied that the nation would be destroyed, but a small portion of the nation would return. "But yet in it shall be a tenth, and it shall return, and shall be eaten: as a teil tree, and as an oak, whose substance is in them, when they cast their leaves: so the holy seed shall be the substance thereof" (Isa. 6:13).
Whether the remnant was comprised of exactly one tenth of the nation is not important; the Bible often uses round numbers when precisely exact figures would be meaningless. Futurists would rather believe that Jews will some day in the future physically return to Jerusalem, or to Israel, but I think rather that a remnant spiritually returned to the Lord two thousand years ago. After they were concluded in unbelief - separated from God the Father - a remnant returned, they accepted Christ, they were born again. The highly figurative language, "shall be eaten: as a teil tree, and as an oak, whose substance in them, when they cast their leaves" probably speaks of them shedding the Old ways, the Law, and receiving a new Substance, that Substance being the Holy Seed---that is---Christ. Over a million Jews were destroyed or carried away in the war of A.D.70. A remnant, maybe a tenth, maybe more or less, was saved.
"FOR I SPEAK TO YOU GENTILES, INASMUCH AS I AM THE APOSTLE OF THE GENTILES, I MAGNIFY MINE OFFICE: IF BY ANY MEANS I MAY PROVOKE TO EMULATION THEM WHICH ARE MY FLESH, AND MIGHT SAVE SOME OF THEM...FOR IF THE FIRSTFRUIT BE HOLY, THE LUMP IS ALSO HOLY: AND IF THE ROOT BE HOLY, SO ARE THE BRANCHES" (ROM. 11:13,14,16).
Provoking to jealousy, and provoking to emulation, are practically one and the same thing. With passages such as these we begin to get the feeling that in those days the Jews who turned to Christ and endured with Him to the end, were special people, even though God had made them just like Gentiles. I believe they, being His own, and holding on to their new faith until the end (A.D.70), were a notch above all others. The New Testament seems to repeat the phrase, "...the Jew first, then the Gentile." Their punishment for unbelief and disobedience would be greater, but their rewards for receiving Christ just might be greater also. They just might be the permanent occupants with Jesus of that great new city coming out of heaven. Check out anything written in the Bible about the New Jerusalem. To hear Dispensationalists talk, you would think that it was built especially for the Gentile Church, but it has 12 foundations, with the names of the 12 tribes of Israel, and 12 gates with the names of the twelve Apostles - all Jews. There is not the name of a single Gentile written on it anywhere. Could it have been built especially for the new Church of Christ, made up mostly of faithful Jews? That is a possibility.
FOR IF THE CASTING AWAY OF THEM BE THE RECONCILING OF THE WORLD, WHAT SHALL THE RECEIVING OF THEM BE, BUT LIFE FROM THE DEAD" (Rom. 11:15)?
The "casting away of them" is detailed in Romans 11:32. After God concluded them in unbelief, they were as Gentiles, spiritually dead. They all could return to God through faith in Jesus Christ. Those who did were "born again." Jews traveled from life to death, and back to life again. Peter says that God had "begotten them again to a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead." He used the word "again," and that is a positive clue that they were alive before, then they were not, and now they were alive again. "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead" (1 Peter 1:3). The Scriptures interpret Romans 11:32 better than anyone can. But, as might be expected of Dispensational scholars, they failed to pick up on that.
"AND IF SOME OF THE BRANCHES BE BROKEN OFF, AND THOU, BEING A WILD OLIVE TREE, WERT GRAFTED IN AMONG THEM, AND WITH THEM PARTAKEST OF THE ROOT AND FATNESS OF THE OLIVE TREE" (ROM. 11:17);
Some Dispensationalists see the "olive tree" as the nation Israel, and the "wild olive tree" as the Church, and all of this happening in the future. But Dispensational theologians fight hard to maintain a distinction between Israel and the Church; the Church never becomes part of the nation of Israel, now or in the future. Notice how futurists forcefully weave a future scenario of restored Israel into just about every Bible passage they comment on, without regard to consistency or common sense logic:
"Gentiles must remember...that not all branches of Israel have been discarded. Just unrepentant Israel is broken off. The life of the tree of Abraham has not been removed. The wild branches gain sustenance from the root which still bears a remnant of Jewish believers." (IBID. p 1436). This muddle-headed remark is typical of Dispensational scholarship, and indicative of a mind-set which worships the tree more than the Creator of the tree.. The broken off branches were unrepentant Israel. And just who do they think were the remaining branches - those that weren't broken off? They couldn't have been any other than repentant branches of Israel. But repentant Israelites were saved - they were in the church. So who was left in the "tree of Abraham?" Were there some sort of "in-between" Israelites, neither saved nor unsaved, but hanging somewhere in limbo, waiting to be saved "nationally" in the Tribulation? Nonsense! There were only repentant Israelites, and unrepentant Israelites. "...so the holy seed shall be the substance thereof" (Isa. 6:13). Repentant Israel gained sustenance from the Root, the holy Seed, which was Christ, not from the "tree of Abraham." There were only two classes of Israelites, those that believed on Christ, and were saved, and those who did not believe on Christ, and were lost. Don't bother searching for a third class of Israelites rejecting the Son, dedicated to the Father only, and permanently preserved by Him. There are none. If they reject the Son, they might as well reject the Father; the fires of judgment will be just as hot: "Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: but he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also " (1 John 2:23).
The branches being broken off speaks of God disowning part of Israel for unbelief. The wild olive tree are unsaved Gentiles. Now, being grafted in among them means that the family of God, or Kingdom of Christ---the root and fatness of the olive tree---though originally established for the nation of Israel, now accepts both Jews and Gentiles who come to the Father through faith in Christ. The "olive tree" formerly represented Israel, but only because Israel represented the family of God. Today the Good Olive Tree is still a metaphor for the Family of God. In it are believing Gentiles, and believing former Israelites, but no Israel. All of us enjoy all the things that being in the Family of God has to offer (root and fatness).
"BOAST NOT AGAINST THE BRANCHES. BUT IF THOU BOAST, THOU BEAREST NOT THE ROOT, BUT THE ROOT THEE. WELL; BECAUSE OF UNBELIEF THEY WERE BROKEN OFF, AND THOU STANDEST BY FAITH. BE NOT HIGHMINDED, BUT FEAR: FOR IF GOD SPARED NOT THE NATURAL BRANCHES, TAKE HEED LEST HE ALSO SPARE NOT THEE. "BEHOLD THEREFORE THE GOODNESS AND SEVERITY OF GOD: ON THEM WHICH FELL, SEVERITY; BUT TOWARD THEE, GOODNESS, IF THOU CONTINUE IN HIS GOODNESS: OTHERWISE THOU ALSO SHALT BE CUT OFF" (ROM. 11:18-22).
If you want to see a good example of a non-Jew boasting against the branches, read almost any commentary produced by a Dispensational Bible scholar. Most have two things in common: they believe that Jews are still guilty of crucifying Christ; and the Gentile "virgin bride," the Church, is heavenly while Jews are earthly, i.e., in the future Millennium, Jews will be digging the soil and planting and plowing for their sustenance in the rocky land of Palestine, while we will be in the heavenly New Jerusalem ruling with Christ over them. I, for one, will not be holding my breath waiting for that to come true. In earthly terms, Christ was Jewish, not Gentile. And if, perhaps, He may tend to give "preferential treatment" to His brethren after the flesh, who am I to complain? During the forty years between Pentecost and the holocaust, they had to hold on to faith in Him, or give in to the wiles of the devil, abandon faith, and be damned. They went through a great deal more than I ever did. Their reward just might be greater also. Will we Gentiles be only occasional guests of the New City? Will we be on the outside looking in? Revelation seems to suggest that. "And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honor into it" (Rev. 21:24). Of course, it won't matter much to me. I'll be thankful for eternal life, even if I have to spend in on a farm in Georgia, on a fishing boat off the coast of North Carolina, or herding cattle in Montana. And if I have to travel to the New Jerusalem to see Jesus, I'll go there, you can count on it. He came unto His own. His own were Jews.
"AND THEY ALSO, IF THEY ABIDE NOT STILL IN UNBELIEF, SHALL BE GRAFTED IN: FOR GOD IS ABLE TO GRAFT THEM IN AGAIN. FOR IF THOU WERT CUT OUT OF THE OLIVE TREE WHICH IS WILD BY NATURE, AND WERT GRAFTED CONTRARY TO NATURE INTO A GOOD OLIVE TREE: HOW MUCH MORE SHALL THESE, WHICH BE THE NATURAL BRANCHES , BE GRAFTED INTO THEIR OWN OLIVE TREE" (ROM. 11:23-24)?
It is important to notice that "God was able to graft them in again...if they remained not still in unbelief..." They couldn't be grafted in AGAIN unless they had been in before, and now were out. How did they fall out? To repeat, the answer is in Romans 11:32, which says that God concluded them all in unbelief. They had been in as Jewish members of the Family of God. Now they were out, and in unbelief. But if they didn't remain in unbelief, God was able to graft them in again.
"FOR I WOULD NOT, BRETHREN, THAT YE SHOULD BE IGNORANT OF THIS MYSTERY, LEST YE SHOULD BE WISE IN YOUR OWN CONCEITS; THAT BLINDNESS IN PART IS HAPPENED TO ISRAEL, UNTIL THE FULNESS OF THE GENTILES BE COME IN" (ROM. 11:25).
It is regrettable that Christian scholars do not always consider all of Scripture when interpreting certain passages. "Blindness in part" may seem to be speaking of a "partial blindness" of Israel, but verse 7 confirms the truth that only a part of Israel was blinded, and II Thessalonians reveals that this blindness was not partial or temporary, but complete and fatal.
FULNESS OF THE GENTILES BE COME IN
The meaning of this biblical expression is so important to the understanding of prophecy that it bears repeating. A serious mistake Dispensational scholars have made was to assume that "fulness of the Gentiles" began with the calling out of the Church. Dr. Walvoord believes that "times of the Gentiles" has reference to political domination by Gentiles, and in this he is correct. But on the other hand he believes that "fulness of the Gentiles" has reference to Gentile blessing and opportunity in this age, so that the "fulness of the Gentiles" will come in just before the times of the Gentiles run out, that is, just before the rapture of the Church. That idea is not scriptural, is nothing short of a wild guess, and totally misses the mark. The "fulness of the Gentiles be come in" marks the beginning of the times of the Gentiles, rather than the end. In A.D.70, the house of Israel was left desolate. The times of Israel came to an abrupt end. With the times of Israel ended, the times of the Gentiles began. The times of Israel and the times of the Gentiles never ran concurrently. When one ended, the other began, and vice versa. Bible scholars believe that the times of the Gentiles began with Gentile political dominance sometime in the days of the Babylonian Captivity. Not so. When God established the priesthood nation of Israel, the times of Israel continued unbroken throughout all its history, even at times when in captivity to Gentile nations. There was always Israel, and they were always God's people, even when there was only a remnant. When the Lord Jesus Christ visited Israel they were still in their day (Luke 19:42).
The "fulness of the Gentiles be come in" means exactly what it seems to mean: it was the time when the fulness of the power and stature of the Gentiles came to be, as contrasted to the power of the holy people, the Israelites, which now was scattered. We needn't guess when that happened; the Scriptures pinpoint the time for us in Isaiah 6, verses 11, and 12. The blindness ended with the nation. After that there was no Israel, no Jews, and no judicial blindness.
"AND SO ALL ISRAEL SHALL BE SAVED: AS IT IS WRITTEN, THERE SHALL COME OUT OF SION THE DELIVERER, AND SHALL TURN AWAY UNGODLINESS FROM JACOB: FOR THIS IS MY COVENANT UNTO THEM, WHEN I SHALL TAKE AWAY THEIR SINS" (ROM. 11:26-27).
Is this to happen in the future? Dispensational Bible scholars insist on it. Chafer writes: "The national salvation and forgiveness of Israel is yet a future expectation and is promised to occur when the Deliverer comes out of Sion" (Things To Come, p 265). This next segment, copied from Things To Come, shows, among other things, the subconscious Anti-Semitic sentiment which prevails among most if not all Dispensational scholars, and also reveals the haphazard thinking which led to the idea that, because the nation Israel did not experience the promised blessings 2000 years ago, blessings and "national salvation" have been postponed until a future time when Christ comes again.
According to Chafer, "Jehovah will, in connection with the second advent of Christ, and as part of Israel's salvation, 'take away their sins.' This, Jehovah declares is His covenant with them (Rom. 11:27)....Jehovah will yet in the future, in the briefest portion of time, and as part of Israel's salvation, take away their sins...We conclude, therefore, that the nation Israel will yet be saved and her sins removed forever through the blood of Christ" (IBID. p 266)
This is an incredible statement, in view of all the Scriptures to the contrary. "The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world" (John 1:29). Israel was part of the world in those days. Can anyone be so indoctrinated into the subtleties of futurism as to believe that somehow, when Jesus took away the sin of the world, He skipped over Israel?
Dispensational Futurism draws a curtain over the accomplishments of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, 2000 years ago. What did He do the first time He came? Did He accomplish anything worthwhile? How is it that His death on the cross, and His resurrection from the dead, had no effect upon Israelites? Dispensationalists teach as though they believe that at the first advent Christ came only to save the Gentile world, leaving Israel's "national salvation" for another time. Even though the Bible is clear that He died for the sins of the world, they somehow believe that the "national salvation" of Israel will not take effect until He returns, and Israel experiences national repentance. Only then will Israel be forgiven. This kind of teaching is not biblical, it is diabolical, and comes straight from the pits of hell. Whether these Bible experts accept it or not, Christ's first advent was all about Israel. Although He died for the sins of the whole world, when God visited His people, His people were in the forefront, Gentiles were secondary. "He came unto His own..." Has the Deliverer not yet come to Sion? Let the Bible speak:
"Fear not, daughter of Sion: behold, thy King cometh, sitting on an ass's colt" (John 12:15). This happened in Jerusalem (Sion is another name for Jerusalem). This was near the end of Christ's ministry. Jesus Christ had already been in Sion for about three and a half years. Only a special kind of worldly blindness would prompt Bible scholars to preach that the Deliverer is yet to come to Sion..
"As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed" (Rom. 9:33). New Testament scriptures never intimate that there was ever to be a "national salvation" in addition to individual salvation. Individuals made up the nation of Israel, just as individuals make up any nation. Before a nation can "experience salvation," the individuals must be saved. To tell the truth, "national salvation" is entirely meaningless; only the people count. Christ came to the nation of Israel, but only because that's where His people, known as the "holy people," were. And that is the only reason that Israel was called a "holy nation." If they had all lived in Nebraska 2000 years ago, guess where the Lord would have arrived?
"He came unto his own, and his own received him not. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name" (John 1:11-12). What about those who did not believe on His name? Were they set aside, kept somewhere in limbo (or purgatory) until Christ returns to effect "national salvation?" The Bible says nothing of the kind. This is what it says about those who did not believe on His name: "What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded" (Rom. 11:7). And what happened to those that were blinded? "And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness" (2 Th 2:11-12). And what happened to those who were damned? The Lord Jesus Christ tells us, as He foretells the war in AD70: "For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people. And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled" (Luke 21:22-24).
So, part of Israel was saved into the Church, and the other part fell by the sword of the Romans, or were led away captive. Did every single Israelite perish? Probably not. It stands to reason that not every Jew on the face of the earth became a Christian or was destroyed as an unbeliever. We may be almost certain that there have been descendants from both camps. But ALL Israel had been concluded in unbelief (converted to Gentiles). So any Israelite who physically survived the downfall of the nation was no longer a Jew, and neither were his children. "Jewish ancestry" today is a myth. There are no Jews today. And there is no Israel. When God decided to close down Israel, He made sure there were no Jews remaining. Such is the meaning of "All" in Romans 11:32.
Futurists also believe that God did not manage to take away ungodliness from Jacob, but will do so in the future, when "all Israel shall be saved." Of course, Dispensationalists understand that not every Israelite will be saved. But some think that "all Israel" means the nation as a whole, minus a few "rebels." Quite the opposite. The nation perished, and only a remnant, which Paul identified as "all Israel," was saved. It is a grave error to believe and teach that some day in the future the Deliverer shall come out of Sion and only then shall ungodliness be turned away from Jacob. That concept belittles the fact that the Deliverer had already come out of Zion, suffered and died on the cross, took away their sins, and turned away ungodliness from Jacob. That was 2000 years ago. Paul writes, "It is written..." and quotes from the Old Testament. It shouldn't be difficult to see that if it was written, then to him that originally wrote it, the event was to be future, thus it was proper to say that the Deliverer SHALL do such and such. And though from Paul's vantage point, it had already happened, still he was quoting the Old Testament prophet, when he said, "it is written..." and so it happened. If Christ died for the sins of the world, but failed to take away the sins from Jacob 2000 years ago, then simply returning won't do the trick; He must return, and be crucified all over again. Is that going to happen? If that is the Dispensational expectation, they ought to pack a big lunch; I believe they are going to have a long wait!
"FOR GOD HATH CONCLUDED THEM ALL IN UNBELIEF, THAT HE MIGHT HAVE MERCY UPON ALL" (ROM. 11:32).
This was the end of all Jews, Israel, the Old Testament system of Law and sacrifices, and all things Jewish. The first "all" in the verse above are Jews. It is important to understand that God concluded only Israel in unbelief, so that He might have mercy upon all, Gentile and Jew alike. He did not, as some Bible expositors believe, "shut up all men in disobedience, so that He could show mercy to all." Any honest attempt at an interpretation of that new world translation results in complete nonsense. The first "ALL" in this verse were the Jews, of which Paul was writing about in the preceding context verses. God concluded all Jews in unbelief, in other words, He made them, spiritually, just like Gentiles. He did not conclude Gentiles in unbelief; He didn't have to. All Gentiles are born that way to begin with. Not so the Jews. Jews were born into the family of God, they were natural children of God. Paul hints at this: "We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles, Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified" (Gal. 2:15-16). He says, "even we [even we Jews] have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law..." Paul strongly shows that the Jewish system had come to an end, and only faith in Christ saves.
WHO ARE THE CHILDREN OF THE PROMISE?
If there remains the question as to who are the children of the promise, Paul gives the answer: "But the Scripture hath CONCLUDED ALL UNDER SIN, THAT THE PROMISE BY FAITH OF JESUS CHRIST MIGHT BE GIVEN TO THEM THAT BELIEVE. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise" (Gal. 3:22,29). This verse gives a more detailed explanation of that which Romans 11:32 touches on. God concluded ALL Jews under sin (or under the dominance of sin, or under the power of darkness or of Satan. Expressed differently, He put all Jews into the same boat that Gentiles are born in). It also reveals that everyone who is of faith is Christ's, and is Abraham's seed, and heir according to the promise. This clearly obviates the need to preserve a fictitious "Israel," force all Jews some day to "repent," run them through the future seven year "Great Tribulation," (another piece of fiction), and force upon them a "guaranteed converted heart" (Things To Come, p 116), so that God can fulfill His promises to the "seed of Abraham."
THERE ARE NO JEWS TODAY
God made sure that there would be no Jews after the time of Christ. "For God had concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all" (Rom. 11:32). The term "Jew" is not an ethnic term. It is a religious designation. "Jews" didn't start out being "Jews." Abraham, the "father of all Jews," was a Gentile.
THERE IS NO ISRAEL TODAY
Futurists are still blessing the day when the nation of Israel was "restored" in 1948. How did Israel come to be in 1948? It was chartered into existence by the satanic, Communist dominated, United Nations. Did God have a hand in restoring Israel? If so, do you think that He would need such an ungodly organization to help Him. Do the Scriptures anywhere give even a hint of Israel being restored after being destroyed by ancient Rome? Jesus said, "Behold, your house is left unto you desolate." (Mt. 23:38) and that's the way He left it. Consider the possibility that in 1948 a group of people who prefer to call themselves "Jews" formed a "nation" where Old Israel once stood, and called it "Israel." Was this God's doing? If it was, then why, pray tell, would He have been needing the help of a secular nation like the United States to keep this "restored" Israel alive and afloat? Our tax dollars have been supporting this "restored" Israel for longer than we care to know. The truth is, this "new Israel" is a secular nation, just like any other nation, founded by unbelieving Gentiles, just like any other unbelieving Gentiles. They may have chosen the name "Israel," but it means absolutely nothing. They could have named it "Turkey"...oops! There already is a Turkey. But they could have named it "Chicken," or "Billy Goat," or anything else, and it wouldn't have made any difference. Those who started this "Israel" are a deluded people, unbelieving Gentiles, thinking they are Jews when they are not, and therefore living under a curse. "For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them" (Gal. 3:10).
THAT WAS
"Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live."(John 5:25)
THIS WILL BE
"Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation" (John 5:28-29)
So, in short, in the fulness of the time - that is - when the time was ripe, Christ came to Israel to confirm His heavenly Father's promises to the nation. That was going to take seven years. But after three and a half years, the Jews rejected and crucified Him. At some point in time, God concluded all Israel in unbelief. He made them just like the Gentiles. After that everyone, Jew and Gentile alike, can only come to the Father through faith in Jesus Christ. After the day of Pentecost, the disciples spent forty years taking the Gospel to the Jews all over the world. Some believed, and were saved. Many refused to believe, even though they knew who Christ was. These were blinded and destroyed in the war of A.D.70. The nation ended at that time. Today there is no Israel, and there are no Jews. All people are the same. There are those who believe in Christ, and they are called Christians. Those who do not are unbelieving Gentiles.
"The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand." (John 3:35) "For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son: That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father, which hath sent him." (John 5:22-23)
HOME
"In that I command thee this day to love the Lord thy God, to walk in his ways, and to keep his commandments and his statues and his judgements, that thou mayest live and multiply: and the Lord thy God shall bless thee in the land whither thou goest to posses it. V17 But if thine heart turn away, so that thou wilt not hear, but shall be drawn away, and worship other gods, and serve them; V18 I denounce unto you this day, that ye shall surely perish, and that ye shall not prolong your days upon the land, which thou passest over Jordan to go to possess it.V19 I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live."We are told time and again by certain scholars that this covenant, and almost all covenants God made with Israel, were "unconditional covenants," that no matter what Israel might do, God had obligated Himself to deliver all that He promised of the good things to the nation. But, as we see above, Scripture tells a different story.
Three and a half years after Jesus was baptized and anointed Messiah, the nation rejected and crucified Him, just as God knew they would. Some forty years later the hammer of justice fell, the nation was destroyed as promised, and a deluded people who call themselves Jews have been without a country, wandering all over the world for almost 2000 years, persecuted and harrassed almost everywhere. All the while they cling tenaciously to the Law which now is a curse to anyone who tries to live under it. With the help of the Satan-driven United Nations, they "restored" for themselves a nation in 1948 and called it "Israel," , but did God have anything to do with it? What's worse, many Christians are spellbound by some bizarre movement lately that would turn back the clock, and make everyone and everything Jewish again, albeit under innovative labels such as "Christian Jew." Refusing to believe what the Bible says, they run with itching ears to theological shysters who preach a glorious future for a non-existent "race" of people. That "race" was once a proud and blessed race, but now they are no longer Jews, but merely unbelieving Gentiles, no longer under the umbrella of God's protection as before. The great shame of Christianity is that, instead of witnessing the truth to them, we are actually encouraging the spiritual suicide of millions.
DON'T FIX WHAT AIN'T BROKE
The first thing we notice in commentaries on the book of Romans, even by those Bible teachers who claim to be conservative and/or fundamental, is the puffed up attitude that if one has been to a Bible college, or a seminary, and has studied Greek for a year or two, he is automatically capable of translating the Bible for himself, and is able to do a better job of it than anyone else, even better than those men who translated the KJV Bible. With a Greek dictionary or lexicon in hand, he feels he has virtually no peer in the department of Bible corrections. The "KJV Commentary," (the term "KJV" here should be taken with great reservation, or a large grain of salt), jumps right into the Book of Romans with it's own modern view of what some verses ought to say:
Rom. 1:1. "'Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle.' Paul calls himself a servant (Gr. duolos, bondslave) of Jesus Christ. In his mind, since a Roman slave was answerable only to his master, Paul was not just servant to the Lord but slave as well and answerable only to Him" (The King James Bible Commentary, p. 1395).With all due respect, that is nonsense. It is gibberish intended to lend credibility the scholar's foolish choice of a Bible translation which "corrects" the KJV's "servant" with "bond-servant." A Roman slave was a bond-servant, and answerable to one master, because he had no choice. That was not the case with Paul. He could leave the Lord any time he wanted to. He just didn't want to. That's what made him a servant instead of a slave.
By the way, the scholar implies that the Greek doulos has only one translation which is "bondslave." That is false. In Strong's Concordance, the Greek "doulos" means, "a slave, literally or figuratively, involuntary or voluntary; frequently therefore in a qualified sense of subjection or subserviency: bondservant."
If involuntary, then the correct translation is slave; if voluntary, the correct translation is servant. Jesus Christ didn't force Paul to labor for Him against his will, so he was not a slave. Therefore, the proper term, as it is given in the KJV, is servant. The work of modern translators exposes a great deal of either sloth or incompetence on their part. Translating from Greek to English requires greater expertise than some Bible experts seem to posses. Most of us are happy to leave the KJV just as it is, and we're all the better for it. Paul was "called," but not coerced. Slaves respond to a whip; not so readily to a "call."
AND DECLARED TO BE THE SON OF GOD WITH POWER, ACCORDING TO THE SPIRIT OF HOLINESS, BY THE RESURRECTION FROM THE DEAD" (ROM. 1:3-4):
The same scholars of the "King James Bible Commentary" seem to devote so much time and energy seeking out and correcting errors in the KJV which aren't really there that they overlook the meaning of much that is there. Not that they are lacking in proper piety. In fact, all their material reeks with pious platitudes, extolling the "goodness" and the "greatness" of God as though they really believe it, something which they no doubt remember from childhood Sunday School lessons. That's well and Good. But they are refusing to pass along the knowledge of God that also ought to be taught to others. "And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also" (2 Tim. 2:2). Note how the pious scholar missed the entire point of Romans 1:4. He writes,
'And declared to be the son of God with power.' Notice that although Jesus Christ was made of the seed of David according to the flesh, He was not made the Son of God...this fact was graphically and unmistakably revealed to the world according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead..." (p 1395)His paragraph was short, sweet, and as pious as can be, but not one word is said telling us what the Bible verse is really all about. His work is in line with some modern translations which tell us about all the power God needed to declare Jesus the Son of God, and nothing about the power given to Jesus at His resurrection. "Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away" (2 Tim. 3:5). Modern Bible translators, and many "good, Godly, Fundamentalist" scholars simply do not believe that Jesus was given all power over the whole universe. And even if they believe that, they're not sure He knows what to do with it. They have Him sitting in heaven on His Father's throne, waiting to come back and assume His rightful position as King of Israel. Exactly what He's waiting for is never fully explained.
Those modern translations rewrite this verse to focus on all the "tremendous" power God required to declare Jesus the Son of God, i.e., "And declared with power to be the Son of God..." Too many Bible expositors, even those who ostensibly interpret according the KJV, fall in line with this trivialized translation, often ignoring completely the fact that at His resurrection, Jesus was declared to be the Son of God possessing power. There are sufficient other Scripture verses which prove that this rewrite is false and misleading. "And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth" (Matt 28:18).And we surely ought not to miss the passage in Ephesians: "And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power, Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come" (Eph. 1:19-21)
The power God needed to declare Jesus the Son of God was really no big deal to God, and He made no issue of in His Word. He had already been declared to be the Son of God twice. Once when He was baptized, and again at the mount of Transfiguration, and in neither case was the "tremendous" power to declare Him Son of God stressed, or even mentioned, revealing that this would be a pointless redundancy, like repeating endlessly that "God is good." Any Christian who has graduated beyond first year of Bible milk and who has to be reminded again and again of the extent of God's power is having serious problems with his beliefs. The writer of Hebrews says, Get past that and get on with it! There is a great deal more in the Bible than milk and cookies. "For every one that useth milk [is] unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe." (Hebrews 5:13)
The Lord Jesus Christ rose from the dead possessing power. It was His own prediction come true. Remember that just before the Transfiguration, Jesus told His disciples that not all of them would be dead before they saw Him in His kingdom. Before he rose from the dead, one of the disciples, Judas Iscariot, had committed suicide. In Matthew chapter 28 He announced to His eleven disciples after His resurrection, "All power is given unto me..." and in Ephesians 1:19-23 we find again the message that the power given to Him at His resurrection is great, it is above all other powers on earth and in heaven, and exercised against world powers in favor of His own who believe.
"FOR I AM NOT ASHAMED OF THE GOSPEL OF CHRIST: FOR IT IS THE POWER OF GOD UNTO SALVATION TO EVERY ONE THAT BELIEVETH; TO THE JEW FIRST, AND ALSO TO THE GREEK" (ROM. 1:16).
It is very important to understand that the Gospel went to the Jew first. And this happened in the first century, A.D., up to the time of the war in the year 66. First, the covenant which God the Father had made with the ancients of Israel was confirmed to the Jews, beginning with the anointing of Jesus Christ as the Messiah at His baptism, and continuing for seven years thereafter. Daniel prophesied that the covenant would be confirmed for one week of years. But three and a half years later, in the midst of the week, after Israel rejected Christ, the Gospel, which before was the preaching of the glorious promised Kingdom of heaven, now took on a slightly different aspect, being a new Kingdom which Israel the nation lost and which would go to another nation. It was not preached to the Jews only, but to the Gentiles also. However, for a time it was preached to the Jews first. At one point Paul became disgusted with the stubborn unbelief of some of the Jews: "Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles" (Acts 13:46). This may have marked the end of the seventh year - the one week - after Christ's baptism; we don't exactly know, and it doesn't matter. After the rejection and crucifixion of Christ, the exact end of the seven weeks became irrelevant. Israel itself had nullified the covenant, and had lost the kingdom which was promised to it, and which was to be confirmed and delivered within those seven years.
"FOR HE IS NOT A JEW, WHICH IS ONE OUTWARDLY; NEITHER IS THAT CIRCUMCISION, WHICH IS OUTWARD IN THE FLESH: BUT HE IS A JEW, WHICH IS ONE INWARDLY; AND CIRCUMCISION IS THAT OF THE HEART, IN THE SPIRIT, AND NOT IN THE LETTER; WHOSE PRAISE IS NOT OF MEN, BUT OF GOD" (ROM. 2:28-29). This is an important passage. It identifies the real Jews in Paul's day. They were not only the natural born descendants of Abraham, but the faithful remnant who were faithful to God the Father and also (consequently) believed on Christ. In the time of Christ, it was no longer of any benefit to be a Jew outwardly if one was not a Jew inwardly (of course, it was never of any benefit to be a Jew if one was not faithful to God the Father). One of a number of verses which attest to that is John 5:23: "That all men should honor the Son, even as they honor the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him." In general, "Jews" today do not believe that the Lord Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and Saviour of mankind. Christians, particularly Bible scholars of the futurist persuasion, in their confusion, somehow see them as "God's faithful remnant," or "God's protected and cherished race," or "the apple of His eye," or something like that. That is contrary to Scripture. If they do not believe in His only begotten Son, they are none of His. After the demise of the Jewish system in A.D.70, if they do believe, then they are not Jews, but Christians. Biblically speaking, believing Jews are Christians who have surrendered their nationality for a greater and more lasting kingdom, whereas unbelieving Jews are the enemies of God. So where is that "protected and cherished race?" Scofield reveals a great deal of Scriptural ignorance when he offers that God is "wonderfully preserving the race of Israel to this day..." Tell that to someone who has seen what happened in Nazi concentration camps! Nowhere in the Bible does it say that God will preserve any race of people who tenaciously hold on to the idea that they can worship the Father and reject the Son. In fact, the Bible specifically says that they have placed themselves under a curse: "For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith" (Gal. 3:10-11). It is a grave, unscriptural error to preach that the unbelieving "Jew" is cherished and being protected above and beyond any other unbelieving Gentile. It is also the most vicious form of anti-Semitism imaginable. Who knows how many people might have turned to Christ in the past 2000 years if they hadn't been encouraged to remain "Jews." The truth is, since the end of the war in AD70, there is no Israel, and there are no Jews. We see positive evidence of this in the Book of Romans.
"WHAT ADVANTAGE THEN HATH THE JEW? OR WHAT PROFIT IS THERE OF CIRCUMCISION? MUCH IN EVERY WAY: CHIEFLY, BECAUSE THAT UNTO THEM WERE COMMITTED THE ORACLES OF GOD." (ROM. 3:1-2)?
This passage should not be construed to mean that it is speaking of our day, and that the Jew today still has the advantage, being of the race to whom were committed the oracles of God. The Jews were the most privileged people on earth. But in spite of all those advantages, they still failed miserably. Paul was speaking of his day, not ours. The Jews in his day had many advantages. Although God had virtually "disowned" them by concluding them all in unbelief, (Rom. 11:32), yet He did not cast them away. The effort to bring them back into the fold (not into old Israel, but into the family of God) through the preaching of the Gospel was without equal. It was "to the Jew first."
FOR WHAT IF SOME DID NOT BELIEVE? SHALL THEIR UNBELIEF MAKE THE FAITH OF GOD WITHOUT EFFECT" (ROM. 3:3)?
Somehow, Bible scholars have turned the situation around, and have made the unbelieving part of Israel the manipulators of God's intentions. They teach that, because of the unbelief of Israel, God had to "pack up His bags and leave, hoping for a future day when He can come back and try again to offer them the Kingdom. In this verse Paul reveals that the unbelief of some didn't change God's plan one bit.
Those who believe that God still has a future planned for Israel as a priesthood nation in the end times would be hard pressed to explain why He is letting millions and millions of Jews die in unbelief during the time of the Church, while intending to force salvation upon an arbitrarily selected generation of Jews after the Rapture of the Church. Are all Jews of all time saved anyway, or what? There is no logical consistency here, even though many evangelicals preach and believe this, while others believe some muddled variation of it. The idea creates some sticky logical problems for futurists. Consider this possibility:
All mankind of all time and in all the world should believe on Christ Jesus. True or False? True, of course. Everyone, even the unshakable believer in Futurism, agrees. That is the for which we should all be working and praying. The problem with this, however, is that if successful, it would make all mankind Christian. So why is that a problem?
Well, what would happen when the time of the "Great Tribulation" and the "Millennium" finally came. There would be no Jew available to go into either. The anti-Christ would have no one to persecute for crucifying Christ, the crime for which dispensational scholars everywhere still hold Jews blamable, and the Millennial Kingdom would remain vacant of Jews for a thousand years. There would be no 144000 Jewish "super - evangelists," leading countless millions of Gentiles to Christ, as we have been taught.
The "Great Tribulation," according to futurists, and also the "Millennium," are designed especially for the Jews. But with all Jews having been converted to Christianity, and now full-fledged members of the Church, where is God going to find enough Jews to make the "Great Tribulation" worthwhile? The solution? Limit the number of Jews that would respond to the Gospel of Christ? No other solution to the futuristic dilemma appears viable (dispensationalists talk about Israel still being "partially blinded, but not so blinded that salvation is impossible, only more difficult." That appears to be their solution) . What should be the perfect situation has actually become a confused mess. If this were God's idea, He would be caught with a plan which He hadn't thought through carefully enough, because throughout the New Testament, and even the O.T., God worked tirelessly to bring all mankind to the saving knowledge of truth. Following the dispensational futuristic plan, He couldn't do that
"And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned" (Mark 16:15-16). Jesus said, "preach the Gospel to every creature." That would certainly include Jews. It was God's will, therefore, that all men everywhere be saved. Of course, not everyone has accepted the Gospel, and that, ironically, seems to be the salvation of dispensational prophecy. Futurism, therefore, could not survive except for the unbelief of some men. What a legacy! Should dispensational futurists be proud of who they are?
MOREOVER THE LAW ENTERED, THAT THE OFFENCE MIGHT ABOUND. BUT WHERE SIN ABOUNDED, GRACE DID MUCH MORE ABOUND: (ROMANS 5:20)
While this verse is not directly concerned with prophecy, yet the way a number of modern translations render it causes some expositors to say things which are totally at odds with real Scripture and the character of God. The NASV: "And the Law came in that the transgression might increase..." Hal Lindsey, following this lead, writes, "...the Law was given to make man sin more...now I realize that it sounds almost blasphemous to say that God gave something to man that would actually make him sin more. But that is exactly what the Scriptures say" (The Road To Holocaust, p 151).
Embracing new and sophisticated things leads man in many directions, not always where God wants him to go. God never gave man anything that would make him sin more. The NASV translators couldn't have understood the nature of God when they produced this piece of nonsense, and Mr. Lindsey revealed extreme carelessness in choosing translations to quote from. The KJV's English is older, but much more accurate "That the offense might abound" is not at all the same as "that the transgression might increase." The KJV can be paraphrased somewhat like this: "the Law came in to make better known to the sinner the offensive nature of the sin committed." Mr. Lindsey is right in one respect. To say that God would give something to man to make him sin more is indeed blasphemy. "Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:" (James 1:13)
FROM PENTECOST TO THE HOLOCAUST - THE FINAL YEARS OF ISRAEL
Chapters 9, 10, and 11, if studied with an open, unbiased mind, and interpreted honestly and literally, reveal the ultimate fate of Israel in greater detail than any other book of the Bible. Paul tells us what happened, how it happened, and why. I present several points which may help as we study Romans.
1. From the time God established the nation, Israelites were not born sinners, as are Gentiles. They were from birth the people of God. They were a special people to God.
2. They were the children of the ancients with whom God made certain covenants containing marvelous promises of a great Kingdom.
3. The generation of Israelites, alive when the Lord Jesus Christ came to earth, was a special generation. It was to this generation that God had planned to fulfill the promises. The Kingdom would have been set up just for them and those following, The temple would not have been destroyed, Israel would have continued indefinitely as God's priesthood nation in a more glorious way than ever before. Contrary to popular belief, the crucifixion of Christ was not in the original plan - not ostensibly - that is. Temple worship, with animal sacrifices and all, would have continued. All nations of the world would have traveled to Jerusalem to worship God. Israel would have been sitting "at the head of the table" so to speak. That's the good news.
4. The bad news is that, if they hearkened not to the voice of their God, the generation would receive the ultimate judgement promised to a disobedient nation. It would bring about the demise of Israel. "But if thine heart turn away, so that thou wilt not hear, but shalt be drawn away, and worship other gods, and serve them; I denounce unto you this day, that ye shall surely perish, and that ye shall not prolong your days upon the land, whither thou passest over Jordan to go to possess it. I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live" (Deut 30:17-19):
5. Israel didn't listen, as we all know. In the fulness of the time, when the Messiah came to confirm the covenant with Israel, and deliver the Kingdom, the nation rebelled, and even crucified the Son of God.
6. The whole course of events took a new direction. We might say that God put plan B into action (although plan B was the real plan, and was made ready even before the foundation of the world).
7. First He took away the special status that Israelites have enjoyed from their beginning as the children of God. He concluded all Israelites in unbelief, and made them the same as Gentiles (Rom 11:32).
8. Whereas Israel had always worshiped the Father, now that was no longer sufficient. Anyone who worships the Father, but rejects the Son, has neither the Father nor the Son. "That all men should honor the Son, even as they honor the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him" (John 5:23). "Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: but he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also " (1 John 2:23). "Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son" (2 Jo 1:9).
9. So, after God concluded Israel in unbelief, all people in the world, Jews and Gentiles alike, were sinners. The Jew was as if he had never been a Jew; spiritually speaking, he would have to be born all over again. He must now come to the Father through faith in the Son, just as the Gentile. The Jew must be "born again."
10. A part of Israel was stubborn, and in spite of all the miracles which they saw Jesus do, refused to believe. This part of Israel was blinded. That blindness was fatal, and would last until Israel was completely destroyed. The blinded part of Israel did not escape.
11. The great effort of the Apostolic Church was to get the Gospel out to every Jew in every nation of the world. This was done during the 35 or forty years between Pentecost and the war of A.D.70
12. This was the war in which the temple, the city, and all the blinded, stubborn, unbelievers of Israel were desolated. That was the event which we refer to as the "holocaust." It was the time of Jacob's troubles. Those were the worst days that Israel had ever experienced. They were also the final days, therefore Israel, as such, would never experience such a time again.
13. During those days a remnant of Israel was saved. Paul makes it clear that this remnant was saved according to the election of grace. In other words, if the Jew received the Gospel, and believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, he was saved, and became part of the remnant of Israel.
"NOT AS THOUGH THE WORD OF GOD HATH TAKEN NONE EFFECT. FOR THEY ARE NOT ALL ISRAEL, WHICH ARE OF ISRAEL. NEITHER, BECAUSE THEY ARE THE SEED OF ABRAHAM, ARE THEY ALL CHILDREN: BUT, IN ISAAC SHALL THY SEED BE CALLED. (ROM. 9:6-7).
If we take note of this passage, we will find that Paul defines "all Israel" as that part of Israel which was of faith. In the old times "all Israel" descended from Abraham through Isaac, because these had faith in God. Now, in Paul's day, an Israelite, if he was to be part of "all Israel," must also have faith in the Son of God. "Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son" (1 John 2:22). Notice that these were not simple unbelievers who didn't know any better; John calls them liars. These were the apostate, unregenerate, blinded Jews. It is important to remember that being a descendant of Abraham didn't necessarily make one a Jew. So, later, when we find that, "All Israel shall be saved," we must consider the biblical definition of "all Israel" as given to us by Paul. This definition seems to evade some commentators, who somehow see "all Israel" as a future generation of Jews saved in the "tribulation," incongruous as that may be.
"EVEN US, WHOM HE HATH CALLED, NOT OF THE JEWS ONLY, BUT ALSO OF THE GENTILES? AS HE SAITH ALSO IN OSEE, I WILL CALL THEM MY PEOPLE, WHICH WERE NOT MY PEOPLE; AND HER BELOVED, WHICH WAS NOT BELOVED. AND IT SHALL COME TO PASS, THAT IN THE PLACE WHERE IT WAS SAID UNTO THEM, YE ARE NOT MY PEOPLE; THERE SHALL THEY BE CALLED THE CHILDREN OF THE LIVING GOD. ESAIAS ALSO CRIETH CONCERNING ISRAEL, THOUGH THE NUMBER OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL BE AS THE SAND OF THE SEA, A REMNANT SHALL BE SAVED" (ROM. 9:24-27):
"Osee" is the Greek name of the prophet, Hosea, and this quote is taken from Hosea 1:10. While it may appear that the people who were "not my people" were primarily Gentiles Hosea, in fact, is speaking of Israel, not Gentiles: "Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God" (Hos. 1:10).
A REMNANT SHALL BE SAVED
Dispensational futurists anticipate that one day in the far off future (they believe that the day is now "very near") Israel will, enmasse, repent and turn to their Lord for salvation during the "Great Tribulation," and then "all Israel' will be saved. That is a statement that goes nowhere. Just who is "All Israel?" The dispensational definition is nebulous, and quite confused. They say that "all Israel" doesn't mean that the "rebels" of Israel will be saved. The Bible scholar writes, "...we must understand this expression [all Israel] to mean Israel as a company, rather than every Jew without single exception. No one is ever saved without a personal relationship with the Saviour" (The King James Commentary, p 1437). Precisely! But when have we ever seen Israel "as a company" having a personal relationship with the Saviour. That has never happened, and certainly not since the nation was obliterated by the Romans. Those who have a personal relationship with the Saviour have abandoned their national identity and heritage as Israelites, and have become Christians. To be a Jew, he must live by the Law which, after the time of Christ, is a curse, and in no wise compatible with Christianity. Jewism and Christianity are not compatible terms. There is no such thing, for example, as a "Christian Jew." A "Jew" who is Christian is not a Jew. People who call themselves "Jews" do not believe in Christ. By Paul's definition, they are not Israel. The vast majority of "Jews" today are not Christian. Therefore, they are not Israel. How, then, is "all Israel" to be saved in the future?
The question of how is all Israel to be saved in the so-called future "Tribulation" is one of many contradictions and logical problems dispensational theologians face as they try to interpret Scripture in accordance with the haphazard guidelines handed them by their predecessors. "All Israel" is not some arbitrarily selected generation of Jews out of millions of Jews who have lived and died in unbelief in the past 2000 years. and who happen to be living when the Church is "raptured.." If they represent "all Israel," then they all must, somehow, become believers. But human nature, being what it is, if that particular "race" of people has been living in unbelief for 2000 years, it is not likely that some random generation is going to repent and believe. The nearest thing to massive conversion, I suspect, came in the first days of the new Church when several thousand men were saved after the Holy Spirit came upon the disciples on the day of Pentecost. Normally, however, there was more rejection than conversion.
As always, however, dispensational technicians have a "fix" for any problem their mixed up theology creates, including this one. They merely put their own spin on the Scriptures. Dr. Pentecost writes: "...this covenant {Palestinian Covenant] has the guarantee of God the He will effect the necessary conversion which is essential to its fulfillment...The new covenant guarantees Israel a converted heart as the foundation of all her blessings..." (Things To Come, pp 98,116).
Dispensationalists, with enough presence of mind to realize that if Israel is in unbelief now, she no doubt will be in unbelief when the "Tribulation" comes, but cannot receive the promised blessings, while in unbelief, paves the way by "guaranteeing" her conversion. By guaranteeing Israel's conversion, God will then be able to fulfill His "unconditional" covenant, and everyone will be happy. The problem is, the Bible never talks about a "guaranteed conversion." A guaranteed conversion is the same thing as forced salvation, and, as far as anybody knows, God has never worked that way. Conversion is guaranteed, and so is salvation, to anyone who accepts it, but that is the catch; it must be accepted. That order cannot be reversed. Israel did not accept it, thus there was no guarantee.
Paul reveals that all Israel surely would be saved, but he explained who all Israel was. Paul also made it abundantly clear that all Israel was saved in his day, during the forty years between Pentecost and the holocaust.
GOD DID NOT CAST AWAY HIS PEOPLE - AND YET HE DID
"He came unto his own, and his own received him not. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name" (John 1:11-12): This happened in the land of Judah. Follow the logic closely: If they became the Sons of God (people of God) after they received Him, then before that they could not have been Sons of God. But we know that Jews have, from the beginning, been the people of God. When or how did they become "not the people of God?" The answer is clearly given in Romans 11:32, when God had concluded them all in unbelief. Modern translators again widely missed the mark when they state, as in the NASV, that "For God has shut up all in disobedience that He might show mercy to all." This can only be interpreted to mean that God somehow closed up everyone in some kind of "sin trap," causing every one to sin so that He can show them all forgiveness and mercy for those sins. Such translations are ungodly, and interpretations based on them are total nonsense. The Jamieson, Faussett, and Brown, for example, says this: "'...hath shut them up to unbelief' - that he might have mercy upon all - i.e., those all of whom he had been discoursing; the Gentiles first, and after them the Jews..." (page 1173). Another bizarre interpretation comes from the Wycliff Bible Commentary: "Paul's conclusion is that God imprisoned them all in disobedience in order that he might have mercy on all. Each all in this verse refers to both Jew and Gentile. God shuts up men for the purpose of setting them free..." (Page 1219).
Such are the ridiculous visions of scholars who profess the use the King James Bible, but believe something else entirely. Even a cursory examination of a couple of verses preceding verse 32 reveals that the first "all" were the Jews, and the second "all" were both Jews and Gentiles. Paul is writing to Gentiles: "For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief" (Rom. 11:30): "Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy" (Rom. 11:31). The normal, unbiased eye cannot mistake the fact that, since he was writing to Gentiles, then "their," and "these," and "they," cannot be Gentiles, they were Jews. If you trace backward to verse 26, you can easily see that. The statement of Wycliff, that "God shuts up men for the purpose of setting them free," begs heaven for any kind of sane explanation.
"For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all" (Rom. 11:32). The word, "concluded," does not mean "shut up." The simplest interpretation is that "God had made up His mind." And unbelief does not mean "disobedience," it means "unbelief." God had made up His mind that all Jews would henceforth be in unbelief. They would not necessarily be unbelievers, they would now be just like unsaved Gentiles. They would no longer be the children of God from birth. They could return to the Father, but only through faith in Jesus Christ, just like everyone else. There would henceforth be no difference between the Jew and the Gentile. "And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith" (Acts 15:8-9). "Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference" (Rom. 3:22): "For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him" (Rom. 10:12). "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved" (Rom. 10:13).
Gentiles are not born "God's children," or "God's people." After God concluded all Israel in unbelief, neither were Jews. But God would call them His people again, after they came to Him through faith in His beloved Son. Out of all the people of Israel, only a remnant was saved.
"FOR THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE JEW AND THE GREEK: FOR THE SAME LORD OVER ALL IS RICH UNTO ALL THAT CALL UPON HIM" (ROM. 10:12).
Commentators often fail to point out the fact that the distinction between Jew and Gentile became nonexistent when God concluded all Israel in unbelief. Unrepentant Jews have been unbelieving Gentiles ever since. They lost their national identity - and their nation some 2000 years ago. Today they have no identity, except that of a Gentile. If people, particularly Christian scholars ever recognized that, and stopped encouraging "Jews" to be something no one can be any more, who knows? There would probably be much less anti-semetism in the world. At least, they would be removed from the curse spelled out in the Bible:
"For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith" (Gal. 3:10-11).
"BUT I SAY, HAVE THEY NOT HEARD? YES VERILY, THEIR SOUND WENT INTO ALL THE EARTH, AND THEIR WORDS UNTO THE ENDS OF THE WORLD" (ROM. 10:18).
Often we hear that one of the signs of the end being near is that by radio, and television, and other modern means of communication the Gospel will soon be heard in all the world. But Paul here reveals that the words of the Gospel have already gone out to the ends of the earth. The world that Paul spoke of was the world where dispersed Israelites lived. The Church was chiefly concerned with bringing the Gospel to every Jew in the then known world. Along the way, of course, many Gentiles received the Gospel and were saved.
"If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and [be] not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, [and] which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;" (Colossians 1:23) "BUT I SAY, DID NOT ISRAEL KNOW? FIRST MOSES SAITH, I WILL PROVOKE YOU TO JEALOUSY BY THEM THAT ARE NO PEOPLE, AND BY A FOOLISH NATION I WILL ANGER YOU" (ROM. 10:19).
That foolish nation was the nation of Gentiles. "I SAY THEN, HATH GOD CAST AWAY HIS PEOPLE? GOD FORBID. FOR I ALSO AM AN ISRAELITE, OF THE SEED OF ABRAHAM, OF THE TRIBE OF BENJAMIN. GOD HATH NOT CAST AWAY HIS PEOPLE WHICH HE FOREKNEW. WOT YE NOT WHAT THE SCRIPTURE SAITH OF ELIAS? HOW HE MAKETH INTERCESSION TO GOD AGAINST ISRAEL, SAYING, LORD, THEY HAVE KILLED THY PROPHETS, AND DIGGED DOWN THINE ALTARS; AND I AM LEFT ALONE, AND THEY SEEK MY LIFE. BUT WHAT SAITH THE ANSWER OF GOD UNTO HIM? I HAVE RESERVED TO MYSELF SEVEN THOUSAND MEN, WHO HAVE NOT BOWED THE KNEE TO THE IMAGE OF BAAL. EVEN SO THEN AT THIS PRESENT TIME ALSO THERE IS A REMNANT ACCORDING TO THE ELECTION OF GRACE" (ROM. 11:1-5).
Bible teachers seem to have great difficulty with the concept of who are "His people." Hal Lindsay, in his book, The Road To Holocaust, taking his cue from a modern translation, states, "I say, then, God has not rejected His people, has He.... A critical question is, "To whom exactly does 'His people' refer....Even the way the question is worded reveals that God still, in a very special sense considers unbelieving Israel to be 'His people'....He emphasizes their continuing special relationship by calling the unbelieving nation 'His people.'" (pp 166-167).
This is pure imagination speaking, and it directly contradicts written Scripture. In the first place, nothing is said in Romans, or anywhere else, that from the New Testament times on - particularly after Christ died for the sins of the world (Israel included), that any nation of unbelieving people has any special relationship with God. They cannot be "His people" if words in Scripture have any meaning at all.
When God says that He had not cast away "HIS PEOPLE," He makes it clear that He had not cast away "HIS PEOPLE." He made no reference to all of Israel. Unbelievers, no matter what nation they are from, are not His people, and never in the history of man have they ever been His people. All knowledgeable Christians, even dispensational futurists, understand that no one has ever been saved through unbelief. This applies to "Jews" as well as Gentiles. If anyone is an unbeliever, how can he be part of "God's people?" He cannot. The Scriptures are very clear:
"That all men should honor the Son, even as they honor the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him" (John 5:23).
"Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: but he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also " (1 John 2:23). "Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son" (2 John 1:9).
Seeing only through futuristic eyes, Mr. Lindsey writes, "The whole focus of these three chapters [Romans 9, 10, and 11] is concerned with the plight of that mass of Israelites who are in this present age unbelievers...Romans chapter eleven spells out how the LORD will solve this dilemma." (IBID, p 167). Chapter eleven does indeed spell out how the Lord solves the dilemma of unbelieving Israel, but not in the way that Mr. Lindsey assumes.
Who are the people which God foreknew? Paul says that they were His people. In view of John 5:23, they could be none other than those who believed in the Son of God. God knew who they would be. They were the remnant that Paul was speaking of. Paul, himself, was part of that remnant. As long as there was an Israel, there was always a remnant of Israel, people of faith, even in its darkest days of apostasy. So, likewise, in Paul's day there was a remnant of faithful Jews.
There was one difference: this was a remnant according to the election of grace. They were saved by grace through faith in Christ. A WORD OF CAUTION! New translations such as the NASV confuse the truth with, "In the same way then, there has also come to be at the present time a remnant according to God's gracious choice." This in reality eliminates salvation by grace, and instead, would have God "graciously choosing" a group of Israelites to become a remnant. Are modern translators and dispensational futurists promoting the idea that God is in the habit of "graciously choosing" people for salvation, just as they believe that He will give Israel a "guaranteed converted heart," in order that there will be a "remnant" available to go into the "Great Tribulation," and then "Millennial Kingdom." This is a clear perversion of truth, and perpetuates confusion in the Church. It is common biblical knowledge that God never forces salvation upon anyone. It is not true that the remnant in Paul's day believed because God made them a remnant. God recognized them as a remnant because they believed.
Mr. Lindsey quotes Romans 11:1, then offers an unusual bit of logic: "I say, then, God has not rejected His people, has He? May it never be! For I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin...If God has rejected forever His people on a national basis, then He has rejected me also, since I too am from that nation."(IBID p 168). Mr. Lindsay takes Paul's meaning of this verse and turns it completely around, equating membership in national Israel with salvation by faith in Christ. Scriptures make it clear that God did not cast away His people, because only those people who believed on His only begotten Son were genuinely His people. Even though all Israelites had been concluded in unbelief, and were in the state of being lost, the faithful would not remain so. and for a period of forty some years the Gospel would be preached to every Jew in the world, and all be given the opportunity to accept or reject Christ. God indeed did not cast away His people. At the same time, neither did He force upon them a "guaranteed converted heart."
THE BLINDING OF ISRAEL
There is a great deal of confusion among Bible scholars concerning the "blinding" of Israel. We skip ahead a few verses to Romans 11:25: "FOR I WOULD NOT, BRETHREN, THAT YE SHOULD BE IGNORANT OF THIS MYSTERY, LEST YE SHOULD BE WISE IN YOUR OWN CONCEITS; THAT BLINDNESS IN PART IS HAPPENED TO ISRAEL, UNTIL THE FULNESS OF THE GENTILES BE COME IN." It is commonly believed that Israel is "partially blinded" to this day, and will continue to be blinded until the "fulness of the Gentiles be come in." This latter expression is misunderstood to mean that when the "full number" of Gentiles are brought into the Church, then Jesus will come and take up His own (rapture), and at that point the blindness of Israel will be lifted. The KJV Commentary tells it this way: "The spiritual blindness of Israel is not only to be understood as partial and not total, but also as temporal and not eternal. This blindness holds sway over the nation Israel until the fulness of the Gentiles is come. According to Acts 15:14, God is visiting the Gentiles today to call out a people for His name. Luke 21:24 says, 'Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.' This means that when the complete number of Gentiles has entered the kingdom of God, the spiritual blindness on the nation Israel shall be removed." (Page 1437)
This view raises some questions which, to my knowledge, no one has been able to adequately answer:
Even if there were an Israel today, why on earth would God keep them blinded? What would be the purpose?
Acts 15:14 is completely misrepresented. The verse says, "Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name." It is understood by futurist scholars to have reference to the present-day Church. Concerning the present-day Church, God did not visit the Gentiles first. There are more than ample Scriptures to show that He visited the Jews first. "He came unto his own..." (John 1:11) "These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not. But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." (Matt. 10:5-6). "But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel." (Mt. 1524)
Scholars misunderstand Acts 15:14, which says that "God at the first visited the Gentiles. The first time God ever visited anyone to take out of them a people for His name was thousands of years ago, when He visited Abraham's family in Ur of the Chaldees. Abraham and his father Terah were Gentiles. They are the Gentiles which God at the first visited to take out of them a people for His name.
The fulness of the Gentiles is not "the full number of Gentiles come into the Church." That term has reference to Gentiles, not the Church. In the next two verses, Paul clearly reveals that when he says "Israel was blinded in part," he means that part of Israel was blinded, and part was not. "WHAT THEN? ISRAEL HATH NOT OBTAINED THAT WHICH HE SEEKETH FOR; BUT THE ELECTION HATH OBTAINED IT, AND THE REST WERE BLINDED (ACCORDING AS IT IS WRITTEN, GOD HATH GIVEN THEM THE SPIRIT OF SLUMBER, EYES THAT THEY SHOULD NOT SEE, AND EARS THAT THEY SHOULD NOT HEAR;) UNTO THIS DAY" (ROM. 11:7-8). Some of the Israelites "obtained it," the rest were blinded. This passage lays to rest the accepted "scholarly" discombobulated tale that all Israel is "partially blinded."
When Paul says, "in part," he means that only part of Israel was blinded. Here Paul divides Israel into two segments: Those who believed, and became the election; and those who refused to believe, and became blinded. Verse 7 is quite clear on that. The elect obtained salvation, "the rest were blinded."
When scholare are pressed to explain why Israel is "partially blinded," they offer no coherent answer other than that this blindness makes them harder to win over to Christ. But this is the height of ungodly foolishness, and it makes Bible scholars seem even more stupid when, at other times, they piously preach that God wants all men to be saved. If God wants all men saved, why on earth would He place a stumbling block in the path of anyone who could be saved? And why those who supposedly are His own special people, if such they are?"
Dr. Pentecost writes the following piece of confusion concerning the blindness of the Jews: "Paul says that the blindness is in part. This reveals the fact that the blindness is not universal so that no Jew can believe today. The possibility of an individual's salvation exists, although the nation has been judiciously blinded....it is to be noted that there is a definite time when the blindness will be removed from the nation. Paul says that 'blindness in part has happened to Israel, until...the fulness of the Gentiles be come in..." (IBID p 303).
THE "FULL NUMBER" OF THE GENTILES
Dispensational futurism teaches that Israel is still blinded, and will remain blinded until the time of the rapture of the Church. The way they arrive at this conclusion is quite interesting. Where Paul states that the blindness will continue until the "fulness of the Gentiles be come in," as given in the KJV, a number of scholars reject that in favor of the modern translation of "until the full number of the Gentiles be come in." This translation, apparently, is to be preferred by those who have a special agenda to propagate. The usual interpretation is that the blindness will be removed when the "full number of the Gentiles' has come into the Church. What constitutes "full number" is not elaborated upon, but many Dispensational devotees assume that it means when Christians have brought in all the Gentiles that can be saved into the Church, so that there are no more Gentiles to be saved, then that plan of God will be finished, and He will come and rapture the Church, so that the Anti-Christ can be revealed, opening the way for the "Great Tribulation."
Dr. LaHaye writes of the 144000 Jews: "As a result of their preaching, an innumerable multitude will respond from every nation, tribe, people and language."(Revelation Unveiled, p 156). And again: "...during the first part of the Tribulation the greatest soul harvest in all history will take place. In fact, it is this writer's belief that more people will accept Christ during the early months of the Tribulation...than have been converted in the nearly two thousand years of the Church Age" (IBID, p 153).
Hal Lindsey endorses this same sentiment: "Israel's partial hardening of heart is said to continue 'until the full number of Gentiles has come in.' (11:25 NIV) The original Greek literally says, 'until the FULLNESS of the Gentiles has come in,' but the New International Version correctly interpreted the word 'fulness' in the light of the context...this idea of filling out the full number of saved Gentiles during this age definitely is what is meant by the statement, 'until the full number of Gentiles has come in.'" (Road To Holocaust, p 202).
We respectfully disagree. Mr. Lindsey deserves great respect for his accurate portrayal of the dangers of Islam, and the ominous signs of America's coming troubles with Muslims, but his futuristic views concerning Israel and the Jews are completely off the wall. The idea that the 144000 Jews are going to be great evangelists in the future "Great Tribulation," and that they will win more souls to Christ during the seven year Tribulation than the Church had been able to do in 2000 years is totally fictitious.
The rapture, as they believe, takes place only after every Gentile that can be saved will be saved, and brought into the Church, then the Tribulation begins, and then the 144000 Jewish "Apostle Pauls" will preach the Gospel world wide, winning more Gentiles to Christ than the Church was able to do in 2000 years. But this raises a big question: if all the Gentiles that could be saved had already been saved, where are the 144000 Jews going to find all those countless millions of unsaved Gentiles to witness to?
THE END OF ISRAEL'S BLINDNESS
We've heard the time predicted when Dispensational scholars think the blindness of Israel will end. It might be of interest to see what the Bible itself has to say about that. It may surprise these scholars to know that the time is definitely spelled out in the Old Testament, and that time is not what they say it is.
Isaiah 6, verse 9: "And he said, Go, and tell this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not." Verse 10: "Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert, and be healed." Verse 11: "Then said I, Lord, how long? And he answered, Until the cities be wasted without inhabitant, and the houses without man, and the land be utterly desolate," Verse 12: "And the LORD have removed men far away, and there be a great forsaking in the midst of the land." Verse 13: "But yet in it shall be a tenth, and it shall return, and shall be eaten: as a teil tree, and as an oak, whose substance is in them, when they cast their leaves: so the holy seed shall be the substance thereof."
Notice particularly verses 11 and 12. Isaiah was told that the blindness would continue until the cities be wasted without inhabitant, and houses without man, and the land be utterly desolate, and the Lord have removed men far away, and there be a great forsaking in the midst of the land. At first glance this may seem to be the "Great Tribulation" which Dispensationalists predict is to happen after the rapture of the Church, but it is not. This was the time when Rome invaded Israel, and destroyed the city, and the temple in AD70. At that time they carried off over a million Jews as prisoners of war. Dispensationalists would deny that, but pay attention to the details of their story of the dispensational "Great Tribulation, which goes something like this:
The Church is raptured. The Anti-Christ is revealed. He makes a "firm" seven year covenant of peace with Israel. After three and a half years he breaks the covenant, sets himself up as God in the temple, defiling the Jewish house of worship. This angers the godly Jews and goads them into an armed rebellion. Thus begins the serious half of the Tribulation. The war continues for some three and a half years, the Jews fighting valiantly against the overwhelming odds of the ten nation confederacy of the Anti-Christ. But just as they are about to lose the war, Jesus returns with "ten thousands of His saints," (the Raptured Gentile Church, some presume), defeats the Anti-Christ and his armies, and rescues Israel. The Lord Jesus Christ then goes about setting up the "Millennial Kingdom." Could this be the time that Israel's blindness is removed? Could this be what Isaiah was talking about? Not at all. As we can see, this story is quite different from the one given by Isaiah..Dispensationalists try hard to make Isaiah's holocaust something other than the obvious AD70 event.
A Bible scholar of the KJV Commentary Camp makes an attempt to place this event given by Isaiah in the time of the Babylonian Captivity, but notice how he overlooks an important point in God's answer to Isaiah's question of how long will the blindness continue: "God's answer; that he would continue to preach the message until the cities were desolate and only a remnant survived, indicated that his message would be pertinent to Israel up until the time of the Babylonian captivity..." (page 779). His effort to obscure the truth is lame at best. The point he overlooked is that the Bible says nothing about the blindness of Israel ending at that time. In fact, it says nothing at all about Israel's blindness in those days. The scholar had crafted a neat solution to this difficult problem, but his solution, designed to bolster futurism, was totally erroneous.
I don't believe that Isaiah chapter 6 is about the Babylonian captivity, because the Bible says nothing about Israel's blindness being removed at that time And neither is Isaiah's description the same as the future "Great Tribulation given by futurists." . We saw in Isaiah's prophecy that "the cities be wasted without inhabitant, houses without man, and the land be utterly desolate, men carried far away, and the land utterly desolate." This is not the picture given us of the future "Great Tribulation." It is, however, an accurate description of the time when tribulation in the land of Judah was great, the time of Jacob's trouble, two thousand years ago, in A.D.70. This is the only disaster experienced by Israel which fits Isaiah's prophecy to a T. The blindness of Israel ended then.
HOW WAS THE BLINDNESS REMOVED?
Paul writes: "What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded" (Rom. 11:7). The election became the Church, but what happened to the rest? "And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness" (2 Thes. 2:10-12). They ALL were damned; All the blinded Jews perished. The blindness of Israel ended because all the blinded Israelites perished. Question: If all the believing Jews became the Church, and all the unbelieving Jews perished, who was left? The answer is, of course, no one. The nation of Israel vanished along with the Israelites, in A.D.70.
KILLING TWO BIRDS WITH ONE STONE
We now have all the information we need to determine the true meaning of "fulness of the Gentiles be come in." "Fulness," depending on the context in which it is used, does not necessarily mean "full number," as we have been taught by modern scholars. The Oxford Dictionary offers an excellent clue: "completeness, perfection; complete or ample measure or degree." This is most often the Scriptural meaning of the word. Only rarely does it mean "full number." For example, to translate fulness in any of these verses below as "full number" would result in nonsense:
"Let the sea roar, and the fulness thereof: let the fields rejoice, and all that is therein" (1 Chron. 16:32). "In the fulness of his sufficiency he shall be in straits: every hand of the wicked shall come upon him" (Job 20:22). "Thou wilt show me the path of life: in thy presence is fulness of joy; at thy right hand there are pleasures for evermore" (Psalm 16:11). "And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace" (John 1:16). "And I am sure that, when I come unto you, I shall come in the fulness of the blessing of the gospel of Christ" (Rom. 15:29). "But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law" (Gal. 4:4), "That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him" (Eph. 1:10): "Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all" (Eph. 1:23). "And to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fulness of God" (Eph. 3:19). "Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ" (Eph. 4:13): "For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell" (Col. 1:19); "For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily" (Col. 2:9).
"Fulness, then means, "full stature," "full power," "dominance." This was the status of the Gentiles world when Israel fell. Whereas before, in the sight of God, Israel had been in it's day, man only imagines that the Day of the Gentiles began in the times of Babylon. Scripturally, The day of Israel continued from it's beginning until AD70, or until the time of Christ. "Saying, If thou hadst known, even thou, at least IN THIS THY DAY, the things which belong unto thy peace! but now they are hid from thine eyes" (Luke 19:42). "Be come in" is a phrase which speaks of a beginning, not the culmination of the Church. "Fulness of the Gentiles be come in" could be paraphrased, "The full stature of the Gentile world begins." without doing damage to God's Word. When the day of Israel went out, the day of the Gentile came in. They never ran concurrently. We are living in the times of the Gentiles, and will be until the end of the world.
Jews were blinded because they rejected the truth, primarily the truth that Jesus Christ was the Son of God incarnate. They were guilty because they personally saw Him, saw the miracles that He did, and heard Him preach, yet refused to believe. People today who mistakenly think they are "Jews" are not blinded the same way that their guilty ancesters were. They are just like any other Gentile, blinded only by the god of this world. Most Dispensational Bible scholars believe that Jews are still guilty of crucifying Christ, and that they will recognize their guilt during the "Tribulation," and repent of it. That is an unscriptural concept. Whatever they are guilty of now has nothing to do directly with what happened 2000 years ago.
"What mean ye, that ye use this proverb concerning the land of Israel, saying, The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge" (Ezek 18:2)? "As I live, saith the Lord GOD, ye shall not have occasion any more to use this proverb in Israel" (Ezek 18:3). "The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him" (Ezek 18:20).
UNTO THIS DAY
Careless reading of the Bible has prompted many to assume that Jews are still blinded because Paul uses the phrase, "unto this day." Nothing can be farther from the truth. When Paul wrote the Epistle to the Romans, the Jews were blinded, and those were the days Paul was talking about. By "this day," he was speaking of that day - his day and time, not ours. That generation of Jews, guilty of rejecting the Messiah, and crucifying Him, was blinded, and later destroyed in the holocaust of A.D.70. "Jews" today are not judicially blinded. The truth is, as we have seen, there are no Jews today. When God concluded all Israel in unbelief, He turned all Jews back into Gentiles, from which they came (Abraham, the father of all Jews, was a Gentile), and now there is no difference between Jew and Gentile. The Bible never says that Israel would ever be re-instated, or that the Jewish nationality would ever resume again. The whole world today is composed of only two classes of people, spiritually speaking, Christians and Gentiles. The "Jewish race" may have been a viable term when the nation existed, but it was never an ethnic term, it was strictly a religious designation.
"I SAY THEN, HAVE THEY STUMBLED THAT THEY SHOULD FALL? GOD FORBID: BUT RATHER THROUGH THEIR FALL SALVATION IS COME UNTO THE GENTILES, FOR TO PROVOKE THEM TO JEALOUSY. NOW IF THE FALL OF THEM BE THE RICHES OF THE WORLD, AND THE DIMINISHING OF THEM THE RICHES OF THE GENTILES; HOW MUCH MORE THEIR FULNESS" (ROM. 11:11-12)?
Those who strongly adhere to Dispensational teaching see in these two verses a future restoration of the whole nation of Israel, Jews in large number, coming to Christ in the "Great Tribulation" period. "Fulness" to some of them means, their "full number," and that, as we have seen, is false. The NASV offers "their fulfillment," and who knows what they mean by that. I doubt if Jews in general have been fulfilled in the last 2000 years. The NRSV offers "their full inclusion," and that, in a sense, is correct - those who accepted Christ were "included" into the Family of God. Did the NRSV scholars have any idea that they were at least partially right? Judging from some of their other silliness, we have reason to doubt. And, of course, Futurists live up to their title at every turn: "'...how much more their fulness,' or large-scale conversion, will bring riches to the Gentile nations and glory to God. Thus Paul begins to lay the groundwork for the proof that Israel's rejection is not permanent. She will be restored to God" (King James Commentary, p 1436). That is another example of a poorly thought out remark. The Israel's "large-scale conversion" is supposed to take place in the future "Tribulation." That is supposed to happen after all the Gentiles that could be saved have been saved and raptured. So how is Israel's "large-scale conversion" expected to bring riches to the Gentile nations which will be by then largely devoid of Gentiles?
Somehow, Futurists believe that when Israelites see Gentiles "feasting on bread from the banquet table of God and enjoying the salvation which could have been theirs, they will be convinced of their apostasy and foolish rejection of Jesus as their Messiah..." (IBID. p 1436). And that, presumably, will bring about full-scale repentance. But just when and how is this scenario supposed to take place? If the Gentiles are in heaven feasting at the table of God, how are the unbelieving Jews, down here on earth in the Tribulation, supposed to see them? Once again, we see reasonable biblical exegesis take a back seat to ecstatic imagination. Provoking the unbelieving Jews to jealousy was a goal set to happen in that first century, in Paul's day. The unbelievers of the Jews didn't see their believing counterpart eating fried chicken at a heavenly banquet table. "For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost" (Rom. 14:17).
A Jew who has been disowned by God, then repents and comes back to God through faith in Jesus Christ, has returned from the spiritually dead, and come to his fulness. So "fulness" here simply means salvation of the Jew, regardless of number. Naturally, the more the merrier, but the Bible places no premium on number. All we know is that a "tenth," a small part, a remnant, came back.
The "fall of them," and the "diminishing of them" mean roughly the same thing. The fall of them refers to the national disobedience, the diminishing of them means that God disowned them as His people (Rom. 11:32). But what would their "full number" have to do with anything? The Dispensational forced interpretation says that the nation of Israel has been set aside, but that after it is received again---we suppose that means their fulness, or full number---a greater revival will take place than ever in history. The problem is that no where in the Bible does it say that the nation will be received again, nor is anything said about any future revival.
Their "fulness" means the salvation of a remnant of Jews during the forty years between Pentecost and the holocaust. Paul spoke of the remnant, and Isaiah prophesied that the nation would be destroyed, but a small portion of the nation would return. "But yet in it shall be a tenth, and it shall return, and shall be eaten: as a teil tree, and as an oak, whose substance is in them, when they cast their leaves: so the holy seed shall be the substance thereof" (Isa. 6:13).
Whether the remnant was comprised of exactly one tenth of the nation is not important; the Bible often uses round numbers when precisely exact figures would be meaningless. Futurists would rather believe that Jews will some day in the future physically return to Jerusalem, or to Israel, but I think rather that a remnant spiritually returned to the Lord two thousand years ago. After they were concluded in unbelief - separated from God the Father - a remnant returned, they accepted Christ, they were born again. The highly figurative language, "shall be eaten: as a teil tree, and as an oak, whose substance in them, when they cast their leaves" probably speaks of them shedding the Old ways, the Law, and receiving a new Substance, that Substance being the Holy Seed---that is---Christ. Over a million Jews were destroyed or carried away in the war of A.D.70. A remnant, maybe a tenth, maybe more or less, was saved.
"FOR I SPEAK TO YOU GENTILES, INASMUCH AS I AM THE APOSTLE OF THE GENTILES, I MAGNIFY MINE OFFICE: IF BY ANY MEANS I MAY PROVOKE TO EMULATION THEM WHICH ARE MY FLESH, AND MIGHT SAVE SOME OF THEM...FOR IF THE FIRSTFRUIT BE HOLY, THE LUMP IS ALSO HOLY: AND IF THE ROOT BE HOLY, SO ARE THE BRANCHES" (ROM. 11:13,14,16).
Provoking to jealousy, and provoking to emulation, are practically one and the same thing. With passages such as these we begin to get the feeling that in those days the Jews who turned to Christ and endured with Him to the end, were special people, even though God had made them just like Gentiles. I believe they, being His own, and holding on to their new faith until the end (A.D.70), were a notch above all others. The New Testament seems to repeat the phrase, "...the Jew first, then the Gentile." Their punishment for unbelief and disobedience would be greater, but their rewards for receiving Christ just might be greater also. They just might be the permanent occupants with Jesus of that great new city coming out of heaven. Check out anything written in the Bible about the New Jerusalem. To hear Dispensationalists talk, you would think that it was built especially for the Gentile Church, but it has 12 foundations, with the names of the 12 tribes of Israel, and 12 gates with the names of the twelve Apostles - all Jews. There is not the name of a single Gentile written on it anywhere. Could it have been built especially for the new Church of Christ, made up mostly of faithful Jews? That is a possibility.
FOR IF THE CASTING AWAY OF THEM BE THE RECONCILING OF THE WORLD, WHAT SHALL THE RECEIVING OF THEM BE, BUT LIFE FROM THE DEAD" (Rom. 11:15)?
The "casting away of them" is detailed in Romans 11:32. After God concluded them in unbelief, they were as Gentiles, spiritually dead. They all could return to God through faith in Jesus Christ. Those who did were "born again." Jews traveled from life to death, and back to life again. Peter says that God had "begotten them again to a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead." He used the word "again," and that is a positive clue that they were alive before, then they were not, and now they were alive again. "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead" (1 Peter 1:3). The Scriptures interpret Romans 11:32 better than anyone can. But, as might be expected of Dispensational scholars, they failed to pick up on that.
"AND IF SOME OF THE BRANCHES BE BROKEN OFF, AND THOU, BEING A WILD OLIVE TREE, WERT GRAFTED IN AMONG THEM, AND WITH THEM PARTAKEST OF THE ROOT AND FATNESS OF THE OLIVE TREE" (ROM. 11:17);
Some Dispensationalists see the "olive tree" as the nation Israel, and the "wild olive tree" as the Church, and all of this happening in the future. But Dispensational theologians fight hard to maintain a distinction between Israel and the Church; the Church never becomes part of the nation of Israel, now or in the future. Notice how futurists forcefully weave a future scenario of restored Israel into just about every Bible passage they comment on, without regard to consistency or common sense logic:
"Gentiles must remember...that not all branches of Israel have been discarded. Just unrepentant Israel is broken off. The life of the tree of Abraham has not been removed. The wild branches gain sustenance from the root which still bears a remnant of Jewish believers." (IBID. p 1436). This muddle-headed remark is typical of Dispensational scholarship, and indicative of a mind-set which worships the tree more than the Creator of the tree.. The broken off branches were unrepentant Israel. And just who do they think were the remaining branches - those that weren't broken off? They couldn't have been any other than repentant branches of Israel. But repentant Israelites were saved - they were in the church. So who was left in the "tree of Abraham?" Were there some sort of "in-between" Israelites, neither saved nor unsaved, but hanging somewhere in limbo, waiting to be saved "nationally" in the Tribulation? Nonsense! There were only repentant Israelites, and unrepentant Israelites. "...so the holy seed shall be the substance thereof" (Isa. 6:13). Repentant Israel gained sustenance from the Root, the holy Seed, which was Christ, not from the "tree of Abraham." There were only two classes of Israelites, those that believed on Christ, and were saved, and those who did not believe on Christ, and were lost. Don't bother searching for a third class of Israelites rejecting the Son, dedicated to the Father only, and permanently preserved by Him. There are none. If they reject the Son, they might as well reject the Father; the fires of judgment will be just as hot: "Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: but he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also " (1 John 2:23).
The branches being broken off speaks of God disowning part of Israel for unbelief. The wild olive tree are unsaved Gentiles. Now, being grafted in among them means that the family of God, or Kingdom of Christ---the root and fatness of the olive tree---though originally established for the nation of Israel, now accepts both Jews and Gentiles who come to the Father through faith in Christ. The "olive tree" formerly represented Israel, but only because Israel represented the family of God. Today the Good Olive Tree is still a metaphor for the Family of God. In it are believing Gentiles, and believing former Israelites, but no Israel. All of us enjoy all the things that being in the Family of God has to offer (root and fatness).
"BOAST NOT AGAINST THE BRANCHES. BUT IF THOU BOAST, THOU BEAREST NOT THE ROOT, BUT THE ROOT THEE. WELL; BECAUSE OF UNBELIEF THEY WERE BROKEN OFF, AND THOU STANDEST BY FAITH. BE NOT HIGHMINDED, BUT FEAR: FOR IF GOD SPARED NOT THE NATURAL BRANCHES, TAKE HEED LEST HE ALSO SPARE NOT THEE. "BEHOLD THEREFORE THE GOODNESS AND SEVERITY OF GOD: ON THEM WHICH FELL, SEVERITY; BUT TOWARD THEE, GOODNESS, IF THOU CONTINUE IN HIS GOODNESS: OTHERWISE THOU ALSO SHALT BE CUT OFF" (ROM. 11:18-22).
If you want to see a good example of a non-Jew boasting against the branches, read almost any commentary produced by a Dispensational Bible scholar. Most have two things in common: they believe that Jews are still guilty of crucifying Christ; and the Gentile "virgin bride," the Church, is heavenly while Jews are earthly, i.e., in the future Millennium, Jews will be digging the soil and planting and plowing for their sustenance in the rocky land of Palestine, while we will be in the heavenly New Jerusalem ruling with Christ over them. I, for one, will not be holding my breath waiting for that to come true. In earthly terms, Christ was Jewish, not Gentile. And if, perhaps, He may tend to give "preferential treatment" to His brethren after the flesh, who am I to complain? During the forty years between Pentecost and the holocaust, they had to hold on to faith in Him, or give in to the wiles of the devil, abandon faith, and be damned. They went through a great deal more than I ever did. Their reward just might be greater also. Will we Gentiles be only occasional guests of the New City? Will we be on the outside looking in? Revelation seems to suggest that. "And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honor into it" (Rev. 21:24). Of course, it won't matter much to me. I'll be thankful for eternal life, even if I have to spend in on a farm in Georgia, on a fishing boat off the coast of North Carolina, or herding cattle in Montana. And if I have to travel to the New Jerusalem to see Jesus, I'll go there, you can count on it. He came unto His own. His own were Jews.
"AND THEY ALSO, IF THEY ABIDE NOT STILL IN UNBELIEF, SHALL BE GRAFTED IN: FOR GOD IS ABLE TO GRAFT THEM IN AGAIN. FOR IF THOU WERT CUT OUT OF THE OLIVE TREE WHICH IS WILD BY NATURE, AND WERT GRAFTED CONTRARY TO NATURE INTO A GOOD OLIVE TREE: HOW MUCH MORE SHALL THESE, WHICH BE THE NATURAL BRANCHES , BE GRAFTED INTO THEIR OWN OLIVE TREE" (ROM. 11:23-24)?
It is important to notice that "God was able to graft them in again...if they remained not still in unbelief..." They couldn't be grafted in AGAIN unless they had been in before, and now were out. How did they fall out? To repeat, the answer is in Romans 11:32, which says that God concluded them all in unbelief. They had been in as Jewish members of the Family of God. Now they were out, and in unbelief. But if they didn't remain in unbelief, God was able to graft them in again.
"FOR I WOULD NOT, BRETHREN, THAT YE SHOULD BE IGNORANT OF THIS MYSTERY, LEST YE SHOULD BE WISE IN YOUR OWN CONCEITS; THAT BLINDNESS IN PART IS HAPPENED TO ISRAEL, UNTIL THE FULNESS OF THE GENTILES BE COME IN" (ROM. 11:25).
It is regrettable that Christian scholars do not always consider all of Scripture when interpreting certain passages. "Blindness in part" may seem to be speaking of a "partial blindness" of Israel, but verse 7 confirms the truth that only a part of Israel was blinded, and II Thessalonians reveals that this blindness was not partial or temporary, but complete and fatal.
FULNESS OF THE GENTILES BE COME IN
The meaning of this biblical expression is so important to the understanding of prophecy that it bears repeating. A serious mistake Dispensational scholars have made was to assume that "fulness of the Gentiles" began with the calling out of the Church. Dr. Walvoord believes that "times of the Gentiles" has reference to political domination by Gentiles, and in this he is correct. But on the other hand he believes that "fulness of the Gentiles" has reference to Gentile blessing and opportunity in this age, so that the "fulness of the Gentiles" will come in just before the times of the Gentiles run out, that is, just before the rapture of the Church. That idea is not scriptural, is nothing short of a wild guess, and totally misses the mark. The "fulness of the Gentiles be come in" marks the beginning of the times of the Gentiles, rather than the end. In A.D.70, the house of Israel was left desolate. The times of Israel came to an abrupt end. With the times of Israel ended, the times of the Gentiles began. The times of Israel and the times of the Gentiles never ran concurrently. When one ended, the other began, and vice versa. Bible scholars believe that the times of the Gentiles began with Gentile political dominance sometime in the days of the Babylonian Captivity. Not so. When God established the priesthood nation of Israel, the times of Israel continued unbroken throughout all its history, even at times when in captivity to Gentile nations. There was always Israel, and they were always God's people, even when there was only a remnant. When the Lord Jesus Christ visited Israel they were still in their day (Luke 19:42).
The "fulness of the Gentiles be come in" means exactly what it seems to mean: it was the time when the fulness of the power and stature of the Gentiles came to be, as contrasted to the power of the holy people, the Israelites, which now was scattered. We needn't guess when that happened; the Scriptures pinpoint the time for us in Isaiah 6, verses 11, and 12. The blindness ended with the nation. After that there was no Israel, no Jews, and no judicial blindness.
"AND SO ALL ISRAEL SHALL BE SAVED: AS IT IS WRITTEN, THERE SHALL COME OUT OF SION THE DELIVERER, AND SHALL TURN AWAY UNGODLINESS FROM JACOB: FOR THIS IS MY COVENANT UNTO THEM, WHEN I SHALL TAKE AWAY THEIR SINS" (ROM. 11:26-27).
Is this to happen in the future? Dispensational Bible scholars insist on it. Chafer writes: "The national salvation and forgiveness of Israel is yet a future expectation and is promised to occur when the Deliverer comes out of Sion" (Things To Come, p 265). This next segment, copied from Things To Come, shows, among other things, the subconscious Anti-Semitic sentiment which prevails among most if not all Dispensational scholars, and also reveals the haphazard thinking which led to the idea that, because the nation Israel did not experience the promised blessings 2000 years ago, blessings and "national salvation" have been postponed until a future time when Christ comes again.
According to Chafer, "Jehovah will, in connection with the second advent of Christ, and as part of Israel's salvation, 'take away their sins.' This, Jehovah declares is His covenant with them (Rom. 11:27)....Jehovah will yet in the future, in the briefest portion of time, and as part of Israel's salvation, take away their sins...We conclude, therefore, that the nation Israel will yet be saved and her sins removed forever through the blood of Christ" (IBID. p 266)
This is an incredible statement, in view of all the Scriptures to the contrary. "The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world" (John 1:29). Israel was part of the world in those days. Can anyone be so indoctrinated into the subtleties of futurism as to believe that somehow, when Jesus took away the sin of the world, He skipped over Israel?
Dispensational Futurism draws a curtain over the accomplishments of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, 2000 years ago. What did He do the first time He came? Did He accomplish anything worthwhile? How is it that His death on the cross, and His resurrection from the dead, had no effect upon Israelites? Dispensationalists teach as though they believe that at the first advent Christ came only to save the Gentile world, leaving Israel's "national salvation" for another time. Even though the Bible is clear that He died for the sins of the world, they somehow believe that the "national salvation" of Israel will not take effect until He returns, and Israel experiences national repentance. Only then will Israel be forgiven. This kind of teaching is not biblical, it is diabolical, and comes straight from the pits of hell. Whether these Bible experts accept it or not, Christ's first advent was all about Israel. Although He died for the sins of the whole world, when God visited His people, His people were in the forefront, Gentiles were secondary. "He came unto His own..." Has the Deliverer not yet come to Sion? Let the Bible speak:
"Fear not, daughter of Sion: behold, thy King cometh, sitting on an ass's colt" (John 12:15). This happened in Jerusalem (Sion is another name for Jerusalem). This was near the end of Christ's ministry. Jesus Christ had already been in Sion for about three and a half years. Only a special kind of worldly blindness would prompt Bible scholars to preach that the Deliverer is yet to come to Sion..
"As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed" (Rom. 9:33). New Testament scriptures never intimate that there was ever to be a "national salvation" in addition to individual salvation. Individuals made up the nation of Israel, just as individuals make up any nation. Before a nation can "experience salvation," the individuals must be saved. To tell the truth, "national salvation" is entirely meaningless; only the people count. Christ came to the nation of Israel, but only because that's where His people, known as the "holy people," were. And that is the only reason that Israel was called a "holy nation." If they had all lived in Nebraska 2000 years ago, guess where the Lord would have arrived?
"He came unto his own, and his own received him not. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name" (John 1:11-12). What about those who did not believe on His name? Were they set aside, kept somewhere in limbo (or purgatory) until Christ returns to effect "national salvation?" The Bible says nothing of the kind. This is what it says about those who did not believe on His name: "What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded" (Rom. 11:7). And what happened to those that were blinded? "And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness" (2 Th 2:11-12). And what happened to those who were damned? The Lord Jesus Christ tells us, as He foretells the war in AD70: "For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people. And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled" (Luke 21:22-24).
So, part of Israel was saved into the Church, and the other part fell by the sword of the Romans, or were led away captive. Did every single Israelite perish? Probably not. It stands to reason that not every Jew on the face of the earth became a Christian or was destroyed as an unbeliever. We may be almost certain that there have been descendants from both camps. But ALL Israel had been concluded in unbelief (converted to Gentiles). So any Israelite who physically survived the downfall of the nation was no longer a Jew, and neither were his children. "Jewish ancestry" today is a myth. There are no Jews today. And there is no Israel. When God decided to close down Israel, He made sure there were no Jews remaining. Such is the meaning of "All" in Romans 11:32.
Futurists also believe that God did not manage to take away ungodliness from Jacob, but will do so in the future, when "all Israel shall be saved." Of course, Dispensationalists understand that not every Israelite will be saved. But some think that "all Israel" means the nation as a whole, minus a few "rebels." Quite the opposite. The nation perished, and only a remnant, which Paul identified as "all Israel," was saved. It is a grave error to believe and teach that some day in the future the Deliverer shall come out of Sion and only then shall ungodliness be turned away from Jacob. That concept belittles the fact that the Deliverer had already come out of Zion, suffered and died on the cross, took away their sins, and turned away ungodliness from Jacob. That was 2000 years ago. Paul writes, "It is written..." and quotes from the Old Testament. It shouldn't be difficult to see that if it was written, then to him that originally wrote it, the event was to be future, thus it was proper to say that the Deliverer SHALL do such and such. And though from Paul's vantage point, it had already happened, still he was quoting the Old Testament prophet, when he said, "it is written..." and so it happened. If Christ died for the sins of the world, but failed to take away the sins from Jacob 2000 years ago, then simply returning won't do the trick; He must return, and be crucified all over again. Is that going to happen? If that is the Dispensational expectation, they ought to pack a big lunch; I believe they are going to have a long wait!
"FOR GOD HATH CONCLUDED THEM ALL IN UNBELIEF, THAT HE MIGHT HAVE MERCY UPON ALL" (ROM. 11:32).
This was the end of all Jews, Israel, the Old Testament system of Law and sacrifices, and all things Jewish. The first "all" in the verse above are Jews. It is important to understand that God concluded only Israel in unbelief, so that He might have mercy upon all, Gentile and Jew alike. He did not, as some Bible expositors believe, "shut up all men in disobedience, so that He could show mercy to all." Any honest attempt at an interpretation of that new world translation results in complete nonsense. The first "ALL" in this verse were the Jews, of which Paul was writing about in the preceding context verses. God concluded all Jews in unbelief, in other words, He made them, spiritually, just like Gentiles. He did not conclude Gentiles in unbelief; He didn't have to. All Gentiles are born that way to begin with. Not so the Jews. Jews were born into the family of God, they were natural children of God. Paul hints at this: "We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles, Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified" (Gal. 2:15-16). He says, "even we [even we Jews] have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law..." Paul strongly shows that the Jewish system had come to an end, and only faith in Christ saves.
WHO ARE THE CHILDREN OF THE PROMISE?
If there remains the question as to who are the children of the promise, Paul gives the answer: "But the Scripture hath CONCLUDED ALL UNDER SIN, THAT THE PROMISE BY FAITH OF JESUS CHRIST MIGHT BE GIVEN TO THEM THAT BELIEVE. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise" (Gal. 3:22,29). This verse gives a more detailed explanation of that which Romans 11:32 touches on. God concluded ALL Jews under sin (or under the dominance of sin, or under the power of darkness or of Satan. Expressed differently, He put all Jews into the same boat that Gentiles are born in). It also reveals that everyone who is of faith is Christ's, and is Abraham's seed, and heir according to the promise. This clearly obviates the need to preserve a fictitious "Israel," force all Jews some day to "repent," run them through the future seven year "Great Tribulation," (another piece of fiction), and force upon them a "guaranteed converted heart" (Things To Come, p 116), so that God can fulfill His promises to the "seed of Abraham."
THERE ARE NO JEWS TODAY
God made sure that there would be no Jews after the time of Christ. "For God had concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all" (Rom. 11:32). The term "Jew" is not an ethnic term. It is a religious designation. "Jews" didn't start out being "Jews." Abraham, the "father of all Jews," was a Gentile.
THERE IS NO ISRAEL TODAY
Futurists are still blessing the day when the nation of Israel was "restored" in 1948. How did Israel come to be in 1948? It was chartered into existence by the satanic, Communist dominated, United Nations. Did God have a hand in restoring Israel? If so, do you think that He would need such an ungodly organization to help Him. Do the Scriptures anywhere give even a hint of Israel being restored after being destroyed by ancient Rome? Jesus said, "Behold, your house is left unto you desolate." (Mt. 23:38) and that's the way He left it. Consider the possibility that in 1948 a group of people who prefer to call themselves "Jews" formed a "nation" where Old Israel once stood, and called it "Israel." Was this God's doing? If it was, then why, pray tell, would He have been needing the help of a secular nation like the United States to keep this "restored" Israel alive and afloat? Our tax dollars have been supporting this "restored" Israel for longer than we care to know. The truth is, this "new Israel" is a secular nation, just like any other nation, founded by unbelieving Gentiles, just like any other unbelieving Gentiles. They may have chosen the name "Israel," but it means absolutely nothing. They could have named it "Turkey"...oops! There already is a Turkey. But they could have named it "Chicken," or "Billy Goat," or anything else, and it wouldn't have made any difference. Those who started this "Israel" are a deluded people, unbelieving Gentiles, thinking they are Jews when they are not, and therefore living under a curse. "For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them" (Gal. 3:10).
THAT WAS
"Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live."(John 5:25)
THIS WILL BE
"Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation" (John 5:28-29)
So, in short, in the fulness of the time - that is - when the time was ripe, Christ came to Israel to confirm His heavenly Father's promises to the nation. That was going to take seven years. But after three and a half years, the Jews rejected and crucified Him. At some point in time, God concluded all Israel in unbelief. He made them just like the Gentiles. After that everyone, Jew and Gentile alike, can only come to the Father through faith in Jesus Christ. After the day of Pentecost, the disciples spent forty years taking the Gospel to the Jews all over the world. Some believed, and were saved. Many refused to believe, even though they knew who Christ was. These were blinded and destroyed in the war of A.D.70. The nation ended at that time. Today there is no Israel, and there are no Jews. All people are the same. There are those who believe in Christ, and they are called Christians. Those who do not are unbelieving Gentiles.
"The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand." (John 3:35) "For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son: That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father, which hath sent him." (John 5:22-23)
HOME