In the first chapter we established the principle of biblical hermeneutics: the Old Testament must be interpreted in light of the new revelation given in Jesus Christ. What then does the New Testament teach about Israel? If the Old Testament sees the future salvation of Israel, does the New Testament reinterpret these prophecies so radically that they are to be fulfilled spiritually in the church: Is the church the new and true Israel? Or does God still have a future for his people Israel?
We are fortunate to have in the inspired Scripture a lengthy discussion of this theme in Romans 9-11. Paul first expresses his heart-felt concern and love for his kinsmen after the flesh. He says, "I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart" (Rom. 9:2) for Israel because they have rejected Jesus as their Messiah.
His first point is that "Israel," that is, the true spiritual Israel––the people of God––is not identical with the physical offspring of Abraham. "For not all who are descended from Israel [natural seed] belong to Israel [spiritual seed], and not all are children of Abraham because they are his descendants" (Rom. 9:6-7). Paul recalls Old Testament history to prove this. Abraham had two sons, Isaac and Esau. However, even though the family of Esau and his descendants are the natural seed of Abraham, they are not included in the spiritual seed; but "through Isaac shall your descendants be named" (Rom. 9:7). "This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God but the children of promise are reckoned as descendants" (Rom. 9:8). God chose Isaac but rejected Esau. Therefore the true descendants of Abraham––the true Israel––must be determined not by natural physical descent, but by the divine election and promise of God.
The implication is clear. Not all Jews of Paul's day can call themselves "Israel," the people of God, but only those who emulate Abraham's faith, and so prove themselves to be children of promise.
This principle has already been enunciated earlier in the Roman epistle. In Romans 2:28-29, Paul writes, "For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true circumcision something external and physical. He is a Jew who is one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual and not literal."
This principle of spiritual vs. physical circumcision is not original with Paul. He is repeating a theme already found in the Old Testament: "Circumcise yourselves to the Lord, remove the foreskin of your hearts, O men of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem, lest my wrath go forth like fire, and burn with none to quench it, because of the evil of your doings" (Jer. 4: 4). External obedience to the law of Moses does not make one a member of the true sons of Abraham, assuring him of the favor of God; there must be a heart––and a life––to match. Otherwise he will face the wrath of God.
This principle is applied in two verses in the Revelation of John. John speaks of "those who say they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan" (Rev. 2:9; cf. also 3:9). Here are people who (rightly) claim to be Jews. While they are physically and religiously Jews, John says that they are not spiritually Jews but are in fact a synagogue of Satan, because they reject Jesus as their Messiah and persecute his disciples.
Paul next meets the objection that if this is true, it reflects an arbitrary action on the part of God. Paul answers in strong language. God is God, the creator of men, and as such has a right to do as he pleases with his creatures. "But, who are you, a man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, 'Why have you made me thus?' Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for beauty and another for menial use?" (Rom. 9:20-21). This verse is often interpreted in terms of God's election and rejection to the salvation of the individual. However, whatever may be the application to the individual, Paul's thought is primarily about redemptive history and God's election of Jacob to be the heir of the promises given to Abraham. God has endured with much patience the rebellion and apostasy of literal Israel, "in order to make known the riches of his glory for the vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand to glory" (Rom. 9:23). That is to say, God has been patient with the unbelief of literal Israel that through it he might show mercy upon true Israel. Paul picks up this idea later in the section. "So I ask, have they stumbled so as to fall [finally and irretrievably]? By no means. But through their trespass salvation has come to the Gentiles" (Rom. 11:11). God has a purpose in Israel's stumbling and unbelief. It was not that God had grown impatient and the fall of Israel occurred for its own sake. Rather, God used the fall of Israel to bring salvation to the Gentiles.
Paul carries this out in the earlier passage The vessels of mercy, which he has prepared for glory consist not of the Jews only but also of Gentiles (Rom. 9;24) The "vessels of mercy" which God has chosen to take the place of the vessels of wrath––unbelieving Jews who stand under God's judgment––are a mixed company consisting of both Jews and Gentiles. Then Paul does an amazing thing. He quotes two passages from Hosea which in their Old Testament context refer to Israel and applies them to the Christian church which consists largely of Gentiles. And he does this to prove that the Old Testament foresees the Gentile church. "As indeed he says in Hosea, 'Those who were not my people I will call my people, and her who was not beloved I will call my beloved'" (Rom. 9:25).
Hosea had been commanded by the Lord to take a wife who was a harlot to symbolize Israel's spiritual harlotry. His second child was a girl, and Hosea was told, "Call her name Not pitied, for I will no more have pity on the house of Israel to forgive them at all" (Hos. 1: 6).
However, this rejection of Israel is not final and irremediable. In fact, Hosea goes on to affirm the future salvation of Israel in the Kingdom of God. Hosea sees a day when violence will be removed from the animal kingdom. God will make a covenant with the beasts of the field, with the birds, and with creeping things. He will abolish the instruments of violence and warfare, the bow and the sword, indeed, war itself. Israel will dwell safely in the land; she will lie down in safety. "And I will betroth you to me forever; I will betroth you to me in righteousness and in justice, in steadfast love, and in mercy" (Hos. 2:19). Then Hosea says, "And I will have pity on Not pitied, and I will say to Not my people, 'You are my people'; and he shall say, 'Thou art my God'" (Hos. 2:23).
Here we have the same phenomenon in the area of eschatology which we found in Christology: Old Testament concepts are radically reinterpreted and given an unforeseen application. What in the Old Testament applies to literal Israel, in Romans 9:25 applies to the church, which consists not only of Jews but also of Gentiles (Rom. 9 24). In fact, the predominate structure of the New Testament church is Gentile.
Paul again quotes from Hosea: "And in the very place where it was said to them, 'You are not my people,' they will be called 'sons of the living God'" (Rom. 9:26). Hosea had a third child, a son, and was told, "Call his name Not my people, for you are not my people and I am not your God" (Hos. 1:9).
In this case, Hosea goes on immediately to announce the future salvation of Israel. "Yet the number of the people of Israel shall be like the sand of the sea which can be neither measured nor numbered; and in the place where it was said to them: 'You are not my people,' it shall be said to them, 'Sons of the living God'" (Hos. 1:10).
Here, in two separate places, prophecies which in their Old Testament context refer to literal Israel are in the New Testament applied to the (Gentile) church. In other words, Paul sees the spiritual fulfillment of Hosea 1:10 and 2:23 in the church. It follows inescapably that the salvation of the Gentile church is the fulfillment of prophecies made to Israel. Such facts as this are what compel some Bible students, including the present writer, to speak of the church as the New Israel, the true Israel, the spiritual Israel.
This conclusion is supported in passages where Paul speaks of Christian believers as (spiritual.) children of Abraham "The purpose was to make him [Abraham] the father of ally who believe without being circumcised and who thus have righteousness reckoned to them, and likewise the father of the circumcised who are not merely circumcised but who follow the example of faith which our father Abraham had before he was circumcised" (Rom. 4:11-12). Here Abraham is said to be the father of believing Jews and believing Gentiles. The conclusion follows inescapably: it is believers, whether Jews or Greeks, who are the true children of Abraham-the true spiritual Israel. We are reminded again of Romans 2:28-29; real Jews are those who have been circumcised inwardly.
Again in Romans 4:16 Paul repeats "For he [Abraham] is the father of us all." Writing to the Galatians, Paul had already stated this truth, "So you see that it is men of faith who are the sons of Abraham" (Gal. 3: 7).
To Dispensationalists, a "spiritualizing" hermeneutic is the most dangerous way to interpret the Old Testament. Professor John Walvoord has written that this is the hermeneutic which characterizes modern Roman Catholic, modern liberal, and modern non-dispensational conservative writers (The Millennial Kingdom, Dunham, 1959, p. 71). The present writer feels that he must adopt a spiritualizing hermeneutic because he finds the New Testament applying to the spiritual church promises which in the Old Testament refer to literal Israel. he does not do this because of any preconceived covenant theology but because he is bound by the Word of God.
If then the church is the true spiritual Israel, "has God rejected his people"-literal Israel (Rom.11:1)? Paul goes on to answer this question at some length. He hints at their future salvation in Romans 11:15, "For if their rejection [of literal Israel] means reconciliation of the world [salvation of the Gentiles], what will their acceptance mean but life from the dead?"
Paul goes on to illustrate this by the famous metaphor of the olive tree. The olive tree is the people of God, seen in its entirety. Natural branches (Jews) have been broken off from their natural tree, and wild olive branches (Gentiles) have been grafted into the cultivated olive tree. But whoever heard of grafting wild branches into a cultivated tree? Paul is aware of this problem, for he says that it is "contrary to nature" (Rom. 11:24). Paul warns the Gentiles who have taken the place of Israel not to boast over Israel, for God is able to cut them off again. In the same way, "even the others [Jews], if they do not persist in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God has the power to graft them in again. For if you have been cut from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and grafted, contrary to nature, into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these natural branches be grafted back into their own olive tree" (Rom. 11: 23-24).
Then Paul summarizes the whole situation by a magnificent statement: "Lest you be wise in your own conceits, I want you to understand this mystery, brethren: a hardening has come upon part of Israel, until the full number of Gentiles come in, and so all Israel will be saved; as it is written,
Here is the divine order in redemptive history: natural branches on the cultivated olive tree; natural branches broken off because of unbelief; wild branches grafted in, contrary to nature; the natural branches yet to be regrafted into the olive tree. Israel stumbled at the rock of offense––Christ––but not that she should forever fall (Rom. 11:11). When Paul says, "All Israel will be saved," he obviously cannot mean every Jew who ever lived. He is talking about redemptive history. But the day will come when "all Israel," the vast majority of living Jews, will be saved.
We could wish that Paul had written more about the way in which Israel will be saved. The words "the Deliverer will come from Zion" may well refer to the Second Coming of Christ. One of the purposes of his return will be to redeem Israel as well as to take the church unto himself.
However, two things are clear. Israel must be saved in the same way as the church––by turning in faith to Jesus as their Messiah (Rom. 11:23), and the blessings which Israel will experience are blessings in Christ––the same blessings which the church has experienced.
What then of the detailed promises in the Old Testament of a restored temple? The book of Hebrews clearly answers this question when it says that the law was "but a shadow of the good things to come instead of the true form of these realities..." (Heb. 10:1). The law with its temple and sacrificial system was only a shadow of the blessing––the reality––which has come to us in Christ. The shadow has fulfilled its purpose. Christ has now entered the true tabernacle in heaven where he presides as our great high priest. It is inconceivable that God's redemptive plan will revert to the age of shadows.
Indeed, Hebrews flatly affirms this. Here we read, "But as it is, Christ has obtained a ministry which is as much more excellent than the old as the covenant he mediates is better, since it is enacted on better promises. For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion for a second" (Heb. 8:6-7). The point to be emphasized is that Hebrews is contrasting the new covenant made in Christ with the Mosaic covenant. If the Mosaic covenant had been adequate, there would have been no need for a second covenant.
Hebrews proves this by a long quotation from Jeremiah 31:31-34.
Here we have again the phenomenon we have already encountered. It is very difficult to believe there are two new covenants: the one made by Christ with the church through his shed blood, and a future new covenant to be made with Israel, which according to Dispensationalists is largely a renewal of the Mosaic covenant. To be sure, we have already found in Romans 9-11 that Paul teaches that literal Israel is yet to be brought within the new covenant; but it is the same new covenant made through the cross with the church. It is not a different covenant. Hebrews 8 applies a promise made through Jeremiah to the new covenant made by Christ with his church.
This is made doubly clear in a second passage. Hebrews 10:11-17 speaks of the sacrifice of Christ on the cross for sins, his subsequent session at the right hand of God, "then to wait until his enemies should be made a stool for his feet. For by a single offering he has perfected for all time. those who are sanctified" (Heb. 10:13-14). These words make it indisputable that Hebrews is talking about the covenant made by Christ with his church. Then Hebrews quotes again from Jeremiah 31.
It is difficult to see how anyone can deny that the new covenant of Jeremiah 31 is the new covenant made by Christ with his church.
The passage we have just cited from Hebrews says that when there is forgiveness, there is no longer any offering for sin. The forgiveness wrought by Christ renders invalid and obsolete the Mosaic system. Hebrews asserts the same truth in 8:13: "In speaking of a new covenant, he treats the first as obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away." Whether or not these words refer to the historical destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in 70 A.D., they at least affirm the dissolution of the old Mosaic order, because the new order of redemptive reality has come.
Here again we have a radical reinterpretation of the Old Testament prophets which speaks of the impermanence of the Mosaic covenant with its temple and sacrificial system. The argument of Hebrews is that these are types and shadows pointing to the spiritual reality which has come in Christ. Once the types and shadows have fulfilled their purpose, they are discarded in God's redemptive programs.
What does this have to do with the present Israeli question? Three things: First, God has preserved his people. Israel remains a "holy" people (Rom. 11:16), set apart and destined to carry out the divine purpose. Second, all Israel is yet to be saved. One modern scholar has suggested that in the millennium history may witness for the first time a truly Christian nation. Third, the salvation of Israel must be through the new covenant made in the blood of Christ already established with the church, not through a rebuilt Jewish temple with a revival of the Mosaic sacrificial system. Hebrews flatly affirms that the whole Mosaic system is obsolete and about to pass away. Therefore the popular Dispensational position that Israel is the "clock of prophecy" is misguided. Possibly the modern return of Israel to Palestine is a part of God's purpose for Israel, but the New Testament sheds no light on this problem. However, the preservation of Israel as a people through the centuries is a sign that God has not cast off his people Israel.
What About Israel? The Last Things. An Eschatology For Laymen. George Eldon Ladd. Wm. B. Eerdmans Pub. Co. 1978. Pages 19-28.