Confusion has dominated the Western world in regards to Israel. Today antisemitism has spread around rapidly like an evil virus. So what does the Bible say about Israel in the OT and the land of Israel today and the church?

Further questions: How do biblical covenants bear on Israel today? Do the Sinai covenant or the New Covenant cancel the two-part Abrahamic covenant? What does the remnant mean in the Bible? What did Jesus call his homeland? Does the church replace Israel?

Let’s begin.

I.. Jesus and Israel

A.. What did Jesus call his homeland?

Often in published versions of the Bible, the words of Jesus are put in red font in the four Gospels and in other parts of the New Testament when his words are being quoted or he speaks in a vision that a follower may have. Many regard his specific words as extra-special. Here they are, in the following references. The two slashes indicate a parallel passage in Matthew, Mark, or Luke.

Matthew: 8:10 //; 10:6, 23; 15:24; 19:28

Mark: 12:29

Luke: 4:25, 27; 7:9 //; 22:30

John: 1:47 (Jesus calls Nathanael an Israelite)

In all these “red-letter” passages – the actual words of Jesus – he calls his country only Israel.

B. What did others call it in the Gospels?

In these verses people other than Jesus are speaking or writing. Narrator means the authors of the Gospels.

Matthew: 2:6 (prophecy from Micah); 2:20 (an angel); 2:21 (narrator); 9:33 (appreciative crowd); 15:31 (narrator); 27:9 (prophecy from Zechariah and Jeremiah); 27:42 // (mocking crowd)

Mark: 15:32 // (mocking crowd)

Luke: 1:16 (angel); 1:54 (Mary’s Magnificat); 1:68 (Zechariah, father of John the Baptist); 1:80 (narrator); 2:25 (narrator); 2:32, 34 (Simeon); 24:21 (an anonymous disciple and Clopas, probably Joseph’s brother, so Jesus’ uncle)

Were Jesus, James and John First Cousins? Was Clopas Jesus’ Uncle?

John: 1:31 (John the Baptist); 1:49 (Nathanael); 12:13 (the crowds during Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem)

All of these people matter-of-factly call their nation and Jesus’ nation by the name Israel, and nothing else.

C. What does the rest of the New Testament call it?

What do the New Testament authors other than Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John call the nation where Jesus ministered and his movement was born? Here are all the references:

Acts: 1:6; 2:22, 36; 3:12; 4:10, 27; 5:21, 31, 35; 7:23, 26, 37; 9:15 (Jesus’ words in a vision); 10:36; 13:16, 17, 23, 24; 21:28; 28:20

Romans: 9:4, 6, 27, 31; 10:1, 19, 21; 11:1, 2, 7, 25, 26

1 Corinthians: 10:18

2 Corinthians: 3:7, 13; 11:22

Galatians: 6:16? (see below for the “Israel of God”)

Ephesians: 2:12

Philippians: 3:5

Hebrews: 8:8, 10; 11:22

Revelation: 2:14; 7:4; 21:12

All of the passages refer only to the name Israel. Some call the citizens of Israel Israelites, and no other name. Not Palestine. Not Palestinian.

Please note that twice Paul said Israel as referring to the church. But he did not say “New Palestine.” Even in those two references, Israel still refers to the Israel of the Bible.

D. Does the New Testament ever call it Palestine?

There are no references to this name anywhere in the New Testament.

None.

E. Could Jesus have called Israel by any other name?

In their writings that cover many subjects and historical periods, these historians and travelers occasionally use the name Palestine, usually in the context of Syria and its southern environs: Herodotus (c. 485-420? BC); Josephus (c. 37 to post-100 AD), a Jewish historian; Suetonius (69/75 to post-135 AD); Arrian (c. 90-180? AD) (search here); Appian (c. 95 to post-163 AD); Pausanias (second century AD).

Referencing these historians and travelers is not to say that Jesus (or the New Testament authors) read them, particularly the ones who lived after Jesus and the authors! Rather, these historians and travelers imply a wide timespan and regions and historical periods in which the name Palestine could circulate and become part of the common linguistic coinage.

Therefore, Jesus had the choice of the name Palestine or Israel. But he chose to remain within the biblical tradition, calling his country Israel. The New Testament authors also chose the biblical tradition, exclusively.

F. Was Jesus a Palestinian?

As noted in the Introduction to this article, the Palestinian media think so. However, in Matthew 1:1-17 and Luke 3:23-38, his genealogy is presented. No rationalist has to believe in them to understand that Matthew and Luke were keen on placing Jesus firmly in the Biblical tradition. Bible Gateway.

Clearly, the best records we have demonstrate that Jesus was thoroughly Jewish – historically, culturally, and ethnically.

G. Summary

Jesus never called his nation Palestine. Why is this so important? Many today call it Palestine. If they mean the Levant, which encompasses a huge territory, including Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Israel, Gaza Strip, and the Sinai Peninsula, then they may be right. But there has never been a separate and historical nation of Palestine with its own parliament or prime minister and president and judiciary.

Also, for the more biblically inclined, Jesus never called it “The Land that Vomited Out My Ancestors and Therefore We Have No Right to Live Here.” No, he called it Israel, as if it were the most natural thing that his fellow Jews should live in their historic homeland.

Speaking of vomiting out the ancient Israelites, let’s move to the next section. Do Jews have the historical right to the land of Israel today? After all, the land vomited out their ancestors in 722 BC (northern kingdom) and in 586 BC (Jerusalem and Judah, the (southern kingdom).

Let’s look into these historical facts and this question in the next long section.

II. Israel and the Land Grant

A. Abrahamic covenant

It is divided into two parts.

The first part was a royal grant of land, an everlasting promise to possess Canaan (Gen. 15:7). God swore on himself that it was to belong to Abraham and his descendants forever, but under the Lord’s ownership.

In the second part, Abraham and his descendants were to be totally dedicated, loyal, and obedient to their sovereign Lord (Gen. 17). If they were not, then the covenant is violated (see nos. 3 and 4).

The Abrahamic covenants together were repeated to Abraham (Gen. 22:17-18), Isaac (Gen. 26:3-5), Jacob (Gen. 28:13-15), and Moses (Exod. 6:2-4). It was celebrated by the psalmist (Ps. 105:7-11) and the exiles who had returned (Neh. 9:7-8).

This gives us a hint that in spite of violating the Sinai covenant for centuries, the Abrahamic land grant is not canceled. God had sworn on himself.

B.. Differences in the two parts

In the first part, the land grant, Abraham was to have the land by God’s everlasting promise (Gen. 15:17).

In the second part, the terms were conditional. In Gen. 17:4, the phrase “as for me” and in v. 9 “as for you” signify the conditions. For God’s part, he would ensure that Abraham would have many descendants, and he reinforced the land grant established in the first part (Gen. 17:8). For Abraham’s part he and his descendants were to be totally consecrated to the Lord.

The land grant does not ignore the holiness required of the ancient Israelites, but the grant also has an everlasting quality to it. Could this explain why Jews have a calling, an urge, to return to Israel, even today?

C. Violations of the Sinai covenant and the consequences

Do the violations cancel the everlasting land grant?

If the people broke the Sinai covenant, then the land would vomit them out because it was God’s land, not theirs (Lev. 18:22; 20:22). And the land did vomit them out when the northern and southern kingdoms repeatedly and egregiously violated this covenant (2 Kings 17-18; 2 Chron. 36:15-23).

However, the Abrahamic covenant, particularly the first part, is different from the Sinai covenant. The Abrahamic covenant is related to and interdependent with the Sinai covenant, but violating the Sinai did not permanently cancel the first part of Abrahamic covenant, as we shall see below.

D.. Christ and his fulfillment of all of the covenants

But doesn’t Christ’s fulfillment of all the Old Testament covenants permanently cancel the Abrahamic land grant?

It is the clearest teaching of Scripture that Christ fulfills all OT covenants through the New, which he initiated at the Lord’s Supper and ratified at his death and resurrection.  He fulfills even the two-part covenant given to Abraham. Specifically, Paul says that in Abraham’s “seed” all the nations will be blessed. Who is the “seed”? Christ alone is the seed (singular) of Abraham (Gal. 3:15-18), and salvation goes through him and only him. Now the church inherits the whole world by salvation through Christ (Rom. 4:13). Now through him the whole world is being blessed as his gospel is spread. We can be like Abraham the believer, but our faith is now directed towards and put wholly in Christ. This is Paul’s main emphasis throughout his writings, particularly in Romans 4, 9-11 and Galatians 3-4.

The sign of the second Abrahamic covenant was circumcision. Today, believers are not circumcised except in their hearts to remove the effects of their sin nature (Rom. 2:25-29; 1 Cor. 7:19). So the sign of the covenant and therefore the second part of the covenant are obsolete. The Jerusalem and the temple establishment rejected the Messiah, about four decades before the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem in A.D. 70. That rejection, however, opened the door to Gentiles to receive salvation offered through the Messiah (Gal. 3:15-18).

As noted, now the church inherits the world (Rom. 4:13), while the Jews can inherit Israel. They are on two parallel tracks globally and geographically, but salvation is through Christ alone.

As I have asked before, is it possible that the land aspect of the first covenant is still in force? Did the Israelites’ breaking the Sinai covenant cancel the Abrahamic land grant? Does the New Covenant cancel the land grant also? Many interpreters say yes: both the Sinai covenant and the New Covenant canceled the specific aspect of the Abrahamic covenant that promised the land.

Let’s now explore this issue more thoroughly.

E.. The validity of the land grant today

Is the one aspect of the first part of the Abrahamic covenant—the land grant (Gen. 15)—still in effect throughout history, including today? Let’s consider this.

1.. Vomiting them out

As noted earlier, if the people broke the Sinai covenant, then the land would vomit them out.

And if you defile the land, it will vomit you out as it vomited out the nations that were before you. (Lev. 18:28)

2..This actually happened

God indeed judged the people of Israel because of their repeated violations, and he evicted them from the land (Jeremiah preached nonstop about this).

¹⁵ The Lord, the God of their ancestors, sent word to them through his messengers again and again, because he had pity on his people and on his dwelling place. ¹⁶ But they mocked God’s messengers, despised his words and scoffed at his prophets until the wrath of the Lord was aroused against his people and there was no remedy. ¹⁷ He brought up against them the king of the Babylonians,^[g] who killed their young men with the sword in the sanctuary, and did not spare young men or young women, the elderly or the infirm. God gave them all into the hands of Nebuchadnezzar. ¹⁸ He carried to Babylon all the articles from the temple of God, both large and small, and the treasures of the Lord’s temple and the treasures of the king and his officials. ¹⁹ They set fire to God’s temple and broke down the wall of Jerusalem; they burned all the palaces and destroyed everything of value there. (2 Chron. 36:15-19)

3.. Introducing the remnant of Israelites

However, a remnant was promised that they could return (2 Kings 19:30-31; Ezra 9:15-16; Jer. 23:3; 40:11; Zeph. 3:9, 12). Because God moved on Cyrus’s heart, this return happened (2 Chron. 36:22-22; Ezra 1:2).

4.. Moses, the violations of Sinai covenant, and the return

Moses promised a return to the land based on the covenant he made with Abraham and Isaac and Jacob (Lev. 26:40-45; Jer. 33:25-26; Mic. 7:18-20).

These most important verses are found all the way back in Leviticus:

⁴⁰ “‘But if they will confess their sins and the sins of their ancestors—their unfaithfulness and their hostility toward me, ⁴¹ which made me hostile toward them so that I sent them into the land of their enemies—then when their uncircumcised hearts are humbled and they pay for their sin, ⁴² I will remember my covenant with Jacob and my covenant with Isaac and my covenant with Abraham, and I will remember the land. ⁴³ For the land will be deserted by them and will enjoy its sabbaths while it lies desolate without them. They will pay for their sins because they rejected my laws and abhorred my decrees. ⁴⁴ Yet in spite of this, when they are in the land of their enemies, I will not reject them or abhor them so as to destroy them completely, breaking my covenant with them. I am the Lord their God. ⁴⁵ But for their sake I will remember the covenant with their ancestors whom I brought out of Egypt in the sight of the nations to be their God. I am the Lord.’” (Leviticus 26:40-45, emphasis added)

These verses are crucial (43-44): “They will pay for their sins because they rejected my laws and abhorred my decrees. Yet in spite of this, when they are in the land of their enemies, I will not reject them or abhor them so as to destroy them completely, breaking my covenant with them.”

So when the Israelites broke the Sinai covenant, God still remembered his land-grant covenant with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The centuries-long violations did not permanently cancel the land grant.

5.. New Covenant promised

However, God was about to make a new covenant (Jer. 31:31-34). Will the New Covenant cancel the Abrahamic land grant? Not necessarily, for going beyond Israel, as the church is called to do, is not the same as canceling God’s land grant—a narrow focus—to Abraham and his descendants. In any case, the land grant aspect is everlasting. As the next point, says, this “everlastingness” is historically expressed and fulfilled in the return of the Jews to their land promised to Abraham in Gen. 15, despite centuries of violating the Sinai covenant.

Recall that Jesus called his homeland Israel, not “The Land that Vomited Out My Ancestors and Therefore We Have No Right to Live Here.”

Redemption and restoration still apply.

6..The remnant returns

After seventy years (Jer. 25:11-12; 29:10), when the remnant returned to the Holy Land, they rebuilt the temple (Ezra 1:2-3; Zech. 6:12-15). They lived there even under later Greek and Roman occupations.

7.. More to the story: The Romans

The Jews of Jesus’s generation were ejected from Jerusalem after the destruction of the temple in A.D. 70. The New Testament teaches that the destruction of temple was God’s judgment on national Israel for rejecting its Messiah (Luke 19:41-44; 20:9-19; 21:20-24; Matt. 21:43-46), though individual priests and thousands of other Jews of Jerusalem and Judea believed in and converted to the Messiah (Acts 2:41; 4:4; 6:7; 21:20).

8.. Two interpretations of history: restrictive and freer.

The more restrictive interpreters say that promise to the remnant was fulfilled when the Jews returned to their land during the administration of Nehemiah and Ezra. And that’s true. The promise was fulfilled back then. But the restrictive interpreters add that there is no more possibility of further fulfillment. (These interpreters are preterists, which means fulfilled, but let’s not get bogged down with terms.)

The freer interpreters say that the remnant returned back then, and this fulfilled the promise, but the promise has the multi-fulfillment principle built into it: The original promise also applies to remnants located far into the future, even to the return of the Jews today. (Let’s call this interpretation the partial preterist and partial futurist, which says the prophecies were fulfilled–preterist–but they can also apply to the future–futurist. However, once again let’s not get bogged down in the over terms.)

This post assumes the partial preterist and partial futurist interpretive grid, based on the covenant of Abraham. Even though each covenant in the Old Testament is fulfilled in Christ, all fulfilled covenants still retain a few everlasting qualities, particularly the land grant aspect. The covenants are carried forward in Christ.

But in the final analysis, God removes kings and sets them up (Dan. 2:20-21). The Lord Most high rules the kingdom of men and gives it to whomever he wills (Dan. 4:17). God restored Israel in 1948, as we will see below.

9..The remnant from the Roman times until now

From the destruction in A.D. 70 until 1948, Jews were absent from the land except for a remnant. A remnant is important in the history and promises to the ancient Israelites (Gen. 45:6; 1 Kings 19:18; 2 Kings 19:30-31; Is. 10:20-21; 11:10-13, 16; Jer. 23:3; 42:2, 15, 19; 42:19; Ezek. 11:13-21; Amos 5:15; Mic. 2:12-13; 4-5; 7:18-20; Zeph. 2:7, 9; 3:9-20; Hag. 1:12-14; 2:2-9; Zech. 8, 10; all of the books of Nehemiah and Ezra).

This remnant theology is rooted in the everlasting and unconditional land grant contained the Abrahamic covenant. Something has urged the Jews to return to their historic homeland. I say it is God, mainly, but something awful compelled them to return.

10.. The holocaust

After the holocaust, yet another remnant formed the nation of Israel in 1948. The government was secular, but many people believed in God and returned.

11.. Faith in God or God’s sovereign will

Let’s build on the previous point. God made the promise of land to Abraham, and the patriarch believed the Lord, and it was accounted or credited to him as righteousness (Gen. 15:6). Faith is needed to trigger the promise of land. A remnant of Jewish patriots, whether knowing God or not, was simply following the royal land grant covenant.

Yes, the promise of return to the land is conditional, but Moses predicts that the ancient Israelites will be able to repent after they return and are living in the land:

⁴ Even if you have been banished to the most distant land under the heavens, from there the Lord your God will gather you and bring you back. ⁵ He will bring you to the land that belonged to your ancestors, and you will take possession of it. He will make you more prosperous and numerous than your ancestors. ⁶ The Lord your God will circumcise your hearts and the hearts of your descendants, so that you may love him with all your heart and with all your soul, and live.   ⁷ The Lord your God will put all these curses on your enemies who hate and persecute you. ⁸ You will again obey the Lord and follow all his commands I am giving you today. (Deut. 30:4-7)

Israel as a whole has not yet repented, but give it time. Let revival have a chance to play out.

Ultimately it was God’s will. Recall that God removes kings and sets them up (Dan. 2:20-21). The Lord Most high rules the kingdom of men and gives it to whomever he wills (Dan. 4:17).

God sovereignly restored Israel to the Jews in 1948.

Let’s build on God’s sovereignty

F. God’s sovereignty to meet desperate human needs

This point has nothing to do with dispensationalism. I am not a dispensationalist. This point does not include a discussion of what the Bible says about the Abrahamic covenant and how the ancient Israelites broke the Mosaic covenant and were exiled to Babylon as a punishment. Nor does this point get into the destruction of the temple and Jerusalem in A.D. 70. It does not include the biblical prophecies about Jews returning to their ancient homeland after WWII (but see below for this last discussion).

Instead, it is about God’s sovereignty today, which adds up to applied theology to meet human needs. God simply put it on various Jews’ hearts to find peace in their ancient homeland that they could not find throughout their sojourn in Europe (think of the pogroms) and especially after the holocaust. Survival trumps abstract and luxury beliefs by at-ease American Christian interpreters of the Scriptures, many of whom are now turning against Israel, which I see as a danger and deception. .

These discussions, which I have engaged in myself, seem so irrelevant to the needs at hand.

Here are three examples:

Does the Land of Israel Belong to Jews Today by Covenant?

Replacement Theology: True or False?

Twelve Reasons the USA Should Support Israel

Think of the Parable of the Good Samaritan. Perhaps certain American Bible interpreters represent the priest and Levite, and Truman was the good Samaritan who helped the man who had been beaten by robbers, who, let’s say, represent the Jews after WWII (Luke 10:30-37).

Jesus ends the parable with this practical insight, speaking to the expert in the law who had begun the discussion in the first place (think again of Christians who are experts in the Bible and the beaten man as the Jews):

³⁶ “Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?”

³⁷ The expert in the law replied, “The one who had mercy on him.”

Jesus told him, “Go and do likewise.”

Presumably Truman saw the need for a safe haven for the Jews after WWII and pushed for a return. He’s the one who showed the beaten man mercy.

I was gratified to learn recently that mainline theologian Reinhold Niebuhr and MLK, Jr. favored Jews returning to their ancient homeland based on simple justice. Mark Tooley, at Juicy Ecumenism, in his post “Christian Zionism as Heresy?” (7 Nov. 2025) writes:

Instead, they saw a suffering people, nearly exterminated, who deserved a homeland. For them it was a matter of biblical justice. And for Niebuhr at least, it was a a question of “Christian Realism,” in that the Jews, as the target of centuries of irrational prejudice, could not be safe without a homeland.

I’m not liberal like Niebuhr or MLK were, but we agree on God’s simple justice and compassion that explains Israel’s right to exist.

Objection: You are treating Bible prophecy lightly. How dare you! My reply: I was not going to discuss this, but here we go. I may be rejecting popular Bible interpretations, but not Bible prophecy as such, properly interpreted. I believe in the prophecies that say Israel will return applies today because we have all seen double fulfillment in history. Example:  Daniel prophesies the abomination of desolation which pollutes the temple (Dan. 9:27; especially 11:31). This was fulfilled twice: (1) by Antiochus IV Epiphanes in 167 B.C. and (2) the Romans in A. D. 70 (see Matt. 24:15). I see no reason why God could not be double- or triple-fulfilling the prophecies about the Jews returning to Israel today. But I don’t like to get entangled in complicated interpretations. For me, it’s the basic principle of God sovereignly and kindly meeting the desperate needs of his elect people (see Rom. 11:28, which still calls the Jews who refuse to submit to their rue Messiah “beloved” and “elect”). For me, it is about biblical justice.

God raises up and deposes kings and rules over kingdoms (Dan. 2:21; 4:17). Israel became a nation in 1948, so God in his mercy ordained this to happen (or so I believe). Why? So Israelis can be protected by themselves and for themselves (with a little of our help) from the world’s historic aggression against them. It’s about God’s mercy and justice for them. Also, the Israeli citizens can hear the gospel in Hebrew. Jews need salvation through their true Messiah every bit as desperately as anyone else around the globe.

G. Questions and replies

11. Question:

But don’t you make too much of the dual-part of God’s covenant with Abraham? What if both parts are true and Israel lost its right to the land?

Reply:

In sum and substance, the land grant, whether in one part or two, is everlasting, even when Christ fulfilled all Old Testament covenants. That’s the main point, even for those who do not separate the Abrahamic covenant into two parts. But for those who do separate them, I presented a case for the everlasting quality through the first part. Either way, God always preserves a remnant despite the majority violating any part of the Abrahamic or Sinai covenants. That’s the main point.

One more time, here are the key Scriptures, as proof, about how important a remnant is to God, so he can honor his covenant with Abraham, whether in two parts or just one: Gen. 45:6; 1 Kings 19:18; 2 Kings 19:30-31; Is. 10:20-21; 11:10-13, 16; Jer. 23:3; 42:2, 15, 19; 42:19; Ezek. 11:13-21; Amos 5:15; Mic. 2:12-13; 4-5; 7:18-20; Zeph. 2:7, 9; 3:9-20; Hag. 1:12-14; 2:2-9; Zech. 8, 10; all of the books of Nehemiah and Ezra.

Once again, who is the remnant, according to the NT? See the very final section for the answer.

Further, after the psalmist goes over the history of Israel’s disobedience and transgression of the Sinai covenant, even to the point of sacrificing children to false gods (Ps. 106:37-39), the remnant will still return:

All of those Scriptures confirm the everlasting aspect of the land grant to Abraham when God sees a remnant.

2. Question:

Does the Abrahamic covenant and the New Covenant mean there are two tracks to eternal salvation?

Reply

No. The focus in this post has been narrow—the land grant aspect of the Abrahamic covenant, not eternal salvation. Jesus is the only way. That’s the main point of the New Covenant, so it has replaced any other way of salvation in any other old covenant.

However, let us now explore the salvational aspect for Jews more deeply. The Hebrew Bible is full of prophecies about the Messiah. Isaiah 53 is extremely clear, in referring to the death of the Messiah four decades before the destruction of the temple in A.D. 70. Surely Isaiah was given a vision or special knowledge of Yeshua / Jesus going through that ordeal.

See this post for a table of them:

Messianic Prophecies

H. Summary

The first everlasting part of the Abrahamic covenant is historical and national and geographic and still ongoing because it is premised on the faith of Abraham. It was an everlasting land grant.

The second part of the Abrahamic covenant is conditional and obsolete because of national Israel’s disbelief in their Messiah. This rejection opened the way of salvation to all of the planet. Circumcision is no longer the sign of any covenant in the New Covenant, but circumcision of the heart is (Rom. 2:25-19; 1 Cor. 7:19; Gal. 5:6; 6:15; Eph. 2:11; Col. 2:11). The NT does not discuss the right of Jews to return to their land, because the Jews were already there, though Jesus predicted the temple would be destroyed (Luke 21:6). The NT authors did not see two thousand years into the future, but were focused on the events of their day (despite what Bible prophecy teachers say to the contrary).

Therefore neither violating the obsolete Sinai covenant (and then repenting afterwards) nor the arrival of New Covenant permanently cancels the narrow promise of land to Abraham and his descendants in a small geographical area. I believe for covenantal and historical reasons that the land is theirs; the land belongs to a remnant that believes.

Just because Christ has fulfilled all the covenants laid out in the Old Testament does not mean every element is thrown out. My thesis in this post is that the one element in the Abrahamic covenant, particularly the first one, retains the land grant. I believe this grant is everlasting. Since the NT is silent about Jews abandoning the land, even during judgment on Jerusalem, the door is open to interpreting a return of the remnant.

As we will learn below more fully, unconverted and unsaved Jews are collectively still “in Abraham,” while non-Jews who convert to Judaism are now “in Moses” or “within the law.” By adoption they are also “in Abraham.” By contrast, converted and saved Jews and converted and saved Gentiles are “in Christ.”  Being in Abraham or in the law is insufficient for eternal salvation. However, being in Christ, God’s Son, whom God introduced to humanity about two thousand years ago, is now the only way to God and eternal salvation for Jews and Gentiles–for everyone who puts his faith in the Son.

As Peter proclaimed before the Jewish Sanhedrin (high court and council) in Jerusalem, now salvation is only through faith in Jesus Christ, Yeshua ha-Meshiach (Acts 4:12). I for one will never abandon Peter in his bold stance and declaration before an august assembly of Jewish leaders.

Returning to the Land ≠ Salvation in Christ

Jews today need their Messiah. Please don’t accept the theology of the two-track covenants: one salvation for Jews through the covenants with Abraham and Moses, and the other track for Gentiles (and a few “wayward” Messianic Jews) through Jesus Christ. Two tracks of history are not the same as the one way to salvation through the New Covenant and Christ. Yes, Jesus is the only way of salvation for everyone on the planet, Jew and Gentile.

God is bringing his people back to the land, for the purpose of evangelizing them. People gathered together in one location and speaking one main language are more easily reached than otherwise. And reports coming out of Israel say that the Messianic movement is growing stronger. (Thank God!)

A very important point: it can be argued, correctly, in my view, that Messianic Jews are the true remnant, so it is vital that they move there and witness to the Messiahship of Jesus to their fellow Jews,  but only if the Messianic Jews feel called by God.

III. The Church and Israel

A.. Brief intro.

This section is about replacement theology. My long conclusion, repeated here, is built on my translation and exegesis of Romans 11:25-32.

Please go here to read it:

Replacement Theology: True or False?

B. The church and geo-political Israel

The church has not replaced geo-political Israel or ethnic Jews living outside of Israel. Paul would have considered it absurd if anyone had claimed that Christians should move to national Israel and take over Jerusalem or kick them out of their synagogues in the land and in the Romans provinces. I believe it never crossed Paul’s mind that his fellow Israelites should no longer live in their ancient homeland, Israel itself. He never once called it “The Land that Vomited Out My Ancestors and Therefore We Have No Right to Live Here.” No, he called it Israel, as if it were the most natural thing that his fellow Jews should live in their historic homeland.

Two thousand years ago, before the destruction of the temple in A.D. 70 and even afterwards; the Jews were already there and were always in the land, if not the capital. Paul certainly never wrote about this ejection from the land of Israel in his epistles. For him it was biblically natural for Jews to be there, though he yearned for their salvation in the Messiah (Rom. 9:1-4).

C. Abraham’s land grant

Paul knew Old Testament history and the two exiles and what caused them (habitual violations of the Sinai Covenant and the law of Moses) and he knew about the return of the Jews. Yet they still belonged in the land out of God’s mercy and family ties to Abraham, with whom God established the covenant of a land grant.

D. Violations of the Sinai covenant

Recall that when the ancient Israelites made a golden calf, in Exodus 32, Moses interceded for them that God would be merciful and relent from wiping them out; Moses did not appeal to the Sinai Covenant, which had just been introduced in Exodus 19 and confirmed in Exodus 24. He appealed instead to the patriarchs, in order to secure the promised land. God will completely fulfill his promises to them, the lopped off branches lying on the ground, despite their being enemies and disobedient, when the deliverer will come out of Zion and turn Jacob away from his (their) sins. So in a sense, in regards to ownership of the land of Israel, God’s covenant and land grant to the patriarchs trumps the law of Moses!

E. Disobedient and enemy Jews

Paul surprised me.

Unsaved national and ethnic Israel, though an enemy of the gospel and disobedient to God, is still his elect and beloved, because of the patriarchs. Moses seems to be circumvented for the patriarchs! They seem to trump him! God has not forgotten his unbelieving people. They too will eventually be saved, when the full number of the Gentiles comes in and the deliverer comes or will come out of Zion. They will be picked up off the ground and grafted back into the cultivated olive tree. But caution: Romans 11:23 says if they do not persist in their unbelief. Conditions do apply.

F. Global plan of salvation

God has a new plan of salvation, which goes through the Messiah, his Son. God introduced this plan throughout the OT and then fulfilled it in his Son, two thousand years ago. The Son is the deliverer who has come and will come out of Zion (Rom. 11:26-27). However, because the Jerusalem and temple establishment rejected him, God opened the door of salvation to the Gentiles. Now saved Jews and saved Gentiles have become the new people of God, the church, the assembly, the ekklēsia (Eph. 2). And so even though some of the Jews rejected God’s new plan of salvation, God’s heart is wide open to them, to this day.

The people of God can no longer be only in Abraham and depend on him. They must now be in Christ. He is Abraham’s Highest Descendant and fulfillment of God’s promise to the patriarch of being a blessing to the nations (Gentiles).

G. Fulfillment theology

It is better to say that the Messiah has fulfilled the Old Testament promises and covenants for salvation. Specifically for salvation, we should call it fulfillment theology. But as to the promises to Abraham and his natural descendants, God will fulfill his promises to his chosen patriarch and them, which is salvation. And then they will be the deepest and fullest blessing to the nations because they will be in the Messiah. He and his gospel are the highest and ultimate blessing for the whole world (Gal. 3:7-14).

H. Replacement theology: partly true and partly false.

True:

True for salvation, depending how one defines “replacement.” Salvation is found only in the Messiah, by grace through faith, whether Jew or Gentile, and no longer in Abraham or the law of Moses. The New Covenant has replaced (fulfilled is better) the Sinai Covenant (Heb. 8), but this does not mean the church replaces Israel, which is the real question and claim of replacement theology.

So all in all, adding up all of the complex Scriptural data, for me, once again, it is better to say that Jesus fulfills the OT promises of salvation, such as they were, which had previously required obeying the law of Moses and depending on family ties to Abraham. Now we place our faith in God’s Son, by grace through faith. We Gentiles are connected to Abraham through the Messiah by spiritual family ties.

However, I still have to circle back around and observe that saved Gentiles have been grafted into the cultivated olive tree and have replaced the lopped-off branches of unbelieving Jews. So only in this sense is replacement theology true to Scripture. But God will miraculously graft the unbelieving Jews back into the olive tree, so the replacement is temporary and partial and pertains only to salvation in the Messiah.

Nowhere do I read that God commissioned heavy machinery to tear out the cultivated olive tree, from the root to the branches. No, the tree is still in place. Gentiles have to be grafted into something, after all.

This new plan of salvation has nothing to do with replacing national Israel or ethnic Jews. Instead, the new plan is a call to them to repent and place their faith in and surrender to the Messiah as Lord.

Why temporary and partial replacement? See the next paragraphs.

False:

Replacement theology is false if its teachers claim that all God’s promises to Abraham are canceled; if they teach that national Israel is no longer the elect or beloved of God, because Jews are currently enemies of the gospel and are disobedient to God and his Son; if they say that Israel has no right to live in their historic homeland because they are enemies of the gospel and are disobedient; if they say that no Old Testament prophecies–not even one–will ever be fulfilled for national Israel and ethnic Jews. After all, Paul quoted Isaiah 59:20, 21; 27:9 (see Septuagint); Jeremiah 31:33,34. So all verses about salvation–at least those verses and especially those–are for them. God holds out his heart and hands all day long to call them to his Son for their salvation.

Why are they still beloved and elect?

The gifts and calling of God will not be rescinded. Unbelieving Israel with an enemy status is still elect and still beloved of God, but only because of the patriarchs. Jews are temporarily enemies and temporarily disobedient, but they are not beyond salvation or recovery. God will completely fulfill his promises to Abraham, when the disobedient yet beloved and elect descendants of the three patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are in the Messiah, by grace through faith in him.

That’s how much God loves Jews and Israel, because of the patriarchs.

I. Summary

Replacement:

1.. The old plan of salvation without the Messiah is replaced (“fulfilled” is better) with the new plan of salvation in the Messiah.

2.. Sinai Covenant is replaced (“fulfilled” is better) with the New Covenant, ratified and confirmed by the Messiah.

3.. Lopped off branches (= disobedient Jews with enemy status) from the cultivated olive tree (= Old Israel) are replaced with the grafted-in branches (= Gentiles who follow the Messiah) taken from a wild olive tree. However, God will pick up the disobedient Jew  from the ground and regraft in the old branches by a miracle, but only if the Jews do not persist in unbelief, as Romans 11:23 warns. Again, conditions apply.

No replacement:

1.. National Israel and ethnic Jews

They are not replaced with the church (the church is made up of converted Jews and Gentiles).

2.. The land of Israel

It is not replaced with … what exactly? (The church transcends all national borders.)

3.. Fulfilled verses

Not every single Old Testament promise and prophecy is replaced with the New Testament, though numerous verses are fulfilled. However, some verses await fulfillment or still apply to us today (see Daniel 12:2-3 and Isaiah 59:20, 21; 27:9 [see Septuagint]; Jeremiah 31:33,34). This includes God’s covenant of a land grant to Abraham (Gen. 17:7-9), even though Israel had been disobedient in its long history, by breaking the law of Moses.

4.. Disobedient national and ethnic Israel

They are still the elect and beloved of God because of the patriarchs, are not replaced with the redeemed church. So, surprisingly, both the redeemed church is the elect and beloved of God because of the Messiah and unredeemed and disobedient Israel, enemies of the gospel, is still the elect and beloved of God because of the patriarchs. However, salvation is only in the Messiah, so the Highest Descendant of the patriarchs, the Messiah, trumps the patriarchs themselves, for salvation.

5.. Four groups of branches:

(1) The ones on the wild olive tree (pagans who have not yet responded to the gospel); (2) the redeemed Jews saved through the Messiah who remain on the cultivated olive three; (3) pagan branches who have been grafted into the cultivated olive tree because they are saved in the Messiah; (4) lopped off branches from the cultivated olive tree that are lying on the ground next to the cultivated olive tree. They are disobedient to God and enemies of the gospel (unsaved Jews). What happens to the the first and fourth branches> For the first, keep preaching the gospel. For the fourth collection of branches, read the next paragraph.

6.. God’s ultimate salvation for national Israel and ethnic Jews

“All Israel will be saved” happens through the Messiah alone. This ultimate salvation is not replaced with the new plan of salvation that excludes anyone, Jew or Gentile. “All Israel will be saved” is awaiting its fulfillment in God’s timing, when the deliverer will come out of Zion and rescue Israel through the Messiah and his plan of salvation, expressed in the gospel. God will pick up the cut-off branches lying on the ground and graft them back in to salvation in the Messiah.

J. Two questions and replies

1.. Should the church and geo-political and ethnic Israel be distinct?

Yes.  The New Covenant church is qualitatively different from the OT assembly or qahal, regardless of the covenant (Abrahamic, Mosaic, Davidic, etc.). People in the OT were saved on the basis of grace through faith, and evidently a remnant of the ancient Israelites took this path of salvation. True, a Gentile could immigrate into the commonwealth of ancient Israel and become a participant in divine blessings and favor. But the New Covenant church, made up of redeemed Jews and redeemed Gentiles, is now the body of Christ. Those two groups are now one new person, and the dividing wall has been torn down. Salvation comes only through him, not by works of the law or law keeping. which had been mixed in with the salvation of the ancient Israelites, even the faithful remnant. So the Messiah makes all the difference.

Also, the Spirit permanently indwells the body of Christ, which the Spirit had not done in ancient Israel. True, the Spirit was at work back then and came on people for service, but not in the same way as he did at Pentecost and ever afterwards through the baptizing work of the Spirit.

So all in all, Israel and the church should be kept distinct. God still has a plan for ethnic and geo-political Israel all throughout the church age. I believe this not because of dispensationalism but because it is obvious that the NT teaches it. Unsaved and unredeemed Israel and ethnic Jews outside of Israel are separate and distinct from redeemed and saved Jews and Gentiles–the church, the ekklēsia.

And so the centerpiece of his plan is his Son’s ekklēsia. Only the church is redeemed by the blood of Christ. Only the church is indwelt permanently by the Spirit. Only the church can preach the true gospel of God’s salvation by grace alone and faith alone. Only the church has experienced salvation that comes only through the Messiah, the Son of God. Only the church has been born again.

2. What does Paul mean by the Israel of God in Galatians 6:16?

Here are the relevant verses:

¹⁴ May I never boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which^[a] the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world. ¹⁵ Neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything; what counts is the new creation.  ¹⁶ Peace and mercy to all who follow this rule—to the Israel of God. (Gal. 6:14-16)

Note how the NIV translates v. 16, with a long dash. The Greek conjunction kai, is usually translated as “and” (“and the Israel of God”). It could also be translated as “even.” (“even the Israel of God.”) So who is the Israel of God?  I interpret the phrase to mean the people of God, both saved Gentiles and saved Jews, who form one new humanity (Eph. 2:15). However, some interpreters say it refers to saved Jews. But I am not convinced because both Jews and Gentiles form “new creations” and circumcision and uncircumcision fade away in the light of redeemed new creation. This ritual used to be a wall of division, but now it is discarded for an internal change by faith in the Messiah. Therefore, the Israel of God is the church, in Galatians 6:16.

However, as we saw in the major section “Jesus and Israel,” in nearly all other instances in which the noun Israel appears throughout the entire Bible, it always refers the to geo-political land and ethnic Jews. Galatians 6:16 may be the one exception. But it is difficult to build an entire doctrine of replacement theology on one disputed verse.

IV. Application

A. Jesus and Israel

Jesus first ministered in Israel (Matt.10:5-42; 15:24). And then he told his disciples to go into all nations and make disciples (Matt. 28:18-20). This is called the Great Commission.

So the kingdom of God as Jesus lived and preached it breaks down barriers. Palestinian Christians should know that they are not alone while they are under attack or being forced to submit to dhimmitude (Islamic second-class citizenship for Christians or Jews). Christians have almost entirely left Bethlehem.

Any person, particularly the defenseless and innocent, of any religion, who is caught in a crossfire of bullets and bloodshed, should receive help. That’s the essence of the ministry of Jesus, who identifies with all people everywhere, in the bigger picture, regardless of ethnic origins or nationalities.

B. Biblical names for Israel

There are no references to Palestine in the Bible. None. That name was never part of the vocabulary of Jesus or the New Testament authors, even though they had the choice to call it such. Jesus would not recognize the label Palestinian for himself.

Today, some extra-political readers may not like this conclusion, but at least they will no longer be confused about history. And at least they will no longer be able to confuse others with their misinformed and shrill rhetoric.

C. Breaking down the dividing wall

God’s whole plan for humanity is to break down the dividing wall between a small number of Jews and the rest of the eight billion people on the planet (cf. Eph. 2:14). This was important in Paul’s day because for him Israel was a major player in the first-century Roman empire. He knew nothing of North and South Americas, for example. But despite his limited perspective, he was inerrantly inspired as he wrote, and his main message is to break down any divisive wall anywhere for any religious or ethnic reason.

D. The church, not Israel, is God’s centerpiece.

Now for us today, the church must reach out to everyone, including Jews, and keep an eye on any anti-Semitism that rears its ugly head. The church goes global, and this is God’s main focus. Picture a target. The church is at the center, while Israel is off to the side. But Israel has not been wiped off the target. Despite what American and Israeli Messianic Jews and American Christians seem to claim about Israel being God’s main focus, he wants his message of the gospel of Christ and his kingdom to reach everyone, far, far outside the small borders of Israel. And the church is the only living organism that can accomplish this mission, by his grace. Therefore, the church, not Israel, is the center of his attention, the apple of his eye—but that is not to say God does not care about this small nation. He does. But he has gone and is going global. Therefore, we should have his perspective and mission.

E. Let’s stop fighting against the stubborn fact

Let’s not call Israel by this name: “The Land that Vomited Out the Ancient Israelites and Therefore Jews Today Have No Right to Live There.” No, let’s call it Israel, as if it were the most natural thing that Jews should live in their historic homeland.

Christians (and Muslims and anyone else) who deny Jews the right to live in their promised land seem churlish and ungenerous. It’s a done deal, a fait accompli, so these deniers must stop denying it now. I believe there is a deep “God reason” for this return so many centuries later, and the mystery is embedded in the everlasting land-grant aspect of God’s covenant to Abraham. This mystery is expressed in God’s will. He raises up nations.

We can support the Jewish state of Israel and still call for the salvation of the Jews everywhere through their true Messiah. In fact, the best way to support Israel is to issue this call of salvation.

RELATED

Equally important:

Twelve Reasons the USA Should Support Israel

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Works Cited