|
| |
The Future of Israel (part 3)
A Glance at Romans
The Letter to the Romans is not a piece of systematic theology. It is full of
systematic theology, but that theology is adduced to demonstrate a Biblico-theological
point. We fall short of an understanding of Romans if all we see in it is a
discussion of justification, sanctification, election, and holy living, with a
"little parenthesis on the Jews" stuck in the middle. A full understanding of
Romans needs to take into account that the redemptive-historical concern
overarches everything else. Justification, sanctification, election, and holy
living are implications of the Coming of the Kingdom, and they are laid out in
Romans to make the point that the Coming of the Kingdom overcomes the
Jew/Gentile distinction and creates One New Man in Christ.
Paul starts in Romans 1 by saying that his ministry is to Gentiles, though
the gospel is to the Jew first (1:13-16). The gospel is necessary because of the
fall of man into idolatry (1:17-32). The gospel is the revelation of the
righteousness of God at this time in history (1:16-17). Romans concerns the
implications of that revelation, which includes the forgiveness of sins, the
resurrection of the inner man, the coming of the Spirit, and climactically the
resurrection of the political order of the world.
All men come under judgment, but in the Old Covenant Gentiles could be saved
if they trusted God and followed His ways apart from the Law, while Jews were
saved if they trusted God and followed His ways revealed in the Law. Moreover,
the faithful Noahic Gentile believer had a true inward circumcision, while the
faithless Jew had negated his own outward circumcision (chap. 2). In other
words, as far as salvation was concerned, the Jew had no special place in the
Old Covenant order.
So then, why did Jews exist? They were set aside to minister the oracles of
God as priests to the nations (3:1-8). These oracles of God were the Law-Word of
the Old Testament. Apart from a living faith-relationship to God, however, the
Law-Word only killed men by condemning them. The living faith-relationship,
which existed provisionally in the Old Covenant, has now arrived in its fullness
because of the work of Jesus Christ. This faith-relationship establishes the
Law-Word in a sphere of life instead of death (3:9-31).
In the Old Covenant, the faith-relationship was something Jew and Gentile had
in common, as we see from the fact that Abraham had it as a Noahic believer
before he was circumcised (chap. 4). The benefits of resurrection-life, seen in
the opening of Sarah's dead womb, came to both Jew and Gentile through the
faith-relationship.
One of the purposes of the Law, considered in redemptive-historical terms,
was to put sinners to death. It showed men their need of resurrection, and
thereby pointed to the need for the faith-relationship. The Law came in a
context of death, not only the death that came from Adam's sin, but also the
political death-context that resulted from the Jew-Gentile split. The Law could
never overcome that political death, because it was part of it. Only when the
Jew-Gentile split had been overcome through resurrection could the Law be
re-established in a sphere of life. Those who are united to Christ through
resurrection have a new positive relationship with the Law (chaps. 5-6).
Being raised from the dead, we are no longer subject to the total
killing force of the Law, seen especially in the laws of uncleanness and
sacrifice, but since we are still sinners, the partial killing force of
the Law is still necessary for our personal mortification and sanctification
(chap. 7). The Law helps show us our wickedness, purges us, and drives us to
Christ in the quest for renewed experience of resurrection life. The work of the
Holy Spirit continually serves to deliver us from the old world of the flesh
into the new world of resurrection life (chap. 8).
I have only surveyed these chapters in a cursory manner, obviously, but I
have done so to show that Paul is concerned from the beginning with the
Jew-Gentile bipolarity, so that the idea that Romans 9-11 is a parenthesis is
nonsense. Romans 9-11 carries forward the redemptive-historical themes of Romans
1-8. Romans 9-11 shows the outworking of the resurrection in its political
dimension, the overcoming of the Babelic order by the reuniting of believing Jew
and Gentile into one body. The climax of the whole first eleven chapters is the
Amen at the end of chapter 11.
Then Paul applies his theme. In chapters 12-13 he applies the fact that we
are now one body in Christ to righteous living in the Church and in the world.
In chapters 14-15 he addresses the conflict that existed in the Interim Church
between converted Jew and converted Gentile. The Jews tended to want Gentiles to
come under the Law, a tendency that went to seed among the apostate Judaizers.
The Gentiles, rejoicing at last to be in the Kingdom on an equal basis, tended
to react against the Jewish believers and mistreat them. This was a problem
unique to the Interim Church, though of course the Post-Holocaust Church faces
similar problems and so these chapters are still very relevant to us today.
Paul's argument to the Romans is this: The night is almost over, and the day is
at hand, so bear with one another for the present, because in a few years this
phase of redemptive history will be over (Rom. 13:11-12).
If we look back now at Romans 9-11, we can see that Paul is concerned with
those Gentile believers who were reacting against the Jewish believers. He warns
them not to despise the Olive Tree, and tells them that the history of Israel is
not quite over yet. There is at present, he says, a Remnant in Israel, and
before Jerusalem is destroyed, many Jews will be saved and there will be a great
harvest. He says that this "fulfillment" of Israel will work a great benefit to
the Gentile believers, for it will be a political resurrection that finally
overcomes the Jew-Gentile bipolarity for all time (11:12).
Romans 9 & 10
Paul begins by speaking of the duties and privileges of Israel. Only in
Romans 9-11 does Paul use the term "Israel," while everywhere else in Romans he
uses the term "Jew." The word "Jew" is associated with the Restoration Covenant,
and was the peculiar term for the people at that time, for the New Covenant
superseded the Restoration Covenant. In social and political terms, the
bi-polarity in the New Testament Church was between Jew and Gentile. Paul goes
back to the term "Israel" here because his stress is on the calling of these
people to be priests to the nations, a calling made most explicit at the time of
the Mosaic Covenant, which was when the term "Israel" replaced "Hebrew" as the
name for these people. Paul is saying that the special relationship of Israel to
the nations is not yet over. Jerusalem continues to be the center of the world
until A.D. 70.
Paul then moves to a discussion of the Remnant. Not every Israelite was a
true Israelite, for being a member of true Israel was never a matter of race but
of calling and election (9:6-13). The Remnant is to the ungodly nation as Jacob
to Esau, and as Israel to Egypt. The refusal of Israel to enter the New Covenant
is analogous to Pharaoh's refusal to hear God. Just as God raised up Pharaoh, so
He raised up Israel. God dealt with Pharaoh by showing Him mercy between each
plague, with the result that Pharaoh got harder and harder against God.
Similarly, Israel became harder and harder under the judgments God visited upon
her throughout Old Covenant history. Each time God withdrew His judgments,
Israel became worse than she had been before (9:14-18).
The Remnant had readily confessed that God was the Potter and they were the
clay (Is. 64:8). They were ready to change under God's reshaping hands, and
enter the New Covenant. Apostate Israel, however, resisted God and became a
broken pot, henceforth good for nothing but unclean uses (9:19-22). God was
mixing the soft Remnant clay with the Gentiles and making a new, more glorious
pot (9:23-26). (Remember, man is made of earth, so clay is a pregnant analogy.)
During this Interim, however, the Remnant still existed and had a function.
They had not yet become completely blended with the Gentiles into the Church.
The Remnant within Israel protected her from wrath. God was willing to spare
Sodom if only ten righteous people were found in it. Jerusalem is called Sodom
(and Egypt) in Revelation 11:8, and Paul says that it is Remnant in Sodom that
preserves her (Rom. 9:27-29). When the Remnant flees, and the rest of it slain,
then Sodom will have no more protection. The Man of Sin will no longer be
restrained (2 Thess. 2).
In Romans 10 Paul argues that the Law should have led them to faith. Romans
10:4 says that Christ is the goal of the Law, so that anyone who kept the Law in
faith would be led to Christ. Verse 5 says that anyone who kept the Law in faith
would find life, and verses 6-11 expand that thought. (Verse 6 should begin with
"and," not "but." The Greek word is a simple connective, ho de, not the
adversative, alla.)
Anyone who really understood the Law, says Paul, would see that salvation is
by faith, both for Jew and Greek (10:11-13). The peculiar task of the Jew
(Israelite) was to be a preacher to the Gentiles (10:14-15). God sent prophets
to Israel so that Israel would be faithful, and by becoming faithful, minister
to the Gentiles. When Israel refused to fulfill her calling to be priests to the
nations, God would take His message directly to the Gentiles in order to provoke
Israel (10:16-21).
Taking the gospel to the Gentiles was designed to make Israel "jealous" (Dt.
32:21; Rom. 10:19). This term is neutral. In a positive sense, Israel's jealousy
should lead them back to the Lord. In a negative sense, Israel's jealousy would
cause them to become furiously angry at God, His prophets, and the Gentile
converts. When Jesus brought this up in Luke 4, His home town tried to kill Him.
The book of Acts shows that Paul's ministry among the Gentiles was treated the
same way (cf. esp. Acts 21:28ff.).
At the beginning of both Romans 9 and 10, Paul expressed that his personal
desire was to see Israel saved. His ministry among the Gentiles, while designed
for their good in itself, was also designed to provoke Israel (cf. 11:13-14).
During the Interim period, this provoking ministry was going on. It is not going
on today. Modern Jews are not in the least provoked by the fact that non-Jews
believe the Gospel. Modern Jews get angry with Jews convert, not when
"Gentiles" do. In this respect, Modern Jews are just like any other
non-Christian group. This is strong evidence that Romans 9-11 is concerned only
with the early days of the Church.
Romans 11
Paul returns to the Remnant in 11:1-10. He says that at the present time,
there is still a Remnant of Israel. He is one such, he says. He points back to
Elijah. The nation might have been destroyed in Elijah's day, except for the
Remnant 7000.
The Remnant and its provoking work will have the effect of making the Jews
"jealous." The fact that gospel has gone to the Gentiles, and they are
inheriting the riches of the Old Testament promises, is not the last word. Paul
reveals that the Remnant's work will bear fruit among the Israelites, so that
Israel will experience a "fullness" (v. 12). When this "fullness" happens, it
will be "life from the dead" -- resurrection (v. 15). We shall return to this in
a moment.
Having established that Israel has a future, Paul exhorts the Gentile
believers not to lord it over Israel. Just as the Jews are not to dominate the
Gentiles in the Church, so neither are the Gentiles to despise the Jews. God had
grafted the Gentiles onto the patriarchal stock of the Olive Tree, but soon He
will graft Israel back in, making One New Tree (11:16-24).
Verses 25-26 say that the partial hardening of apostate Israel will last
until the fullness of the Gentiles comes in, and then all Israel (not just the
Remnant) will be saved.
So, the fullness of the Gentiles comes first, and then the fullness of
Israel. What does this mean? In context, I believe that the fullness of the
Gentiles has to mean the transfer of the riches to them, as mentioned in verse
12. This transfer of treasures went on during the Interim, and it is seen
particularly in the completion of the canon of the New Testament, because the
New Testament interprets and applies (transfers) the Old Testament to the New
Covenant situation. The fullness does not refer only to words, however, but also
to the completion of the formation of the New Covenant Church, which was a large
part of Paul's own (Israel-provoking) mission. Just as Old Covenant Israel was
to minister to the Gentiles by preaching and obeying God's law, so the New
Covenant Gentile Church was to minister to Israel by preaching the New Testament
and living righteously. Just as the Old Covenant Gentiles would admire Israel if
she were faithful (Dt. 4:6-9), so it was necessary for the New Covenant Gentiles
to be faithful in order to draw Israel into the Church. (This role reversal may
be part of the reason why Jerusalem is called Babel in the book of Revelation.)
Why did this fullness of the Gentiles have to happen first? Because
only then would the fullness of provocation be possible. The presence of the New
Covenant Church and its true interpretation of the Hebrew Scriptures had the
effect of gradually stripping away the veil that lay over Moses' words (2 Cor.
3), which was but the outworking of the rending of the Temple Veil that happened
at Christ's death. When the Church was fully formed, and the Scriptures
completed, then the veil was fully removed, and the provocation to jealousy
reached its most intense development.
The purpose of the provocation was the salvation of Israel. True, for many,
the provocation resulted in wrath, but for others it would result in repentance.
Paul says that in the future (their future, not ours), this provoking work would
bear fruit. Not just a Remnant but "all Israel" would turn to the Lord. At this
point, Jew and Gentile would finally be One New Man in Christ, and this would be
the political resurrection of the world that removed the bi-polarity of Babel
and Israel.
The Book of Revelation
Paul does not describe how this would come about in detail, but we can see
from the Book of Revelation what actually happened. A full discussion of this
history would require us to delve into Josephus and other ancient writers. For
now, I only want to show how Revelation delineates the Pauline prophecy.
Revelation concerns the judgment of the Old Creation, both Jewish and
Gentile. Since Eden-Jerusalem is the center of the world, the book is centrally
concerned with Jerusalem, but it also devotes attention to the Havilah-Roman
Beast as well. The entire bifurcated Old Covenant order is going to be torn
down.
I believe Revelation 7 shows the salvation of the Jewish Remnant and the
initial Gentile Church. The 144,000 are the Remnant, and the great multitude
from the nations is the "mixed multitude" that accompanied them out of the Egypt
of rebellious Judaism (cf. Rev. 11:8). These are sealed against the initial
outpourings of wrath against Jerusalem and the world.
I believe that Revelation 10:7 points to what Paul called the fullness of the
Gentiles, for it says that the mystery of God has been completed. At this point,
it becomes necessary for John to preach again, this time to bring about the
fullness of Israel. Right away we are shown the ministry of the two witnesses in
Jerusalem, and their martyrdom. Here is jealousy and wrath poured out against
those who provoke Israel, but the result of the witnesses' deaths is that many
feared and gave glory to God (11:13; cp. Acts 5:11-14). This, I believe, is the
"fullness of Israel." Immediately we are told that the world has become the
kingdom of Christ (Rev. 11:15).
Revelation 12 & 13 back up to provide context for what follows, which is the
harvest of this Fulfilled Church. On the basis of my studies in the Abomination
of Desolation, it seems to me that the martyrdom of the two witnesses is the
Desolating Sacrilege, or at least part of it. At this point, many of the Remnant
fled Jerusalem and were saved (Rev. 12:14).
The new converts, the Fullness, were stuck in Jerusalem. I believe they are
seen in 14:1, standing with the Lamb on Mount Zion. As long as these believers
remained in Jerusalem, the city could not be destroyed. Thus, they had to be
harvested first. The harvest of these saints is simultaneously the filling up of
the cup of Jerusalem's wrath, for the massacre of these saints eliminates
Jerusalem's protection, and calls down the full wrath of God against her.
The angels reap the harvest of the Fullness (14:14-20). (Chilton and others
err in seeing this as a picture of God's wrath against the wicked.) We see the
Fullness standing in heaven with God in Revelation 15. They were faithful to
death. Their blood is the wine of God's wrath, which He will make their killers
drink (14:10). The Fullness joins their Lord outside the city (14:20),
privileged to join Him in martyrdom (Col. 1:24).
The blood of these martyrs is put into chalices and poured out on Jerusalem,
to her destruction (15:7; 16:1-21). The city is seen drinking this blood, taking
into herself the death she visited upon them (17:6).
It is my opinion that the martyrdom of the Fullness of Israel is what brings
about the "life from the dead" that Paul spoke of in Romans 11. Thus, after the
destruction of Jerusalem we are shown that Satan, who was on the earth during
the Interim (12:9, 12), is cast into the abyss to deceive the nations no longer.
The Church comes to life again, seated on thrones, and ruling with Christ for
the millennium, which begins at that point (Rev. 20:1-6). This initial
resurrection of the saints is a foretaste of the final resurrection to come at
the end of history.
(A footnote: The current Reformed view is that the millennium is the entire
Church Age, either in heaven or on earth, from A.D. 30 forward. But in that
case, how can the millennium end before the final apostasy [20:7ff.]? If
I am right that the millennium begins with the political resurrection of A.D.
70, that would explain why the millennium ends before the second coming of
Christ, with the release of Satan. The millennium is bracketed on both sides by
short periods during which Satan is not bound in the abyss.)
Conclusion
In these short essays I have obviously not taken up every question
surrounding this issue. I have sought to make a case for a preterist view of
Romans 11. I think it is a very credible case, and I am pretty much convinced by
it. Filling in the details will have to wait for another occasion.
If Romans 11 was fulfilled in the first century, does it have any use for the
Church today? I believe so. The issue Paul was addressing can be generalized to
address a common issue today. The hardened Israelites were those who had
inherited the tradition of the faith but were not living it. They are analogous
to liberal and dead orthodox Christians today. Surely it is true that such
people are greatly offended by faithful Christians. They are provoked to
jealousy and wrath, and go out of their way to persecute those who show up their
cardboard faith for what it is. Paul's admonition throughout all his letters,
however, shows us how to deal with such people. We are to be all the more
faithful and loving in our own circles, because the more visible our own
"fullness" becomes, the better our witness becomes. Just as the fullness of the
Gentiles eventually led to the fullness of Israel, so the fullness of faithful
Churches today can and will lead to the fullness of unfaithful liberal and dead
orthodox Christian communities.
|
|
