Concerning the future of Israel, Supercessionism, and a Reformed approach to the issue, Michael Horton writes,
“So while some amillennialists regard all of the saving promises to Israel as fulfilled in the new covenant church without remainder and dispensationalists treat them as fulfilled only in a revived theocracy of Israel in the millennium, Paul’s argument in Romans 9-11 seems more complicated. While Israel is the church and the church is Israel, this spiritual nation will be enlarged in the last days – this time, with a great influx of ethnic Jews. As I have argued, I do not believe that the New Testament teaches that the church is a replacement for Israel but rather that Gentiles have been grafted into the vine of the true Israel, from which the original nucleus of new covenant disciples emerged. Salvation has come to the world through the Jews; Jesus was sent to the Jews; the gospel was first brought to the Jews, and the kingdom grew from Jerusalem to the ends of the earth. In the end, it will be brought full circle, from the ends of the earth back to Jerusalem again.” (The Christian Faith, 949-50).
As far as I can tell, this seems to be the view of Jonathan Edwards, J. C. Ryle, and, I think Charles Spurgeon. Interesting.
Luke is a pastor-theologian living in northern California, serving as a co-lead pastor with his life, Dawn, at the Red Bluff Vineyard. Father of five amazing kids, when Luke isn’t hanging with his family, reading or writing theology, he moonlights as a fly fishing guide for Confluence Outfitters. He blogs regularly at LukeGeraty.com and regularly contributes to his YouTube channel.
I am always confused on this one. I think I change my theological viewpoint about every three months on this… lol
Ha ha! Does it depend on the latest CNN current events?
Hilarious story: I had a class with Buzz Brookman at NCU and one of the books we had to use (in 2001) had the Soviet Union as the fulfillment of some of Daniel. Buzz was HILARIOUS when he was assigning the reading… oh my.
What do you think about Horton’s thoughts? I was surprised to read that… Reformed guys aren’t historically known for being non-Supercessionists!
He sounds more like what I grew up with, if I am reading him right. I know that if I think the Church has replaced Israel (and Israel’s covenant was bi-lateral, not unilateral) I don’t say it too loud! 😉
What does “Israel” mean in this context? A geographical region, a people… which people, and why?
My first thought is that this type of question is completely born out of a modern state of affairs… 🙂 And it’s largely political. I don’t think it would have been asked in the 1st century… ha ha
My second thought is that, as Casey indicates below, Scripture uses the term in reference primarily to the ethnic group of people… though Paul does begin to expand that definition to include the seed of Abraham that are seed due to faith.
Interesting.
Paul seems to use Israel in three different ways: 1) ethnic Jews, 2) the faithful remnant of ethnic Jews, 3) and I think the least use and perhaps most metaphorically, the church.
One question is, does Scripture foresee Abraham as father of just the Jews, or many nations? When Paul and the gospel writers say Gentiles can be sons of Abrahama does that imply they are “Israel”, or parts of other nations that are sons by their faith?