# Promises to Israel



## bmdowns (Mar 12, 2011)

I have some missing links in my understanding of how the promises to Israel relate to the end times. 

For the historical premil., when and to whom are those promises given and to be received? 

For the disp. premil, are they received in the so called "millenial period"? If so and only "Israel" (I'm using their language here and not including "the church as part of Israel for the sake of this Q) With that interpretation what are the gentile Christians doing during the millenial period?

Here's what I can't comprehend how it works together: How is it that only the premil. disp. believes in the so called rapture? Could someone believe in the rapture, 7yrs. of trib, millennial reign, and also believe that both Jews and Gentiles (all of true Israel) will receive the OT promises to Israel?

Thanks!


----------



## Peairtach (Mar 12, 2011)

> I have some missing links in my understanding of how the promises to Israel relate to the end times.



I'm sure we all do.

As a covenantal postmil, who believes that Romans 11 indicates an ongoing place for the severed natural branches in God's redemptive scheme, I believe that the OT Church/Israel has expanded in the New Covenant period to include Jews and Gentiles who profess faith in Christ and their children (see e.g. Galatians 6:16). The unbelieving Jews have meantime been excommunicated, but God has promised to always have some Jews in His Church and at some stage the nation as a whole will be re-ingrafted. 

God's Land has also expanded in the New Covenant period to include the whole Earth. See e.g. Matthew 5:5.

The unbelieving Jews only truly find God's promises fulfilled for them by accepting Christ as the Messiah and King of Israel and being reingrafted into the Israel of God.

Because of these changes, the Jews (converted and unconverted) can't/shouldn't simplistically appeal to the promises regarding the Land of Israel/Palestine.

The Israel of God is in the process of inheriting the Earth through the Holy War of evangelism.


----------



## Rook (Mar 26, 2011)

Richard,

I appreciate many of your posts as they are very helpful. What do you mean by the nation of Israel as a whole being grafted into Christ? I assume you are speaking of a large number, and not every single person. I have been struggling with Romans 11, and go back and forth from day to day with the passage. If you would not mind giving me a breakdown of what you see the passage teaching I would love to hear? Thanks.


----------



## jwithnell (Mar 26, 2011)

> but God has promised to always have some Jews in His Church and at some stage the nation as a whole will be re-ingrafted.



I really struggled with Romans 11 last summer too and found that John Murray's commentary on Romans was very helpful. I had previously worked along the conclusion that anyone who came to faith was part of the new Zion and ethnic background had no part at any stage since Jesus' resurrection. Then I ran up against Romans 11 and respected reformed preachers saying that there will be a future coming-of-faith among the Jews (but with no earthly national identity ... i.e. not the country of Israel per se). I had to conclude that this is the correct position, although "nation as a whole" does not quite jive with Romans 11:11 and following. Yes the natural branch will be grafted back in -- i.e. we will see many of Abraham's natural descendants coming into the church -- but there will always be some who refuse to bend their knee to Christ.


----------



## Peairtach (Mar 26, 2011)

Rook said:


> Richard,
> 
> I appreciate many of your posts as they are very helpful. What do you mean by the nation of Israel as a whole being grafted into Christ? I assume you are speaking of a large number, and not every single person. I have been struggling with Romans 11, and go back and forth from day to day with the passage. If you would not mind giving me a breakdown of what you see the passage teaching I would love to hear? Thanks.


 
Well I'm glad if I'm of any assistance by God's grace.

When I say "Israel as a whole" or "the Jews as a whole" I mean that the Jewish nation as a whole will become characterised by Christianity and adherence to Christ, not that every last individual will be converted. 

Being postmil, I believe this about all nations also, that e.g. Scotland will be converted/re-converted to Christ, and England, Wales, Ireland and the USA. But in Romans 9-11 our Apostle, the Apostle to the Gentiles, is dealing with the Jews in particular, partly in case the Gentile Christians should think that "God was finished with the Jews" and boast themselves against the natural branches.

The Apostle's lesson hasn't been learned very well by the Christian Church or by Christendom in general.

I have an analysis of O.Palmer Robertson's treatment of Romans 11 here:

http://www.puritanboard.com/f45/o-palmer-robertson-romans-11-a-51401/

It will be easier to understand if you have a copy of his otherwise excellent book "The Israel of God". I'll have to write it up properly with references to his book and put it in a blog section, but I give my reasons for believing that Romans 11 teaches more than just an ongoing relatively small number of Jews being/becoming Christians in the interadventual period.

I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for a massive ingathering of the Jews, any more than I would hold my breath waiting for a massive ingathering of the Scots, but in the last few decades - so I hear - there have been more Jews embracing Christ than for a long time.


----------



## Rook (Mar 26, 2011)

I have Robertson's book. I'll have to read it this summer when I get back home from school. From my understanding Robertson believes that Romans 11 teaches there will be a continuation of a small number of Jews brought into the church throughout the interadventual period. But he stops there correct? Whereas you would say that Paul is pointing to something even greater? I have postmil leanings, as you say, there are certain passages I cannot send on a rocket into the eternal state. I'll have to do some reading this summer.


----------



## jwithnell (Mar 26, 2011)

> Being postmil, I believe this about all nations also,


 I believe our positions would be quite similar if not for the eschatological differences  I do think we will see a greater proportion of Jews among the overall population of Christians -- however far the earthly kingdom advances. Once I got used to this change doctrinally, I actually found it pretty exciting,


----------



## Peairtach (Mar 26, 2011)

> I believe our positions would be quite similar if not for the eschatological differences



Well that's alright; you'll find out I'm right one day anyway, in this life or the next  

And what's more, the amils will be happy to find out that postmillenialism is correct after all! What, with all these conversions!


----------



## Pilgrim (Mar 26, 2011)

With regard to "historical" premils, I think you will find a diversity of opinion. I've found that some who identify with that label today do so because of their interpretation of Rev. 20 and often punt on the details. They aren't dispensational and aren't amil and thus are basically "historic" premil by default. Many of those in this camp would interpret the promises to Israel similarly to common amil interpretations. This seems to be a fairly common view among younger Southern Baptists, for example. 

Now, if you delve into the 19th and early 20th Century Reformed (and Calvinistic, broadly speaking) non-dispensational premils, I think you'll find that they often tended to have somewhat more of a Judeo-centric eschatology than later "historic" premils who are heavily influenced by G.E. Ladd. In other words, many of them had some place in their eschatology for a restoration of national Israel on some level.  They remained covenantal and in some cases were strongly critical of the nascent dispensationalism of their day. Examples include Horatius Bonar, C.H. Spurgeon, J.C. Ryle, David Baron, Nathaniel West and others. 

I've recently become aware of the Sovereign Grace Advent Testimony, a UK organization that seeks to perpetuate that premil legacy. It appears that a number of Free Presbyterian (N. Ireland) ministers are involved, among others. (I recognize some names, but not others. The names will no doubt be more familiar to our UK members.) SGAT appears to reprint a lot of books from that time period, but don't seem to have much material posted online. However, some of the titles they list can be found online elsewhere and most if not all are probably in the public domain. They have a lot of Benjamin Wills Newton material listed. Newton was one of the Plymouth Brethren who broke with Darby over pretribulationism and If I recall correctly, Darby's sectarianism. Spurgeon was a noted critic of Darby but seems to have held Newton and George Mueller in the highest regard. They were post-tribulationists, as was Samuel Tregelles. 

Now, to confuse things even further, several decades ago there were a good number of Presbyterians who insisted they held to covenant theology and denied they were dispensationalists, yet were pretrib. This view was pretty common in the Bible Presbyterian church and was predominant at one time. I haven't delved into it too deeply, but apparently some who were pretrib were okay with the Dispensational label and others weren't, I suppose because they rejected the classic Dispensational 7 dispensation scheme. Other notable Presbyterian premil leaders of the 20th Century held to mid trib or pre-wrath views, like J. Oliver Buswell and J. Barton Payne.


----------



## Rook (Mar 26, 2011)

I do not believe death will be defeated 1,000 or so years after the coming of Christ. 1 Cor. 15 does not make much sense to me in light of a premil view.


----------

