Whenever the Old Testament Prophets prophesied about 'Israel', they always meant physical Israelites - they never meant Gentiles - they didn't even mean Gentiles who would later become born-again believers in Jesus and members of the Church.
Whenever they spoke about the then-future salvation of Gentiles, they still always referred to them as Gentiles - never as Israel, never as Levites, never as Zion.
All of their prophecies about Israel, Zion, Levites and the Temple always had physical Israel, Zion, Levites and the Temple in mind - never the Gentiles who would later become believers in Jesus and fellow-members of the same, new body.
But what they said about the Gentiles also came true.
The Old Testament predicted that once the Promises concerning Israel would be fulfilled and the Gentiles would also be participating in the promised-salvation - the distinction between Jews and Gentiles would thereafter cease, for all spiritual intents and purposes.
And that came true too - they definitely foresaw the present, new body, comprised of Jews and Gentiles without distinction. But that doesn't mean we can take the prophecies which had physical Israel in mind and instead make them directly about some other group and never about Israel. It also doesn't mean we can relegate it to some other, future time instead of to the timeframe required by the prophecies themselves.
Dispensational Pre-Millennialists are right in saying that spiritualising such promises concerning Israel and making them instead to refer to a different group other than physical Israel, as some Post-Millennialists and A-Millennialists do, is to deny the faithfulness of God towards Israel - but they are wrong in thinking the fulfilment of those promises has been postponed until the future.
It was all literally fulfilled, on physical Israel's behalf, on time, and just as promised - that's the whole point of the Gospel. The Apostles' doctrine.
Whenever they spoke about the then-future salvation of Gentiles, they still always referred to them as Gentiles - never as Israel, never as Levites, never as Zion.
All of their prophecies about Israel, Zion, Levites and the Temple always had physical Israel, Zion, Levites and the Temple in mind - never the Gentiles who would later become believers in Jesus and fellow-members of the same, new body.
But what they said about the Gentiles also came true.
The Old Testament predicted that once the Promises concerning Israel would be fulfilled and the Gentiles would also be participating in the promised-salvation - the distinction between Jews and Gentiles would thereafter cease, for all spiritual intents and purposes.
And that came true too - they definitely foresaw the present, new body, comprised of Jews and Gentiles without distinction. But that doesn't mean we can take the prophecies which had physical Israel in mind and instead make them directly about some other group and never about Israel. It also doesn't mean we can relegate it to some other, future time instead of to the timeframe required by the prophecies themselves.
Dispensational Pre-Millennialists are right in saying that spiritualising such promises concerning Israel and making them instead to refer to a different group other than physical Israel, as some Post-Millennialists and A-Millennialists do, is to deny the faithfulness of God towards Israel - but they are wrong in thinking the fulfilment of those promises has been postponed until the future.
It was all literally fulfilled, on physical Israel's behalf, on time, and just as promised - that's the whole point of the Gospel. The Apostles' doctrine.
No comments:
Post a Comment