future of Israel as a theological question, The

Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, Sep 2001 by Blaising, Craig A

Post-Holocaust theology is correct in calling Christianity to recognize the Jewishness of Jesus, but it has completely missed the NT message of which Jew he is. What about the charge that Jesus could not be the Messiah since he did not bring in the kingdom? Once again, post-Holocaust theology is unable to answer this question and stumbles over it because of its inadequate Biblical foundation. The NT proclaims the inauguration of the kingdom in the pre-ascension and ascension ministries of Jesus with the fullness of the kingdom yet to come. Those who believe in Jesus participate in the inaugural blessings of the kingdom.

Israel today, however, Israel that is mostly in unbelief, needs to see Jesus as the one who prophesied the destruction of the temple and the visitation of judgment on Jerusalem and the people. The temple has been in ruins since AD 70, and for over 1800 years, Israel was without any political presence in the land. The stark fact of the fulfillment of that prophecy as recorded in the NT needs to be given serious attention. This same NT witnesses to the revelation of kingdom power and shalom in the ministry of Jesus and sets forth Jesus' teaching that the kingdom will indeed come for Israel, although the time is not revealed. It is, as Jesus said, known only to the Father (Mark 13:32; Acts 1:7). But it will come, and as a sign, Jesus gave his own death and resurrection, his own enactment of the sign of Jonah (Matt 12:38-50; Luke 11:29-32). Israel needs to consider this sign in light of the prophesy of Hos 6:1-3:

Come, let us return to the Lord, for he has torn us, but he will heal us; he has wounded us, but he will bandage us; he will revive us after two days; he will raise us up on the third day that we may live before him. So let us know, let us press on to know the Lord. His going forth is as certain as the dawn; and he will come to us like the rain, like the spring rain watering the earth.

The resurrection of the Son of David from the dead on the third day is the guarantee to Israel that after a season of being wounded and torn, the Lord will indeed raise them up to fully realize the kingdom promises. And when he does this for Israel, what will it mean for Gentiles? As Paul says, in Romans 11, it means "life from the dead" (cf. Ezek 37:1-28).

4. Ecclesiology. What about the Church? Obviously, when we realize that Israel does indeed have a future in the plan of God, we must lay aside the ecclesiology of supersessionism. While we recognize that the NT makes comparisons between OT Israel and the NT Church, and articulates the Church's relationship to God covenantally through the covenants of Israel, we need to avoid the supersessionist reductionism which simply identifies the Church as the replacement of Israel. Such a view not only falls to the unwarranted arrogance of which Paul warned Gentile Christians (Rom 11:17-18), but it has two other serious effects: (1) it impoverishes the Church's understanding of the plan of God as revealed in Scripture, and (2) it distorts the Church's true identity. The Church is not an essentially Gentile construct, even though since the second century, the majority of Christians have been Gentiles. Thinking of itself as Gentile and seeing itself as the replacement of Israel has been the source of political misconstruals of the nature and mission of the Church. It is most important for an ecclesiology that keeps in view God's future for Israel to recover the meaning of the Church as a fellowship anticipating the coming establishment of the kingdom in all its fullness for Israel and Gentiles. Consequently, it is a table fellowship of Jewish and Gentile believers. It is a table fellowship of one kind of Gentile believers with other kinds of Gentile believers, and of all kinds of Gentile believers with Jewish believers-all of whom have received the inaugural blessings of Christ's kingdom and who await that fullness. The vision of Jesus and the apostles was that in the Church, Jewish believers and Gentile believers would sit down together in peace without Jews requiring Gentiles to become Jews. But in order to truly understand the vision today, we have to add: without Gentiles requiring Jews to become Gentiles.