ENDTIME ISSUES No. 10: ISRAEL IN PROPHECY
Brian Wicker
ENDTIME ISSUES No. 10: ISRAEL IN PROPHECY
Samuele Bacchiocchi, Ph. D., Professor of Theology, Andrews University
Dear Members of the Endtime Issues Forum:
The last Bible study I posted "Life in the World to Come" (Endtime
Issues No. 9) has generated considerable healthy discussion. It is evident
that some members of our forum strongly feel that there will be no marital
relationship of any kind in the world to come. They assume that God is
going to change the make up of our human nature from heterosexual to
unisex, what that may be. Personally I feel that it is better not to be so
sure of what God is going to do, otherwise we may be in for a
disappointment. While we wait for the consummation of our redemption, let
us not become accusative of those who envision life in the new earth
similar to the present one, but without the presence of sin, suffering,
sickness, pollution, and death.
For me it is hard to believe that God would create planet earth to
be inhabited by heterosexual human beings and then repopulate this planet
at the End by unisex persons. If God declared at the beginning "it is not
good for man to be alone," is He going to change His mind and proclaim at
the End "it is better for human beings to be alone"? This is hardly
reflective of the unchangeable (Heb 13:8) and omniscient nature of God. It
is inconsistent with God's nature for Him to declare the creation of
mankind as male and female "very good" at the beginning, and then eliminate
gender distinctions at the End. Would not this imply that God discovered
that gender distinctions were "not good" after all? Does the God of
Biblical revelation learn from mistakes like human beings? Such notion is
preposterous to me.
Let me reassure those who have expressed disagreements with my
view, that what I posted represents a tentative, personal theological
reflection, based on what I consider a sensible interpretation of
Scripture. But this does not means that I am necessarily right. I come
from Rome, Italy, but I do not claim infallibility. All what I can claim
is that I have time time to think through the issues I am writing about.
Further reflection, enlightened by your constructive criticism, may lead me
and all of us to a fuller understanding of these Bible teachings.
With this issue I am starting a series of Bible studies focusing
specifically on endtime prophecies. We will consider both the mistaken and
the correct interpretation of prophecies regarding the signs of the End. I
have chosen to begin with an analysis of the role of Israel in prophecy,
because most Evangelical Christians strongly believe that the restoration
of the State of Israel since 1948 represents the "center piece" of endtime
prophecies. This view is bold taught by practically all the popular
preachers today. This means that if what is widely believed and preached
today about the role of Israel is prophecy, is based on a mistaken
interpretation of relevant Biblical texts, there is a most urgent need to
expose the fallacies of this teaching.
This essay represent a brief excerpt from a longer chapter I have
written on this subject. Feel free to contact me for a copy of the whole
chapter. May I express my gratitude again to all of you who have been
sharing these Bible studies with your friends, inviting them to join our
ENDTIME ISSUES FORUM. As a result of your endeavors, our list is growing
by an average of 100 names. Thank you for making it possible for me to
share my ministry of Biblical research with a larger audience.
ISRAEL IN PROPHECY
It is widely believed among Evangelical Christians that the steady
return of Jews to Palestine during this century, and the establishment of
the State of Israel in 1948, represent an amazing fulfillment of specific
Old Testament promises made to the Israelites. Furthermore, this alleged
fulfillment is viewed as the prelude to such final events as the Rapture,
the Tribulation, the rebuilding of the Jerusalem Temple, the conversion of
the Jews, the Return of Christ, and the establishment of the millennial
Jewish kingdom ruled over by Christ from David's throne in Jerusalem.
Leon J. Wood aptly expresses this popular view in The Bible and
Future Events: "The clearest sign of Christ's return is the modern state
of Israel . . . One should realize that God's timetable could call for
Israel to be in the land for many years before bringing the fruition of the
age. But with the nation actually there, and with many factors concerning
it fitting into conditions set forth in Scripture for the last days, . . .
one may safely believe that Christ's coming is not far in the future."
Hal Lindsey is even more specific by asserting that the political
restoration of Israel in 1948 is not only "one of the most important events
of our age," but also "the most important prophetic sign to herald the era
of Christ's return." He even boldly predicted in 1970 that "within forty
years or so of 1948, all these things could take place."
A Remarkable Event. To say the least, the return of many
Jews to Palestine and the establishment of the State of Israel are most
remarkable happenings. So it is not surprising that many Christians and
Jews see in these events which have transpired in the Middle East the
fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies. But is this a legitimate
interpretation of prophecies?
It is quite possible to believe personally that the Jewish
people have a moral or historical right to the land of Palestine and that
God has providentially led in the establishment of the State of Israel, but
can such a belief be legitimately grounded on Biblical prophecies? To
answer this question, it is necessary briefly to examine at least some of
the prophecies generally adduced in support of this belief.
Old Testament Restoration Prophecies
God's Promises to Israelites. There is, first, God's
promise to Abraham that his descendants would inherit "all the land of
Canaan, for an everlasting possession" (Gen 17:8; cf. 12:7; 13:15; 15:18).
In addition there are promises in some of the prophets that speak of a
"second" return of the Israelites (Is 11:11) to their homeland "from all
the nations" (Jer 29:14). Dispensationalists believe that this predicted
return is supposed to be in unbelief (Ezek 36:24-26; cf. Jer 30). They
find confirmation for such a belief in what is taking place today.
The restoration promises are viewed as unconditional
literal promises whose fulfillment began for the first time in 1948 with
the dramatic recovery of part of Palestine by the Jews. Previous
possessions and dispossessions of the land of Canaan by the Israelites
supposedly do not fulfill God's territorial promises for at least two
reason. First, God promised not temporary but "everlasting possession" of
the land (Gen 17:8). Second, the Israelites have never possessed in the
past all the promised land "from the river of Egypt to the great river, the
river Euphrates" (Gen 15:18).45
Conditional Nature of God's Promise. The above
literalistic interpretation of God's territorial promises ignores first of
all their conditional nature. God's promise of land to Abraham's progeny
was conditional on a continuing obedience to His covenant requirements:
"God said to Abraham, 'As for you, you shall keep my covenant, you and your
descendants after you throughout their generations" (Gen 17:9; cf. 18:19).
The conditional nature of the promise of the land in the
Abrahamic covenant is clearly recognized in the Scriptures. Moses, for
example, after the Kadesh rebellion, reminded the new generation that
disobedience prevented their parents from entering the land of promise:
"Not one of these men of this evil generation shall see the good land which
I swore to give to your fathers" (Deut 1:35; cf. Num 14:22-23).
Anticipating the expulsion of the Israelites from the land
on account of disobedience, Moses admonished the people to "return to the
Lord," who in turn would remember "the covenant with your fathers which he
swore to them" (Deut 4:30-31; cf. Deut 30:2, 3; I Kings 8:47-50).
The conditional nature of God's promises is perhaps best
stated in Jeremiah 18:9-10 where the Lord declares: "If at any time I
declare concerning a nation or a kingdom that I will build and plant it,
and if it does evil in my sight, not listening to my voice, then I will
repent of the good which I had intended to do it."
The principles established in this passage is that God's
predictions of weal or woe for a nation are conditional upon obedience or
disobedience. Obviously it is only by God's grace that believers can
fulfill the conditions, but the fact remains that the conditions are there
and no one has the right to take the "ifs" out of the Bible.
The Return in Unbelief. Dispensationalists refuse to apply
the principle of the conditional nature of God's promises to the
predictions regarding the return of the Jews to Palestine. They appeal to
passages such as Ezekiel 22:17 and 36:24-28 to argue that "the Jews are to
be gathered back to the land in a state of unbelief. The national
conversion to Jesus Christ their Messiah will not take place until after
they are restored to the land."46 In other words, the territorial
restoration of the Jews is supposed to precede their conversion to the
Messiah.
Unfortunately, this belief is based on a misinterpretation
of certain Biblical texts. For example, the statement found in Ezekiel
22:19-20, "I will gather you in my anger and in my wrath," is taken to
refer to the present emigration of the Jews to Palestine in unbelief.
This interpretation is erroneous for at least two reasons.
First of all, in the preceding verses Ezekiel is describing not the future
but the contemporary situation of the Israelites by enumerating their sins
which will cause God to scatter them "among the nations" (v. 15). Second,
the gathering of the Jews "in my anger and in my wrath" refers not to their
return to Palestine in unbelief, but to the finality of God's judgment upon
their disobedience which historically took place through the Babylonian
invasions and captivity.
This passage leaves no doubt that the purpose of the
gathering is for judgment, not restoration. This is clear in the following
verse where the Lord says: "I will gather you and blow upon you with the
fire of my wrath, and you shall be melted in the midst of it" (Ezek 22:21).
Thus the gathering in Ezekial, like the assemblying in Jeremiah (8:14), is
for the purpose not of restoration and salvation but of judgment and
destruction.
Regathering and Cleansing. The second "proof text" generally
cited to support the return-in-unbelief view, is Ezekiel 36:24-25: "For I
will take you from the nations, and gather you from all the countries, and
bring you into your own land. I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and
you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses, and from all your idols I
will cleans you." The fact that the promise of territorial restoration
precedes the spiritual cleansing of the people in this passage is taken to
mean that first the Jews will return to Palestine in unbelief and
afterwards they will be cleansed and redeemed.
This conclusion is based on an artificial chronological
sequence which cannot be derived from the passage. Ezekial is not saying
that the Lord first will regather the Israelites and then at a subsequent
period He will cleanse them. He simple declares that God will do two
things for His people: He will regather and cleanse them. No hint is
given that the two events will be separated by an undetermined length of
time.
The context of the chapter suggests that the regathering
and the cleansing will take place at the same time, with the spiritual
cleansing preceding rather than following the regathering: "On that day
that I cleanse you from all your iniquities, I will cause the cities to be
inhabited, and the waste places shall be rebuilt" (Ezek 36:33).
Observations such as these clearly show that Ezekiel 36:24-28 offers no
proof for a twentieth-century return of the Jews in unbelief to Palestine.
Two Biblical Principles. Further support for this
conclusion is provided by two basic Biblical teachings regarding the land
of promise. First, historically it was unbelief that prevented the
Israelites from entering the land of Canaan (Num 14:23; Ps 95:7, 11). This
truth is reiterated by the author of Hebrews when he emphasizes that
unbelief disqualifies anyone from entering the rest which the Sabbath
typifies, whether it be the political rest in the land of Canaan (Heb
3:18-19; 4:6-8) or the spiritual rest of salvation (Heb 4:3, 9, 10). If
unbelief prevented the initial entrance into the land of Canaan, it can
hardly provide the condition accompanying a return to it.
Second, God rewards obedience, not disobedience, with the covenant
privileges. The restoration predicted by the prophets is conditional in
character. Israel will be restored "if they repent with all their mind and
with all their heart in the land of their enemies" (1 King 8:38; cf. Hosea
11:10, 11; Deut 30: 2, 3, 9, 10).47
A "Second" Gathering. Another prophecy viewed by many as a proof
text for the present reconstitution of Israel is found in Isaiah 11:11:
"in that day the Lord will extend his hand yet a second time to recover the
remnant which is left of his people, from Assyria, from Egypt, from
Pathros, from Ethiopia, from Elam, from Shinar, from Hamath, and from the
coastlands of the sea."
Isaiah's reference to "a second" gathering of the remnant
of Israel from many nations is viewed as being fulfilled today for the
first time with the return of some Jews to the reconstituted State of
Israel. The latter is seen as the prelude to the final regathering of
Israel, which, to use J. F. Walvoord's words, "will have its culmination
when Israel's Messiah returns to the earth in power and glory to reign."
This view rests on the assumption that the "second"
gathering predicted by Isaiah was not fulfilled when a faithful remnant of
Israel returned from Babylon to Jerusalem in 536 B.C. under Zerubbabel and
again in 457 B.C. under Ezra. Two main reasons are generally given.
First, the return from the Babylonian exile was only from one nation,
Babylon, and not "from all the nations" (Jer 29:14; cf. Is 11:11). Second,
the return from the Babylonian exile was but a pale reflection of the
grandiose return envisioned by Ezekiel, Jeremiah, and Isaiah.
A Return "From All the Nations." The first reason ignores three
significant facts. First, it was customary at that time to sell prisoners
of war to other nations, so that they were dispersed far and wide (Joel
3:7; Jer 42-44; Ezek 27:13; Amos 1:6, 9). In a gradual return from
captivity it would be natural for some of the widely dispersed Jews to go
back to Palestine from many countries. This is what apparently took place
after the Babylonian exile, since those who returned did not belong
exclusively to the tribe of Judah but also to the other tribes as well
(Ezra 2:59; 6Z:17; 1 Chron. 9:33, 34).
Second, the prophets sometimes fuse together references to
a return from "the land of their captivity" (i.e. Babylon) with a return
from "all the nations," because to their minds these expressions were
simply variant ways of describing the condition of the Jews in exile and
God's promised restoration. A good example is found in Jeremiah 30:10-11,
where the two expressions are used interchangeably in the same passage:
"Fear not, O Jacob my servant, . . . for lo, I will save you from afar, and
your offspring from the land of their captivity . . . I will make a full
end of all the nations among whom I scattered you" (cf. Jer 31:8, 11;
46:27).
Third, to apply literally and consistently Isaiah's
prediction of "a second" gathering of Israel from many nations to the
contemporary return of the Jews to Palestine would require that the Jews
destroy or plunder or subjugate the Philistines, the Edomites, and
Moabites, and the Ammonites, as stated in the context of Isaiah's prophecy:
"They shall swoop down upon the shoulder of the Philistines in the west,
and together they shall plunder the people of the east. They shall put
forth their hand against Edom and Moab, and the Ammonites shall obey them"
(Is 11:14). Since these nations have long ago disappeared, it is hard to
see how the Jews today could fulfill literally Isaiah's prediction of "a
second" gathering.
This fanciful prophetic interpretation could be avoided
simply by carefully reading the context, which clearly speaks of "a second"
return of a remnant from Assyria, in relation to the first return from
Egypt under Moses: "There will be a highway from Assyria for the remnant
which is left of his people, as there was for Israel when they came up from
the land of Egypt" (Is 11:16). Assyria is mentioned first (also in v. 11)
presumably because Isaiah wrote these words after the Northern Kingdom had
been deported to Assyria in 721 B.C. Thus this prophecy had a literal
fulfillment when the Israelites returned from captivity in the sixth
century B.C.
Limited Return from Babylonian Captivity. The second reason
maintains that the trickle of Jews who returned to Palestine under
Zerubbabel in 536 B.C. and under Ezra in 457 B.C. was only a pale
reflection of the grandiose return envisioned by the prophets. Moreover,
the Jews did not experience the economic prosperity and agricultural
fertility predicted by the prophets (Is 35:1; 61:4). The surrounding
nations were not destroyed and continued to threaten the Jews again and
again. Consequently, one must look allegedly for a later fulfillment in
the events of our time.
The return of the Jews to the land is now in progress.
Israel has become the strongest military power of the Middle East. The
soil is being reclaimed after centuries of neglect, through the diversion
of water from the Jordan to irrigate the Negev desert. These developments
have led many Christians to believe that that restoration prophecies are
indeed being fulfilled today. A travel advertisement in Christianity Today
(October 27, 1967) aptly expresses this popular belief: "Is Prophecy Being
Fulfilled in the Bible Lands Today? Come and See."
Threefold Fulfillment of Restoration Prophecies
It can hardly be disputed that the restoration prophecies
were not completely fulfilled in the post-exilic period and that it is
appropriate to look for a fuller fulfillment at a later time. However, in
looking for a greater fulfillment it is important to recognize that
prophecies regarding the Land of Canaan and the restoration of Israel may
be fulfilled in a threefold way: literally, figuratively, and
antitypically.
Literal Fulfillment. God's territorial promise to
Abraham's progeny was first fulfilled literally several times. Joshua, for
example, declares: "The Lord gave to Israel all the land which he swore to
give to their father: and having taken possession of it, they settled there
. . . Not one of all the good promises which the Lord had made to the house
of Israel had failed; all came to pass" (Josh 21:43, 45; cf. 1 Kings 8:56;
Jer 32:21-23).
Similarly, the promised restoration of the Jews to
Palestine predicted by the prophets found an initial literal fulfillment
when a remnant of the Jews returned under Zerubbabel, Ezra, and Nehemiah.
Jeremiah, for example, in the same passage where he announces the
restoration of the Jews "from all the nations" (Jer 29:14), explicitly
explains when the promised restoration would take place: "Thus says the
Lord: When seventy years are completed for Babylon, I will visit you, and
I will fulfill to you my promise and bring you back to this place" (Jer
29:10). Daniel correctly understood that this prophecy would be fulfilled
not at a distant future but in his own time (Dan 9:2).
Figurative Fulfillment. God's promise of the land to
Abraham's progeny and of the restoration of Israel have also been fulfilled
in a second way, figuratively. The New Testament explains that the land
and blessings promised to Abraham's posterity have been fulfilled not only
literally, in the past return of the Jews to Palestine, but also
figuratively in and through the coming of Christ, Who is the intent and
content of God's covenant with Abraham (Acts 3:25-26; 13:16, 32-33).
Paul explains that the promises which God "made to Abraham and to
his offspring" (Gal 3:16) have been fulfilled through Christ, because He is
the epitome of the true seed of Abraham. The fulfillment, however,
consists not in a future repossession of Palestine by the Jews, but rather
in the inheritance of the whole renewed earth by believers in Christ from
all nations (Rom 4:13; Matt 5:5, 3; Rev 21:1-8).
Ingathering of the Gentiles. Not only God's territorial
promise to Abraham's progeny, but also the later predictions regarding the
restoration of Israel, are seen in the New Testament as fulfilled
figuratively through the coming of Christ. At the Jerusalem Council, for
example, after Peter, Paul, and Barnabas reported how God brought many
Gentiles into the faith, James, who apparently presided over the council,
said: "Brethren, listen to me. Simeon has related how God first visited
the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name. And with this the
words of the prophets agree, as it is written 'After this I will return,
and I will rebuild the dwelling of David, which has fallen; I will rebuild
its ruins, and I will set it up, that the rest of men may seek the Lord,
and all the Gentiles who are called by my name, says that Lord, who has
made these things known from of old'" (Acts 15:14-18).
James here quotes Amos's prophecy regarding the restoration
of David's kingdom (Amos 9:11-12) which would bring about the ingathering
of the Gentiles, and declares that this prophecy was being fulfilled
through the ingathering of the Gentiles into the community of God's people.
We have here a clear example of a figurative New Testament fulfillment of
an Old Testament prophecy regarding the restoration of Israel.
Noteworthy is the change made by James in translating
Amos's prophecy. Amos's phrase "that they may possess the remnant of Edom"
(Amos 9:12), becomes in Acts 15:17, "that the rest of men may seek the
Lord." What this means is that James saw the fulfillment of Amos's
prophecy not in a future political restoration of the Davidic dynasty that
would militarily gain possession of the remnants of Edom, but rather in the
spiritual reign of Christ which is voluntarily sought by believers. Here,
then, the New Testament interprets figuratively an Old Testament prophecy
regarding the restoration of Israel.
Antitypical Fulfillment. Prophecies about the Promised
Land and the restoration of Israel will also be ultimately fulfilled
antitypically-that is, in the final possession by all of God's people of
the new earth of which Canaan was a type.
The Scripture indicates that the land of Canaan was a type of the
inheritance of God's people in the new earth. Hebrews explains that
Abraham and his believing descendants saw the ultimate fulfillment of the
promised land of Canaan, not in a return to "that land from which they had
gone out," but rather in reaching "a better country, that is, a heavenly
one" (Heb 11:15-16). Consequently Abraham, who had been promised the land
of Canaan, "looked forward to the city which has foundations, whose builder
and maker is God" (Heb 11:10).
The future "holy city" (Rev 21:10), to which Abraham looked
forward, will be the antitypical fulfillment of God's promise to him of the
everlasting possession of the land of Canaan. This promise will be
fulfilled on the new earth for all the spiritual descendants of Abraham,
believing Jews and believing Gentiles. Paul emphasizes this truth when he
writes: "If you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs
according to promise" (Gal 3:29). As believers we are "heirs" to God's
promise made to Abraham regarding the land of Canaan. This promise will be
ultimately fulfilled when we reach the "better country" and "inherit the
world" (Heb 11:6; Rom 4:13).
Messianic Restoration. The antitypical fulfillment also applies
to the prophecies regarding the gathering of Israel from the dispersion.
Isaiah's prediction of "a second" gathering of the remnant of Israel (Is
11:11) is given in the context of the Coming of the Messiah as a glorious
Judge who "shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the
breath of his lips he shall slay the wicked" (Is 11:4). The outcome of
this final judgment will be peace, justice, and harmony in the natural
world, "for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord as the
waters cover the sea" (Is 11:5-9).
At the time of the final messianic restoration just
described, "the Lord will extend his hand yet a second time to recover the
remnant" from many nations (Is 11:11). What this means is that Isaiah
forecasts the second gathering of Israel, not merely to the land of Canaan,
but to the Messiah Himself at the time when He will come as a Judge to
restore justice, peace, and prosperity to this world. This gathering is
not only for Israel, but for all believers from many nations. (Is 11:11).
The New Testament envisions this final gathering of
believers from all nations at the glorious Return of Christ. At that time,
"He will send out his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather
his elect form the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other" (Matt
24:31). This final gathering will be not to the Middle East, but "from one
end of heaven to the other" to the Savior. This is Christ's final
antitypical fulfillment of Isaiah's predicted second gathering (cf. Matt
8:11-12).
Deeper Meaning of Israel and Canaan. The question could be asked:
Why then do the Old Testament prophets speak so plainly of a national
restoration of Israel to its land, when the ultimate fulfillment of these
prophecies is the inheritance of the new earth by the believers of all the
ages? The answer is to be found in the fact that the Old Testament
prophets often describe the ultimate blessedness by means of terms and
experiences familiar to the Israelites of their days.
For the prophets the term Israel signified the people of
God and the land of Canaan represented the promised blessings of peace and
prosperity. Because of these deeper meanings, these terms could serve to
express the hope for the ultimate realization of God's blessings for His
people.
We noted in Chapter 2 that the "prophetic perspective"
enabled the prophets to see the final divine visitation and restoration
through the transparency of imminent historical events. In the same way
the final gathering of all believers (Is 11:11; 49:6) is sometimes
described by the prophets in terms of the regathering of the remnant of
Israel to its land.
The above considerations on the literal, figurative, and
antitypical fulfillments of the Old Testament prophecies regarding the
restoration of Israel lead us to conclude that there is a sense in which
these prophecies were not fully realized in Old Testament times. However,
their fuller realization must be sought, not in a political restoration of
the Jews in Palestine, but in the universal gathering of all believers in
the new earth.
To limit the fulfillment of these prophecies to a political
restoration of the Jews in Palestine, whether it be now or during the
millennium, is to ignore the witness of the New Testament which sees these
prophecies fulfilled not in some future return of the Jews to Palestine but
in the present gathering of believers into the church and in a future
universal gathering of people from all tribes, peoples, and tongues in the
new earth.
"The Times of the Gentiles." One of the prophecies most
quoted by dispensationalists to support the present return of the Jews to
the city of Jerusalem is Luke 21:24: "Jerusalem will be trodden down by
the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled." Many
Christians believe that this prophecy was fulfilled for the first time on
June 6, 1967, when the Jews recaptured the Old City of Jerusalem, thus
terminating its "treading down" by the Gentiles.
The reasoning for this view is aptly expressed by a leading
dispensationalist theologian, C. F. Baker: "If this city is trodden down
until a certain time, there must of necessity come a time following that
when the city will not be trodden down . . . If this Scripture teaches
anything, it teaches that the earthly Jerusalem is to be restored." Such
reasoning sounds logical but it rests on a gratuitous interpretation of the
adverb "until," besides ignoring Christ's overall teachings on this subject.
The primary function of the adverb "until" in the phrase "until
the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled" is to indicate the termination of
the treading down of Jerusalem but not its restoration to a previous state
of Jewish sovereignty. The adverb "until" (achri) in itself does not
suggest a change to a previous situation. For example, in the admonition
"Hold fast what you have, until I come" (Rev 2:25), the adverb "until" does
not convey the idea of a change from a present condition of faithfulness to
a previous condition of unfaithfulness (cf. Rev 2:10; 1 Cor 15:25).
In this statement Jesus simply says that for Jerusalem the
condition of being trampled underfoot will not cease within fifty or a
hundred years, but will continue right on until His Second Coming. The
event which follows the fulfillment of "the times of the Gentiles" is not
the restoration of Jewish sovereignty over the city of Jerusalem, but the
Return of Christ (Luke 21:25-28).
Prediction of Destruction, not of Restoration. Note should
be taken of the fact that in predicting the destruction of Jerusalem,
Christ said nothing about its restoration. What Jesus taught instead is
that the special status of the Jews as a people of God had come to an end
(Matt 23:38; Luke 19:41-44). In the parable of the Tenants in the
Vineyard, the unfaithful tenants do not regain possession of the Vineyard
at a later time, but lose it forever, as God gives it "to a nation
producing the fruits of it" (Matt 21:41-43).
The same truth is expressed in the parable of the Wedding
Feast, where the place of those who were originally invited to the feast is
taken by all sorts of other people brought in from the street (Matt
22:1-10). Those who "sit at table with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the
kingdom of heaven" "come from east and west . . . while the sons of the
kingdom will be thrown into the outer darkness" (Matt 8:11-12).
This description of people coming "from east and west"
alludes to certain prophetic descriptions of the return of the Jews from
exile (cf. Is 43:5; Ps 107:3). Yet here Jesus clearly applies these
prophecies to the gathering of all believing people, Jews and Gentiles.
The New Testament foresees not the return of the Jews to a restored
Jerusalem but the gathering of all believers to the New Jerusalem built by
God Himself (Rev 21-22).
Conclusion. The unmistakable conclusion that emerges from this
study of the major restoration prophecies is that none of these offers a
forecast or even a hint of a restoration of the Jews to Palestine in our
century as a prelude to the final events of earth's history.
We have found that the Scripture sees these prophecies as
fulfilled literally when a remnant of Jews returned to Palestine from
Babylon; figuratively when Christ came the first time to gather spiritually
all believers unto Himself; and antitypically when Christ will return to
gather physically His people "from one end of heaven to the other" to the
new earth.
The view that the political restoration of the Jews in 1948
is "the most important prophetic sign to herald the era of Christ's return"
is, then, a view which has no legitimate Biblical support. Unfortunately,
however, such a mistaken view is the very basis upon which rests the
popular scenario of End-time events promoted by popular Evangelical
preachers today.
Christian regards
Samuele Bacchiocchi, Ph. D.,
Professor of Theology and Church History,
Andrews University
4990 Appian Way
Berrien Springs, MI 49103
Phone (616) 471-2915 Fax (616) 471-4013
E-mail sbacch...@qtm.net
SBacch...@csi.com
WWW HOMEPAGE: http://www.andrews.edu/~samuele
JOHN
