The Holy Spirit can be fully present any place in the world where he is welcomed, so there is not specific holy land.

…and the world is our inheritance, the entire earth. To be realized when heaven and earth become one through Jesus. But true, we now live it out “in Christ.” That is our sphere of existence, though I’m not sure how one can say that is the land in which we live. Where is that found biblically speaking?

I have appreciated Burge’s thoughts on this issue. Does he address the (often overlooked) point that many OT promises regarding Israel seem to be fulfilled in the Kingdom, even the New Heaven/Earth (e.g., Ezek 37:1-14 and Rev 21:1-4)?

when i read the scripture, i think of Land as the space where God is. he has created a space in his own presence and that is the land.

Seems to me that this understanding of the land goes along with idea of a living temple. Instead of a building, we are now God’s temple. Instead of a parcel in the Middle East, the whole world is now God’s land.
Christopher Wright, in “The Mission of God,” uses and image of two triangles, a smaller one inside a larger one that touch at the apex. At the apex is written “God.” At one lower corner of the small triangle he lists “Israel” (the people) and at the other is “the land,” The corresponding corners of the larger triangle are “Humanity” and “the Earth.” God’s mission is to expand the smaller triangle until the two triangles are one in the same.

Speaking of Chris Wright, in his “The God I Don’t Understand,” he has a brief but helpful discussion on the land in the New Testament and how the promises of the land are “transferred to Jesus” (pp. 167-170). His discussion is in response to various “end times” views associated with the land, and the politcal agendas that make use of those views.

I find Gary Burge’s comments to be most disingenous and misleading. The NT’s focus is on spreading and defendung the Good News (gospel) of salvation, not by the works of the Mosaic Law, but by God’s gift through His Only Begotten Son Jesus, who kept the entire Mosaic Law from birth to death, and whose unblemished blood becomes the ultimate atonement of all sins of anyone who accepts Jesus finished work on the cross. He is the Lamb that takes away sins of all who believes in HIM. But even in the NT, Paul points out in Romans 9,10, & 11 that God has deliberately blinded most Jews to the Gospel so that the the gentiles may be saved. Paul predicts that the time for the gentiles being saved will come to an end, and at that time, All Israel (i.e. Jews) will have their eyes opened, and they too will be saved.
It is on the OT that is specific to God’s plans for Israel and reveals that The Jews will be driven from Israel scattered throughout the world. Isaiah 60 reveals that at a time when the nations of the world are in Darkness, God will bring The Jews Back to their homeland by ships and planes.
Isa 60:8-9
“Who are these who fly like a cloud And like the doves to their lattices? Surely the coastlands will wait for Me; And the ships of Tarshish will come first, To bring your sons from afar, Their silver and their gold with them, For the name of the LORD your God, And for the Holy One of Israel because He has glorified you. NASU
Ezekiel chapters 36 thru 38 reveal God re-establishing Israel by the return of many Jews in the midst of hostile surrounding nations, and then attacked by many other nations too.
Zechariah predicts that after Israel is established at the end of the diaspora, The surrounding nations will repeatedly attack Israel and be defeated by Israel. The Zechariah predicts that all the nations of the world will turn against Israel. Nuclear weapons will be used:
Zec 14:12-15
Now this will be the plague with which the LORD will strike all the peoples who have gone to war against Jerusalem; their flesh will rot while they stand on their feet, and their eyes will rot in their sockets, and their tongue will rot in their mouth. It will come about in that day that a great panic from the LORD will fall on them; and they will seize one another’s hand, and the hand of one will be lifted against the hand of another. Judah also will fight at Jerusalem; and the wealth of all the surrounding nations will be gathered, gold and silver and garments in great abundance. So also like this plague will be the plague on the horse, the mule, the camel, the donkey and all the cattle that will be in those camps.
NASU
So the return of Jews to Israel is clearly predicted by the OT which all Cjristians accept, and indicated by the Apostle Paul in Romans 9-11.

Just want to add one more Prophecy from Zechariah, a prediction that Israel will come to know Jesus (Y’shua) as their Messiah.
Zec 12
Declares the LORD who stretches out the heavens, lays the foundation of the earth, and forms the spirit of man within him,
“Behold, I am going to make Jerusalem a cup that causes reeling to all the peoples around; and when the siege is against Jerusalem, it will also be against Judah. It will come about in that day that I will make Jerusalem a heavy stone for all the nations; all who lift it will be severely injured. And all the nations of the earth will be gathered against it.
In that day,” declares the LORD, “I will strike every horse with bewilderment and his rider with madness. But I will watch over the house of Judah, while I strike every horse of the peoples with blindness. Then the clans of Judah will say in their hearts, ‘ A strong support for us are the inhabitants of Jerusalem through the LORD of hosts, their God.’”
“In that day I will make the clans of Judah like a firepot among pieces of wood and a flaming torch among sheaves, so they will consume on the right hand and on the left all the surrounding peoples, while the inhabitants of Jerusalem again dwell on their own sites in Jerusalem. The LORD also will save the tents of Judah first, so that the glory of the house of David and the glory of the inhabitants of Jerusalem will not be magnified above Judah.”
“In that day the LORD will defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and the one who is feeble among them in that day will be like David, and the house of David will be like God, like the angel of the LORD before them. And in that day I will set about to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.”
10 “I will pour out on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the Spirit of grace and of supplication, so that they will look on Me WHOM THEY HAVE PIERCED;” and they will mourn for Him, as one mourns for an only son, and they will weep bitterly over Him like the bitter weeping over a firstborn. In that day there will be great mourning in Jerusalem, like the mourning of Hadadrimmon in the plain of Megiddo. The land will mourn, every family by itself; the family of the house of David by itself and their wives by themselves; the family of the house of Nathan by itself and their wives by themselves; the family of the house of Levi by itself and their wives by themselves; the family of the Shimeites by itself and their wives by themselves; all the families that remain, every family by itself and their wives by themselves. NASU

The older yet still invaluable work of G.E. Ladd touches on “the land” as well, at least indirectly. In his “The Last Things” Ladd writes,
“The salvation of Israel must be through the new covenant made in the blood of Christ already established with the church, not through a rebuilt Jewish temple with a revival of the Mosaic sacrificial system. Hebrews flatly affirms that the whole Mosaic system is obsolete and about to pass away. Therefore the popular Dispensational position that Israel is the “clock of prophecy” is misguided. Possibly the modern return of Israel to Palestine is a part of God’s purpose for Israel, but the New Testament sheds no light on this problem.”
The key to any question of this sort is that “…the Old Testament must be interpreted in light of the new revelation given in Jesus Christ.” We see this in Jesus’ “Son of Man” language, 1st century understanding of Isaiah 53′s Suffering Servant, the writer of Matthew’s quotation of Scripture, etc. If, then, Paul writes that Jesus is making a new and spiritual Israel, that then must not eradicate the meaning of OT prophecy, but rather define it.

Scot:
Ahhhh! Horrible! Foul!
Okay, you are free to disagree. But what strikes me as most problematic in you, of all people, endorsing Burge’s ideas, is that this is not good integration of the canonical narrative. It is not good integration of the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament.
Deuteronomy 30:1-6 is a good passage to consider when thinking about God’s faithfulness to carry out his eschatological promises. I understand that Christians may find God’s election of carnal Israel offensive, but I think it irresponsible to do away with this teaching of the Bible.
After all, Paul affirms it repeatedly in Romans 11 and only disingenuous exegesis can remove the people of Jacob, chosen through physical descent, from Romans 11.
Derek Leman

For a Reformed view of the continuing election of Israel and an affirmation that future land promises are indeed about the physical people of Israel, see Barry Horner’s FUTURE ISRAEL.
Horner is no dispensationalist (many of the commenters are reacting against dispensationalism and not properly addressing the canonical narrative). FUTURE ISRAEL is part of the New American Commentary series and is a significant theological statement.
Derek Leman

Derek #10
I understood the post to be about the land, not about the place of the Jews as a people in God’s plan. I see no mention of land in Romans 11. I can’t think of anyplace in the N.T. that talks about a return to the land. I’m a wrong?

#1 RonMcK:
It sounds like you’ve not thought this through. The Holy Spirit was in the world in Deuteronomy also, and yet Deuteronomy 12 speaks of the place where God’s name will dwell. The presence of God in the Bible is concentrated in Jerusalem and the whole land of Israel.
Leviticus 18:24ff indicates that in the Canaanite period (before Israel entered the land), God regarded the land as holy.
So I ask you to reconsider your logic which strikes against Biblical teaching.
Derek Leman

#13 Michael Kruse:
The operating assumption of your question seems to be: “Only the New Testament defines ultimate truth.” What about the Hebrew Bible?
I do think the New Testament addresses the land and the kingdom in the eschatological teachings of Jesus, but it is confusing and most interpreters refer all of the Olivet Discourse to the events of 70 C.E. I think this is just as wooden and overly black and white as futurist interpretations. But when a Jew speaks of God gathering his elect from the four winds as in Mark 13 and Matt 24, he is talking Deuteronomy 30 and the prophetic theme of Israel’s restoration, not Christian rapture.
But, of course, I concede that the land promise to Israel is not a theme developed in the New Testament. Nor do I think it would need to be. The New Testament for the most part is instruction for the non-Jewish part of the congregation of Messiah. The land issue was not pertinent to the immediate needs addressed in the epistles.
Derek Leman

I haven’t seen this book, but I thought Burge’s 2003 book Whose Land? Whose Promise? was sound and eye-opening and accessible, particularly highlighting the plight of Palestinian Christians.
I think the identification by some of the current political entity called Israel with the Biblical people called Israel (regardless of whether or not one sees that term as now applying to both Jews and Gentiles in the whole church) is a source of many problems.

If Paul had a land centered hermeneutic, I don’t think he would have written Romans 4:13. Never in the OT was Abraham promised the world.

AHH #16:
Some people (not saying you) associate all belief in the future and present faithfulness of God to his covenant promises with physical Israel as buying into an entire package of extreme Zionism.
Many would be surprised to find that Israeli Messianic Jews are working in many places for justice for Palestinians.
The land promises should not be taken as a rejection of justice and compassion. It all has to hold together.
Derek Leman

The question I have echo’s Derek’s and is a question in response to Michael’s question #13
It is true, that land ideas are not developed or thematic in the NT.
However, can this be similar to the NPP where we missed much of Paul’s point of view because we divorced it from it’s 1st century Palestinian / Judaic context?
In other words, should we assume a certain amount of land ideation, based on their understanding of the OT and the world around them, in the NT author’s perspective and understand that just because it isn’t black and white in the NT doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist?

I appreciate Derek Leman’s multiple push-backs, but I still think that Burge is trying to show that the popular theology about contemporary Israel and “the land” does not bear New Testament scrutiny. Apocalyptic imagery only gives us a holy city–the new Jerusalem, not a holy land, but a holy, wholly new earth.

#20 John:
Thanks. But one pushback for you: is your eschatology limited to Revelation? Does the Hebrew Bible also play into your eschatology?
The idea of a penultimate as well as ultimate age to come is a good way to synthesize. And Revelation can easily fit into that two-part age to come scheme. In fact, Revelation gives evidence of a two-part age to come (ch 20 vs. chs. 21-22).
Derek Leman

May this author’s tribe increase!
Not only do I believe the view of a reestablished physical state of Israel is unbiblical but I also believe that such a view has allowed many to overlook the injustices committed by the nation of Israel and the blame it equally shares for the continued problems in the middle-east.
Grace and peace,
Rex

K. Rex Butts #22:
I will believe you have the moral authority to judge the Israeli military and government for their part in the war when your children have been blown into small pieces by Palestinian bombs.
Meanwhile our Jewish Messiah weeps and the fact remains, and the fact remains, as Markus Barth said: “?no Gentile can have communion with Christ or with God unless he also has communion with [the people of] Israel.?
It is the kingdom of the Son of David, my friend. That is the kingdom you are seeking.
Derek Leman

Why modern Christianity even has a problem understanding the spiritual nature of the land is somewhat of a mystery. The teachings are clear in the NT that the Kingdom does not come with observation (Luke 17:20) and Jesus stated explicitly to Pilate that if His Kingdom had been of this world then His followers would have fought for it but it wasn?t.
Joh 18:36 ESV Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. BUT MY KINGDOM IS NOT FROM THE WORLD.”
The New Jerusalem is from above which means it is a spiritual realm. The true children of Abraham were not the natural but the Spiritual (Rom 9:7-8). The New Heavens and Earth don?t have a ?Sea? because God dwells with all. The Sea represented the Gentiles division and is no more.
Rev 21:1-2 ESV Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and THE SEA WAS NO MORE. (2) And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.
What we often have in Christianity today is hybridization or mixture of Old Covenant physical Judaism and the New Covenant being meshed together ending up with a distortion of the true reality.
The apostate Jews were judged and condemned in the destruction of their Temple, Priesthood and sacrificial system which was the sign from Christ of their being removed from the Covenant people. They exist no more in the New Covenant. (Dan 12:7)
Ezekiel states that the Land would become like the Garden of Eden at the time of Christ the Messiah. This is all metaphorical language which permeates the entire Bible.
Eze 36:26-35 And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. ? On the day that I cleanse you from all your iniquities ? THE LAND THAT WAS DESOLATE SHALL BE TILLED, instead of being the desolation that it was in the sight of all who passed by. (35) And they will say, ‘THIS LAND THAT WAS DESOLATE HAS BECOME LIKE THE GARDEN OF EDEN,
Most all our problems in Christianity today results from not understanding the metaphorical Hebrew language and misapplying it. It is one of the tragedies of our times especially with the ability to study these matters easily and deeply. However it is near impossible for a Dispensationalist to come to grips with these revelations because it destroys their paradigm that has been cons

Derek,
I never said the Palestinians were innocent but I suppose, in light of your comment, that I don’t have the moral authority to judge the Palestinians until it is my children being blown up by Israeli bombs?
Any ways…I guess Markus Barth won’t be defending justification by faith alone anytime soon, since God’s work in Jesus Christ is not all sufficient?
Grace and peace,
Rex

Norm #24:
If your statement goes unchallenged on this blog full of theologically astute people, then my sadness will only grow deeper. Do you realize what you are saying and how words like yours have been used historically? What will you say to your Jewish Messiah when he comes? And how will you answer for Romans 11:2?
What you espouse is a kind of gnosticism, anti-materialism, and Marcionitism in a slightly altered form. The Hebrew Bible is inferior and physical and must be allegorized to be acceptable to our now superior (sic) spiritual perception.
This is not the Jesus of the gospels. This is not the religion of the Bible. Your vision of the world to come as non-material is not related to the Bible. You are deceived.
Derek Leman

I’ll comment on the social aspect of this belief. I think it is an example of the easy countenance of political philosophy in ideology. Many Christians support Israel’s right to exist, and see the Palestinian side as the greatest threat to that right.
This is my position as well. However, this view also coalesces with an eschatology that literally sees Israel as the land of God’s providence. The brain tends to make connections that aren’t there and, absent serious study, there is nothing to dissuade the average dispy from the conviction that what is happening in Israel represents a sort of apocalyptic endgame. After all, this can’t just all be a coincidence, can it?
It isn’t, of course, as anyone who understands Israel’s recent history will attest. The placement of Jews in Israel was an intentional act of restoration, or of passing the buck (depending on your worldview).
I think many Christians think the Jews somehow randomly found their way back to Israel, rather than seeing it as an intentional migration in the middle part of the 20th century. As such, God must have ordained it without their knowledge.
It is difficult to observe the trajectory of Jewish suffering throughout the last century without assigning some theological significance to it. It is also difficult to ignore the fact that Israel is arguably the only nation expected to make concessions to an amorphous nation-state that it has already defeated in war, and could easily defeat again. Why is anti-Semitism so consistent and so pervasive?
Of course, there are those who HAVE studied the issue (like Derek above) and have come to similar conclusions to those who perhaps lack the grounding to match their convictions.

Rex #25:
Are you sure you know what “justification by faith alone” means? It means faith in the God of Israel and his Messiah, the Son of David. It doesn’t mean faith in faith. And Markus Barth is a precursor to the New Perspective on Paul, and his idea of justification is likely different than yours, but not as different as you might imagine. I highly commend N.T. Wright’s book Justification.
No matter how you slice it, there was a problem with your one-sided judgment against the Israelis. And real moral judgments require first standing in someone’s shoes. A people attacked need to defend themselves, save lives, and be just. Of course no human government or military will do this without tragedy and evil ensuing. But it is easy to take pot-shots at the Israelis when you live without fear in a comfortable place and when your criticisms have no consequences for you. Notice I have not made a judgmental statement about Israel or the Palestinians. I have merely called your judgment naive.
Derek Leman

Derek,
You know not what you?re talking about and a denial of the Spiritual establishment of the Kingdom goes against the Old and New Testament clearly teaching otherwise concerning the coming Spiritual Age. Throwing out language like Gnostic is an ad hominem approach that masks an anti Gospel theology. Christ died for nothing if we are still under a physical covenant of Judaism.
You need to apply the rest of Romans 11 and the contextual realities that the apostate Jews faced that through their unbelief they were being cut off unless they revoked their unbelief.
Rom 11:17-23 ESV But if SOME OF THE BRANCHES WERE BROKEN OFF, ? (19) Then you will say, “BRANCHES WERE BROKEN OFF SO THAT I MIGHT BE GRAFTED IN.” (20) That is true. THEY WERE BROKEN OFF BECAUSE OF THEIR UNBELIEF, but you stand fast through faith. So do not become proud, but fear. (21) For if GOD DID NOT SPARE THE NATURAL BRANCHES, neither will he spare you. ? provided you continue in his kindness. Otherwise you too will be cut off. (23) And even they, IF THEY DO NOT CONTINUE IN THEIR UNBELIEF, WILL BE GRAFTED IN,
Rom 9:7-8 ESV and NOT ALL ARE CHILDREN OF ABRAHAM BECAUSE THEY ARE HIS OFFSPRING, but “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” (8) This means that it is not THE CHILDREN OF THE FLESH WHO ARE THE CHILDREN OF GOD, but THE CHILDREN OF THE PROMISE ARE COUNTED AS OFFSPRING.
Rom 8:8-9 ESV THOSE WHO ARE IN THE FLESH CANNOT PLEASE GOD. (9) You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. ANYONE WHO DOES NOT HAVE THE SPIRIT OF CHRIST DOES NOT BELONG TO HIM.
2Co 3:17-18 ESV Now THE LORD IS THE SPIRIT, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. (18) And WE ALL, WITH UNVEILED FACE, ? ARE BEING TRANSFORMED INTO THE SAME IMAGE from one degree of glory to another. For this comes from the LORD WHO IS THE SPIRIT.
2Co 3:6 ESV who has made us competent TO BE MINISTERS OF A NEW COVENANT, not of the letter BUT OF THE SPIRIT. For the letter kills, but THE SPIRIT GIVES LIFE.

Everyone:
Hmm, Norm #29 keeps calling us the Apostate Jews and putting verses in bold. His language could be evidence of some extreme views (dare I speculate that he is an anti-Semite?). After all, us Jews are all Apostates to him and, either in spite of Romans 11:2 or in ignorance of it (though I have pointed it out to him), he continues to assert that Israel is no longer chosen.
He also seems to think that Spirit means “non-material,” and cites quite a few verses about God’s Holy Spirit as if we should read it as evidence that the world to come and the present kingdom is non-material.
But the Spirit indwells people, buildings, and places. There is no dichotomy.
Derek Leman

Derek, you keep invoking the Hebrew scriptures. But the Hebrew Bible has its fulfillment in Christ and the New Covenant people of God. The chosen people of the New Covenant are the people of faith, regardless of physical ancestry. According to Romans 9-11 the hope remains for those physically descended from Israel (who remain beloved due to the patriarchs) to reenter the fold by faith. But the New Testament is emphatic about leaving the nationalistic expectations about natural Israel in the past and finding their higher and fuller fulfillment in Jesus and in the Jews and Gentiles who constitute believing Israel. And if you read the Hebrew scriptures in the light of the apostolic teaching, you will find that the Hebrew scriptures teach the same thing. Sorry to say this so bluntly, as it is going to sound harsh. But eschatological theories that rip Old Testament passages from their original context, as you have done, do violence to the precious Hebrew scriptures and result in outlandish endtimes scenerios that bear no resemblence to apostolic teachings.

Derek #28,
I have read N.T. Wright’s “Justification”. I understand fully that Jesus as Messiah represents Israel and that the fulfillment of the Abrahamic Covenant comes through Israel represented by God’s Messiah. Does that mean the object of our faith must be both God in Christ and Israel?
Any ways, if you read my comment #22 carefully, my judgment was not one-sided. I spoke of the blame that Israel equally shares which implies that the Palestinians equally share in the blame for the problesm as well. Further, my comments were directed not so much at Israel but at Christians who have neither stood in the shoes of the nation of Israel nor the Palestinians but have seemed to cast their judgment solely upon the Palestinians.
I don’t know what the “political” solution is to bring about peace in the Middle-East. In some ways it seems like to boys continuously fighting in the school-yard…at some point it no longer matters who started what, both parties are responsible and share in the blame for the problem. With that being said, as a Christian who thinks more along the lines of the Anabaptist tradition, I don’t think their is a “political” solution to the problem. Instead, I believe the radical ethics which Jesus taught in his “Sermon on the Mount” is only practical solution that has hope. It may sound simplistic to believe in that while living in the US where I fortunately have not had to face roadside bombs, suicide bombers, etc… trying to kill me but I have faced other challenges that have tested my ethical convictions (unfortunately with mixed results…the war between the flesh and the Spirit wages on).
Well, that is enough said. Blessings to you as you serve Jesus.
Grace and peace,
Rex

Derek #28,
I have read N.T. Wright’s “Justification”. I understand fully that Jesus as Messiah represents Israel and that the fulfillment of the Abrahamic Covenant comes through Israel represented by God’s Messiah. Does that mean the object of our faith must be both God in Christ and Israel?
Any ways, if you read my comment #22 carefully, my judgment was not one-sided. I spoke of the blame that Israel equally shares which implies that the Palestinians equally share in the blame for the problesm as well. Further, my comments were directed not so much at Israel but at Christians who have neither stood in the shoes of the nation of Israel nor the Palestinians but have seemed to cast their judgment solely upon the Palestinians.
I don’t know what the “political” solution is to bring about peace in the Middle-East. In some ways it seems like to boys continuously fighting in the school-yard…at some point it no longer matters who started what, both parties are responsible and share in the blame for the problem. With that being said, as a Christian who thinks more along the lines of the Anabaptist tradition, I don’t think their is a “political” solution to the problem. Instead, I believe the radical ethics which Jesus taught in his “Sermon on the Mount” is only practical solution that has hope. It may sound simplistic to believe in that while living in the US where I fortunately have not had to face roadside bombs, suicide bombers, etc… trying to kill me but I have faced other challenges that have tested my ethical convictions (unfortunately with mixed results…the war between the flesh and the Spirit wages on).
Well, that is enough said. Blessings to you as you serve Jesus.
Grace and peace,
Rex

Dave Leigh #31:
You suggest that the New Testament approach is to subsume and render obsolete what has come before. That is simply a hermeneutical assumption you are making.
You further assume that I do not have a well-thought-out theology of the Hebrew prophets to back up what I am saying.
If you are interested, I have a theology of restoration and world to come from the prophets in my book The World to Come (on amazon) and I will in August release a book on the identity, aims, and message of Jesus in his Jewish context (Yeshua in Context). These are not matters I comment on lightly. I have done my homework (I am not assuming that you have not done your homework — do tell of research and work you have done in these areas).
Derek Leman

Derek,
I?m sorry but I didn?t realize you were a Jew. I don?t think we are going to be able to have much of any common dialogue because of my faith in the fulfillment of Israel from an Old Kingdom of physical works to a spiritual Kingdom. I assume that you do not accept the NT scriptures as they were intended. I?m not inclined to continue arguing with you as it would not prove fruitful.
However your anti Semitic accusations toward me are woefully pathetic and is another reason dialogue with you is to be avoided. I won?t even pursue your other nonsensical derisions.

Derek,
Thanks for speaking up on behalf of us who see Torah- and Israel-life compatible with Messiah faith. I, too, am saddened to see the anti-Israel and replacement theology rhetoric in these comments. I thought greater Christianity was moving past this.

It is unfair to suggest that (all) replacement theology is “anti-Israel.”

Matt #37:
I think it should be pointed out that Judah did not say ‘(all) replacement theology is “anti-Israel.”‘
But I would say that all replacement theology / supersessionism is, in the end, anti-Israel.
And not only have I said it, a number of post-Holocaust Christian theologians have said it, not least R. Kendall Soulen in The God of Israel and Christian Theology.
Supersessionism has a way of working out from the ivory tower and into actions that target Jews. This is the reality of history. And we are naive if we think humanity is now too advanced for another sort of Nazi terror to be possible. Humanity is not one iota more righteous since WWII.
Derek Leman

Derek #34
Thanks Derek. I’m familiar with your credentials and your work. I have no interest in entering a dual of resum?s with you, as this kind of argument is ad hominem.
I think there are some heavey-weight scholars you do need to spar with, however, and Burge is certainly one of them. McKnight another.
As a Christian who has a rich Jewish heritage myself, I have enjoyed and appreciated many of the corrective roles you’ve played in Messianic Judaism. So it is difficult to tell that that on the issues related to eschatology and the land, yes, I do think you “do not have a well-thought-out theology.”
But what I think or who I am is beside the point. In this thread Burge and McKnight are the ones you must answer, and it is your hermenuetical assumptions that are in question.

38. Derek said: I think it should be pointed out that Judah did not say ‘(all) replacement theology is “anti-Israel.”‘
But I would say that all replacement theology / supersessionism is, in the end, anti-Israel.
Well, if, as you say, replacement theology is, in the end, anti-Israel, then isn’t there something to my observation that some are suggesting replacement theology = anti-Israel?
But this is not fair (and inaccurate), and it is a roundabout way of saying that unless you agree with holy land theology you are anti-Semitic. I have not heard anyone say this outright, but I frequently hear people say things that come pretty close to it.

Dave Leigh #39:
Well said and fair enough.
Scot has been silent in the comments. I rather think that he may side with Burge in part, but not in full. But I may be wrong. I know that in conversations Scot and I have had, he is much more “kosher” on the Israel question than a lot of theologians.
Derek Leman

@norm
I am not Jewish, but you would do well to exercise caution when invoking passages regarding transplanted branches as they apply to the “apostate Jews”. These verses are used to declare the Jews are eternally separated for God, and have fueled a great deal of anti-Semitism throughout history.
That does not make it wrong to cite those passages, nor is it wrong to make your argument in this context.

Matt #40:
There is a great deal of room in a non-supersessionist theology for seeking justice and a righteous and humane solution to the dispute over the land of Israel.
Please don’t assume that the most unbalanced Zionists you have heard represent the views of Jewish people, Israelis, Messianic Jews, etc. Most Israelis I know are wanting to deal and heal, not fight and maim.
It does not follow that the only way to believe in a just Middle East is to assume that the church has replaced Israel or that Israel is a footnote in the canonical narrative. Israel’s irrevocable, carnal election is a foundational doctrine of the Hebrew Bible and New Testament.
So why am I angered by Burge’s view? Because (1) to say that the land is now Christ is to say that in Christ the promises of God are no and too bad and (2) the assumption that unless the NT spells out a theology of the land, Christians should abandon the historic covenants between Israel and God is a poor view of the Bible and a tragic recapitulation of historic Christian triumphalism.
Derek Leman

Norm #35:
In other words, it is okay to describe Jews on the whole as apostate if only Christians are in the room, but if a Jew shows up you should apologize? It doesn’t matter if I am a Jew or not. What matters is that your view of Jewish people is revealed by your describing us as apostate Jews.
I didn’t have enough evidence to say that you are anti-Semitic on the whole. I know that people make statements without properly thinking much of the time.
But if your view of Jewish people is that we are condemned apostates, then that is classical anti-Semitism and has played itself over and over in church history. But don’t believe me. Inquire of any professor of church history at any university or seminary.
Derek Leman

Greetings,
I followed the link from Derek’s blog and wanted to comment.
Paul tells gentiles not to be arrogant least they be broken off. This seems like good advice to those wanting to treat Israel and the Jewish people as apostates. G-d’s election of Israel is eternal, Sinai was a wedding where He took Israel to be His bride. The Tanakh (Old Testament) repeatedly promises the Land to Abraham and His decedents as a never ending covenant. Being part of the Jewish Community (and believing Yeshua is the Messiah) one can see many devote Jews who love G-d with their enter heart, soul and strength.
If this is so, then the Physical land is promised to Israel and no matter what is said it does not alter the fact. If Rev is to be taken at face value, Israel will be in the Land. If not: what city is divided, what Temple is defiled.
To think that G-d somehow decided to throw 3/4′s of His word away and replace it with Paul’s letters which then supersede the other Emissaries is at best naive and more likely a flawed view on scripture.
Shalom (Peace) – RGBG

Kevin #42
I have no problem with being sensitive with our Jewish friends or our Islamist friends but when discussing NT applied theology I?m not in it to soothe people?s feelings but to try and discern the truth of the Gospel message. I hate to be blunt but the NT scriptures speak of a Covenant people which infer those who seek God through His redeemed truth. Now if we want to start appropriating a Universalist approach to God?s Covenant people then I simply need to be shown how that is the truth of scripture. This idea of classifying anti Semitism to those who aren?t Universalist inclined seems a bit intimidating to serious discussion of the nature of scriptures. If this site is not equipped to be that forth right then someone needs to post the rules a little more plainly.
I?m seeing more philosophy discussed here than serious theology and that is alright if this is the sites purpose.

Norm #46:
I can understand why you got the idea that I am a universalist. I am not. I did not mean that it is anti-Semitic to believe that Jewish people need Jesus. I believe Jewish people need Jesus.
I’m not commenting on final destinies. I’m not saying who is going to an afterlife of judgment and who is going to an afterlife of reward. That is not my point either. But if you suspected that Jewish people without faith in Jesus were sadly destined for judgment in the world to come, I would not call that anti-Semitic.
The problem with a lot of theology is that the categories have been to simple, too black and white. Is the afterlife the only point of the gospel or of God’s election? I don’t think so.
What I said was anti-Semitic is the idea that the Jewish people are no longer elect and stand as a condemned people with all the promises cut off.
But you will need to somehow integrate into your theology Romans 11:2 and 25-29.
Derek Leman

Derek,
I would like to know what you believe Israel was elected *for*.
Thank you.
Dana

To say that the covenant God made with the Jews has been replaced by a new covenant is to say God failed. God intended the salvation of the world through the Jews but could not bring about his purposes. I don?t buy supercessionism.
And yet, Jesus life, teaching, death, and resurrection was simultaneously continuous and discontinuous with what Second Temple Jews anticipated. I?ve heard some suggest the New Testament is in some ways a midrash on the covenant in light of the encounter with Jesus and the resulting discontinuities. The New Testament community saw Jesus as an extension and fulfillment of the covenant, not a disjuncture from it.
My reading is that one of the key points of disjuncture is with regard to the temple and the land. Rather than the restoration of a physical temple, the temple is a building of living stones. (1 Cor 3:16-17, Eph 2:21) And rather than a physical temple built in a ?holy land,? all the earth is the holy land and we are God?s temple upon it. And that I believe explains why no mention of the land in the N.T that we would certainly expect to be there if Second Temple Judaism understanding was completely embrace. No more holy lands. No more holy buildings. All is God’s and all is holy.
Brent Sandy wrote a great book called, ?Plowshares and Pruning Hooks: Rethinking the Language of Biblical Prophecy and Apocalyptic.? He writes the prophecy was primarily about prosecution, persuasion, and prediction ? in that order. Prophecy usually makes extensive use of metaphor, poetry, and hyperbolic apocalypsim. It is used not only to convey information but to motivate at a visceral level. That means prophecy is frequently suggestive not precise. It gives a sense of where God is leading not and an HD video.
I?d also add that reading Scripture is much like reading a good novel. You don?t appreciate what all the pieces mean until you get to the end. If you reread the novel you will begin to see things you missed and reinterpret other things because you now know how the story ends. Similarly, you can?t understand Jesus and the New Testament without understanding the Hebrew Testament because the New Testament church was clearly embedded in the Jewish context, not a response against or departure from it. But we also can?t read the Old Testament without the New Testament because it gives critical pieces from the end of the Scriptural story that reinterprets what came before. The two testaments are inextricably connected.

Dana #48:
Israel was elected for:
(1) a covenant of blessing, to be blessed and to be a vessel of blessing for all people
(2) a relationship with God, which is a present reality and not simply about afterlife
(3) a people of revelation, to receive the self-revelation of God and pass it on
(4) an irrevocable promise of ultimate restoration and glorification (circumcised hearts in the age to come)
(5) a peoplehood and a land (Gen 12:1-3)
(6) blessing for faithfulness and curse for unfaithfulness (corporate, not individual).
I may have left some aspect out. I wrote this off the top of my head.
Derek Leman

Michael Kruse #49:
Your theology here has much to commend it. I do not agree, but you are nuancing it well. You’ve definitely thought this through.
If you would agree with me that Jesus understood the eschaton (which is a debatable point, I know), then his view of the Temple and land should be considered. He called the Temple, “My Father’s house,” and fought for its sanctity, not its demise. He spoke of the elect being gathered from the four winds in the Olivet discourse. That is restoration of Israel language, evoking the New Exodus. I would argue that this saying is in the context of Jesus’ time and should not be read as an invention of the later church. Therefore, it should be read in its Jewish sense and not as a reference to the Christian idea of the rapture.
Derek Leman

1. Let’s all agree not to break Godwin’s Law here, ok?
2. I’m not sure I fully agree with Derek regarding the land, the modern state of Israel, and how to appropriately weigh the authority of the Hebrew Scriptures & the New Testament, but I certainly disagree with Norm about the Jewish people. Read some history. I’m not sure that every kind of supercessionism automatically equals anti-Semitism, but I know what that kind has meant for Jewish folks for centuries.

Derek,
Thanks for the measured response. By the way I?m quite familiar with the Paul?s theology that we find in Rom 9-11 and I expected you to have already brought up ?all Israel? will be saved. The statement of ?all Israel? is going to contradict many other statements within 9-11 if it isn?t taken in the complete context of Paul?s explanations. Paul is referencing Hosea 1 & 2 concerning the bringing back into the fold of his people the scattered tribes of all Israel. All Israel in this context is referring to the redemption of these scattered people of Israel but only the remnant faithful.
Rom 9:27 ESV And Isaiah cries out concerning Israel: “Though the number of the sons of Israel be as the sand of the sea, ONLY A REMNANT OF THEM WILL BE SAVED,
Rom 11:5-8 ESV So too at the present time THERE IS A REMNANT, CHOSEN BY GRACE. (6) But if it is by grace, it is NO LONGER ON THE BASIS OF WORKS; otherwise grace would no longer be grace. (7) What then? Israel failed to obtain what it was seeking. THE ELECT OBTAINED IT, but the rest were hardened,
Also the context of the times has to be kept in focus here in Romans. Paul?s tension of saving can often be understood in the context of the coming calamity of the Jewish Temple worship system as found in Jerusalem. There is an understanding that this is to be considered a Judgment against the Jews who never come into the Messianic fold when this occurs. The saving would be God?s providential protection for those who believed and take Christ at his word and who flee to the mountains when they see the Roman Armies advancing. Therefore these verses are speaking more to contemporary times and events than they are about projecting a future scenario that might happen thousands of years in the future. Context is critical.
Mat 24:1-2 ESV Jesus left the temple and was going away, when his disciples came to point out to him the buildings of the temple. (2) But he answered them, “You see all these, do you not? Truly, I say to you, there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.”
Mat 24:15-16 ESV “So when you see the abomination of desolation spoken of by the prophet Daniel, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand), (16) then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.

Just to apply a little understanding to whom Israel is. Think of Israel as the Old Covenant church in which the faithful attempted righteousness through their own works effort. In Christ this works mode of existence is being replaced due to Christ Death and resurrection. Christ died doing what the first Adam could not and became the successful sacrificial Lamb and therefore became the New second Adam (1 Cor 15:45). Christ as the New Adam of Israel brings the Covenant people Israel into the New Covenant and with them the Gentiles are grafted in to form one new Body out of two (the Body of Christ).
Eph 2:13-15 ESV But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. (14) For he himself is our peace, WHO HAS MADE US BOTH ONE and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility (15) by ABOLISHING THE LAW OF COMMANDMENTS expressed in ordinances, that he might CREATE IN HIMSELF ONE NEW MAN IN PLACE OF THE TWO, so making peace,
This New Body under the Headship of Christ is called the Body of Christ (the new church) in lieu of the previous Body of sin and death (the old church) under old Adam. This corporate understanding of Israel as a transformed Body becoming new is critical to understand the meaning of much of what is occurring. Israel is still in existence under the Banner of Jesus Christ and the doors are wide open.
Php 3:21 YLT who shall transform THE BODY OF OUR HUMILIATION to its becoming conformed to THE BODY OF HIS GLORY ?
1Co 12:12 YLT For, even as THE BODY IS ONE, and hath many members, and all the members of the ONE BODY, being many, ARE ONE BODY, so also is the Christ,

Joshua 21:43-45 (English Standard Version)
43(A) Thus the LORD gave to Israel all the land that he swore to give to their fathers. And they took possession of it, and they settled there. 44(B) And the LORD gave them rest on every side just as he had sworn to their fathers.(C) Not one of all their enemies had withstood them, for(D) the LORD had given all their enemies into their hands. 45(E) Not one word of all the good promises that the LORD had made to the house of Israel had failed; all came to pass.
God’s promise was fulfilled a long time ago…
There is no mention of Galatians in any of these comments, either, which I thought was strange.
Israel will be saved in Romans 11 because God promised Abraham in Genesis 12 (further fleshed out in Galatians 3, specifically vs.7-14
And look at vs.15-16: 15(A) To give a human example, brothers:[a](B) even with a man-made covenant, no one annuls it or adds to it once it has been ratified. 16Now(C) the promises were made(D) to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, “And to offsprings,” referring to many, but referring to one,(E) “And to your offspring,” who is Christ.
The Seed of Abraham, the wild olive branch grafted in, talk about one community of believers in Christ.

Ok, thanks, Derek.
I’ve lately been made aware of the parallels between the Adam narrative and the Abraham narrative. Would it be fair to say that Adam -as a distinct person and also as a type of Humanity in general (not the “federal head”!)- was elected for all those things? And then I would say, because he/we turned away from a love relationship with God we severed ourselves from that life of blessing- went into the exile of death. However, God kept his covenant with humanity and started again, with Abraham, whose heart God saw. When Abraham’s descendants over time broke every one of the Ten Words, exile happened again. Jesus was the antitype/fullness of both Adam the Human and David the Israelite (priest of and king over creation), through whom God is restoring the Temple/Gan Eden- God’s good creation as humans experience it, including the whole world, not only Eretz Israel.
I think it’s interesting that what came to the top of your head did not include “for a human family for the Incarnation of Messiah God into the universe.”
I resonate with Michael Kruse’s thoughts, that God didn’t fail. For myself, I see God inviting all ethnic groups to enter into the community of the true Priest/King, Jesus, who came through the people of Israel- which in my mind’s eye I see as something like the joining of the Missouri river to the Mississippi. The channel/course of the MI hasn’t changed; it’s just that the MO is no longer dammed (no pun intended but I like it). The MI river course “hosts” the waters that flow into it. Yet, the river does becomes changed- it is augmented and doesn’t disappear. I don’t mean to say that all distinctions between groups should be obliterated; all analogies fail at some point, of course.
But as for Rom 11, I believe vs 2 is true: God does not reject Israel. God invites anyone, Jew or Gentile, to be part of the Renewed Humanity, which began with Jesus, the faithful Israelite/Human, and his first Jewish followers- the point of entry for the MO. If some Jewish people want to be a national entity in that particular place, let that be worked out, and let them be safe. I don’t believe Israel or any other ethnic people should be obliterated. Israel is still beloved, 29ff. Yet God did not choose her because she was the most powerful or numerous, but in order to keep his own covenant and bring her/us out of the slavery of sin/death, Deut 7.7ff – ultimately, to keep his covenant with all humanity because he is faithful in his love. And God has mercy on all, and brings us out of the exile of death and back into a relationship of love and life through his Messiah- (who is one of the Holy Trinity, one in essence and undivided. Sometimes in these discussions we forget the Trinity).
I’ve been influenced a lot by Wright, who believed St Paul was urging the Roman Gentile Christians not to look down on and exclude the Roman Jewish Christians, and by some of the work of J. Sailhamer. Wright emphatically denies he is a supercessionist.
I may be wrong, but this is how I see it.
Shalom-
Dana

I’m not a theologian, a philosopher, or a Jew. I do have an interest in the Bible and Christianity as a Christian.
I dealt with a somewhat similar topic on my blog recently (url above if anyone is interested).
I base Biblical interpretation on what Tim LaHaye once wrote. Namely that Bible prophecy is normally straight forward. If it says something, you can assume that it is literal unless it provides an explanation.
To that end, I am one who believes that when the Bible speaks of a restoration of Israel, it literally means a return to the land. I can see how people might have believed it to be symbolic a hundred or a thousand years ago when it seemed impossible that Israel would ever be restored as a nation, but people, we have seen it with our own eyes!
My blog was inspired by an online argument with a person who followed Sheldon Emry’s beliefs that America was the New Israel and that the Israelis are not Jews, but Khazarians. If you havn’t heard of this, don’t waste brain cells looking into it. There is no evidence for it and much to the contrary.
My own pastor also recommended a couple of podcasts from Denton Bible Church regarding Israel. These are available on iTunes.
Shalom and God bless.

I would add that if God can run out of patience and reject Israel, then we should all be worried. Instead look at it as a picture of God’s supernatural patience and forgiveness. He used the falling away of Israel to bring the Gospel to the gentiles and will one day redeem Israel.

Dana Ames #56:
You definitely are right I should have included in my list: Israel is elect as the people through whom God is incarnated, ultimately in the divine Messiah.
I would suggest to you that there is no reason to believe that renewed humanity does not exist before Jesus’ death. The cross works backwards and God was renewing humanity even before Messiah came.
I would suggest that God’s call to the nations for blessing through the seed of Abraham did not start with Jesus either. God was working with people from the nations from the get-go.
I would also suggest that your definitions of “God did not reject Israel” is too weak. You say that not rejecting Israel means all people are now without distinction in the election of God and God invites Jewish people to faith just as Gentile people. This does not do justice at all to Romans 11 which suggests that Israel’s election continues in every way. Israel is the holy lump which makes the rest of the dough holy. Israel is the root of the tree.
The righteous of the nations have an equal blessing in God’s economy, but Israel is always the older sibling of the family, as it were.
Derek Leman

Hi Derek,
“physical people of Israel”, “physical descendants of Abraham”.
does it include those made Jewish by the macabies? does it include chozaria? does it include all the people (and there were many) that became Jewsih not by being physically realted to Abraham but by “gior”? what about people who converted to Judaism (esther 8:17) ?do you really think that the Jews in Yaman and in Moroco and in ethiopia are physical sons of Abraham?
what about Isaiah 56:3-8 (how was it interpreted before Jesus came)? I object to the way you speak of Jewish Identity.
did Paul in romans 11 meant only the pure physical Israel? no Ethiopian Jewish included? none of those whom we are told about in esther?
I`m an Arab, Do you think I can buy all the “son of Ishmael” nonsense?
Moreover I think that Brueggemann is right when he says “the Hebrew bible is polyphonic” and so is the NT.
It is not as simple as you show it to be. in “meah sheareem” in Jerusalem alot of orthodox Jews say the existence of the state of Israel is against God`s will. I don`t want to be like those in “meah shearim” or like “natori karta” another orthodox (at least in their view) jewish sect that burns flags of Israel. and I don`t have my own opinion on what are the plans of God for modern state israel but I thibk that the narrative you are promoting is (to say the least) a flawed one.

#55 Rich Goulette:
If you will examine some good commentary material on Joshua and Judges, you will find there is a tension between God fulfilling the promises to Israel in that era and Israel not completing the task.
Further, many use this verse from Joshua as a proof text that God has already given Israel all that was promised. Then why do the Israelite prophets continue talk of land and restoration? And why does Jesus speak of the elect being gathered from the four winds?
Proof texts are not worth much as a theological tool.
Derek Leman

David,
God didn’t reject Israel but some of them rejected Him via His Son. The failure was not with God as He delivered on all His promises.
I have a question for you David. In Hosea the message concerns Israel and Judah and the statement is made that in the future there will be a covenant made with them and the animals. It states that they will lie down in Safety.
Hos 2:18 ESV And I WILL MAKE FOR THEM A COVENANT on that day with THE BEASTS of the field, THE BIRDS of the heavens, and THE CREEPING THINGS of the ground. And I will abolish the bow, the sword, and war from the land, and I WILL MAKE YOU LIE DOWN IN SAFETY.
It also says in Isaiah 11 that at the time that the Root of Jesse comes that these wild and domestic animals will also be lying down together. My question to you: are these scriptures talking about literal animals joining into Covenant with Israel or are they perhaps speaking of Gentile peoples as the Wild animals that will rest in the New Land with the Remnant Jews Gods domestic people?
Isa 11:1 ESV There shall come FORTH A SHOOT FROM THE STUMP OF JESSE, and a branch from his roots shall bear fruit.
6-11 ESV THE WOLF SHALL DWELL WITH THE LAMB, and THE LEOPARD SHALL LIE DOWN WITH THE YOUNG GOAT, and THE CALF AND THE LION and the fattened calf together; and a little child shall lead them. (7) THE COW AND THE BEAR shall graze; their young SHALL LIE DOWN TOGETHER; and the lion shall eat straw like the ox. ? IN THAT DAY THE ROOT OF JESSE, ? the Lord will extend his hand yet a second time TO RECOVER THE REMNANT THAT REMAINS of his people, ?
Now if we read these things literally we seem to have all sorts of problems because the Root of Jesse has already come and established the Gentiles and Jews but I don?t find anywhere that these animals were brought into Covenant with Israel. Well perhaps the animals of Peters vision signifying the inclusion of the Gentiles might fit in there somehow. How do you think LaHaye would characterize this language? Literal or symbolic?

Elias #60:
Just to make sure I am not heard wrong:
–If you have been subjected to bad religious rhetoric about the sons of Ishmael, I am sorry you had to endure that and I have not been about that at all.
–I have not said anything anti-Arab and I don’t think you were accusing me, but I want to be clear.
Now, to address what you said:
–If God chose carnal election (election by physical descent), then he did. If he did not, then please explain you theology of Genesis, if not the rest of the Bible, including the genealogies of Jesus.
–If you say, “God’s election can’t be carnal because physical descent gets mixed up and confused over time,” then all you are doing ultimately is criticizing God. Maybe, I hope I’m not out on a limb here, God is far more intelligent than all of us and has no problem with the dilemma.
–The boundaries of Israel have always been semi-permeable.
–As a Middle Easterner (not sure if you were born there or here, but point is the same), you are also among the few nations selected by God for special promises (many promises to descendants of Assyrians, Elamites-Persians, Egyptians, Babylonians) of blessing in the last days.
I do hope there is no enmity between simply because I advocate for my people just as you advocate for yours.
Derek Leman

Norm #62:
The theology you expressed about Israel as the church in the Old Testament and having failed by trying to earn merit with God has been thoroughly discredited. Even if you reject some of the ideas of the New Perspective on Paul, you should develop a more nuanced understanding of works than that. Judaism is not about merit-based acceptance any more than Christianity. I have a ton of scholars on my side with that assertion.
Meanwhile, you say some of Israel rejected God by rejecting Messiah. Actually, the far more common case in the last 2,000 years has been Jews told they have to decide between either God (Torah) or Jesus (the church says you must live like a Gentile to be a Christian). As Mark Kinzer has said in Postmissionary Messianic Judaism, Israel’s no to Jesus has often been a yes to God. Shame on the church for making Jewish people become Gentile in order to come to Jesus (reverse Galatianism).
I hope some of what I am saying is getting through to you and challenging you to study the issues more.
Derek Leman

Derek,
For some reason you assume that I haven?t studied these issues. That is not the case, I?ve studied them plenty and I recognize misapplications when I see them. I doubt seriously if you really have grasped what I?m speaking about concerning Israel as the church redeemed as I?ve got my share of scholars on my side as well. Is this a case of each one of us pulling out our big scholar guns to out duel the other?
By the way I?m not addressing the history outside of scriptures but am focusing purely upon NT and OT text to establish what was understood in those contemporary times. I am fully aware of the misdeeds and literal murdering that has gone on since in the name of Christianity to our shame. Also I?m not disavowing living with the freedom of traditions of various cultures as long as they do not become focuses of Idolatry to replace the Grace of Christ. That is another thread for a new day in itself.

Derek,
I can go with Israel being the older sibling. I do believe that the Lamb was slain from the foundation of the world, and that the cross “works backwards” and God was and still is at work among the nations. All is by and for and through Jesus the Anointed One. I also believe that the Incarnation/Cross/Resurrection (esp the latter) is the “flash point” from which that work extends backward, not that somehow Israel was ultimately fulfilling her call up until Jesus. It seems to me that scripture records that Israel fell short, because she was made up of humans who needed redemption just like everyone else.
I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree about Rom 11. I don’t believe Israel’s election continues “in every way”.
You are doing a manful job with the questions and concerns of this post. Thank you again.
Dana

Norm (62),
I obviously did overstate LaHaye’s position in my original post. Some parts of the Bible are symbolic. What I should have said that he wrote is that the symbolic parts are usually obviously so.
To me, the passage of Hosea 2:18 that you referenced is something that hasn’t happened yet. It seems to be akin to the lion laying down with the lamb (Isaiah 11:6, 65:25). I believe that this prophecy will likely be fulfilled on the Root of David’s second visit.
My question to you: Is there any scriptural indication that Hosea is NOT talking about literal animals?

Norm #65:
Sorry, but here is why I don’t think you have studied these issues thoroughly. You said, “Think of Israel as the Old Covenant church in which the faithful attempted righteousness through their own works effort. In Christ this works mode of existence is being replaced due to Christ Death and resurrection.”
Let me list the reasons this statement reflects a lack of depth:
(1) “the faithful attempted righteousness through their own works effort”: Can you demonstrate this in any meaningful study of Second Temple Judaism? First Temple Judaism? The Hebrew Bible? Qumran? The pseudepigraphic literature?
(2) “the faithful attempted righteousness through their own works effort”: Are you sure you didn’t get this from reading Reformation authors? Are you sure this is not in fact reaction to Pelagianism and medieval indulgences in either an Augustan or Lutheran context? Where in Judaism are you finding this to be a defining characteristic?
(3) “works effort”: Do you prefer this definition of Paul’s language about works over the more recent theories in New Perspective on Paul writers? If so, what are your reasons and how do you demonstrate that Paul understood Judaism in this way?
(4) “the faithful attempted . . . In Christ this mode of existence is being replaced”: Wait a minute, are you saying that before Messiah came, God’s economy actually was one of merit-based acceptance and that it only changed after Jesus came? Where do you find that? How does this work theologically without God being contingent and mutable?
So it seemed to me that you were saying things you had read in older sources and things you had not checked out thoroughly in terms of historical accuracy and theological consistency.
Derek Leman

Dana #66:
Let me say though, and you may agree with me, the statement “Israel fell short” is woefully lacking. Israel also succeeded. Just as the church has a history of mostly failure but also of amazing righteousness in certain places, times, and communities, so Israel should be judged to have had some amazing successes.
Every time I take out my Bible, I am amazed at the wonders of Israelite literature (humanly written and divinely inspired, to be sure, but the human authors were not robots being dictated to). The Israelite people produced the greatest wisdom, worship poetry, prophetic literature, gospels, epistles, and apocalypses the world has ever seen.
It would be good if people saw both sides instead of assuming (not saying you did) that Christendom is somehow good and the Jewish people somehow bad.
What would Jesus say about church history? About the state of the churches in our modern world? It might look like the indictments of the Hebrew Bible against Israel.
Derek Leman

Derek,
everyone falls short of the Human Life in union with God that God wants for us. Everyone needs redemption and healing. Whatever successes Israel or the Church have had have been because of the kindness and providence of God working in and with human choices. How, I’m not going to say I know; I do know God is not coercive and does not violate a person’s choice. For me, this is one of the big things that makes God truly great and truly good.
I do believe there is a clear and decisive break in history at the point of the Resurrection. From then on “the people of God” are those from every tribe, tongue and ethnic group who trust God and are baptized into Christ, Jews included. (I do not mean to put any kind of limits on God; God’s judgments are unfathomable, and he will save whom he will save, even among those who lived before the Resurrection, since God has always been at work in the world. I’m Eastern Orthodox, and that’s one reason I am: we don’t, unless we are foolish, say where the church is not, or that God *can’t* work in such and such a way.) There is now only one “people of God”, only one “New Humanity”. God has broken down the dividing wall between Jew and Gentile. Again, this is not to say that there are no distinctives among us, or that God now rejects the Jews. I simply think we have to be very careful about deciding what God’s promises to Israel are, and whether or not they have been fulfilled, and, if they have, how, and what the ramifications are. I believe that is what you’re trying to do within the scope and bounds of your conscience.
May the people of Israel be blessed, and may Jerusalem know peace.
Dana

Derek,
I have read what you have written, but I remain unconvinced about one thing especially, namely, that Israel was ever supposed to be about physical descent.
Also, if you are trying to convince people who do not already agree with you, you should take some of the ranting tone out of your responses. It would help your credibility.

Derek,
The faithful under the Old Covenant were held prisoner under the Law in which redemption would never be accomplished through their manifold works. I?ll provide you an assortment of scriptures to reinforce that Paul explicitly taught against works. He would not have been addressing this issue so diligently if it had been a negligible mirage and not a reality of the times. This is basically Grace 101 and I?m a little surprised that you are not grasping this understanding. You?re tossing around the various ancient thinkers and diverse applications which sounds high minded but are simply irrelevant and are empty proclamations with nothing of substance within. So in answer to your question: on where I develop these thoughts from I present to you the following word of God for your consideration. However this may be my last response to you as your getting way out in left field IMHO the further we go and I?ve expended more time than I should have already and we will have to engage again later perhaps.
Rom 3:20-21 For BY WORKS OF THE LAW NO HUMAN BEING WILL BE JUSTIFIED in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin. (21) But NOW THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD HAS BEEN MANIFESTED APART FROM THE LAW, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it–
Rom 3:27 Then what becomes of our boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? BY A LAW OF WORKS? No, but by the law of faith.
Rom 3:28 For we hold that one is justified by faith APART FROM WORKS of the law.
Rom 4:2 For IF ABRAHAM WAS JUSTIFIED BY WORKS, he has something to boast about, but not before God.
Rom 9:31) but that Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousness did not succeed in reaching that law. (32) WHY? Because they did not pursue it by faith, BUT AS IF IT WERE BASED ON WORKS.
Rom 11:6 But if it is by grace, IT IS NO LONGER ON THE BASIS OF WORKS; otherwise grace would no longer be grace.
Gal 2:16 yet we know that a person IS NOT JUSTIFIED BY WORKS OF THE LAW but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and NOT BY WORKS OF THE LAW, BECAUSE BY WORKS OF THE LAW NO ONE WILL BE JUSTIFIED.
Gal 3:10 For ALL WHO RELY ON WORKS OF THE LAW are under a curse; for it is written, “Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them.”
Eph 2:8-9 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, (9) NOT A RESULT OF WORKS, so that no one may boast.
2Ti 1:9 who saved us and called us to a holy calling, NOT BECAUSE OF OUR WORKS but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began,
Heb 9:14-15 how much more will the blood of Christ, ? purify our conscience FROM DEAD WORKS to serve the living God. (15) Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since A DEATH HAS OCCURRED THAT REDEEMS THEM FROM THE TRANSGRESSIONS COMMITTED UNDER THE FIRST COVENANT.
Rom 7:8-10 But sin, seizing an opportunity THROUGH THE COMMANDMENT, produced in me all kinds of covetousness. For apart from the law, sin lies dead. (9) I was once alive apart from the law, but WHEN THE COMMANDMENT CAME, SIN CAME ALIVE AND I DIED. (10) The very COMMANDMENT THAT PROMISED LIFE PROVED TO BE DEATH to me.

In Romans 11, when Paul affirms that God has not rejected Israel, he points to himself as the example. What does Paul exemplify? Certainly nothing having to do with nation, temple, or land.

derek,
there is no enmity. And I was born there and still living there. My problem with “Sons of Ishmael” is that it is historically wrong.
Again I`m disagreeing with you on your definition of who is a Jew. It is not as if the number of the converts to Judaism was neglible. what I`m saying that defining the Jews around ethnic lines (coming physically from the same father) doesn`t stand the test of historical facts. It is more complicated than that.
“-As a Middle Easterner (not sure if you were born there or here, but point is the same), you are also among the few nations selected by God for special promises (many promises to descendants of Assyrians, Elamites-Persians, Egyptians, Babylonians) of blessing in the last days.”
Do you really believe this? I can say that almost no one in the midle east can say that he knows his physical origins and can trace it back to these peoples. (except when they want to dominate other people and want devine legetimation e.g sadam husein, and if I say more it may get me in trouble )
Derek for me the only election or “selection for speacial promises” that I can indorse unconditionally is the one in the Crucified Messaiah.
I hope you will consider these things… as a brother, I speak to you, because the way we will tell our narative will affect the way we live in this area.
Anyway it was a very good conversation, and I like to say again, no enmity.
elias

Percival #71:
If Israel was “never” about physical descent, then please do explain how Israel was (and is) determined. It would be helpful if you gave a brief rationale for your answer also. And the view I have on this is not some private interpretation. It is common in theological explanations of election.
Derek Leman

Norm #72:
I asked you to define what “justified by works” means in Pauline writing and to give an answer that is based on historical context. WHat you did was quote some verses that use the word “works” and assume that “works” means what you think it means.
Have you read any New Perspective on Paul writings? If you pick just one, N.T. Wright’s Justification is a good bet.
Derek Leman

Elias #74:
How do you explain the promises God makes to various nations if you then say that o one can be from those nations today as intermarriage and migration have wiped out all such distinctions?
Was God mistaken?
God will bless whom he will bless and, in Messiah, he has blessed you and I richly, has he not? No problem if we never see eye to eye on this one. I guess we will look back on it in the age to come and be amazed at what God has done.
Derek Leman

Chaplain Mike #73:
Thank you for the work you do at internetmonk.
It seems you are implying that Paul’s definition of Israel in Romans 11 is those who have faith in Jesus. Yet he says in 11:28 that he is talking about those who are enemies of the gospel. And in 11:23 he says if they do not continue in their unbelief, they will be grafted back into their own olive tree.
It is rather difficult to say Paul means Jesus-believing Jews in Romans 11 when you consider these parameters.
If I have misunderstood you, please let me know.
Derek Leman

David #67
I think we all are aware of how LaHaye deals with scripture and I would state that because he often misapplies or ignores Hebrew symbolism he ends up with fanciful ideas.
Let?s look again at the covenant animals in question found in Hosea 2:18. This menagerie of animals is found often throughout scripture and Daniel may be the easiest to grasp their context. You might remember that in King Nebs dream Daniel identifies him as a Tree under which an assortment of animals finds their protection. These animals in OT scripture typically signify the Gentile peoples of a Kings dominion.
Dan 4:20-22 The tree you saw,? whose leaves were beautiful and its fruit abundant, and in which was food for all, under WHICH BEASTS OF THE FIELD FOUND SHADE, AND IN WHOSE BRANCHES THE BIRDS OF THE HEAVENS LIVED– (22) it is you, O king, ?
Besides Daniel, Ezekiel also declares that these Tree Nations found in the Garden of Eden also shelter this collection of animals.
Eze 31:3-6 Behold, Assyria was a cedar ? (5) So it towered high above all the trees of the field; ? (6) All THE BIRDS OF THE HEAVENS made their nests in its boughs; under its branches all THE BEASTS OF THE FIELD gave birth to their young, and UNDER ITS SHADOW LIVED ALL GREAT NATIONS.
Christ also uses the Tree metaphor to describe His coming and expanding Kingdom in Matt 13.
Mat 13:31-32 ? “The kingdom of heaven ? when it has grown it is larger than all the garden plants and BECOMES A TREE, so that THE BIRDS OF THE AIR COME AND MAKE NESTS IN ITS BRANCHES.”
So whenever you often see this usage of animals in OT Hebrew scripture you can expect that it is simply a Hebrew idiom symbolically illustrating Gentile peoples outside of the Jews themselves. We find these assorted animals used beginning in Genesis 1.
Gen 1:30 And to every BEAST OF THE EARTH AND TO EVERY BIRD OF THE HEAVENS AND TO EVERYTHING THAT CREEPS ON THE EARTH, everything that has the breath of life, I have given every green plant for food.” And it was so.
Gen 1 above is describing what Ezekiel says about the animal creatures as well when during the time of the Messiah the River of Life that previously had been four Rivers in Gen 2 becomes only the One River which of course is Jesus Christ.
Eze 47:7-9 As I went back, I saw on the bank of the river very many trees ? (9) And wherever the river goes, EVERY LIVING CREATURE THAT SWARMS WILL LIVE,
This is confirmed in Rev 22 concerning the river of life and the Tree healing the Nations again signifying the Gentiles would exist under the Eternal Tree of the Lamb.
Rev 22:1-2 Then the angel showed me the river of the water of life, bright as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb (2) through the middle of the street of the city; also, on either side of the river, THE TREE OF LIFE ? The leaves of the tree were for THE HEALING OF THE NATIONS.
So when Peter sees a vision of unclean animals (Acts 10) in relation to the Gentiles we are seeing the NT prophetic fulfillment of Hosea 2:18 in which the Jews are joined in Covenant with the Gentiles.
Yes we could read the language as literal about wild animals lying down with each other but it would be a distortion of the Hebrew theological concepts being put forth and have only fanciful understandings.

Derek # 76
I provided enough background that the concepts of justification by ?works of the Law? are self explanatory. Sorry if that isn?t enough for you and yes I?m familiar with the New Perspective on Paul having several of Wrights Paul?s works. Let me recommend another book to you also that you might find interesting by Tom Holland ?Contours of Pauline Theology? and can be downloaded in PDF format from Holland?s site if one wishes.
Have enjoyed the discussion
Blessings
Norm

Fundamentally, the idea that God selects certain nations is really nationalism, placing loyalty to country or ethnic group over loyalty to God.
And if you are going to be nationalistic about it, our reflexive loyalty to Israel is not good for our national security.
Right-wing Christian support based on biblical interpretation helped get us into Iraq and Afghanistan and it’s hard for me to see the holiness in that soldier- and civilian-killing quagmire.

Derek, (honest question)
You seem to have a blanket “okay” with the injustices commited by the Isreali govt./military….is this soley due to the fact they are Jewish, or because you do not care for how Palestine (more specifically Hamas and such) carry out war? Frankly, as a whole I don’t believe the Isreali govt or military is acting in a way commanded to them, and therefore I’m perfectly fine with not being okay with their tactics.
There are verse after verse which describe how one ought to treat their enemy, and revenge and “justice” and even “defense” is not in any that I am aware of. On the other hand, I also know that wars and terror are going to happen regardless….I’m just not certain we are okay with the injustices of one side because we are on their side….which is typical of what the U.S. govt. has done to (most recently) Iraq and Afghanistan in the name of Homeland Security and those Americans who are okay with what is being done.
I do not for one moment EVER believe you have to live in fear to sympathize those who do, or judge those who are causing fear. If at any moment we decide because we live in the safety of America that we don’t need to then we are guilty ourselves. I daily see victims from all over the world, and I don’t even fully understand the issues they come from, but regardless…I can not be happy with those inflicting the pain and terror and can have empathy for those who are being inflicted. I don’t care which side of the GAZA strip someone comes from….war is nasty, even if it’s defined in the book…it’s still nasty.

“You seem to have a blanket “okay” with the injustices commited by the Isreali govt./military….”
Wendeth-
did you bother reading all the comments??
Let’s start with #18, then go to #28 and then #43.

http://midrashetc.com/
Unless I?ve overlooked it, no one has discussed the following verses involving a NT interpretation of the OT, as well as the current situation of Jew and Gentile, from Romans 15?
7 Therefore, accept one another, just as Christ also accepted us to the glory of God.
8 For I say that Christ has become a servant to the circumcision on behalf of the truth of God to confirm the promises given to the fathers,
9 and for the Gentiles to glorify God for His mercy . . .
Paul distinguishes two groups of Roman believers, Jews and Gentiles, exhorting them to mutual acceptance. He goes on to say that Messiah now serves these two groups in different ways. Messiah has become a servant to confirm them. At the same time Messiah?s service to Gentiles is an expression of God?s pure mercy, for which the Gentiles will give thanks to God.
I don?t see any way around the ongoing distinction between Jew and Gentile (the particular and universal choices of God) in these verses and, consequently, in the mind of Messiah. We may disagree on the nature of the promises given to the fathers, but, whatever they are, Messiah confirms them. They are still in force today.

Derek,
Sorry, I have not checked this blog for a reply to what I said.
I don’t want to go into a big long explanation. I think Elias is thinking along the same lines. Both of us being from the middle east may be why we thought of the same thing. Tribal affiliation is a big deal here, but it doesn’t depend on physical descent.
Is “Israel” determined by physical descent from Abraham or by tribal affiliation with the covenant people of God?
Briefly, all of Abraham’s servants were circumcised and their offspring were joined to Abraham’s tribe though they were not descended from Abraham. That was at the start.
Many were joined to Israel through history. The Hebrews exiting Egypt were pretty mixed I believe. Those ancestors of Jesus, Rahab and Ruth, were not from the blood linage of Israel. Uriah the Hitite, etc.
If even one of these gentiles were joined to Israel and their offspring became part of the tribe of Israel, then I think that shows that physical descent was not the determining factor, but rather membership came through the sign of circumcision. Our view of what Israel means should reflect that basic truth. Also, the NT view of circumcision should help us define what it means to be “Israel” today.

Jon,
I did (or, believed I did) read the entire thing before commenting, in fact it took me a long time to decide to comment. However, I will thank you for pointing out specific #’s and perhaps I did over look or mis-understand something and will look again.

Jon (to follow up)
I stand by my question/post…perhaps I’m not following Derek’s thought even after re-reading (because I do recall those posts)….hence why I posed the question to Derek, it was an honest question, and it was an honest opinion based on the idea of being in other’s shoes. I have respect for Derek and in no way intended an attack, and by his own language through the posts, I do not believe he’d take it as such (and no, I’m not accusing you of blaming, just clarifing)

Hi Derek,
#77
Do you really stand behind the logic you use in your response #77?
Do you think that when Gos said “blessed is my people egypt” he meant modern day egypt (that has nothing to do with egypt of that time)?
I think that you don`t read the promises of the hebrew bible correctly.
the only election, (in my opinion), that we need to assert is the one in the crucified messsaiah. the other elections will bring to the middle east wars and hatred. We are elected in the Crucified messaiah, Jew and Son of God. We are elected under the sign of the cross. any other election, in my opinion, will be used to jusify injustice, genocide and domination.
Now if I (non Jew) start thinking that everything began with me and that God prefered me then I should be reminded of Romans 9-11. But if someone starts overemphasising (please note: overempasising) Jewish identity and physical relatio to Abraham then Galatians will be an apropriate response.
anyhow, I hope I can discuss these things with you in this world
elias

http://midrashetc.com/
Percival,
You write that ?the NT view of circumcision should help us define what it means to be ?Israel? today.? Good idea. Could you take a look at #84, where I quote Rom 15:7-9?
Paul is exhorting two groups to accept each other. Could this passage refer to the circumcision of the heart and promises intended for all who are circumcised in heart? If so, then Paul is asking believers (the circumcised in heart) and non-believing Gentiles to accept one another. This doesn?t make much sense in the context of the letter, which isn’t addressed to the general public but to the church at Rome. It also doesn?t line up with verse 7, where ?Messiah accepted us? (that is, Paul and his readers).
So one group must be Jews, the group Paul identifies by the ritual circumcision by which their boys and adult male converts are received into the covenant explained in Gen 17. Messiah is a servant to this group to confirm the promises to the fathers. The other group is simply ?Gentiles,? the rest of the nations.
Can anyone offer an interpretation of these verses that does not include an ongoing place for corporate Jewish identity based on the promises to the fathers and secured by the ongoing service of Messiah?
It seems to me that if we can?t agree on something this simple, the larger discussion is futile. I’m just looking for a ray of hope here.

In the Hebrew scriptures, literally the words of the Creator Himself, we find numerous Divine assertions about the election of the Jews. We don’t see the Jews didn’t “electing” themselves. Rather, their god chose them, just as they chose Him (Deut. 5:27). In His own words (Isaiah 45:4) we have “For the sake of Jacob My servant, of Israel My chosen, I summon you by name and bestow on you a title of honor, though you do not acknowledge Me.” And in the same Book, at 65:9, the Almighty promises to the Jews, His chosen people, the land of Israel: “I will bring forth descendants from Jacob, and from Judah those who will possess my mountains; my chosen people will inherit them, and there will my servants live.”
What part of these Hebrew scriptures gives rise to any question that it may actually be Christians rather than Abraham’s Jewish descendants that are the Creator’s chosen people? What is so unclear about these verses that 89 comments into this discussion there’s still no recognition that the Holy Land was given by the Almighty to the Jews?

Hmmm. On the one hand, Percival says that all Christians are “Israel.” On the other hand, Carl Kinbar thinks that Messianic Jews are bound by the New Testament to keep rabbinical traditions.
You both forget that God inspires Messianic Jews by his grace to put their trust in him alone without any add-ons, so we’re no longer bound by Torah, now we have Christ’s law. Yet we’re still Jews in every way.

As a Messianic Jewish believer in Jesus myself, it frustrates me that Derek is claiming to be a rabbi and claiming to be Jewish.
He is in fact a Gentile who claims to have converted to Messianic Judaism.
He now considers himself more authentically Jewish than myself because he keeps rabbinic traditions and I do not, even though I was born Jewish.

Joseph (no. 92),
I sense the frustration evident in your comment at Derek’s claim to be Jewish.
According to rabbinic Judaism, you’re a Jew and Derek isn’t.
But you reject rabbinic Judaism.
So, what is your problem with Derek?

For all concerned:
Derek’s statement that I “Messianic Jews are bound by the New Testament to keep rabbinical traditions” is simply untrue.
Joseph’s comments about Derek Leman are simply untrue. Derek and his family went through an extensive conversion process and they are now Jews. Unless one believes that the only way to be a Jew is to be born a Jew). He is also a rabbi, ordained by the Union of Messianic Jewish Congregations after a lengthy process of academic and spiritual preparation. I can’t verify or falsify Joseph’s last comment,but based on my knowledge of Derek, I doesn’t ring true.
That said, because of previous blog experience with Joseph, I won’t interact any further with his comments unless they relate directly to the subjects being discussed by everyone else.

CORRECTION: JOSEPH’S statement that I believe “Messianic Jews are bound by the New Testament to keep rabbinical traditions” is false. Too bad there’s no Preview function on this blog!

Carl,
You argued that Derek Leman is a Jew and a rabbi (no. 94). Your claim requires background discussion.
Until recently, missionaries didn’t stoop to redefine “Jew” and “rabbi”. Instead the common meaning of those terms naturally followed the meaning of the Jews, who brought those words to language, who use them, and to whom they apply.
Unfortunately, in some Christian missionary quarters the urge to proselytize the Jews has led to an abandonment of that civility and intellectual integrity. For unscrupulous missionaries, a desire to convince Jews to convert to Christianity through rational and analytical Bible-based discourse has given way to cheap trickery. Jesus is suddenly “Yeshua”, the New Testament has become the “Brit HaHadasha”, the definition of Jew has been conveniently stretched and blurred to include of all things non-Jewish Christians, and the actual subject of traditional Jewish holidays have been supplanted with a new Christological history–all for the consumption of a largely secularized, religiously uneducated Western Jewry these missionaries prey on. The Union of Messianic Jewish Congregations (UMJC) is a Christian missionary group funded and operated by churches bent on seducing Jews to Christianity through trickery, by misidentifying themselves, their beliefs and their religious practices to Jews as Jewish when in fact they are Christian.
You can be sure that any claim of becoming a Jew or a rabbi through conversion or ordination through a Christian organization like UMJC lacks any validity when stacked against the Jewish definition and criteria for those Jewish terms. That’s why the majority of Christendom to this day views UMJC and its ilk as pariah and an embarrassment.
With that as background, I think it’s important when you stake claims about people like Derek’s status as a Jew and a rabbi, that you clearly articulate that you’re using those terms only in the narrow, highly unorthodox and controversial redefinition fringe missionaries invented as a proselytizing tactic and that by the standards for those terms that are broadly understood by English-speaking Jew and Christian alike, Derek is neither a Jew nor a rabbi.

What you see in Joseph is an example of good old fashioned envy mixed with remnants of ethnic pride. Born into a Christian Evangelical family with an assimilated Jewish heritage and having been raised completely out of Jewish environment, most Jewish religious concepts, be it Torah, conversions, etc., are anathema to Joseph. Using his tabloid-themed blog as a soapbox Joseph works feverishly at his computer (in between his school work) to ruin the reputation of many fine Messianic Jewish leaders, freely making false allegations and creating fast and loose connections, googling for skeletons in dark closets of internet. The Messianic Jewish leaders he so disdains are the very same leaders who work selflessly to uphold the Body of Messiah and create mutual understanding and true, lasting unity between Jews and Gentiles – while Joseph himself works to create strife.

“The Union of Messianic Jewish Congregations (UMJC) is a Christian missionary group funded and operated by churches bent on seducing Jews to Christianity through trickery, by misidentifying themselves, their beliefs and their religious practices to Jews as Jewish when in fact they are Christian.”
Paul, you are displaying your utter ignorance. On one hand you are claiming the UMJC is funded and operated by churches, and in the same breath you go on to claim that “the majority of Christendom to this day views UMJC and its ilk as pariah and an embarrassment.”
How about you just admit that you really know NOTHING about UMJC and whatever you just said in your post above is more motivated by your hatred of Messianic Jews (and, on a separate note, a disdain for Christianity), than by any facts in your possession? That would be the least you could do.

Carl: this whole discussion about whether or not a Gentile had an authentic conversion to Messianic Judaism proves my very point.
Who gave the UMJC the authority to make Gentiles actually Jews?
If Gentiles can become Jews and rabbis, and Jews like myself aren’t really Jews but “Hebrew Christians”, well it all becomes very confusing.

Hi Paul, I don’t claim to be practising Judaism at all, just that I am a Messianic Jew, as I was born Jewish and now believe in Jesus. I go to church and I’m happy to call myself a Christian. As I am a Christian, I do not feel mandated to keep the Mosaic Torah.
I think it’s a definition which everyone can feel comfortable with and no-one feels threatened by.
For Derek and Carl, the fact that I don’t keep Torah would make me a disobedient Jew. Indeed, Derek claims that non-observant Messianic Jews are effectively dishonouring God. He does this whilst claiming to be a Jewish rabbi.
So my disagreement is 3-fold:
1. I am actually Jewish and he isn’t
2. The New Testament doesn’t say that non-observant Jewish Christians are disobeying God.
3. I don’t recognise the authenticity of creating Messianic “rabbis.”
I think much of the confusion and suspicion that regular Messianic Jews face is due to this attempt to present faith in Jesus as “Judaism”, which it clearly isn’t.
It’s a shame that Carl refuses to dialogue with me and that Gene is seems hostile; I am very willing to dialogue with anyone.

“If Gentiles can become Jews and rabbis, and Jews like myself aren’t really Jews but “Hebrew Christians”, well it all becomes very confusing.”
Joe, I don’t know why are you so confused with this idea(well, I take that back – I do!). Conversions of Gentiles to Judaism is a basic, elementary concept in Judaism. The formal joining of non-Jews to Israel and to the covenants has been going on for thousands of year. You just a have problem with Messianic Judaism being “Judaism” (with all that entails but with recognition of Yeshua as Messiah), instead of Evangelical Christianity that you chose to assimilate into.

“Conversions of Gentiles to Judaism is a basic, elementary concept in Judaism.”
Right – but faith in Jesus is not Judaism, so the idea of Gentile Christians such as Derek converting to becoming Jewish Christians seems rather dubious.

“Right – but faith in Jesus is not Judaism”
Joe, perhaps not your faith. But I thank G-d that Yeshua’s own faith was and still is Judaism, as is my own.

http://midrashetc.com/
Hi Paul–I’m not a missionary and am not involved with any missionary organization. That said, the issues introduced by Joseph have nothing to do with my reasons for joining this conversation. Previous experience tells me that his involvement in a discussion leads it right down Alice’s rabbit hole. But I would be happy to discuss your questions with you offline.

“Previous experience tells me that his involvement in a discussion leads it right down Alice’s rabbit hole.”
Could you expand on this please?

Joe, I’ll answer for you – what Carl probably means is that discussions with you lead to nowhere and are wholly unproductive, accentuated by intellectual and theological bizarreness, wanton display of willful ignorance followed by inevitable exasperation on the part of people you converse with.
Why do I keep talking to you? I believe that there’s still some hope for you.

In re. no. 98, Gene Shlomovich:
I won’t dignify the purely insulting aspects of the subject posting with a response; it’s baselessness stands on its own.
To Shlomovich’s assertion that UMJC is not funded by churches: The Evangelical Council for Financial Responsibility (www.ecfa.org) reports that “Every member of the board of the UMJC (Union of Messianic Jewish Congregations) is ordained and a member of a mainline Christian church. Most are either AOG (Assemblies of G-d) or Baptist.”
To Shlomovich’s assertion that Christians do not broadly view UMJC and its ilk as pariah and an embarrassment: Eugene J. Fisher, Associate Director of the Secretariat for Ecumenical and interreligious Affairs, National Conference of Catholic Bishops wrote “The phrase, ‘Messianic Judaism,’ is highly problematic to many of us…the New Creation (‘the Church’) is no longer a form of Judaism but its own, distinct reality…It is the Jewish community alone, and not any of the Christian churches which can adjudicate whether or not the name ‘Messianic Judaism’ or ‘Messianic Jew’ can have any standing or recognition. To my knowledge the Jewish community in all its variety is of a remarkably united view on this matter.” And in 2003 Cynthia Jarvis, a Presbyterian minister in Philadelphia, told The Forward “Messianic Judaism is neither rightly representing Christianity nor Judaism. It’s creating a third thing that is misrepresenting both of us.”
I invite you all to Google these quotations to verify for yourselves that I am the one posting accurate statements about the UMJC here, not angry Gene Shlomovich.

“The Evangelical Council for Financial Responsibility (www.ecfa.org) reports that “Every member of the board of the UMJC (Union of Messianic Jewish Congregations) is ordained and a member of a mainline Christian church. Most are either AOG (Assemblies of G-d) or Baptist.”
Paul, can you give me the link on ecfa.org where I can read your accusation regarding UMJC firsthand or that they are even a member of that organization? I tried really hard to find it any support for it, and could not. If you can find it, will you be a mensch enough to apologize and admit that you didn’t get this information from ECFA or any reputable source but simply copied and pasted another antimissionary’s fabrication?
Also, Messianic Jews are not Catholics or Presbyterians, nor do we care if they approve or not. If you found some odd bishop or a minister lady displaying their antisemitism towards Messianic Jews – do you think their opinion matters to anyone within Messianic Judaism? Do you think these same ministers, who seem so respectful to Judaism, do not want to convert every Jew to their faith and eliminate Judaism all together? Of course they do, if they are true representatives of their religion.
The fact is, Yeshua is the Jewish Messiah, he’s your Messiah and mine. We who know the truth will not rest until all of Israel knows Him, no matter the opposition either of Gentiles or of our fellow Jews.

Gene,
First, it’s not within the scope of this Web site for me to teach you how to use Google. But if you do ever acquire that skill, you’ll see that the content of my posting will be all you’ll need to verify its authenticity.
Second, your usage of terms like “mensch” [sic] and “Yeshua” does not convince people that your Christian theology is Jewish; rather, it convinces them they’re dealing with a poseur.
Third, the fact is that 100% of the great Jewish sages who were Jesus’ contemporaries examined his messiahship claims against their tradition from Sinai and they concluded he was just another dime-a-dozen false prophet. 2000 years later, Jesus’ messiahship claims still put him at odds with the Hebrew Bible. So, you who “know” the truth and how it’s totally different from what the Jewish sages saw in their Bible are welcome to believe whatever you want; but if you try to sell it as Judaism, I’m going to call you on it.
Fourth, why do you have such disdain for mainline Christian clerics? You wrote “do you think their opinion matters to anyone within Messianic Judaism?” Gene, no one is oppressing you. Neither Jew nor gentile is oppressing you. And, as a Christian, your claim to be the victim of “anti-Semitic” oppression at the hands of Jews and your fellow Christians is, frankly, ludicrous.

“Second, your usage of terms like “mensch” [sic] and “Yeshua” does not convince people that your Christian theology is Jewish; rather, it convinces them they’re dealing with a poseur.”
Paul, what is your problem with the word “mesch”? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mensch) What’s this “poseur” business? I grew up and lived in Ukraine, in a Jewish family, in a Yiddish speaking home, in a Jewish town where some of the greatest hasidic tzaddikim once lived, I have documented rabbinic hasidic ancestry. Four Jewish grandparents. I can teach you a few things about Yiddishkeit, Paul – you just need to ask! Oh, BTW – Yeshua is a Jew.
“Fourth, why do you have such disdain for mainline Christian clerics? ”
I don’t have disdain for them, I just don’t care what they say on the matter, no more than I care what some imam has to say about Messianic Judaism.
“And, as a Christian, your claim to be the victim of “anti-Semitic” oppression at the hands of Jews and your fellow Christians is, frankly, ludicrous.”
Paul, first of all, I am a Jew. Secondly, I experienced more personal antisemitism on any one day living in Ukraine, than you will in your lifetime. I don’t claim antisemitic oppression at the hands of Jews – what are you talking about? (Not that there are no self-hating Jewish antisemites out there who hate on other Jews – there certainly ARE).

“First, it’s not within the scope of this Web site for me to teach you how to use Google. But if you do ever acquire that skill, you’ll see that the content of my posting will be all you’ll need to verify its authenticity.”
Paul, your above statement just about sums up the veracity of the “facts” you produced here.
“Third, the fact is that 100% of the great Jewish sages who were Jesus’ contemporaries examined his messiahship claims against their tradition from Sinai and they concluded he was just another dime-a-dozen false prophet.”
We are told not to follow a majority to do evil (Exodus 23:2). The opinion of the majority, even leadership, does not constitute the truth. If the first century Jewish leadership was so precise in their judgment of Yeshua and if they guided Israel so well at that time, why do you think G-d once again threw us out of the Land and allowed our Temple to be destroyed? Yeshua gave the reason for what was to happen:
“…and tear you down to the ground, you and your children within you. And they will not leave one stone upon another in you, because you did not know the time of your visitation.” (Luke 19:44)