Red Moon Rising—The Rapture and the Timeline of the Apocalypse

 

 

Chapter Two:
___________

Israel and the End Times

 

        Israel’s role in end-times prophecy is one of the most highly debated subjects among prophecy scholars. A commonly held view is that after Israel’s leaders rejected Jesus as the Messiah, God then turned his back on Israel forever. This view states that in place of Israel God has raised up the Church, and now Christian believers benefit from, and will realize, the promises that God made to Israel. This doctrine is known as Replacement Theology, because it holds that the Christian Church has entirely replaced Israel as God’s chosen people, and that the existence of the Jews today, and of the nation of Israel, is irrelevant in God’s plan and in the prophecies that predict the future.

Replacement Theology first emerged within the early Catholic Church and it was often the justification for the recurring periods of official Church-sanctioned Jewish persecution. Replacement Theology is also taught by many of the more monolithic Christian denominations today such as the Seventh-Day Adventists, the Mormons and the Jehovah’s Witnesses. Many of these denominations claim to have already received from God the correct interpretation of prophecy, and indeed of the entire Bible, and each teaches that it alone is the “one true Church” and the “True Israel” of chosen believers through which God is working to save the world.

The doctrine of Replacement Theology is pertinent to our study of Daniel’s Prophecy of the Seventy Weeks because the interpretation given in chapter one of this book, if correct, completely exposes Replacement Theology as a false teaching.

The question revolves around the seventieth week of the prophecy. Is this final seven year period in the future? Or is it in the past, having already been completed and fulfilled? This question arises because at the beginning of the prophecy the angel Gabriel says to Daniel, "Seventy weeks have been decreed for your people and your holy city…” This means that all of the 490 years of the prophecy apply to the Jews and to the city of Jerusalem. Therefore, if the final seven years of the prophecy are to be fulfilled in the future, then God also has a future for Israel and for Jerusalem—it means that Israel has not been completely replaced or removed from God’s plan.

To combat the teaching that Daniel’s Seventieth Week is still in the future, Replacement Theologians must explain how it has been fulfilled in the past, and that there was no gap of time between the end of the first sixty-nine weeks and the beginning of the seventieth and final week. Alternate dates are given for both the “decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem” which began the seventy weeks of the prophecy, and for the coming of “Messiah the Prince,” which marked the end of the first sixty-nine weeks of the prophecy. Most explanations of this sort then place the end of the entire 490-year period around the year 34 AD. This conclusion is arrived at despite the clear words of Jesus in Matthew 24 that the abomination of desolation (spoken of by the prophet Daniel within the context of the seventieth week) would appear during the great tribulation immediately prior to the Second Coming.

These alternate interpretations of Daniel’s prophecy will not be addressed or challenged in this chapter because many readers, especially those who are new to the subject of Bible prophecy, will probably find the arguments too tedious and too technical to be easily understood. However, because this question is so important I have included a comprehensive appendix at the back of the book in which these different interpretations of Daniel’s prophecy are analyzed.

The key is to understand that there is indeed a future seven year period that will apply to the Jews and to Jerusalem, which is evidence that God has not completely turned his back on unbelieving Israel. Further evidence that Israel still has a part to play in God’s plan comes from the New Testament itself, and is found in the ninth chapter of the Apostle Paul’s letter to the Romans,

“I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, those of my own race, the people of Israel. Theirs is the adoption as sons; theirs the divine glory, the covenants, the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises. Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God over all, forever praised!  Amen.” (Romans 9:2-5)

In this text Paul refers to national Israel in the present tense, as a unique race, and says that to them belong the covenants and the promises. They have not been transferred to the Church, even after the sacrifice of the Messiah, because God still has a plan for Israel despite Israel’s rejection of Jesus that caused Paul so much anguish.

Later in the same chapter Paul turns to the subject of the believing remnant within national Israel and he refers to the writings of the prophet Isaiah,

“Isaiah cries out concerning Israel: ‘Though the number of the Israelites be like the sand by the sea, only the remnant will be saved. For the Lord will carry out his sentence on earth with speed and finality.’ It is just as Isaiah said previously: ‘Unless the Lord Almighty had left us descendants, we would have become like Sodom, we would have been like Gomorrah.’ What then shall we say? That the Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have obtained it, a righteousness that is by faith; but Israel, who pursued a law of righteousness, has not attained it. Why not? Because they pursued it not by faith but as if it were by works. They stumbled over the ‘stumbling stone.’ As it is written: ‘See, I lay in Zion a stone that causes men to stumble and a rock that makes them fall, and the one who trusts in him will never be put to shame.’” (Romans 9:27-33)

At the appearance of the Messiah the religious leaders of Israel were more focused on works than on faith, and they stumbled and rejected Jesus because of this shortcoming. However, the rejection of the Messiah by the greater portion of Israel allowed Jesus to complete his mission, which then allowed for Gentiles to achieve salvation and righteousness before God through faith in his sacrifice. At the same time, however, the believing remnant within Israel remained faithful to God and accepted the Messiah. In Galatians 6:16 Paul refers to this believing remnant within national Israel as the “Israel of God.”

The issue of believing Gentiles and the nation of Israel (composed of a believing minority and an unbelieving majority) as related to the Church, is then taken up further by Paul in Romans 11,

“I ask then: Did God reject his people? By no means! I am an Israelite myself, a descendant of Abraham, from the tribe of Benjamin. God did not reject his people, whom he foreknew. Don't you know what the Scripture says in the passage about Elijah--how he appealed to God against Israel: ‘Lord, they have killed your prophets and torn down your altars; I am the only one left, and they are trying to kill me’? And what was God's answer to him? ‘I have reserved for myself seven thousand who have not bowed the knee to Baal.’ So too, at the present time there is a remnant chosen by grace. And if by grace, then it is no longer by works; if it were, grace would no longer be grace. What then? What Israel sought so earnestly it did not obtain, but the elect did. The others were hardened, as it is written: ‘God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes so that they could not see and ears so that they could not hear, to this very day.’ And David says: ‘May their table become a snare and a trap, a stumbling block and a retribution for them. May their eyes be darkened so they cannot see, and their backs be bent forever.’” (Romans 11:1-10)

The question concerns national Israel. Did God completely reject the physical nation of Israel? Paul again answers “no,” and then explains that within the nation of Israel there will always be a remnant of believing Jews, chosen by grace, who are numbered among the elect. The rest of the Jews who exist within the nation of Israel are said by Paul to have been “hardened,” and they are that portion of national Israel that does not believe. Paul quotes from two Old Testament passages to explain that this hardening is actually part of the overall plan of God, and then he continues,

“Again I ask: Did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all! Rather, because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious. But if their transgression means riches for the world, and their loss means riches for the Gentiles, how much greater riches will their fullness bring!

    I am talking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch as I am the apostle to the Gentiles, I make much of my ministry in the hope that I may somehow arouse my own people to envy and save some of them. For if their rejection is the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead? If the part of the dough offered as firstfruits is holy, then the whole batch is holy; if the root is holy, so are the branches. If some of the branches have been broken off, and you, though a wild olive shoot, have been grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing sap from the olive root, do not boast over those branches. If you do, consider this: You do not support the root, but the root supports you.

    You will say then, ‘Branches were broken off so that I could be grafted in.’ Granted. But they were broken off because of unbelief, and you stand by faith. Do not be arrogant, but be afraid. For if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you either. Consider therefore the kindness and sternness of God: sternness to those who fell, but kindness to you, provided that you continue in his kindness. Otherwise, you also will be cut off. And if they do not persist in unbelief, they will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. After all, if you were cut out of an olive tree that is wild by nature, and contrary to nature were grafted into a cultivated olive tree, how much more readily will these, the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree!” (Romans 11:11-24)

Replacement Theology teaches that after the Messiah’s sacrifice God completely rejected national Israel, and that the promises and prophecies regarding Israel were transferred to the Church, the institution made up of both Jews and Gentiles who believe in Jesus as the Messiah. With this doctrine the very term “Israel” is then often read in both the Old and New Testaments as a clever code word that actually means “Church.” However, Paul’s message above proves that this simply can’t be the case. Throughout Romans 11 the references to “Israel” and the pronouns “they” and “their” consistently refer to that portion of national Israel that has stumbled and been hardened in unbelief after the coming of the Messiah Jesus.

Paul explains in verse 18 that believing Gentiles (members of the Church) should not “boast” over that portion of national Israel that does not believe, because without national Israel they would have never been able to receive salvation in the first place! Paul goes on to make the point that it is more natural for Jews to come to a saving faith in the Messiah than it is for Gentiles. He then writes,

“I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers, so that you may not be conceited: Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in. And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: ‘The deliverer will come from Zion; he will turn godlessness away from Jacob. And this is my covenant with them when I take away their sins.’

    As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies on your account; but as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs, for God's gifts and his call are irrevocable. Just as you who were at one time disobedient to God have now received mercy as a result of their disobedience, so they too have now become disobedient in order that they too may now receive mercy as a result of God's mercy to you. For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all. Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable his judgments, and his paths beyond tracing out!” (Romans 11:25-33)

So far in these passages Paul has been crying out to Gentile believers, telling them not to “boast” over unbelieving Israel, not to be “arrogant,” and not to be “ignorant” of the mystery of Israel which might cause them to be “conceited.” Paul is passionately arguing against any type of thinking that even resembles Replacement Theology which, by entirely dismissing the nation of Israel, is boastful, arrogant, conceited and ignorant to the extreme. Despite Paul’s warnings it still exists today and is accepted by a greater portion of the Christian Church. However, it would not exist if Paul’s words were properly understood and accepted. Let’s summarize for a moment:

The Church is made up of both Jews and Gentiles who believe in Jesus as the Messiah. Israel is made up of a remnant of Jews who believe in Jesus (like Paul himself), plus a greater portion of Jews who have rejected Jesus, stumbled, and been hardened against the truth.

The Church is eternal, and Jews and Gentiles who believe can be confident of eternal life. The believing remnant that exists within Israel is also a part of the Church. In this way Israel and the Church overlap. But what of the rest of Israel, the hardened and unbelieving part? Here is the answer that Replacement Theologians cannot accept: This portion of Israel has only a temporary existence, which Paul explains by saying, “Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in. And so all Israel will be saved...”

According to Paul, at a certain point in the future the hardened and unbelieving portion of Israel will suddenly cease to exist, at which point “all Israel” will be saved. Replacement Theologians cannot accept this, and to avoid it they interpret this one reference to “all Israel” in verse 26 as another code word for “the Church.” Of course the previous reference to “Israel” in verse 25 referred to “national Israel,” and the following reference to “Israel” in verse 28 again refers to “national Israel,” but Replacement Theologians must make Paul out to be inconsistent and contradictory by saying that he meant “the Church” in this passage when he said “all Israel.” I think this interpretation is nonsensical, and I agree with Bible scholar Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum, who writes in his book Hebrew Christianity (p.32) that “the term Israel is never used of Gentiles, whether they are believers or not, nor is it used of the church. It is used only of Jews.” Israel means Israel, whether national Israel as a whole, believing Israel as a minority or unbelieving Israel as a majority.

Paul brings home his attack on Replacement Theology in verses 28-29 when he refers again to the hardened and unbelieving portion of Israel, the same portion that is an “enemy of the gospel,” and says that they are loved by God. The key statement regarding Israel then follows, which is that for them “God's gifts and his call are irrevocable.” In other words, the promises and prophecies regarding Israel are irrevocable. They could not have been transferred to the Christian Church as Replacement Theology argues, even though Israel presently exists as an enemy of the Gospel.
 

Political Issues

No matter how we view Israel’s status before God and her role, or lack of it, in the prophecies of the end times, our views are bound to have ramifications in the realm of politics in the world here and now. This fact is unavoidable.

From my perspective there exist two unfortunate extremes when it comes to Israel. On the one hand we have Replacement Theology which, as mentioned earlier, has been used in the past as justification for anti-Semitism. From this perspective the modern-day nation of Israel can only be viewed as an irrelevant but dangerous anomaly, and the Jewish patriots who helped to found Israel as a nation can really be viewed as no better than terrorists and thieves. If the Church has replaced Israel, and Israel has been completely written off by God, then the Abrahamic Covenant in which God gave Canaan to Abraham’s descendents is no longer valid, and the Jews should give back the land that they have stolen from the Palestinians. From this perspective Zionism as a political agenda appears as misguided and even evil.

On the other hand there is the opposite extreme of Replacement Theology, which appears as a form of Christian Zionism that offers unconditional support for the goals and actions of the modern-day state of Israel, especially if they point in the direction of fulfilling the Abrahamic Covenant. In other words, nothing would make the followers of this extreme view happier than to see a replay of the campaign of ethnic cleansing against the non-Jewish inhabitants of Palestine that took place when Israel took over the land after the Exodus from Egypt 3500 years ago. Unfortunately, many prominent Christian leaders in the US not only believe that Israel has the right to engage in such a campaign, but a divine imperative to do so!

I believe that this view is misguided and wrong. It is not the Christian’s duty to encourage Israel to conquer and take over the land that God promised to give to the descendents of Abraham. Instead, Christians should support Israel’s right to exist, but also pray and work for peace, knowing that the ultimate fulfillment of the Abrahamic Covenant will only occur after the national repentance of Israel according to Zechariah 12:10,

“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.”

The passage above predicts a point in the future when the hardened portion of Israel will repent and accept Jesus as the Messiah. At that point the very definition of “Jew” will become “one who accepts Jesus as Lord,” and in this way “all Israel will be saved.”

It is the Christian’s duty to help bring about this national repentance of Israel by witnessing to Jews one by one, as individuals. And then after Israel repents as a nation and turns to Jesus as her true Messiah God will do His duty and fulfill the Abrahamic Covenant just as He promised He would, as foretold by almost every Old Testament prophet.
 

Conclusion

It is critical to refute Replacement Theology because as a doctrine it takes away the possibility of a future seven year period focused on Israel and Jerusalem that will bring our present age to a close and usher in the Messianic Age with the return of Jesus.

This final seven year period is the very foundation for understanding Bible prophecy as a complete whole, and taking it away leaves the prophecies of the Bible disconnected and susceptible to all kinds of mischief and misinterpretation. The many radical, conflicting and politicized interpretations of Bible prophecy throughout Christian history testify to this fact!

These first two chapters might have been hard to absorb for some readers, with many details that are hard to remember, but their purpose has been very simple: First, to impress upon the reader that Israel still has a part to play in God’s end-times plan, and second, that this plan will be fulfilled on the basis of the Seventieth Week—God’s seven year timeline for bringing our present age to a close.

In the next few chapters we will begin to erect our framework for understanding the rest of Bible prophecy upon this solid foundation.

 

____________

Back to Index