Chapter Index

Introduction

One People

Our Promises

One Hope

One Inheritance

One New Man

The Kingdom Jew

The Temple

The Convergence

Therefore

Introduction

II. Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

The apostle Paul said we should study to show ourselves approved unto God. He said we should study so we can rightly divide (i.e.; understand; handle properly) the word of truth, which is the Scripture. Unfortunately, there seems to be very little interest among today's Christians in the actual study of the Scripture because we no longer consider doctrine or theology important. We are more interested in spiritual experiences, religious programs and outreaches, and personal relationships.

Yet we all have theological views about salvation and the Church. These views may have come to us directly, through a personal study of the Scripture, or they may have come indirectly, through listening to the views of others; particularly the teaching of religious leaders. But the fact is, each one of us has been influenced by some kind of theology. Indeed, each one of us is presently living under the influence of some type of theology. The theology that influences most of today's Christians, and especially pro-Israel Christians, is called Dispensationalism.

Historically, there have been two primary views regarding the relationship between Israel and the Church. The first one—Replacement Theology—is part of a much larger framework of Biblical interpretation known as "Covenant Theology". The second one—Separation Theology—is part of an opposing framework of Biblical interpretation called "Dispensation Theology".

Covenant Theology teaches that the Church has completely replaced National Israel in the plan of God. It views the Church as the continuation of Israel. All the promises made to Israel find their fulfillment in the Church. Old Testament prophecies which refer to the eventual restoration of Israel to the Promised Land, or about Israel's future glory, are interpreted spiritually and are viewed as promises to the Church. However, prophecies of condemnation and judgment are interpreted literally and continue to be applied to the Jews.

According to this view, the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948 had nothing to do with the fulfillment of Biblical prophecy and is of no real religious significance. Many who live under the influence of Covenant Theology are quite anti-Semitic. However, this is not always the case. Some, based on moral and humanitarian convictions, believe the Jews should have their own homeland and they usually support the national aspirations of the Jewish people. However, they do not believe the Jews have a "divine right" to the land and they are just as supportive of the national aspirations of the Palestinians. To them, the Jews are just another race—like the Italians, the Germans and the Mexicans. They are no longer special in any way.

Dispensation Theology teaches just the opposite. It says that the Jews are still special because they are still God's chosen people. It says National Israel and the Church are two completely separate entities and they should never be confused. While Israel is (and shall forever remain) a geo-political nation comprised solely of ethnic Jews, the Church is an entirely new creation of Gentiles and Jews, which came into being on the Day of Pentecost.

Accordingly, none of the promises or prophecies about National Israel in the Old Testament have anything to do with the Church. God has two different chosen peoples—one Jewish (National Israel), and one mostly Gentile (the Church). Each group has a separate program of redemption based on different promises and covenants. Each one has a separate eternal destiny. The inheritance and destiny of National Israel is earthly, while the inheritance and destiny of the Church is heavenly and never the twain shall meet.

Is it possible that both these views are wrong? Is it possible that they both contain some truth, but also much error? We believe the answer is yes. Neither Covenant Theology or Dispensationalism rightly divides the Scripture when it comes to Israel and the Church. However, since this book is being written for the benefit of pro-Israel Christians—most of whom are Dispensationalists—we will limit our study to the difference between what the Scripture teaches regarding Israel and the Church, and what Dispensationalism teaches.

Unfortunately, those who follow Dispensationalism usually have no idea this is what we are being taught because the whole picture is never presented to us at one time. Instead, it's taught in bits and pieces, most of which seem totally unrelated to each other. So we never recognize the error or the confusion that springs from it. Nor do we recognize the danger it poses.

Dispensationalism is rooted in the Plymouth Brethren Movement, especially the teachings of John Nelson Darby. Darby is acknowledged by most of today's Dispensational leaders as the father of the movement. He built on a number of themes that were common among Calvinists of the early 19^th century, but his unique contribution was to introduce a system for interpreting the Bible. Dispensational teachers refer to this system as "literal/historical/grammatical" interpretation. It is explained by Dr. Charles Ryrie—author of the Ryrie Study Bible and one of today's preeminent Dispensational scholars—on page 40 of his book, Dispensationalism. Here he defines a Dispensationalist. He says:

"A Dispensationalist keeps Israel and the Church distinct. This distinction...is born out of a system of hermeneutics that is usually called literal interpretation. To be sure, literal/historical/grammatical interpretation is not the sole possession or practice of Dispensationalists, but the consistent use of it in all areas of biblical interpretation is."

Here then is the definition of a Dispensationalist, as given by one of today’s most well-known and well-respected theologians. A Dispensationalist is one who keeps Israel and the Church distinct—and this distinction is the result of adhering to a particular system of Biblical interpretation. In other words, Mr. Darby did not go to God's Word and seek to be directed of the Holy Spirit when forming his theology. He went to it with a system of interpretation and applied that system to every verse in the Bible.

When this system is applied to "Israel" there can be only one outcome. Israel will always be a national, racial entity comprised of ethnic Jews. Consequently, those under the influence of Dispensationalism just assume that whenever the Old Testament prophets speak about Israel, they are talking about a strictly Jewish entity. In their minds, to view Israel any other way is to reject the literal meaning of God's Word.

Those who won't adhere to this literal/historical/grammatical interpretation of prophesy are accused of "spiritualizing" the Scripture. We are seen as those who refuse to submit our views to the obvious meaning of the text. Often we are falsely accused of believing the error of Replacement Theology. This kind of attitude can be seen in the following statements, which were made by a Dispensational minister we know personally:

"We must not take the literal statements of God and spiritualize their meaning away. By so doing, we have done such a disservice to God that it is tantamount to blasphemy. It is a presumption to take God's statements and give to them an ultimate meaning. Our whole faith will be revolutionized when we give to God's Word the literal meaning that He Himself intends. It is so radical in its implications that it is little wonder we spiritualize it away. Could it be that we do not have the courage to see it in its face value?" 1

Unfortunately, the issue of Biblical interpretation is always presented to us this way by Dispensational teachers. We are always left with only two choices. We must interpret the statements of God concerning Israel in the Old Testament either literally or spiritually. If we interpret them literally, we will automatically come to the same conclusion Dispensationalists have come to. In fact, the only way you can escape this conclusion is by spiritualizing away the intended meaning of God's words—and who wants to be guilty of doing that?

However, there is a third option. The issue of interpreting prophesy goes much deeper than simply choosing a literal or a spiritual interpretation. The real issue is whether or not we are rightly dividing the Scripture—and to do that we must interpret the partial revelation of the Old Testament in light of the full revelation provided by the New Testament.

Even if Dispensational teachers are right in their defense of literal interpretation, they apply their own standard in a very selective fashion. For they pick and choose which passages they will interpret literally, and which ones they will give an ultimate meaning to. They do this because, when you take everything that is said about National Israel and the Church in both the Old and the New Testaments at face value, Darby's system collapses.

One of the things we will illustrate in the following pages is the hypocrisy of Dispensational teachers. We will demonstrate that while claiming to be the great defenders of literal interpretation, they are in fact doing the very thing they accuse non-Dispensationalists of doing. They "spiritualize" any passage of Scripture that will not fit their theology. They refuse to submit their views concerning Israel and the Church to the literal meaning of many passages of Scripture, particularly in the New Testament.

But the essential truth we want to convey through this book is the fact that you do not have to follow the errors of Dispensationalism in order to be pro-Israel. You don't have be a Dispensationalist in order to accept the intended meaning of the prophecies and promises found in Scripture.

We are not Dispensationalists, yet we have a deep love for the Jewish people. We believe they are still God's chosen people and that He has restored them to the land in accordance with His promise. We are very pro-Israel and support the current Jewish State. We even agree with the Dispensational claim that God has prepared a glorious destiny for National Israel.

However, we utterly reject the Dispensational view of what that destiny entails because it cuts us off from many of the promises in the Old Testament that belong to us. As a matter of fact, the Dispensational view of National Israel's destiny is really a form of reverse Replacement Theology because it denies the body of Messiah its proper role and place in the coming kingdom. In short, it makes us unable to understand our destiny as children of Abraham.

Brother Daniel

8/1/06

One People

Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine: And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.

Exodus 19:5-6

And ye shall be holy unto me: for I the Lord am holy, and have severed you from other people, that ye should be mine.

Leviticus 20:26

For thou art an holy people unto the Lord thy God: the Lord thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth.

Deuteronomy 7:6

For the Lord's portion is his people; Jacob is the lot of his inheritance.

Deuteronomy 32:9

The Scripture is pretty clear about the specialness of the Jews. They were severed from among the nations in order to be God's people. He said: "ye shall be mine". Israel was to be His portion of humanity. It was to be His inheritance. Notice the terms which describe this people. They are said to be:

~ Chosen

~ Separate

~ A holy people

~ A peculiar treasure

~ A kingdom of priests

~ God's inheritance

God called Israel to be a testimony of His righteousness and character to the surrounding nations. This is what he meant when He told them they were to be a "kingdom of priests". The nations around Israel were very religious, yet they lived in gross darkness. They worshiped many kinds of idols: the sun, moon and stars, trees, rocks and animals. They were ruthless and without compassion—so much so that child sacrifice and prostitution were part of their worship services. What they needed most was a demonstration of righteousness. They needed to see justice, mercy and compassion lived out in every day life. This is the main reason God gave Israel the Law. Obeying the Law would have produced a visible testimony of righteousness which could be seen by the surrounding nations. By walking in righteousness, every Jew could function as a light. Every Jew could be a priest. That is, they could represent God to those of the nations who knew nothing about Him. Isn't this the same call New Testament believers have been given?

Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.

I. Peter 2:5

Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.

II. Corinthians 6:17-18

Do all things without murmurings and disputings: That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world.

Philippians 2:15

But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should show forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light: Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.

I. Peter 2:9-10

Ye (believers) are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid. Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.

Matthew 5:14 & 16

The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints,

Ephesians 1:18

Is it merely a coincidence that the Church has been given the same call as Israel—to be a light to the nations? Is it just a coincidence that we are referred to in similar terms? The Jewish apostles said Gentile believers are:

~ Chosen

~ Separate

~ A holy nation

~ A peculiar people

~ A royal priesthood

~ God's inheritance

Those not walking under the influence of Dispensationalism would look at this parallel between Israel and the Church and conclude that they are one people sharing the same call. They would think that some how we Christians have become part of Israel—and they would be correct because this is exactly what the apostle Paul taught.

Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth and called "uncircumcised" by those who call themselves "the circumcision" (that done in the body by the hands of men)‑‑remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near through the blood of Christ...

...Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and aliens, but fellow citizens [of Israel] with God's people [the Jews] and members of God's household [of faith], built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone.

NIV Ephesians 2:11‑13 & 19-20

Paul states that at one time—before Messiah came—we who are Gentiles by birth were excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promises. But now in Christ Jesus we have been brought near to Israel. We are no longer foreigners but fellow citizens of Israel. How will you interpret Paul's statements? Will you interpret them literally or will you spiritualize them? Can you accept Paul's description of the Christian's relationship to Israel? If you can, consider yourself fortunate because the average pro-Israel Christian can't. They look at the same parallel between Israel and the Church and come to the opposite conclusion. Since they assume Israel and the Church are not one people, they conclude that the role of being a light to the nations belongs to National Israel alone. But of course the Jews rejected their Messiah and have been temporarily set aside. They can no longer function as a light to the nations. Therefore, someone needs to fill in for them and the Church is that substitute. At present, we are functioning as a light to the nations. But as soon as this dispensation ends, God will rapture the Church to heaven and the role of being a light will revert back to its rightful owners.

It's unfortunate that the very people who claim to be the great defenders of literal interpretation are utterly incapable of interpreting what Paul said in Ephesians literally! They couldn't take Paul's statements at "face value" even if they wanted to because their theology has blinded their minds to the truth. It makes them incapable of grasping the obvious. It's also quite ironic that the people who proudly refer to themselves as Dispensationalists are the ones who have missed the whole point of the dispensation of grace!

For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles, If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you‑ward: How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words, Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ) Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit; That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel:

Ephesians 3:1‑6

Paul said God has instituted a new dispensation called grace and that this dispensation was a mystery which had not been clearly revealed during the preceding ages. God revealed this mystery to him by direct, supernatural revelation when he received his commission from the risen Lord. Then he gives a short explanation of what all this means for Gentile believers. This is the mystery: that the Gentiles have become fellowheirs (with the Jewish people) of the promises God made to Abraham. We haven't just become heirs to some of the promises; we have become heirs to all of the promises! Whatever applies to the physical seed of Abraham applies to us! The reason this is possible is because we have been joined to same body—that is, to the same group of (chosen) people who originally received those promises.

In other words, the Jews are now our people. The land of the Jews is now our land. The heritage of the Jews is now our heritage. The destiny of the Jews is now our destiny—not because we have replaced them as God's chosen people but because we have become part of them. Dispensational theologians reject this literal interpretation of Scripture and insist on maintaining their own alternative view. In spite of Paul's words, they continue to insist that Gentile believers have not been joined to Israel. They say the Church is a completely new, distinctly separate, chosen people.

Galatians 3:29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

Philippians 3:2 3 For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.

Speaking to Gentile believers, Paul said we are the circumcision. He said we are the seed of Abraham. These terms are usually equated with ethnic Jews. By using them, Paul was telling these believers they had become part of God's chosen people. To these Gentiles he also said: "Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise" (Gal. 4:28). We are the children of promise, just the way Isaac was a child of promise. Again, how will you interpret these words? Will you interpret them literally or spiritually? Do you have the courage to accept them at face value or will you apply an ultimate meaning to them? Will you accept the truth that we are heirs to everything Isaac is heir to? The fact that Israel and the Church are one people is not only explicitly taught in the New Testament, it's implicitly stated in casual remarks the apostles made to Gentile churches. For instance, when writing to the church at Rome about how a person is justified, Paul refers back to the life of Abraham and says:

Romans 4:1 What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found?

Speaking to Roman Gentiles, Paul refers to Abraham as our father. In so doing, he is letting these Christians know that Abraham is their father too. He isn't just the father of the physical Jew; he's the father of all who believe. Dispensational teachers would say that Paul was only referring to Abraham as our father in a mystical sense, that all who possess genuine faith are connected to Abraham personally in that we both walk in the same faith. But he was not suggesting that Gentile believers are actually connected to the Jewish people or nation.

Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; And did all eat the same spiritual meat; And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

I. Corinthians 10:1‑4

What explanation can be given for a similar comment made to the Corinthians? The subject in this passage is not justification by faith and Abraham is not the father being referred to. Rather, the subject is the unbelief and failure of the fathers (plural) of the Jewish nation which came out of Egypt. Yet when referring to them Paul says all our fathers. Again, he was letting these Gentiles know that the fathers of National Israel were also their fathers. If the Dispensational view of Israel and the Church is correct, if Christians comprise a completely separate body of people with no real connection to Israel, then why would Paul include us in the history of that nation? Why would he say Abraham was our father? Why would he say the fathers of the nation are our fathers?

Speaking to Gentile Christians, the Jewish apostles said things like: you are no longer foreigners but citizens of Israel. You are the seed of Abraham, the children of promise, the circumcision, and heirs with Isaac. You are a peculiar people, a holy nation, a chosen generation and a royal priesthood. You are God's inheritance. You are a light to the nations. In times past you were not the people of God but now, through faith in Israel's Messiah, you have become His people and the fathers of the nation are your fathers. Yet in spite of all this, most pro-Israel Christians continue to insist that Israel and the Church are two separate groups of people. Talk about missing the point! If these statements do not indicate that we have become part of Israel, what on earth would? What more could Paul have said to relay such a truth?

Our Promises

The Dispensational approach to interpretation—especially Old Testament prophesy—is wrong-headed and leads to some very unscriptural conclusions. As we have said, Dispensationalists view the Old Testament in a very narrow and nationalistic way. They insist that anything said to Israel or about Israel under the Old Covenant pertains only to the Jewish people. Nothing can be applied to the New Testament Church. The history of Israel applies only to Jews. The future of Israel applies only to Jews. The promises to Israel apply only to Jews.

Yet this whole idea stands in direct opposition to the clearly intended meaning of many New Testament passages! As we have seen, the fact that Christians have become part of Israel was explicitly taught by the apostle Paul. It was also implicitly stated through casual remarks he made to Gentile fellowships. But there is yet another way (for all you skeptics) in which the unity of Israel and the Church is revealed—this is by the apostolic interpretation and application of promises and prophecies given specifically to National Israel. In other words, if the Dispensational view of Israel and the Church is correct, we should see the apostles doing the same thing Dispensational teachers do. Since they insist that we cannot apply Old Testament promises or predictions about Israel to the Church, this should also be the position of Paul and the other apostles—should it not?

Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.

II. Corinthians 7:1

When addressing Gentile Christians in Corinth, Paul admonishes them to cleanse themselves of all filthiness. He makes this appeal on the basis of the promises they have received. Exactly what promises is Paul referring to? What promises have these Gentile Christians received? He is referring to the promises mentioned at the close of the preceding chapter.

Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.

II. Corinthians 6:14‑18

One of the promises Paul is referring to is the one where God said: "I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people". Where exactly did God make this promise? He made it way back in the Old Testament books of Exodus and Leviticus. And to whom was this promise made? It was made to the Jews!

And I will sanctify the tabernacle of the congregation, and the altar: I will sanctify also both Aaron and his sons, to minister to me in the priest's office. And I will dwell among the children of Israel, and will be their God.

Exodus 29:44‑45

And I will set my tabernacle among you: and my soul shall not abhor you. And I will walk among you, and will be your God, and ye shall be my people.

Leviticus 26:11‑12

So then, is this promise the exclusive property of the Jewish nation? It can't be, for Paul has just said it belongs to Gentile believers in the city of Corinth. In other words, Paul took a promise that was given specifically to Israel and said it now applies to the Church. Another promise mentioned in that same passage was this one: "Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, and will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be My sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty". Here Paul combines several passages of Scripture—Isaiah 52:11, Jeremiah 31:9 and Hosea 1:10—all of which were about Israel, and applies them to the Church.

Now why do you suppose Paul does the very thing Dispensational ministers say we must never do? Why do you suppose he takes a promise that was given to Jews and says it now belongs to Gentiles? How can he take a promise that belongs to Israel and say that based on that promise, the Church should strive to live a pure life? He did it because he knew (and taught) that Gentile believers have become part of the people to whom these promises apply! The apostles often applied promises that were made specifically to Israel, or predictions about Israel, to the Church. We will only look at a few of them. But remember, it only takes one to show that these men were not preaching Dispensationalism. It only takes one to destroy the whole idea that Israel and the Church are two unconnected groups of people. In Romans chapter nine, Paul is talking about a remnant of Jews that God has promised to save. During his teaching he brings out the fact that it has always been God's intention to include Gentiles in His plan of redemption. He says:

What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction? What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory—even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles? As he says in Hosea: "I will call them 'my people' who are not my people; and I will call her 'my loved one' who is not my loved one," and, "It will happen that in the very place where it was said to them, 'You are not my people,' they will be called 'sons of the living God.'"

NIV Romans 9:22‑26

To substantiate his claim about the inclusion of the Gentiles, he refers to a prophesy given by Hosea which predicted that one day God would call Gentiles "my people" and "sons of the living God".

But I will have mercy upon the house of Judah, and will save them by the LORD their God, and will not save them by bow, nor by sword, nor by battle, by horses, nor by horsemen. Now when she had weaned Loruhamah, she conceived, and bare a son. Then said God, Call his name Loammi: for ye are not my people, and I will not be your God. Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God. Then shall the children of Judah and the children of Israel be gathered together, and appoint themselves one head, and they shall come up out of the land: for great shall be the day of Jezreel.

Hosea 1:7‑11

But wait! This promise was given to Israel! God wasn't talking to the Gentiles when He said: "I will call them 'my people' who are not my people; and I will call her 'my loved one' who is not my loved one," and, "It will happen that in the very place where it was said to them, 'You are not my people,' they will be called 'sons of the living God"—He was talking to Jews! He was promising the Jews that one day He would say these things to them. If Paul were alive today and made these same statements, Dispensational ministers would challenge and rebuke him. They would demand to know who gave him the authority to apply these promises to the Church. Then, if he refused to repent of his arrogance, they would accuse him of "spiritualizing" away the literal meaning of the text and of preaching the error of Replacement Theology—so great is their blindness!

Of course, the most obvious example of the unity of the Church and Israel can be seen in the promise and fulfillment of the New Covenant. Most pro-Israel Christians don't realize that Dispensationalism claims there are two New Covenants. The first New Covenant is the one prophesied by Jeremiah and it pertains primarily to biological Jews during the Millennium. The other New Covenant is the one that has been established with the Church. Such a concept is totally unscriptural but absolutely necessary if Darby's radical distinction between Israel and the Church is to be maintained.

Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel with the house of Judah...But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts write it in their hearts; and will be their God they shall be my people. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

Jeremiah 31:31-33

Dispensationalists have a problem with this promise because God never said He was going to establish this New Covenant with the nations. He only promised to establish it with Israel and Judah. So if we are partaking of the same New Covenant prophesied by Jeremiah, then we have been brought into the house of Israel or Judah. But accepting this truth would destroy the very foundation of Dispensationalism, so Dispensational scholars are forced to say there must be another New Covenant. They say Christians have entered "a" new covenant but not the New Covenant predicted by Jeremiah.

And He also took bread, gave thanks and brake it gave it to them, saying, This is My body which is given for you; do this in remembrance of Me. Likewise He took the cup after supper, saying this is the new covenant in my blood, which is shed for you.

NKJV Luke 22:17-20

There is only one New Covenant—and it was only ratified one time in human history. It was instituted by Messiah through His death and resurrection in 33AD. The writer of Hebrews makes it clear that the covenant Jesus established is the covenant predicted by Jeremiah.

For by one offering He [Jesus] has perfected forever those who are being sanctified. And the Holy Spirit also witnesses to us; for after He had said before This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days says the Lord: I will put my laws into their hearts in their minds will I write them, then He adds, Their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more.

Hebrews 10:14-17

Twice the writer of Hebrews quotes Jeremiah's prophesy when explaining the difference between the Old and the New Covenant (here and Hebrews 8:8-12). Here he uses what Jeremiah said about the New Covenant promised to Israel, to explain a function of the covenant established by Jesus—namely, that "their sins I will remember no more". In other words, under the covenant predicted by Jeremiah, the Holy Spirit will be present to bear witness that our sins will be remembered no more by God.

Isn't it amazing that the defenders of literal interpretation are incapable of accepting the obviously intended meaning of these words? Isn't it sad that they would rather call God a liar—by saying that He has not yet established the covenant He promised—than accept the literal interpretation of the statements in Luke and Hebrews? Brothers and sisters, our God is not a liar! He said He would make a "new" covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah and that's exactly what He did.

As we said, any one of these examples is enough to show that the whole Dispensational view of prophecy is bankrupt. If the apostles believed or taught Dispensationalism, they would never have done what they did. They would never have applied promises or interpreted prophecies about Israel to the Church—just as today's Dispensational ministers will never apply such promises and prophecies to the Church.

When we read the Scripture through a Dispensational lense, everything is divided. God's people are divided into groups of Jews or Gentiles and His promises are divided into earthly promises (for Israel) and heavenly promises (for the Church). But this view cannot possibly be supported by the New Testament. The promises that apply to the Church include the things that are assumed to belong only to Israel. Likewise, the promises to Israel include things which are assumed to belong only to the Church.

Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ. Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.

Acts 2:36‑39

Men and brethren, children of the stock of Abraham, and whosoever among you feareth God, to you is the word of this salvation sent.

Acts 13:26

Peter reveals that the promises to Israel were not just earthly promises of wealth and land and a world-wide Jewish kingdom. They were heavenly promises too—"the word of this salvation" and "the gift of the Holy Ghost". These promises were given first to the "children of the stock of Abraham" because they were intended for them. They are the children's bread. Then they were offered to the Gentiles who were afar off. Those who accept Israel's Messiah become part of Israel. They become Abraham's spiritual children and partake of the same promises given to Abraham's natural children.

So don't ever let any religious leader cut you off from the promises of the Old Testament. Don't ever let anyone tell you that you have no right to apply the promises made to Israel to yourself, just because you are not Jewish. Every promise God made to Abraham, or to Israel, or to the Jewish people, belongs to us because we have been joined to them. Through the Cross of Christ, we have become the children of Abraham.

One Hope

And now I stand and am judged for the hope of the promise made of God unto our fathers: Unto which promise our twelve tribes, instantly serving God day and night, hope to come. For which hope's sake, king Agrippa, I am accused of the Jews. Why should it be thought a thing incredible with you, that God should raise the dead?

Acts 26:6‑8

When standing before King Agrippa as a prisoner in chains, the apostle Paul speaks of the reason he was being judged. He said he was on trial "for the hope of the promise" made to the fathers. Then he begins his defense by asking why the Jews consider it such a strange thing that "God should raise the dead". Thus, the promise God made to the fathers of the Jewish nation had to do with the resurrection of Jesus.

The promises (plural) God made to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are found in Genesis 12:1‑3 & 22:15-18; 26:1‑5; 28:10‑15. Here God promised to bless them and multiply their seed. He said their offspring would spread abroad to the north and south and east and west, that they would be given the land of Canaan for an everlasting possession, and that He would protect them and guide them and give them victory in battle (possess the gates of their enemies). He said all those who blessed them would be blessed and those who cursed them would be cursed. Finally, He said that in them all the families of the earth would be blessed.

However, the promise (singular) that Paul refers to—for which he was arrested—is absent from the promises God made to the fathers. There is no mention of a coming Messiah in these promises. Neither is there any mention of a resurrection. Yet Paul said he was in chains because he believed Jesus' death and resurrection was "the hope of the promise made of God unto our fathers". In other words, Paul said the hope of Israel was a person. How can he say that? How can he say that Messiah was "the promise" given to the patriarchs when such a promise is never even mentioned? How did he come to the conclusion that the hope of Israel was a person?

And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed. So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.

Galatians 3:8‑9

The Lord showed Paul that when God told Abraham all the nations would be blessed by him, He was announcing in advance the coming of the gospel, by which both Jews and Gentiles are saved. Thus, Paul interprets that promise as having been fulfilled in his day by a person.

Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith...

Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

Galatians 3:13‑14 & 29

Paul said the way the promise—"In thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed"—would be fulfilled was through the coming of Messiah. He said the seed was Christ and the blessing was the New Testament gospel. Yet this apostolic interpretation of the promise has been rejected by Dispensational teachers because their literal/historical/grammatical system of interpretation demands that they view National Israel as the seed and their Millennial ministry to the nations as the blessing.

Interpreting Old Testament promises and prophecies without the additional light provided by the New Testament will always produce a Dispensational mind-set, and this mind-set fits nicely into the nationalistic interpretation of Jewish scholars and teachers. The Jewish approach to the promises and prophecies of the Old Testament has always been strictly nationalistic. As far as they are concerned, the Old Testament is all about them—and this is true to a large degree because the Old Covenant was a national covenant. Under that covenant, everything revolved around National Israel. God promised to be their God. He promised that they would belong to Him in a special way. He promised that they would be a blessing and a light to the other nations.

But as the Scripture records, the people of Israel walked in constant rebellion and this forced God to eventually move against them in severe judgment. Yet even after He scattered them across the face of the earth, the prophets consoled them regarding their future restoration. They assured them that God had not forgotten them and that based on His promise to Abraham, He would yet fulfill His word to them.

Thus, the Jewish interpretation of the promises to Abraham and the words of the prophets was that God planned to give them an earthly kingdom in which they would be exalted above, and rule over, the Gentile nations. They assumed that someday in the future—regardless of how rebellious they were—God would be obligated to fulfill His promise to Abraham so they could carry out their call as a light and a blessing to the nations. This view was partially right and partially wrong. It was partially right because some day Messiah will return to this earth and establish a very real kingdom, just like the prophets predicted. His throne will be established in Jerusalem and exalted above the nations (Gentiles). When that day comes, many Jews from all ages will rule with Him.

However, it was partially wrong because neither Abraham or the prophets were shown God's plan to include believing Gentiles in that kingdom. This reality was reserved for the New Testament. In other words, because the revelation contained in the Old Testament was only a partial revelation of God's plan, the Jewish interpretation of that revelation was incomplete. Jewish expositors never have understood that in the plan of God, many Gentiles were destined to become part of Israel's heritage and destiny.

Since Jewish leaders have never understood this reality, they have always combined the promise to Abraham about his seed blessing all the families of the earth, with the words of the prophets about Israel's future restoration, and also the predictions about the coming glory of Messiah's kingdom, and interpreted them as the establishment of a strictly Jewish, earthly kingdom. To this day religious Jews await the establishment of that kingdom. In fact, this is one of the main arguments they use when faced with the truth that Jesus is the Messiah. They say: "If Yeshua was the Messiah, why is there no peace on earth? If He was the Deliverer, why do the nations hate Israel? Why are they seeking to destroy it? If He was the Messiah, where is the kingdom?"

It wasn't wrong for Jewish scholars to believe the words of the prophets. It wasn't even wrong for them to view those words within a strictly nationalistic framework because the Old Covenant was a national covenant. What was wrong was that they refused to let go of that nationalistic interpretation after Messiah came and shed new light on the promises and the prophet's words. What was wrong was that they rejected the further revelation of God's plan that Jesus tried to share. Both in word and deed, the Lord, and later His apostles, tried to show the Jews that their view of their own destiny was wrong because it was incomplete. Unfortunately the Jewish leaders rejected this truth—and so do Dispensational religious leaders.

The Dispensational view of that promise, like the Jewish view, is that National Israel is the seed and their future exaltation over the Gentiles (during the Millennium) is the blessing that was predicted to come upon the nations. But as we have seen, Paul said very clearly that Jesus is the seed. He became a curse for us so the blessing of Abraham (salvation) might come upon us. How then will you interpret Paul's words? Will you accept his interpretation of the promise to Abraham concerning his seed? Will you believe that Messiah is the seed and salvation is the blessing or will you continue to insist that National Israel is the seed and their Millennial ministry is the blessing? Maybe those who find it difficult to accept what Paul said will find it easier to accept Peter's interpretation of that promise.

Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed. Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.

Acts 3:25-26

Keep in mind that on the Day of Pentecost, Peter was not simply engaging the crowd in some kind of religious debate. He was speaking under the direct inspiration of the Holy Spirit. So his interpretation of the promise was God's interpretation of that promise! He says: (1) the "seed" God was talking about way back there in Genesis was Messiah, not National Israel.

(2) The "blessing" Abraham's seed was destined to bestow on the families of the earth was not some future Jewish kingdom but the gospel (by which we are turned away from our iniquities).

(3) Far from being exalted over the nations and ministering to them, Israel itself was one of the nations that needed to receive Abraham's blessing. In fact, they had to receive the blessing before it could be offered to the nations because they were the children of the prophets—it was promised to them first.

How about it, dear reader? Do you have the courage to accept the obviously intended meaning of Peter's words here or will you look for another meaning? Will you accept this New Testament interpretation of that Old Testament promise or will you keep believing the Jewish/Dispensational view? What we as pro-Israel Christians need to understand is that since the Jewish people follow only the Old Testament, and since their interpretation of that Testament is strictly nationalistic, they have replaced Messiah with themselves as the center of God's plan. In their minds, they are the "seed" (of Abraham) that is destined to "bless" the nations, not Messiah. Considering their blinded condition, such a view is not at all unreasonable. As a matter of fact, this is the only logical view to hold. However, it's absolutely wrong for Christians to think this way because we are not blind (at least we shouldn't be). We have the full revelation of the New Testament to help us understand the partial revelation (promises/prophecies) of the Old Testament.

The fact that the nationalistic (Jewish/Dispensational) interpretation of this promise is completely absent from the preaching of Peter and Paul should make any thinking Dispensationalist sit up and take notice. For whatever may be said about Paul, we know Peter was a good nationalist. He was so patriotic he wouldn't even step foot inside the house of a Gentile. God had to give him a supernatural vision before he would even consider taking the message of the gospel to anyone but Jews.

In addition, his ministry was to Jews, not Gentiles. If he thought the Jewish interpretation of prophecy was correct, you can be sure he would have found some way to mention it but he never does. In fact, when he stands before a huge Jewish crowd on the Day of Pentecost he says just the opposite. He tells his fellow Jews to stop waiting for their interpretation of the promise to be fulfilled. He tells them to stop waiting to be exalted over the Gentiles and recognize that the promise was being fulfilled in their day.

For I tell you that Christ has become a servant of the Jews on behalf of God's truth, to confirm the promises made to the patriarchs so that the Gentiles may glorify God for his mercy, as it is written: "Therefore I will praise you among the Gentiles; I will sing hymns to your name."

NIV Romans 15:8‑9

For the apostles, the issue of how this particular promise was to be fulfilled was very important because God's faithfulness was at stake. They boldly testified that Jesus was Israel's Messiah, and that He came to "confirm the promises made to the patriarchs". That is, He came to fulfill them. However, if the Jewish/Dispensational interpretation of that promise is correct, then the apostles were deceived and God has been proven a liar because Messiah came—yet He failed to deliver Israel from their bondage to the Gentiles. Messiah came—yet there has been no establishment of a glorious Jewish Kingdom on earth. Messiah came—yet the Jewish people have no ministry to the nations. In fact, far from being a blessing to the nations, the current Jewish State is a curse upon them (as far as they are concerned).

The apostles said Messiah came and confirmed (past tense) the promise made to the Patriarchs. Dispensationalists say Messiah came and tried to confirm that promise but couldn't because the Jews rejected Him. As a result, God had to implement "Plan B". He turned to the Gentiles and created a brand new, special dispensation for them. Then He created a new and different destiny for them. Some day this dispensation will end and Messiah will return. When He does, the Jews will accept Him and then He will be able to confirm the promise.

So we are faced with a choice. Will we accept the words of the apostles when they tell us the faithfulness of God has already been vindicated through the coming of Messiah? Or will we continue to insist that His faithfulness will be vindicated in the future, when National Israel becomes the fulfillment of that promise during the Millennium? Since the issue at stake is nothing less than the faithfulness of God, Paul dedicates three whole chapters in the book of Romans (9-11) to explain how God has (in his day) kept His word to Abraham.

It is not as though God's word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel. Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham's children. On the contrary, It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned." In other words, it is not the natural children who are God's children, but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham's offspring.

NIV Romans 9:6

Paul said that God originally gave his fellow Jews the promises. Included in the promises (plural) was the promise (singular) to Abraham about his seed blessing all the families of the earth. That particular promise was the most important one of them all. He says that even though the majority of the Jews never obtained that promise, this does not mean God's word has failed because a minority of them did obtain it. He then defines the difference between the majority and the remnant.

Those who disqualified themselves were Jews by birth but they were not considered Abraham's "children" because they did not possess the faith of Abraham and they didn't do the works of Abraham. This group made up a majority of National Israel. Those who obtained the promises were also Jews by birth. But because they possessed the faith of Abraham and did the works of Abraham, God considered them the "children of the promise". This is what he means when he says: "Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel".

I say then, has God cast away His people? Certainly not! For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. God has not cast away His people whom He foreknew. Or do you not know what the Scripture says of Elijah, how he pleads with God against Israel, saying, "Lord, they have killed Your prophets and torn down Your altars, and I alone am left, and they seek my life"?

But what does the divine response say to him? "I have reserved for Myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal." Even so then, at this present time there is a remnant according to the election of grace. And if by grace, then it is no longer of works; otherwise grace is no longer grace. But if it is of works, it is no longer grace; otherwise work is no longer work. What then? Israel has not obtained what it seeks; but the elect have obtained it, and the rest were blinded.

NKJV Romans 11:1‑7

The whole point Paul is trying to make in these chapters is that God is not a liar just because the promise He made to Abraham was never fulfilled to the nation as a whole. First of all, the promise was the coming of Messiah—and He came. Second, there were in Paul's day a remnant of Jews (called "the elect") who were viewed by God as the children of promise, and who received the blessing (salvation) brought to them by Abraham's seed (Jesus). As proof of this reality Paul gives himself as an example. He is a (Jewish) child of promise, part of that elect remnant who has received the blessing of Abraham.

Now unless you ware willing to "spiritualize" away the literal meaning of these statements, there is no way around the fact that according to Paul, the promise made to the fathers was fulfilled to a remnant of their children. However, if the Jewish/Dispensational interpretation of the promise is correct, then Paul could never have made this kind of a defense. The validity of his whole argument rests on this one point: God's promise to Abraham was being fulfilled through the redemption that was being experienced at that time by a remnant of his physical offspring.

According to the Scripture then, the hope of National Israel and that of the Church are the same—salvation through Messiah's blood. There is no New Testament basis or authority for teaching that the promise God made to Abraham about his seed blessing all the families of the earth has anything to do with the exaltation of ethnic Jews over the Gentiles in the next age. You can only maintain such a view by ignoring the apostolic interpretation of that promise and replacing it with a nationalistic/Dispensational one.

One Inheritance

Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect. For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.

Galatians 3:16‑18

For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect: Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression. Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law [Jews], but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham [Gentiles]; who is the father of us all,

Romans 4:14‑16

As we said already, reading the Scripture through a Dispensational lense will cause us to divide the people of God and the promises of God. It will also cause us to divide the one inheritance into two different sub-categories: an earthly one for Abraham's natural seed (Israel) and a heavenly one for his spiritual seed (the Church). Yet Paul never speaks about two different inheritances! He speaks of one inheritance and says that because this one inheritance was given by promise, it can only be obtained through faith. You can't obtain it just by being born Jewish or by obeying the Law. It's obtained by faith—and God has made faith available to both Jews and Gentiles.

And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise: God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.

Hebrews 11:39‑40

The connection between the saints of the Old Testament and those of the New Testament is shown by the writer of Hebrews. The phrase "these all" is clearly a reference to the Old Testament heros of the faith. The writer says that even though these Old Testament saints obtained a good report, they still didn't receive the inheritance that was promised because God has ordained that we all receive it together at Messiah's return. Also, notice very carefully that the promise being referred to is the promise of being "made perfect". The promises God made in the Old Testament—whether to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, to Moses, to King David, or to Israel as a nation—have not been abrogated or postponed. Some were fulfilled in the Old Testament. Some have been expanded and are in the process of being fulfilled in this New Testament age. The rest will be fulfilled after Messiah returns.

Those who adhere to (what they call) "literal" interpretation will never be able to grasp this simple truth because in their minds, the promises of the Old Testament can only be fulfilled by Future National Israel—that is, by a completely separate, geo-political nation of ethnic Jews. Since they assume the promises of the Old Covenant and the promises of the New Covenant are completely different groups of promises, they will never understand that God can fulfill any (presently) unfulfilled promises to Abraham simply by bringing his physical descendants into the New Covenant. It's unfortunate that the ones who are screaming, "literal interpretation, literal interpretation" the loudest, are the very ones who fail to actually interpret the promises literally! Consider, for example, the promise God made to Abraham about possessing the Land of Canaan forever:

And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee. And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.

Genesis 17:7‑8

God promised Abraham that both he and his seed would possess the Land of Canaan forever. That promise has never been fulfilled. Abraham never possessed it at all, and his offspring have only possessed it for short periods of time. The actual fulfillment of this promise is yet future. Thus, when Abraham is raised from the dead, Dispensational teachers say he will not be part of the Church, but rather, part of Israel. He will reside in the land God promised him.

What about Abraham's offspring? What about the Old Testament (Jewish) heros of the faith in the book of Hebrews? Where will they go when they are raised? What about Abraham's offspring in the New Testament? All twelve apostles were his physical offspring. The 70 were his seed. The 120 in the Upper Room, as well as the apostle Paul, were his seed. Indeed, the whole Early Church in and around Jerusalem was composed of Abraham's biological offspring. Where will these Jews go? And what about his offspring over the last 1900 years who have accepted Jesus as their Messiah?

Dispensational teachers say all Jews who died under the Old Covenant will come forth and dwell with Abraham (and with Restored National Israel) in the land God promised them. But those who died (or who are still living) under the New Covenant will be raised and be with the Church in heaven. This view doesn't square with a truly literal interpretation because when you apply Darby's system to this particular promise, there can be only one outcome. Every faithful Jew who has ever lived will eventually have to dwell with Abraham in the Land of Canaan, for God plainly said: "I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee" this land for an everlasting possession.

Again, a truly literal interpretation of Abraham's land-promise requires that all biological Jews—including those who have accepted Messiah— be separated from the rest of mankind after the return of the Lord so they can dwell in the land God promised them. In order to come to any other conclusion, you will have to spiritualize that promise in some way. However, when the full revelation of the New Testament is added to the partial revelation of the Old Testament regarding this promise, what was said about Abraham inheriting the land begins to take on a whole new meaning. The apostolic interpretation of this promise is very interesting.

For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.

Romans 4:13

By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise: For he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.

Hebrews 11:9‑10

With the additional revelation provided by the apostles, we see the promise has been expanded. Abraham is going to inherit a lot more territory than just the Land of Canaan. He's going to inherit the world. In addition, we see that Abraham was looking for more than just an earthly land called Canaan. He desired to be part of a "city" whose builder and maker is God—that is, the New Jerusalem. Since Revelation 3:12 and Hebrews 12:22 tell us the New Jerusalem is the Church, it should be obvious that when the writer of Hebrews said Abraham desired to be part of a heavenly city, he was desiring to be part of the Church. Yet in spite of all this, Mr. Darby and his followers insist that Abraham will never be part of the Church!

Friends, our view of Abraham has been greatly diminished by all the Dispensational nonsense we've been taught. Abraham was not a carnal man. He was a spiritual giant! His walk with the unseen God puts our walk to shame. Without the advantage of the indwelling Holy Spirit or the full revelation of the New Testament, he followed God more faithfully and obeyed Him more radically than any of us do. So you can be sure his reward is going to be much greater than Dispensational theologians allow.

Part of the inheritance prepared for God's people is reigning over the nations with Jesus. But Dispensationalists deprive us of this part of our inheritance because they believe that being part of Messiah's earthly reign is something that belongs to National Israel alone. The destiny of the Church, they say, is the "New Jerusalem"—that is, heaven. This is the original Dispensational view and for more than a hundred years it was maintained by famous scholars like A. C. Gaebelein, Clarence Larkin, Cyrus Scofield and Lewis Chafer. Gaebelein, whose commentary on Matthew was published in 1910, wrote that the promises to National Israel are "all earthly". Then he said:

"The church, however, is something entirely different. The hope of the church, the place of the church, the calling of the church, the destiny of the church, the reigning and the ruling of the church is not earthly, but it is heavenly." 2

In 1920 Clarence Larkin wrote:

"...the 'wife' (Israel) is to reside in the earthly Jerusalem during the Millennium, while the 'Bride' (the Church) will reside in the New Jerusalem." 3

C. I. Scofield—whose annotated Bible influenced so many people—made this same distinction. Though the New Scofield Reference Bible is not as clear in its statements, it still implies an earthly destiny for Israel. In the Scofield Bible Correspondence Course (pp. 23-25) we find the following statement:

"Comparing, then, what is said in Scripture concerning Israel and the Church, we find that in origin, calling, promises, worship, principles of conduct and future destiny all is contrast."

Lewis Chafer, a founding father and first president of Dallas Theological Seminary, wrote:

"The particular point in view here is the fact that all her [National Israel's] blessings, her riches both temporal and spiritual, become her portion when she enters the land. This is the heart of Old Testament prediction. Israel can never be blessed apart from her land...Every covenant, promise and provision for Israel is earthly, and they continue as a nation with the earth when it is created new. Every covenant or promise for the Church is for a heavenly reality, and she continues in heavenly citizenship when the heavens are recreated." 5

One of the most unscriptural positions you can possibly take is that the Church of Jesus Christ will not be ruling the nations of the earth from the earth during the next age. Indeed, as far as this writer is concerned, it takes quite a bit of audacity to deny such a clear truth of the New Testament and then turn around and say you believe in the "literal" interpretation of Scripture! So let's compare the statements of these Dispensational scholars with the testimony of Scripture. Speaking to the (mostly Gentile) Christians in the city of Thyatira, the apostle John wrote:

But that which ye have already hold fast till I come. And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations: And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father.

Revelation 2:25‑27

Mr. Gaebelein, Mr. Larkin, Mr. Scofield and Mr. Chafer obviously did not interpret this portion of Scripture literally did they? Why not? Further on in the book of Revelation we find the 24 elders singing a song of praise to the Lord because they had been redeemed.

And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation, and hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.

Revelation 5:9‑10

Those who say the Church will not rule the nations from the earth do not interpret this portion of Scripture literally either, do they? Why couldn't these brilliant scholars accept the evident meaning of John's words? Could anything be clearer than the following statement—"We shall reign on the earth"? Can there be any doubt as to what Jesus meant when He said—"He that overcometh...to him will I give power over the nations"?

But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

Revelation 20:5‑6

Those who say the Church will not rule the nations of this earth from the earth don't interpret this portion of Scripture literally either, do they? And why not? The angel clearly said that when Jesus returns (at the first resurrection), those who are raised at that time will reign with Him for a thousand years. Again, could anything be clearer than the following statement— "they shall be priests of God and of Christ."? They shall be priests!

Friends, I don't care how many Old Testament prophecies a preacher or prophet or apostle claims to understand, or how may of those prophecies he can quote to support his views; the New Testament says we who are raised at the first resurrection will be functioning as God's "priests" during the next age. It says we will be carrying out that function "on the earth". Any idea, any concept, any teaching that contradicts this truth is simply a lie.

These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, which shall arise out of the earth. But the saints of the most High shall take the kingdom, and possess the kingdom for ever, even for ever and ever...I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them; Until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom...

But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his [Antichrist's] dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end. And the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him.

Daniel 7:17-18; 21-22; 26‑27

Daniel said that one day the saints (Jew or Gentile, it makes no difference) will "possess" the Kingdom of God. And just in case there is any question as to where that kingdom will be located when this time comes, he settles the issue. Please notice that he didn't say we would be given the kingdom of heaven, or the kingdom in heaven, or the kingdom above heaven. He said we would be given the kingdom under heaven—an obvious reference to the earth.

Rest in the Lord, and wait patiently for him: fret not thyself because of him who prospereth in his way, because of the man who bringeth wicked devices to pass. Cease from anger, and forsake wrath: fret not thyself in any wise to do evil. For evildoers shall be cut off: but those that wait upon the Lord, they shall inherit the earth. For yet a little while, and the wicked shall not be: yea, thou shalt diligently consider his place, and it shall not be. But the meek shall inherit the earth; and shall delight themselves in the abundance of peace.

Psalm 37:7‑11

Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted. Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth. Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled.

Matthew 5:4‑6

Both the Old and the New Testament declares that "the meek" (not the Jews!) shall inherit the earth. Messiah Himself was the one who said this in the New Testament. Therefore, those who say the Church will not inherit the earth bear the burden of proof. They need to explain on what basis and by who's authority they reject the "literal" meaning of Messiah's own words.

Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion. I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee. Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession. Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.

Psalm 2:6‑9

All the promises of God—whether given to Israel or the Church—find their ultimate fulfilment in Messiah. It's not the Jewish nation or the Gentile Church which is the focus and center of everything—it's Messiah! Contrary to what we have been taught, God never promised National Israel that He would give them the nations. The promise about inheriting the nations was given to the Son. If you want to partake of that promise, then you must be found in Him.

The purpose of the Old Covenant was to give National Israel a chance to be found in the Son through faith. The purpose of the New Covenant is to give individuals from every nation the same chance to be found in the Son through faith. No Jew or Gentile will be exalted over the nations in the next age unless they become part of Messiah.

The Scripture states in the most explicit terms possible that we will be given the kingdom, that we will possess the kingdom, that we will take the kingdom, that we will be priests of God for a thousand years in that kingdom, and that as kings in that kingdom we will have power over the nations and will rule them with a rod of iron.

Now why would people reject the obvious meaning of these statements? Why especially would those who claim to be the great defenders of literal interpretation reject the literal meaning of these statements and go searching for another meaning? The reason is simple: these verses do not support Darby's Dispensational model. They clash with his literal/historical/grammatical system. Indeed, if taken literally they destroy the very foundation of Dispensationalism because they reveal that the privileges which supposedly belong to National Israel alone, actually belong to Messiah—and to all who are His. The inheritance of the saints, which is based on the promises God made to Abraham and his seed, but which has been divided into earthly and heavenly components by Darby and his followers, is actually one glorious inheritance. It's both an earthly and a heavenly inheritance. Therefore, dear reader, understand that the Land of Canaan belongs to the one people of God. Earthly Jerusalem belongs to the one people of God. Heavenly Jerusalem belongs to the one people of God. The whole planet belongs to the one people of God.

Salvation belongs to the one people of God. The promise of the Spirit belongs to the one people of God. The promise of transformation into the image of Christ belongs to the one people of God. The promise of the resurrection from the dead belongs to the one people of God. The call to be a light to the nations belongs to the one people of God. The call to be a holy nation and a peculiar treasure belongs to the one people of God. The promise to rule and bless the nations with Messiah belongs to the one people of God

EVERYTHING BELONGS TO THE ONE PEOPLE OF GOD!

One New Man

The most important promise God made to Abraham was the promise about his seed blessing all the families of the earth. That seed is Jesus and the blessing is salvation. Numerous aspects of the salvation Jesus brought—such as forgiveness, justification and imputed righteousness—were already known and could be experienced by Old Testament saints. However, the ultimate purpose of redemption was not revealed and could not be experienced by them. The full knowledge of the purpose of salvation was reserved for this present age and it's the central message of the New Testament.

For he is our peace, who hath made both [Jew and Gentile] one [in Christ], and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;

Ephesians 2:14‑15

Here Paul gives us a glimpse of what God is really doing. He's taking two parts of the old creation—parts that have always been at enmity with each other—and making "one new man" out of them. Please notice that he doesn't say Jews and Gentiles are being made new men (plural). He said we are being made "one new man" (singular). He mentions this new man again, later in the same letter to the Ephesians.

Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

Ephesian 4:13

Not only are Jews and Gentiles being made a new race, or a new kind of man, we are being made a perfect man because we are being formed in righteousness and true holiness. We are being fashioned after the image of God.

That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts; and be renewed in the spirit of your mind; and that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.

Ephesians 4:22‑24

Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds; and have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him.

Colossians 3:9‑10

Paul calls the creation which fell because of Adam's transgression the "old man". He calls the new creation which is created in righteousness and holiness the "new man". Then he tells us to put off the old man and put on the new man. Why? Because the new man is the end product. It's the thing God is after. Then Paul gives the Colossian believers a description of the new man. He says the same basic thing to the Galatian believers. In this new creation, in this new and perfect man, there is neither Jew or Gentile.

Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all.

Colossians 3:11

For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. [In which] There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

Galatians 3:27‑29

In Ephesians 4:24 Paul said we are to "put on" the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness. In the above verse he said we are to "put on" Christ, where there is neither Jew or Greek, bond or free, male or female. So the new man and Christ are synonymous.

And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit. Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven. As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly. And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.

I. Corinthians 15:45‑49

Jesus Christ is the "last Adam" and the "second man" because He is the beginning (head, forerunner) of God's new creation. This is why Paul said things like: "...if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new" (II. Cor 5:17). And again: "....in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature" (Gal 6:15). In order to demonstrate just how different the new and the old man are, Paul sums up the distinctions that are peculiar to the old man. The old man is divided into nationalities (Greek, Barbarian, Scythian), into social classes (bond and free), into genders (male and female), and finally, into those who are chosen (circumcision, Jews) and those who are not chosen (uncircumcision, Gentiles). But in the new man—that is, in Christ—none of these distinctions exist. Christ is neither Jew or Gentile, male or female, slave or free. He is a completely new kind of creation.

Under the Old Covenant it wasn't possible to become part of this new man (in experience) because it wasn't possible to be made perfect. This is why, in chapter eleven of the book of Hebrews, the writer said that even though the heros of the faith obtained a good report, they didn't receive the promise of being made perfect. This is also why he says things like:

If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood (for on the basis of it the law was given to the people), why was there still need for another priest to come - one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron?

NIV Hebrews 7:11

Hebrews 7:19 For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God.

This is why a new covenant had to be instituted. Under the New Covenant, it's possible to be made perfect (in actual experience). Under the New Covenant, it's possible to become part of that new race of people God is creating.

To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory: Whom we preach, warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus:

Colossians 1:27‑28

With the additional revelation provided in the New Testament, we can begin to see how all these things are related. The Old Covenant promise to Abraham about his seed blessing the nations has been expanded under the New Covenant. The blessing (salvation) Abraham's seed (Jesus) brought, makes both Jews and Gentiles a new creation. It makes us perfect!

Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself: That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him.

Ephesians 1:9‑10

Here Paul states rather plainly what God's ultimate purpose is. His purpose is to gather "all things" in heaven and earth together in Christ. All things includes all Old Testament things as well. In other words, God intends to bring every person who has ever truly walked by faith—whether under the Old or the New Covenant, whether dead or alive—into this new creation. Dispensationalists will not (indeed they cannot) interpret Paul's words literally because the very logic of their system prevents them from doing so. They look at the Scripture and see two completely different kinds of salvation—one for Old Testament saints (which will also apply to Restored National Israel in the Millennium) and one for New Testament saints.

In his classic Dispensational work entitled "Systematic Theology", Lewis Chafer laments the fact that non-Dispensational ministers seek to place Old Testament saints on the same level as those in the Church. He says:

"It has been a constant disposition on the part of certain writers to invest OT saints with the same position, qualities, and standing as those which belong to the believers who comprise the Church. And there is more recently a disposition to carry the same realities that belong to the saved of this dispensation over into the kingdom dispensation and to Jews and Gentiles alike. Such assumptions are avoided when it is recognized that to the Church alone is accorded the heavenly position and glory. Of her alone it is declared that each of her members who make up Christ’s Body is made meet to be a partaker of the inheritance of the saints in light."

Systematic Theology III: 327

According to Mr. Chafer, the (OT) heros of the faith, those who have received a good report because of their faith, are doomed to experience an inferior version of salvation just because they were Jews and lived in a different age.

Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. For by it the elders obtained a good report....These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.

Hebrews 11:1‑2 & 13-15

The writer of Hebrews said that by faith "the elders" of the Old Testament obtained a good report. They lived by faith and they died in faith. The elders being referred to are Able, Enoch, Noah, Abraham and Sarah. Moreover, while living on this earth, they saw themselves as strangers and pilgrims.

For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country. And truly, if they had been mindful of that country from whence they came out, they might have had opportunity to have returned. But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city.

Hebrews 11:14-16

The way these elders lived (by faith) proved that they were not mindful of the earthly country from whence they came. Neither were they looking for another earthly country. They looked for a heavenly country—and because they looked for a heavenly country, God is not ashamed to be called their God and He has "prepared for them a city".

But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,.

Hebrews 12: 22‑24

The "city" God has prepared for these Old Testament elders is called mount Sion, the city of the living God, and the heavenly Jerusalem. The heavenly Jerusalem is the new Jerusalem. In other words, the Scripture says the faithful saints of the Old Testament are part of the heavenly Jerusalem. They are part of the new creation! Notice very carefully how the writer of Hebrews describes the people who are part of the heavenly Jerusalem. He calls them "the general assembly and church of the first born". In other words, those who become part of heavenly Jerusalem are part of the Church! In addition, they are described as "just men made perfect". Did you catch that? Just men MADE PERFECT! When the writer says just men made perfect, it's the same as saying Old Testament saints brought into the new creation. Yet Mr. Chafer says:

"Much divine blessing is determined for Israel, all of which is anticipated in her covenants and prophecies; but no covenant or prophecy brings that nation into heavenly citizenship, or makes her the Bride of Christ."

Systematic Theology IV:219; 142

Here we have a famous Dispensational scholar directly contradicting the written Word of God! The book of Hebrews states very clearly that God has prepared the heavenly Jerusalem—which is the bride of Christ, which is the Church—for faithful Old Testament saints. Yet in spite of this, Mr. Chafer confidently declares that the heavenly Jerusalem was prepared for the Church alone. He says no covenant or prophesy bestows "heavenly citizenship" upon Old Testament saints or makes them part of the bride of Christ. So once again, dear reader, you are faced with a choice. Will you accept the clearly intended meaning of the apostle's statement in Hebrews, or will you continue to believe the error of this Dispensational theologian?

There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; One Lord, one faith, one baptism, One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

Ephesians 4:4‑6

The apostle Paul said there is "one faith". That means there is only one program of salvation. It started in the Garden and God has been moving it to it's intended climax ever since. Some aspects of this program were revealed in the Old Testament and could be experienced by Old Testament saints. Other aspects have been revealed in the New Testament and are presently being experienced by Christians. The goal of this program is the establishment of a new creation—one that is incorruptible, fashioned in righteousness after the image of God. Paul called this new creation one new man and the writer of Hebrews said all Abraham's faithful children will eventually be gathered into this new man.

The Kingdom Jew

We have seen that in the name of literal interpretation, Dispensational teachers deny New Testament saints their earthly reward as kings and priests in Messiah's kingdom. They also deny Old Testament saints their heavenly reward of being part of the new Jerusalem and the new creation. Not being content to deprive all these saints of their reward, they also seek to deprive Jews who enter Messiah's kingdom the salvation we enjoy. According to Dispensational teachers, the Jews who survive the Tribulation and go into the kingdom will experience a different kind of salvation than Christians experience. That salvation—which is an inferior salvation—will be based on a different covenant. This idea is a central theme of Dispensational writers. One such writer, named Miles J. Stanford, says:

"It is true that the salvation of the Christian and the salvation of the kingdom Jew both depend upon the Blood of the Cross. But there is neither similarity nor comparison between them! The kingdom Jew is given access to the land, and the Messianic kingdom, via the Blood. The heavenly Christian has his position in the Holiest of All. He is seated in the heavenlies, now...It is also true that the kingdom Jew will be indwelt by the Spirit of God. And for what purpose?

"And, I will put My Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you shall keep My ordinances, and do them" (Ezek. 36:27). As He promised through Jeremiah 31:33, "I will make a new covenant with [whom?] the house of Israel, and the house of Judah ...I will put My [theocratic kingdom] law in their inward parts, and write it upon their hearts."

The infinite, incomparable contrast [between the Christian and the kingdom Jew] is that the indwelling Spirit of Christ brings the very life and nature of the glorified Lord Jesus Christ into the Christian as his very Christian life! He does not produce the works of the law, but rather the gracious fruit of the Spirit, the lovely characteristics of the divine/human life of the Lord Jesus."

The Dispensational Gospels

In order to understand how this writer came to this conclusion you have to understand that Dispensationalists do not believe Jesus came to establish the "gospel of grace". Rather, He came to set up an earthly Jewish kingdom based on law. Establishing the gospel and the dispensation of grace was an after-thought, necessitated by His rejection. The laws this kingdom was to be based on were the teachings of Jesus as found in the four Gospels, which Dispensationalists refer to as "kingdom laws". These laws are connected to the Law of Moses and have nothing to do with grace or the Christian New Covenant. Their purpose was to explain to those who were already living under the Law, how they should live in the Messianic kingdom.

However, since the Jews rejected Jesus, the establishment of the Jewish kingdom—which was to be based on Law—had to be postponed. The Jews had to be set aside and a new dispensation had to be created. Along with this new dispensation came a new gospel (the gospel of grace) which offered a new kind of salvation to a brand new people of God (the Gentiles). Then a new destiny (living in heaven) had to be created and a new name (the Church) given to this new people. One day this dispensation will end. The Church will be raptured into heaven and the Great Tribulation will begin. The wrath of God will be poured out and Messiah will return to establish His kingdom—the same Jewish kingdom that was postponed in 33AD., which was to be based on old creation laws rather than the new creation life produced by the New Covenant.

This is why Mr. Stanford can say there is no similarity between the salvation we enjoy and the salvation Jews in the Messianic kingdom will experience. He says the kingdom Jew will be indwelt by the Spirit, but not for the same purpose we are. God gives us the Spirit so we will produce "fruit"—which is His life and character. They will be given the Spirit in order to produce "the works of the law". Dr. Lewis Chafer said:

"The teachings of the Kingdom have not been applied to men in all ages; nay, they have not been applied to any man. Since they anticipate the binding of Satan, a purified earth, the restoration of Israel, and the personal reign of the King, they cannot be applied until God’s appointed time when these accompanying conditions on the earth have been brought to pass...The kingdom laws will be addressed to Israel and beyond them to all the nations which will enter the Kingdom. It will be the first and only universal reign of righteousness and peace in the history of the world...The Church is not once mentioned in relation to the teachings of the Kingdom, nor are those teachings applied to her; for her part in the Kingdom is not to be reigned over, but to reign with Christ, her Head..."

Systematic Theology (IV: 224)

According to Mr. Chafer, nothing Jesus taught in the Gospels has any bearing on the Church, nor can it be applied to the Church. What Jesus said was meant strictly for Jews living under the Law. His teachings were supposed to be the basis for life in the Messianic kingdom. Since that kingdom was postponed, all the Lord's teachings are relegated to the future.

J. Butler Stoney, a Darby contemporary, said the difference between the Christian and the kingdom Jew is that the Christian is now joined to Christ and is one spirit with Him. As a result, we are free from the law (of sin and death). But such is not the case with the kingdom Jew. He will never be joined to Christ, and neither will the Jews of the Old Testament.

"The future earthly kingdom saint will live here on earth, but he will not be united to the Lord Jesus, he will not be dead to the flesh and the world, and he will be a man living in all the commandments and ordinances of the law blameless. This then is the great difference; the heavenly saint has a standing of complete deliverance from the man in the flesh; while the millennial saint will be through grace empowered by the Spirit to do what God requires from man in the flesh. “For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord: I will put My laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts” (Heb. 8:10)...Thus we see the difference in status between the heavenly and the earthly saint. First, the connection with Christ is different, the saints during His rejection being united to Him in heaven, a privilege not known by, nor granted to, any other class of saints, neither to the OT saints, nor the millennial saints ."

Ministry X:36, 37

Apparently it never dawned on Mr. Stoney that this whole attitude is not only unscriptural, it's extremely arrogant. Nothing but religious Gentile pride would cause someone to say that Abraham—who was one of the greatest men of God in the Old Testament—will never be united to the Lord Jesus. Moreover, nothing but Gentile envy would say the Jews who enter the Messianic kingdom will never be joined to their own Messiah.

And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.

Revelation 21:1‑2

The book of Hebrews says Old Testament saints will be part of the heavenly Jerusalem, and John saw this Jerusalem descending out of heaven, prepared as a "bride adorned for her husband". Are we supposed to believe the saints who comprise this city will never be united to the Lord? What about the Jews who go into the Messianic kingdom after the Lord's return? Does the Scripture say they will never have union with Messiah?

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."

NIV Romans 11:25‑27

Speaking of the end of this age, Paul said that when the full number of Gentiles have been come in, all Israel will be saved. Exactly what kind of salvation will all Israel experience? The Greek word for salvation that Paul uses is "sozo" (sode'‑zo); which means "to save". He uses this same word in other places, like Ephesians 2:4‑6—By grace ye are saved—and II. Corinthians 2:15—For we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ, in them that are saved—and II. Timothy 1:9—Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling. Reading what Paul said—either in English or the Greek—would never lead one to the conclusion that the salvation Israel will soon experience is any different from the salvation we now experience. The belief that the two salvations are different must be read into the passage.

Paul's belief that all Israel will be saved wasn't just wishful thinking on his part. It was based on what had been written by the prophets of the Old Testament, two of whom he quotes. Virtually all Bible scholars agree that the first prophet he quoted was Isaiah, who wrote: "The deliverer will come from Zion; he will turn godlessness away from Jacob" (Isa. 59:20). But there is disagreement over the identity of the second quote because the word "covenant" is used.

Exactly which covenant was God talking about when he said—"this is my covenant with them when I take away their sins"? The logical assumption would be the New Covenant. Why? Because even though God made numerous kinds of covenants in Scripture, there is only one covenant that's designed to "take away" our sins. That covenant is the New Covenant—the one predicted by Jeremiah and established by Jesus. The Dispensationalist will reject this possibility because in his view, Jeremiah's new covenant is strictly for Jews. It pertains to an old creation race that's destined to dwell on the earth. It's purpose is not to bring the individual into Christ or make him a new creation, but rather, to prepare him to live under the laws of the kingdom—laws that are closely connected to Moses.

Since Dispensationalists assume there is no connection between Jeremiah's new covenant and the Christian New Covenant, they say Paul could not have meant that God intends to grant the kingdom Jew the same kind of salvation we enjoy. Quite the opposite! The salvation of the kingdom Jew, says the Dispensationalists, is inferior. Yes, he will be saved—but not like we are saved. He will never be granted heavenly citizenship. He will never have union with his own Messiah. He will never be part of the new creation. He must remain an old creation man. He will never be "dead to the flesh and the world". He will only be "living in all the commandments and ordinances of the law blameless".

Surely God's heart must be grieved over the fact that the very thing Paul warned against is exactly what's happened to the Church. Paul said he wanted Gentile believers to understand what happened to the Jews, and what will happen to them, so we would not become conceited—and conceited is a perfect description of the two views the Church holds regarding the Jews. At one end of the theological spectrum we have the conceit of Replacement Theology, which says God is finished with the Jews. At the other end is the conceit of Separation Theology, which says God is not finished with the Jews, but then turns around and deprives the kingdom Jew of the salvation his own Messiah has provided! A good example of Gentile conceit can be seen in the following statements by Dr. Chafer, taken again from his eight volume work, "Systematic Theology". He said:

There is a dangerous and entirely baseless sentiment abroad which assumes that every teaching of Jesus must be binding during this dispensation simply because He said it. The fact is forgotten that the Lord Jesus, while living under, keeping, and applying the Law of Moses, also taught the principles of His future Kingdom, and at the end of His ministry and in relation to His Cross, He also anticipated [not taught] the teachings of Grace. If this threefold division of His teachings is not recognized, there can be nothing but confusion of mind and consequent contradiction of truth.

Systematic Theology (IV: 224)

According to Mr. Chafer, the very idea that Christians should take the words of Jesus seriously is "dangerous" and "baseless". One wonders if he also thought the person who held such a view was dangerous. How about you, dear reader? Do you really believe the words your Lord spoke in the Gospels have nothing to do with you? Do you really believe the teachings of Jesus were "law", even though He said: "...the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life" (John 6:63)?

It's tragic that so few pro-Israel Christians have enough spiritual discernment to realize Dispensationalism is not just an error, it's a blasphemous error. Mr. Chafer, who was a brilliant theologian, never did realize that in the name of literal interpretation he was blaspheming his own Savior! Dispensational scholars have no idea they have been blinded by their own Gentile pride, so they can't see the wickedness that's produced by this theology. The whole Dispensational view of the kingdom Jew stands or falls on this one point: that there are two separate new covenants in the plan of God—one for the Jew (which is based on Law), and one for the Gentile (which is based on Grace). If it can be shown that there is only one new covenant, then the whole theory will collapse.

We sought to show in a previous chapter that there is only one New Covenant spoken of in the Scripture. Only one! Dispensational scholars have never been able to produce a single passage that even alludes to the idea—let alone one that plainly states—there are two new covenants. The whole idea is a fantasy and a lie, conceived by men who were desperate to protect a theology which is unscriptural. John F. Walvoord, a contemporary theologian, practically admits this fact in one of the books he has written. He said:

"My preference was stated earlier in this study for the view advanced by Lewis Sperry Chafer advocating two new covenants, one for the nation of Israel to be fulfilled in the millennium, the other for the Church to be fulfilled in this age...It would be difficult to adjust the ministry of Paul as a minister of the new covenant if, in fact, there is no new covenant for the present age. The concept of two new covenants is a better analysis of the problem and more consistent with premillennialism as a whole."

The Millennial Kingdom - pgs. 218 & 219

Notice that Mr. Walvrood says the theory of two different new covenants is a better answer to a "problem". The problem is that there's only one new covenant mentioned or predicted in the Old Testament—and God said that new covenant would be established with Israel and Judah. Jesus of Nazareth fulfilled that prophesy through His death and resurrection. He established Jeremiah's New Covenant with Israel. But the Gentiles are also partaking of this same covenant, which means Christians have become part of Israel, and this destroys the whole Dispensational house of cards. So Dispensational theologians, having rejected the testimony of Scripture, had to come up with an alternative theory. One of them got the bright idea that there must be another New Covenant. Obviously it didn't matter to this individual that there isn't a shred of Scriptural evidence to support such a wild idea. All he cared about was propping up his shaky theology.

Once you accept the truth that there is only one New Covenant, the absurdity of the statements these Dispensational leaders have made regarding the kingdom Jew becomes self evident. The kingdom Jew is not doomed to experience a lesser, inferior type of redemption. He will be brought into the same New Covenant Jesus established 2000 years ago. He will be brought into the same New Covenant Christians have been walking under. He will be brought into Christ, into the new creation.

The Temple

As we said already, whenever we read the Scripture through a Dispensational lense, everything is divided. Our minds are constantly separating, detaching, disconnecting and polarizing the one people of God, the one inheritance of the saints, and the one plan of salvation. Dispensationalists do not, indeed they cannot, see redemptive history as a single story about one people which is progressing and unfolding. They can only see two completely different stories—one about Jews who are destined to live on the earth, and the other about Gentiles who are destined to live in heaven. This prevents them from ever coming to a proper understanding of God's plan of redemption. They will never grasp the simple fact that the one program of salvation is always moving forward, never backward

For them, the Jewish story does not change. It cannot change. If it did, God would be proven a liar. When you apply Darby's literal/historical/grammatical interpretation to the promises made to Israel, you will always come up with the same view. God laid out a program for the Jewish race in the Old Testament and that program must be brought to pass in its strictest and most literal sense. It can never be altered. Yes, it has been temporarily delayed, but someday it will continue on just the way it was originally.

Dispensationalists firmly believe that since the Jews were called to be God's peculiar treasure and a light to the nations, they can only fulfill that call as a separate biological race of men. The idea that Gentiles could partake of that same call, or that Israel will become a new creation nation comprised of both Jews and Gentiles, is unthinkable. This naturally leads them to the conclusion that when Messiah returns, He will reestablish the Old Testament theocracy that existed in the days of King David, complete with a new temple and a reconstituted Levitical priesthood.

In order to substantiate this view, Dispensational teachers appeal to certain passages in the books of Daniel and Ezekiel. In these passages the prophets speak of how things will be in the Messianic kingdom. Ezekiel describes a temple, a Levitical priesthood, and various animal sacrifices in great detail. "See", says the Dispensationalists, "it says right here in Ezekiel that in the Millennium there will be a temple, a priesthood, and animal sacrifices. Since we believe God says what He means and means what He says, we think these verses should be interpreted literally".

There is just one problem. When it comes to the sacrifices mentioned in Daniel and Ezekiel, the same Dispensational scholars who insist on a strictly literal interpretation of these passages have come to see that they cannot really interpret them literally! You see, if they interpret these verses literally, they will be guilty of blasphemy because the book of Hebrews says Jesus made the final and ultimate sacrifice for sin.

For Christ did not enter a man‑made sanctuary that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God's presence. Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. Then Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But now he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself.

NIV Hebrews 9:24‑26

And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God; From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool. For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.

Hebrews 10:11‑14

Jesus appeared once for all to deliver us from sin by the sacrifice of Himself. Today there is only one offering, one sacrifice that's acceptable to God—the blood of Jesus. The blood of animals is no longer acceptable. Seeking forgiveness and reconciliation through animal sacrifices today is not only unacceptable, it's an abomination to God. It's like spitting in His face. So Dispensationalists are faced with a serious problem. If they interpret these verses literally, not only will they be making a complete mockery of the Lord's sacrifice, they will also be introducing a second way of salvation—that is, though the blood of bulls and goats.

They think they can get around this problem by saying the sacrifices in Ezekiel and Daniel are not expiatory sacrifices—that is, they're not really sacrifices for forgiveness. Their purpose is not to make atonement for sin. Rather, they are memorial sacrifices. Their purpose is simply to commemorate the once-and-for-all sacrifice made by Jesus. Of course this whole argument only serves to demonstrate the utter confusion and hypocrisy Dispensational theologians walk in because in the actual texts, no distinction is made between the offerings that provide forgiveness and reconciliation and the so called "memorial" offerings. For example:

And one lamb out of the flock, out of two hundred, out of the fat pastures of Israel; for a meat offering, and for a burnt offering, and for peace offerings, to make reconciliation for them, saith the Lord GOD. All the people of the land shall give this oblation for the prince in Israel. And it shall be the prince's part to give burnt offerings, and meat offerings, and drink offerings, in the feasts, and in the new moons, and in the sabbaths, in all solemnities of the house of Israel: he shall prepare the sin offering, and the meat offering, and the burnt offering, and the peace offerings, to make reconciliation for the house of Israel.

Ezekiel 45:15-17

Notice carefully that Ezekiel says the purpose of these sacrifices is to "make reconciliation". The English word "reconciliation" comes from the Hebrew root word, kaphar (kaw‑far'), which means to cover, to cleanse, to forgive, and to pardon. It's the same Hebrew word used in Leviticus and Numbers to describe propitiatory sacrifices. It means, quite literally, "to make atonement". However, you don't have to be a Hebrew scholar to see that the purpose of these sacrifices is to make atonement. Just read the passage in English! One of the offerings is described very clearly as a "sin offering". Yet in spite of all this, Dispensational leaders will tell you these offerings aren't really sin offerings; they're just memorial offerings. Looks like the defenders of literal interpretation won't hesitate to apply a non-literal meaning to a passage of Scripture if they think it's absolutely necessary.

Either the animal sacrifices mentioned by Daniel and Ezekiel are actual, literal, sin-atoning sacrifices (just like they say they are), or else they are symbolic. If they are actual sin offerings, then the priests who offer them will be mocking the blood of Christ and the Messianic kingdom will be one long age of blasphemy. If they were meant to be interpreted symbolically, then Darby's literal/historical/grammatical system should be tossed into the garbage dump where it belongs. And if they are symbolic, why couldn't the description of the priesthood and the Temple also be symbolic? Why couldn't Ezekiel's Temple be a description of a yet future spiritual temple?

If we see the plan of redemption as one unfolding story, then interpreting these passages symbolically isn't a problem because we will realize that all the temples in the Old Testament—including the one described by Ezekiel—were but types and shadows of the real temple Jesus is building today. We will realize that God never intended for us to view those temples as the end product. He never intended that we should expect Him to rebuild them and reestablish the old Levitical priesthood with it's animal sacrifices.

The Old Testament economy and sacrificial system are gone forever! God will never restore them because He has established a far better system through Messiah's blood. Also, He will never dwell in a temple made with human hands again. God is building a new kind of temple, which all the other temples simply foreshadowed.

Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God; And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord: In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.

Ephesians 2:19‑22

Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.

I. Peter 2:5

The apostles said we are being built together for an habitation of God through the Spirit. We are God's final temple. While the building of this temple could not actually begin until Messiah rose from the dead, God announced His intention to build it hundreds of years before Messiah was even born. Back while the Second Temple was yet under construction, God spoke of another temple which would be built by a mysterious person called "The Branch".

And the word of the LORD came unto me, saying, Take of them of the captivity, even of Heldai, of Tobijah, and of Jedaiah, which are come from Babylon, and come thou the same day, and go into the house of Josiah the son of Zephaniah; Then take silver and gold, and make crowns, and set them upon the head of Joshua the son of Josedech, the high priest; And speak unto him, saying, Thus speaketh the LORD of hosts, saying, Behold the man whose name is The BRANCH; and he shall grow up out of his place, and he shall build the temple of the LORD.

Zechariah 6:9-12

"The Branch" is Messiah—and the temple He is building is the temple New Testament believers are to be concerned about. This is the temple our minds should be focused on.

I. Corinthians 3:16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?

What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's.

I. Corinthians 6:19‑20

When correcting some of the abuses that were taking place in the church at Corinth, Paul asked this question—Know ye not that ye are the temple of God? This question should be put to contemporary believers, for surely they do not realize they are the temple of God. Whenever anyone says, "the temple of God", they automatically think of a building in Jerusalem because we are just as blind as the religious leaders of Jesus' day.

Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days? But he spake of the temple of his body.

John 2:19-21

Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded.

I. Peter 2:6

Jesus is a picture of what God intends for us. While He walked this earth He was the temple of God. The Father dwelt in Him and manifested Himself through Him. The Lord Jesus manifested the life and character of the Father among men. When people came to Him and asked for healing, help, advice, eternal life or anything else, He had the power to grant that request because He was the living temple of God on earth. When the religious leaders of Israel confronted Jesus, He said, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up". In saying this, He was letting those leaders know—albeit in a subtle way—that the whole idea of God dwelling in a stone building was changing. The program of salvation was progressing and expanding. God's ultimate goal was not to dwell in temples made of stone, but to dwell in vessels of clay. He was letting them know that He was the person Zechariah called "The Branch". Not only is Jesus the builder of God's final temple, He's the chief corner stone of that temple.

According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.

I. Corinthians 3:10

As we read further on in the New Testament, we see that Jesus is not only the builder and the chief corner stone, He's also the foundation of this new temple. After His death and resurrection, He sent His apostles out to lay the foundation of the temple. The way they laid that foundation was by presenting Jesus to all men as their Lord and Savior. Those who accepted the gospel were brought into a relationship with God and they became living stones in the new temple. When this temple is completed, God will dwell in it forever. Centuries later, this revelation continues to be a mystery to most Christians. We still don't get it. Instead of understanding that God wants to make us His dwelling place, we are waiting to make the spirit realm our dwelling place! Instead of seeing that God's ultimate goal is to have a living temple through whom He can manifest all the facets of His Divine nature to the nations living on this earth, we are waiting for Him to rebuild a stone temple and reinstate the (animal) sacrifices of the Old Testament!

So dear reader, once again, you are faced with a choice. Will you accept the apostolic understanding of what the Old Testament temples represented; or will you continue to follow the Dispensational view? Are we saying there will never be any kind of a temple in the Messianic kingdom? Not at all! No doubt there will be some kind of temple or physical meeting place where the nations can gather to worship the King. What we are saying is that the kind of temple Dispensationalists are preaching about will never be built. God will never reinstate the Old Testament (Jewish) theocracy with a Levitical priesthood and animal sacrifices. Never! The very idea is an insult to the blood of Jesus. God has moved on. His program of redemption has progressed far beyond the stage of animal sacrifices. Those waiting for that kind of a temple to be rebuilt or that kind of a kingdom to be set up are going to be disappointed.

The Convergence

The errors of Dispensationalism have infected the churches so thoroughly, the average pro-Israel Christian now walks in utter confusion regarding his/her destiny. Most church creeds say we are going to rule and reign with Jesus. Yet in the real world, the actual hope of the Christian has been shifted from the coming of God's kingdom to the going of the Church to heaven. Indeed, most of us never even think past the venerable rapture. Consequently, we have become doctrinal schizophrenics.

Do you really know what the Scripture teaches about the destiny of the saints? Do you know where you will be and what you will be doing after Messiah returns? The apostle John said God is forming an eternal priesthood from every kindred, tongue and nation (Rev. 5:9‑10 & 20:6). He said this priesthood will rule and reign with Jesus on earth for a thousand years. The apostle Paul called this priesthood "one new man". Before we go any further, stop and think for a moment. If this priesthood is made up of people from every nation, kindred and tongue, what in the world makes us think it's going to be a strictly Jewish entity? Do you realize the idea that a strictly Jewish nation will be the vessel through which the presence of God is brought to the nations during the Millennium is held by virtually all pro-Israel Christians, yet it's totally unscriptural? Do you realize this whole view is actually a form of reverse Replacement Theology because it replaces God's new creation race with an old creation race?

Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

I. Thessalonians 4:17‑18

Paul said when the Lord returns, His people will rise to meet Him. We will be joined to Jesus in a special way through physical resurrection. As a result, we shall "ever be with the Lord". This means that where ever Messiah is, we will be there too. Paul also said the knowledge that we will never again be separated from Jesus should be a comfort to us now, in this life. According to the Scripture then, those who belong to Messiah—both Old and New Testament saints—will be with Him on this present earth for a thousand years, shepherding and ruling the nations which survive the Great Tribulation and the outpouring of God's wrath. Then what? Will we go live in the spirit realm after this thousand-year reign?

And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.

Revelation 20:7‑9

When the thousand years are expired, Satan is loosed from his prison and goes out to deceive the nations. He leads them to fight against the camp of the saints and the beloved city. The beloved city is Jerusalem. The camp of the saints is probably the army of God, who guard and protect the city. Again, please notice that John saw these nations coming up on the breadth of the earth to attack God's city. The city is on earth and the camp of the saints is on earth. Suddenly God destroys those armies and throws Satan into the lake of fire. Immediately after this comes the Great White Throne Judgment (Rev. 20:11-15). Then John says:

And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God [the holy city] is with men [the saved nations], and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God...

...And there came unto me one of the seven angels which had the seven vials full of the seven last plagues, and talked with me, saying, Come hither, I will shew thee the bride, the Lamb's wife. And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God.

Revelation 21:1-3 & 9‑10

Now why do you suppose God is going to create a new earth if we are destined to live in heaven for eternity? John said he saw the holy city coming down out of the new heavens. Where do you suppose it's coming down to? It is coming down to dwell on the new earth! When describing this city, John says:

And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it. And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof. And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it.

Revelation 21:22‑24

The saved nations and their leaders bring their glory into the city. The saved nations will be on the new earth. The leaders of those nations will be on the new earth. The holy city will be on the new earth. So during the Millennium the saints will be ruling the nations on this present earth. After the Millennium they will be ruling the nations on the new earth. What then causes us to think we are going to live in heaven forever?

Are we saying there is no heaven? Of course not! There is indeed a heaven. Do the saints go there when they die? You bet. Will they be in God's presence? Undoubtedly. Well then, what's heaven like? What will we do there? No one seems to know. There's a lot of speculation and wishful thinking about what heaven is like but the fact is, no one actually knows because God hasn't told us what it's like.

There is precious little information about heaven in the Scripture. However, since "going to heaven" is held out as both the goal of redemption and the destiny of the saints, Dispensational leaders have had to come up with some information about heaven—what it's like and what we will do there. They have gone to the Scripture, picked out a verse here and there, and put together a mythological Paradise.

The reason God has told us very little about heaven is because first of all, making it to heaven is not what salvation is all about. Becoming a new creation is what salvation is all about—and that transformation is to be accomplished in this life, not after we die and go to heaven. Secondly, heaven is not our final destination. It's only a temporary home while we wait for the Day of the Lord. Those who have died in the faith are waiting for the Day of Resurrection. They are waiting to get their new bodies so they can enjoy eternal life in the material creation.

You see, God made us for the earth, not for heaven. This is why we were given physical bodies. If God intended for us to live in the spirit realm forever He would have given us spiritual bodies like the angels. But He didn't. He gave Adam and Eve physical bodies with physical senses so they could enjoy physical life in the material creation forever.

The material realm is not inferior to the spiritual realm in the sense of moral goodness or perfection. It's not evil. It's not a place to flee from. The material creation was created good. This earth was created good. In fact, after God finished making the earth He didn't just say it was good, He said it was very good (Gen. 1:31).

This planet was created a paradise and it remained that way until a wicked spiritual creature from the spiritual creation entered it and deceived Eve. When Adam chose to disobey the one commandment God gave him, in order to save his relationship with his wife, he fell, and the material creation fell with him. Now that creation is groaning and travailing, waiting to be delivered from the power of the spirit which has it in bondage.

For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God. For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope, Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now. And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.

Romans 8:19‑23

The thing that changed life in the material creation from being very good to very miserable is that the creation came under the power and dominion of a wicked and vicious spirit. That spirit not only hates God, it hates mankind with a hatred we simply cannot comprehend. Not only does it love to torment us and make us miserable, it's obsessed with our physical and eternal destruction. This is why God is forming a new creation. This is why the Lord Jesus became the Head of that new creation through His resurrection, and why we are being made a new creation through faith in Him. The old creation is waiting to be set free. It isn't waiting for a kingdom run by an old creation race that's not even dead to the world or the flesh! It's waiting for the manifestation of the sons of God. It's waiting for the resurrection of Abraham's children. It's waiting for the seed of Abraham to deliver it from bondage.

Unfortunately, the focus of Christians has been on making it to heaven for so long, when you tell them their destiny is eternal physical life on a restored planet it just doesn't register. The lights are out and nobody's home!

Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

II. Peter 3:12‑13

The apostle Peter said we should be looking for the new heavens and a new earth "wherein dwelleth righteousness". Why would Peter tell us to look for the establishment of a new earth if our destiny is to live in the spirit realm? If you really want to go live in the spirit realm, that's fine. But please understand, King Jesus will be on earth, ruling and reigning from Zion, literally, and so will His people. So it will just be you and the angels up there.

Jesus Christ is a real King. He's coming back to establish a real kingdom on this planet. When He comes, everything's going to converge. Heaven and earth will converge. The living and the dead will converge through resurrection. Israel and the Church will converge. All will be merged into one glorious kingdom. When the material creation has been redeemed, when the curse has been lifted and this earth is restored to its original splendor, when Satan’s rebellion is purged from this planet and there is peace between nations, when the glory of God settles on Jerusalem and Jesus is reigning there in person, when you have been given a new physical body that will never again wax old or perish and you can enjoy this earth the way God intended, I promise you—you will never want to leave the planet!

The average Christian will say: "But what about all the verses in the Bible that talk about going to heaven"? The fact is, even though there are dozens of scriptures in the New Testament that make reference to heaven, not one of these verses say the purpose of redemption is to live in heaven. But isn't it true that we have a "lively hope" which consists of an inheritance "reserved in heaven for us" (I. Pet. 1:4)? Definitely. Is it not also true that we have a "substance" in heaven (Heb. 10:34) and "rewards" in heaven (Matt. 5:12)? Absolutely. However, it is not true that our rewards, our inheritance, and our substance consists of carnal mansions, harps and golden slippers. Neither is it true that we are destined to remain in heaven once we have received those rewards. We will enjoy our rewards in a new, immortal body on earth.

But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking. Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him. After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.

Matthew 6:7‑10

When the Lord's disciples asked Him how they should pray, one of the first things He told them to pray for was that God's kingdom would come to earth. When was the last time you prayed for God's kingdom to come to earth? If you are like the average Christian, the answer is never. This is the result of living under the influence of a theology which arrogantly denies the intended meaning of many New Testament verses of Scripture. Instead of seeing the true plan of God as described by the Lord's apostles, instead of anticipating the redemption and rescue of the creation out of Satan's hands by the seed of Abraham, most of us are waiting to fly off into a Gentile heaven, leaving the earth to Antichrist and the Jews.

According to Dispensationalists, Jesus didn't really come to establish the New Covenant. He didn't really come to open the way for all nations to be brought into the new creation. Rather, His primary goal was to establish an old creation kingdom based on law. When the Jews rejected that kingdom, God had to start a whole new program (i.e.; going to heaven) for the Gentiles.

Brothers and sisters, Jesus came to die. He came specifically to pay the price for our sins and redeem us from the power of Satan. He didn't come expecting to establish a Jewish kingdom. He knew before He ever started His earthly ministry that He was going to be rejected and murdered by the leaders of Israel. He knew what was going to happen because He knew He was Israel's Messiah, and He understood the Old Testament scriptures which predicted His own rejection and death.

Of course, His disciples didn't know what was going to happen. Being good nationalists, they assumed the Lord would finish His ministry in triumph, be crowned king when He entered Jerusalem, and establish the Jewish kingdom. Actually, this was a perfectly reasonable assumption because after all, Israel's Messiah had come—what else should they have expected?

From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day.

Matthew 16:21

Since Jesus knew what was about to happen, while they were all traveling to Jerusalem, He told them He was going to be rejected, condemned and killed. He tried to prepare them. He tried to deliver them from their strictly nationalistic view of what Israel's Messiah would do when He came. Peter, being the most patriotic one of the whole bunch, "...took Him [Jesus] aside and began to rebuke Him, saying, God forbid, Lord! This shall never happen to you" (Matt. 6:22). The reason Peter became so brazen was because he was utterly convinced Jesus would be triumphant in a national sense. He wanted the Lord to establish the Jewish kingdom so bad, he actually scolded Him and told Him to stop saying such things!

It was this blind nationalism—the same kind of nationalism Dispensational teachers have been propagating—that Jesus rebuked when He turned to Peter and said: "Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men" (Matt. 16:23). The Lord was telling Peter that he was putting the interests of men—that is, the interests of Jewish men—before the interests of God. Peter was putting the national interests of Israel ahead of God's plan for creation. Not only did Jesus know He came to die, the Scripture clearly states that His death was predetermined by God from the beginning of time.

Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know: Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:

Acts 2:22‑23

For truly in this city there were gathered together against Thy holy servant Jesus, whom Thou didst anoint, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, to do whatever Thy hand and Thy purpose predestined to occur.

Acts 4:27‑28

There is no "Plan B" in the foreknowledge of God! There is only "Plan A"—and that plan was executed exactly the way God intended. Jesus agreed to be the Sacrificial Lamb before He was even born, while He was still with the Father in heaven. So the idea that He offered to establish the Messianic kingdom during His earthly ministry is totally unscriptural. Moreover, it's wicked. mIf the primary purpose of the Lord's first coming was simply to offer Israel the Jewish kingdom, what would have happened if the Jews had done their duty and accepted the offer? What of the salvation of the Gentiles? What of the cross? What of the prophecies pointing to the cross? Had the Jews accepted the Lord's offer, there would have been no cross, no blood, no salvation for the Gentiles, and creation would be groaning forever. Is it not wicked to say Jesus offered the Jews a kingdom He could not permit to be established?

Of course, Dispensationalists try to get around this problem by saying Jesus knew in advance that the Jews wouldn't call His bluff. He knew they would refuse the offer. No doubt. But that doesn't change the fact that He was making them an offer He could not have possibly redeemed. An offer that cannot be honored is not a sincere offer but a fraud—and our Lord is no fraud! Besides, if Jesus was looking to establish the Messianic kingdom, He had the perfect opportunity to do so. Instead, He deliberately turned that opportunity down and went off into the mountains because He knew it wasn't time to establish that kingdom.

Then those men, when they had seen the miracle that Jesus did, said, This is of a truth that prophet that should come into the world. When Jesus therefore perceived that they would come and take him by force, to make him a king, he departed again into a mountain himself alone.

John 6:14‑15

Friends, the Lord Jesus didn't come to establish the external Messianic kingdom. He came to establish the inner kingdom. He came to bring Jews and Gentiles into the heavenly kingdom, spiritually. This is why He said things like: "The kingdom of God cometh not with observation", and "...the kingdom of God is within you" (Lk. 17:20‑21). This is why Paul said things like: "...the kingdom of God is not in word, but in power" (I. Cor. 4:19‑20), and "...the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost" (Rom. 14:17).

When we place our trust in Israel's Messiah for salvation, God sends His Spirit into our lives. This operation moves us from the (spiritual) kingdom of Satan into the (spiritual) kingdom of Messiah, which at the moment is located in heaven. We are brought into the kingdom and the kingdom is placed within us. The purpose of all this is to make us a new creature. The purpose is to bring us forth in the new man, into the fulness of the image of Christ. The spiritual kingdom begins to grow in us and change us from the image of Adam to the image of Christ. This transformation is called sanctification. When the full number of Gentiles have been brought into Christ and sanctified, God will close this age in judgment and wrath. He will send King Jesus back to establish the external Messianic kingdom with Jerusalem as it's governmental center. The inner kingdom, which has been invisible, will suddenly become visible through the manifestation of the sons of God. It will converge with the material realm.

For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to [National] Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:

Romans 11:25‑26

Paul said at the end of this age "all" Israel will be saved. We have already looked at this passage with regards to what kind of salvation Israel is to experience. Now we want to ask a different question. Exactly who is "all" Israel? Is Paul talking about the Jewish race as a whole? Is he talking specifically about Restored National Israel at the end of this age? When you consider everything he said about the relationship between Jews and Gentiles, the conclusion you will come to is that he was using this term to represent both the restored remnant of National Israel in the last days, and also, the whole people of God. He is talking about a remnant of Jews, and also about Israel in all it's fulness. Thus, when National Israel is finally grafted back into it's own Olive Tree, not only will it be saved, "all Israel" (the whole people of God) will be saved.

Does such a view do away with the specialness of the Jewish people? Is this just another more subtle form of Replacement Theology? Absolutely not. The Jewish race was called to be a kingdom of priests and many of them will fulfill that call in the next age. It's just that they will not fulfill that call alone. When the dust settles, National Israel will be part of "all" Israel. It will no longer be an old creation nation but a new creation nation. The "Israel of God" (Gal. 6:16)—as Paul calls it—will be a real commonwealth, comprised of Jewish and Gentile saints who have been made new creatures in Christ. The nations which survive the Great Tribulation will indeed come up to Jerusalem in order to hear the word of the Lord. However, they will hear that word from all Israel!

Therefore

But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.

I. Corinthians 2:9

Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.

II. Corinthians 7:1

Paul said wonderful things are in store for those who will serve God faithfully. We have been given exceeding great and precious promises (II. Pet. 1:4) from both the Old and New Testaments. The things that have been prepared for us are so magnificent, he said we can't even imagine them. However, there's just one little catch: in order to receive them we must be spiritually clean. "Having therefore these promises" said Paul, "let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit".

Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless.

II. Peter 3:14

Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is. And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure.

I. John 3:2‑3

Paul wasn't the only one who said we must cleanse ourselves. Peter and John said basically the same thing. Peter said we should be diligent to be found spotless and blameless by Jesus when He comes. John said the person who has the hope of becoming like Jesus will purify himself. Why did the apostles say this? They said it because they wanted us to realize that our God, who is holy and righteous, cannot condone sin or dwell with sin. He will never be able to dwell with us in our fallen condition. His character and our character are incompatible. In order to rectify this situation, God sent Jesus into the world to pay the price for our sin, so we might be delivered from that sin and become compatible with the character of God.

Please notice that in the passages we have just quoted, all three apostles laid the responsibility for becoming spiritually clean on our shoulders. Paul said, "let us cleanse ourselves". Peter said we must "be diligent to be found without spot and blameless". John said every man that has the hope of being like Jesus "purifieth himself ". We need to be reminded of this from time to time because every where you turn, preachers and Christian writers are telling us just the opposite. They are telling us we're not responsible to cleanse ourselves because Jesus did that for us. They quote passages like Hebrews 10:9‑10 and I. Corinthians 6:11, which state that we have already been sanctified by the blood of Christ. However, they ignore other passages which teach that after we are saved we still need to be sanctified. Thus, they are only telling us half the truth.

Telling someone half the truth, in order to lead them to a conclusion you know very well they would never have come to had you told them the whole truth, is the same as lying to them. There is no difference. Paul called this kind of thing "handling the Word of God deceitfully" (II. Cor. 4:2). Actually, the term sanctify has two different meanings. The first aspect of the word describes our relationship to God. It means "to be set apart". This is what happens when God calls us and we answer the call. We are set apart for His use. We are set apart as part of His chosen people. In this sense then, becoming a child of God is the same as being sanctified. This is the past tense aspect of the word. We have already been sanctified (set apart for God).

The second aspect of the word describes our relationship to sin. It has to do with us being cleansed, in experience, from all the things which defile us. Sanctification is like sanitization. We use bleach to sanitize things so our bodies will not become defiled by germs and get sick. Sanctification does the same thing for the soul. It cleans the soul and changes us into a different kind of person. It makes us a "new creation".

For this is the will of God, even your sanctification, that ye should abstain from fornication: That every one of you should know how to possess his vessel in sanctification and honour;

I. Thessalonians 4:3‑4

It's this second aspect of sanctification that is God's will for the New Testament Christian. This aspect of sanctification cannot be imputed to us. It's something that must be pursued. It's not a legal position. It's an individual possession that is acquired over time, little by little, as a result of obedience to the Spirit of God, the Word of God, and the example of Jesus. Sanctification is not obtained through self-effort, but rather, through the power of the Holy Spirit. God is the one who cleanses us and makes us pure. However, we must choose to yield and submit to Him as He performs this work. Since God has given man a free will, He can only cleanse us to the degree we allow Him to do so. Thus, in the last analysis, we bear the responsibility for whether or not we become sanctified. That's why the apostles said we must cleanse ourselves.

Dispensational teachers not only ignore all this, they teach the exact opposite. They say Jesus did everything for us at Calvary. All one need do, says the Dispensationalist, is believe and accept what was done for us. Everything we were ordained to have, all that we were destined to become, is supposed to happen automatically, after we die, by grace. According to them, God is responsible for everything and we are responsible for nothing. When we try to do what the apostles said, when we actually seek to cleanse ourselves, we are accused of trying to save ourselves through religious effort. We are accused of trying to be "saved by works". This is the kind of confusion Dispensationalism has produced in most of today's churches.

The Bible states over and over again that we are responsible to do our part. We must attain the first resurrection (Phil. 3:11-12), and labor to enter the rest of God (Heb. 4:11). We have to obtain the new world (Luke 20:35), the prize (I. Cor. 9:24), and salvation (I. Thess. 5:9; II. Tim. 2:10). We have to lay hold of eternal life (I. Tim. 6:12). We must sow to the Spirit in order to reap eternal life (Gal. 6:8). We must win Christ (Phil. 3:8), strive to enter the kingdom (Luke 13:24), and overcome to receive the rewards of Revelation chapters two and three.

Moreover, we must keep ourselves unspotted from this evil world (James 1:27), make our calling and election sure (II. Pet. 1:10), and walk worthy of that calling (Eph. 4:1). We have to cleanse and purify ourselves, our hearts, and our hands (II. Cor. 7:1; James 4:8). We must abstain from fornication (I. Thess. 4:3), and from all appearance of evil (I. Thess. 5:22), from fleshly lusts (I. Pet. 2:11), and lay aside sin (Heb. 12:1). We also have to flee youthful lusts (II. Tim. 2:22), and idolatry (I. Cor. 10:14), and the love of money (I. Tim. 6:11).

In addition, we have to put on the whole armor of God (Eph. 6:11) so we can resist the Devil (James 4:7; I. Pet. 5:8-9), stand against his temptations and assaults (Eph. 6:11), wrestle against his power (Eph. 6:12), war as a good soldier of Jesus (I. Tim. 1:18), and fight the good fight of faith (I. Tim. 6:10). We have to seek both the righteousness of God and His kingdom (Matt. 6:33). We must awake to righteousness (I. Cor. 15:34), and yield to righteousness (Rom. 6:19). We must draw nigh to God (James 4:8), and come out from among those who will not draw nigh to Him (II. Cor. 6:17). We must endure hardness (II. Tim. 2:3), afflictions (II. Tim. 4:5), chastening (Heb. 12:7), persecution and tribulation (II. Thess. 1:4), grief (I. Pet. 2:19), and all things (II. Tim. 2:10). Therefore, we should be sober (I. Thess. 5:6), vigilant (I. Pet. 5:8) and holy (Eph. 1:4).

All these things are things we must do. They do not constitute an invisible legal position. They are not things we can simply believe or confess. We have to do them if we want to partake of the promises laid out in the Scripture.

It is true, we cannot do them in our own wisdom or strength. We can only do them through the power of the Holy Spirit. But we still have to do them. This is why Jesus died on the Cross. He died to empower us to cleanse ourselves. He sacrificed Himself so we could become a new creature. He shed His blood to bring each individual who was destined to be part of the new creation, forward, into the realization and attainment of that glorious destiny.

Not only does Dispensationalism cut us off from our spiritual heritage in Israel, not only does it leave us floundering in a spiritual limbo, not knowing what our destiny is or how to prepare for it, not only does it keep us from understanding our future role in the Messianic kingdom by telling us we are destined to live in heaven forever, it also says we don't really have to cleanse ourselves in order to partake of the things God has prepared for us. All we have to do, says the Dispensationalist, is believe in Jesus.

Friends, Dispensationalism is not a Scriptural theology. Quite the opposite! It's a calculated denial of the New Testament. Dispensational scholars either twist or ignore the words of the apostles in order to support their theories and ideas. The doctrines this theology has produced are not only detrimental to the spiritual walk of believers, some of them are blasphemous. Therefore, we urge all Christians everywhere to seek deliverance from it's influence.

Reference Notes

1. Art Katz, Israel And The Church

2. A.C. Gaebelein, The Gospel of Matthew (Wheaton: Van Kampen Press, n.d.) 1:11

3. Clarence Larkin, Dispensational Truth or God’s Plan and Purpose in the Ages (Philadelphia:Clarence Larkin Est., 1920), p. 76