The Messiah and the Covenants of Israel

We have considered the covenants of Israel. Now we have to face the question, was Israel permanently rejected as the people of God because they rejected the Messianic claim of Jesus? The question is usually phrased:

Has the Church Replaced Israel in the Purposes of God?

It is necessary to consider this subject because we maintain that the Church came into blessing on the grounds of a covenant which the Lord made with Israel – a covenant, which according to Scripture, has not yet been implemented for them as a nation. The replacement view maintains that the dynamics of the implementation of the New Covenant has removed Israel as the beneficiary of the Covenant and substituted them with the Church. They maintain that this major shift in divine policy was made as a result of Israel’s national rejection of Jesus, their Messiah. Stated simply - because they rejected their Messiah, God rejected them, and replaced them with the Church. Consequently the Church inherited the covenant blessings originally promised to Israel. Thomas Ice said that replacement theology “is the view that the Church has permanently replaced Israel through which God works and that national Israel does not have a future in the plan of God”.[1] Replacement theologian, Bruce K. Waltke said, “The hard fact (is) that national Israel and its law have been permanently replaced by the Church and the New Covenant”.[2] We need to be very sure of our ground here, because we began by stating that a main feature of God’s glory was His ḥesed ve-ʾemet. Ḥesed is His loving kindness, that quality that involves acts of beneficence, mutuality, and those obligations that flow from a legal relationship. ʾEmet, usually translated “truth,” encompasses reliability, durability, and faithfulness. The combination of the two terms expresses God’s absolute and eternal dependability in dispensing His benefactions. If He has, even in the smallest degree, withdrawn any element of an unconditional covenant with His ancient people, then the concept of the glory of God being best seen in His faithfulness and reliability must be undermined.

 It is true that the national implementation of the New Covenant for Israel was delayed because of the national rejection of the Messianic claim of Jesus, but as we have already indicated, the New Covenant was activated immediately by the Messiah for individual Israelites if they qualified to benefit from it. In other words, individual Jews who accepted Jesus as Messiah became beneficiaries under the New Covenant. Let us restate our view that while the national implementation of the Covenant is yet future, the execution of the Covenant for individual Jews is current.Every Israelite who acknowledges the person and work of Yeshua HaMashiac (Jesus the Messiah) comes under the New Covenant and is ‘born again’ (to use a Jewish term). We also believe that Gentiles can come into blessing on the same grounds, that is, on the basis of the New Covenant, by acknowledging the person and work of Jesus the Messiah, Son of David, Son of God. This comes about because of the desire of the Lord that His salvation should reach the ends of the earth.[3]

 That the door was opened to the Gentiles to ‘share’ in the blessings of the New Covenant does not mean that the multi-national group of believers, corporately called ‘the Church’ has replaced the national ethnic group called ‘Israel’ in the purposes of God. But the rejection of the replacement view needs to be supported by more than statements.

More Next Time :

---

[1] Thomas Ice, “What do you do with a future National Israel in the Bible,” The Thomas Ice Collection, n.d., p. 2.

[2] Bruce K. Waltke “Kingdom Promises as Spiritual”, in Continuity and Discontinuity, 274 (quoted by Michael J. Vlach in his dissertation ‘The Church as a Replacement of Israel” p.12)

[3]  Isa.49.6