THE PROMISES OF THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT ARE FULFILLED TO CHRISTIAN BELIEVERS, BOTH JEWS AND GENTILES
The fact that all Christians are to live under the Abrahamic covenant is a prominent New Testament teaching. The heart of the covenant offered to all Christians is stated in Hebrews 8:10: “This is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put my laws in their minds, and write them on their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.” This is the same covenant promise that was given to Israel through Jeremiah (31:31-33). In fact, Hebrews 8:10 quotes Jeremiah 31:33. The covenant experience for Christian believers of having God’s law written on their hearts was the very essence of the covenant between God and the Jews (Deut. 6:4-6). By faith Abraham obeyed God’s law (Gen. 26:5), and this experience of righteousness by faith is the heart of the Abrahamic covenant (compare Gen. 17:10, 11 with Rom. 4:11, 23-25). Because Abraham believed God, righteousness was imputed to him. The righteousness of Christ was legally counted for him and bestowed upon him by the gift of the Holy Spirit (compare Rom. 4:1-5 with Gal. 3:5-14).
Paul’s message is that, if we believe as Abraham did, we too will have righteousness imputed to us (Rom. 4:22-25). Christ’s righteousness will be put to our account and also bestowed upon us by the gift of the Holy Spirit. The presence of the Spirit in our hearts is Christ’s presence (John 14:18), and this divine indwelling is righteousness in our hearts (Rom. 8:9, 10).
Abraham’s covenant experience is to be the experience of all those who submit to the loving lordship of Christ, whatever their nationality. The promise of Romans 10:10 is for all Christian believers around the world, Jews and Gentiles: “For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth one confesses unto salvation.”(20) This identical experience is for Jews and non-Jews, for, in respect to salvation, “there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; the same Lord is Lord of all and is generous to all who call on him” (Rom. 10:12).
The logical conclusion is that, although Israel is no longer God’s chosen nation because this status has been transferred to the Christian Church, individual Jews can be saved from sin and given eternal life on exactly the same basis as all Gentiles. By accepting Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord, they are included in the family of God.
This is the message of Romans, chapter 11. The attempt to make the chapter teach that the nation Israel is still God’s chosen nation is quite futile. Note the following major points:
1. Some faithful Jews who believe in Christ are counted among the elect of God; the rest of the nation are blind (verses 5-8).
2. All but the believing remnant have been cast away (verse 15).
3. The majority of unbelieving Jews are likened to branches that have been broken off from a parent olive tree (verses 17-20; compare John 15:5). The parent stock is Christ.
4. The only way rejected Jews can be acceptable to God again is by believing in Christ (verse 23).
5. Believing Jews are grafted back into the parent stock again in the same way as believing Gentiles (verse 24).
6. “All Israel” that will be saved (verse 26) is not a reference to the literal nation Israel. Not even dispensationalists believe that the entire nation Israel will be saved. In the context of Romans 11, “all Israel” refers to those Jews who are elect “if they do not persist in unbelief” (verse 23) and those Gentiles who, because of belief in Christ, have been grafted into the parent olive tree. “The full number of the Gentiles” (verse 25) refers to the total number of Gentiles who will become believers in Christ before the end of time. These Gentiles plus the Christian Jews comprise “all Israel,” in the New Testament sense of spiritual Israel which has inhertied the promises to Abraham.
During the millennium the saved of all ages, including faithful Jews who lived before the Cross and believing Christians who have lived since then, are all in the heavenly kingdom. Revelation 7:15 speaks of them: “They are before the throne of God, and worship him day and night within his temple.” The temple of God is in heaven, not on this earth (Rev. 11:19; 15:5). Not until the end of the millennium does the holy city, New Jerusalem, descend from heaven to this earth (compare Rev. 21:2 with 20:7-9). During the millennium the saved of all ages, including those who have passed through the end-time tribulation (see Dan. 12:1; Rev. 7:14), are occupying thrones in the heavenly temple judging lost human beings and angels (compare Rev. 20:4 with 1 Cor. 6:2, 3).
The idea that the literal nation Israel will be completely restored at the end of history, that during the millennium the Old Testament promises to Israel will be literally fulfilled is an unbiblical teaching. Because the Jews rejected Christ, they lost their chosen nation status, lost the promise that the land of Palestine would be theirs forever, and forfeited their privilege of being the teachers of the Gospel to an unbelieving world. Our Lord bestowed upon His Church in all the world these covenant promises. The land will, indeed, belong to His people, but it will not be limited to Palestine. It will be first the heavenly Canaan during the millennium, followed by the earth made new at the end of the 1,000 years. Jesus said, “Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth” (Matt. 5:5).
Whatever your national or racial heritage, salvation is for you, if you have accepted Christ as your Savior and Lord. You can trust Him to fulfill for you individually the eternal promises for true believers.
References:
1. Yaakov Ariel, On Behalf of Israel: American Fundamentalist Attitudes Toward Jews, Judaism, and Zionism, 1865-1945 (Brooklyn, New York: Carlson Publishing Inc., 1991), p. 121; see also p. 22.
2. Ibid., pp. 25-54; see also Daniel Payton Fuller, “The Hermeneutics of Dispensationalism” (Th.D. dissertation, Northern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1957), pp. 65-137.
3. See Clarence B. Bass, Backgrounds to Dispensationalism (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker, 1960), pp. 13-47, on which my description of dispensationalism is largely based. See also Charles F. Baker, Dispensational Theology (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Grace Bible College Publications, 1971), pp. 583-616; Richard W. DeHaan, Israel and the Nations in Prophecy (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1968), passim; L. E. Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, 4 vols.(Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald, 1954), IV:1220-1227; George E. Ladd, The Blessed Hope (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1956), pp. 5-14, 35-60; Crucial Questions about the Kingdom of God (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1952), pp. 101-117; Ernest R. Sandeen, The Roots of Fundamentalism (Grand Rapids, Michigan; Baker, 1970), pp. 59-80, 101, 136; C. I. Scofield, “The Course and End of the Age,” Bibliotheca Sacra 108 (January-March, 1951), pp. 105-116; “The Last World Empire and Armageddon,” Ibid., 108 (July-September, 1951), pp. 355-362; “The Return of Christ in Relation to the Jew and the Earth,” Ibid., 108 (October-December, 1951), pp. 477-487l; John F. Walvoord, The Nations in Prophecy (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1967), pp. 41-52, 158-171; “Amillennial Eschatology,”Bibliotheca Sacra 108 (January-March, 1951), pp. 7-14; “The Historical Context of Premillennialism,” Ibid., (April-June, 1951), pp. 153-166; “The Theological Context of Premillennialism,” Ibid., (July-September, 1951), pp. 270-281; “The Abrahamic Covenant and Premillennialism,” Ibid., (October-December, 1951), pp. 414-422.
4. See Bass, Backgrounds to Dispensationalism, pp. 33-36.
5. Daniel Payton Fuller, “The Hermeneutics of Dispensationalism,” p. 6.
6. See H. K. LaRondelle, The Israel of God in Prophecy. Principles of Prophetic Interpretation (Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 1983).
7. DeHaan, Israel and the Nations in Prophecy, p. 93.
8. Daniel Payton Fuller, “The Hermeneutics of Dispensationalism,” p. 243.
9. Yaakov Ariel, On Behalf of Israel, p. 16.
10. John F. Walvoord, “The Historical Context of Premillennialism,” Bibliotheca Sacra 108 (April-June, 1951), p. 154.
11. Hal Lindsey, The Late Great Planet Earth (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1970), p. 43.
12. Bass, Backgrounds to Dispensationalism, p. 38; Daniel Payton Fuller, “The Hermeneutics of Dispensationalism,” pp. 15, 18.
13. DeHaan, Israel and the Nations in Prophecy, pp. 88, 89.
14. Ibid., p. 99.
15. Bass, Backgrounds to Dispensationalism, p. 44.
16. See Craig A. Blaising and Darrell L. Bock, eds. Dispensationalism, Israel and the Church: The Search for Definition (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 1992); Darrell L. Bock, “Charting Dispensationalism,” Christianity Today (September 12, 1994), pp. 26-29; Stanley J. Grenz, The Millennial Maze (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1992); Norman R. Gulley, “Dispensational Biblical Interpretation: Its Past and Present Hermeneutical Systems,” Journal of the Adventist Theological Society, 4/1 (1993): pp. 65-93; “Progressive Dispensationalism: a Review of a Recent Publication,” Andrews University Seminary Studies (Spring-Summer 1994, Vol. 32, No. 1), pp. 41-46; Robert L. Saucy, “A Rationale for the Future of Israel,” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 28 (1985), pp. 433-442; “The Church as the Mystery of God,” In Israel and the Church: Essays in Contemporary Dispensational Thought, edited by Craig A. Blaising and Darrell L. Bock (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 1992); The Case for Progressive Dispensationalism: The Interface Between Dispensational & Non-Dispensational Theology (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 1993). Stanley J. Grenz writes: “In recent years, however, the success of dispensationalism has been paralleled by a growing questioning of the received dispensational orthodoxy. Adherents themselves have been tinkering with the system, modifying some of its more objectionable features. Others have abandoned it completely. There are signs that the dominance of this viewpoint–at least in its classical expression–may be on the wane, just as was the fate of other eschatological systems in previous eras.”–The Millennial Maze, p. 63. Despite the modifications in the theological system, “dispensationalists of all varieties adamantly reject the contention that the church is the New Israel.”–Ibid., p. 96. Norman R. Gulley lists the changes accepted by progressive dispensationalists: “(1) Progressive fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies/promises in the church age, and thus a rejection of traditional futurism. (2) Accepting the church as implicit in the Old Testament, and the moral law and the Sermon on the Mount as applicable in the church age rather than relegated to Israel in the millennium. (3) Accepting that Old Testament prophecy can have double fulfillments in the church age, such as Joel 2 at Pentecost (Acts 2) and in the future. (4) Progressive fulfillment of prophecy involving an acceptance of inaugurated eschatology and a rejection of the church age as a parenthesis between Israel in the Old Testament and Israel during the millennium. (5) Progressive fulfillment of prophecy involves rejection of a postponed kingdom and rule of Christ, and focuses on His present rule from heaven’s throne over all on planet-earth. (6) Progressive fulfillment of prophecy rejects that there are two new covenants, one for Israel and the church, finding the one new covenant sequentially fulfilled–spiritually in the church age and physically to Israel in the millennium. (7) Progressive fulfillment of prophecy rejects the final difference between the earthly people of God (Israel) and the heavenly people of God (church), opting rather for a dwelling together in the new earth.”–“Dispensational Biblical Interpretation,” pp. 83, 84.
17. Darrell L. Bock, “Charting Dispensationalism,” Christianity Today (September 12, 1994), p. 29.
18. In this article, unless otherwise indicated, all Bible quotations are taken from the New Revised Standard Version.
Paul Weighs In
That’s why Paul used the covenant to help explain the plan of salvation as it was fulfilled in Jesus Himself. See Galatians 3:6-9, 15-18. Paul connects the covenant made with Abraham to Jesus and to salvation by faith alone.
Through Abraham’s seed-referring not to his many descendants, but in particular to one, Jesus (Gal. 3:16), God would bless the entire world. All who would be a part of Abraham’s seed, which happens by faith in Christ (Gal. 3:29), would find that Abraham’s God would be their God as well. Even back then, Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness (Gal. 3:6). Abraham was no more saved by works than the thief on the cross was; it’s always and only God’s saving grace that brings salvation. Abraham fulfilled his end of the covenant promise. His obedience revealed the faith that took hold of the promise of salvation. His works didn’t justify him; instead, the works showed that he was already justified. That’s the essence of the covenant and how it is expressed in the life of faith (see Rom. 4:1-3).
This does not mean Abraham did not stumble for we know he did. In fact, later on we will see that he refers to Sarah as his sister again. We cannot forget that as Abraham lived, God was sanctifying him, just as we are sanctified from our sin problems.
A Greater Piece of Real Estate
We also need to understand that Abraham knew that the promise of land (Canaan) was literal upon condition, but he knew of something much greater…a city (land) which had foundations and who’s builder and maker is God (Hebrews 11:8-10). Was he anticipating the descent of the New Jerusalem from the sky to the dry land per Revelation 21:2-3?
God had promised Abraham that God Himself would build out of him a people who will be blessed and made great (“I will make you a great nation, and I will bless you, and make your name great”). That promise implies that God Himself would provide an environment for the descendants of Abraham in which that promise would be fulfilled, or in the alternate meaning of “city”, that God Himself would build the people (*).
Thus, the teaching of Hebrews 11 is that Abraham was looking forward to an environment that God Himself would provide for his people, not the details of such an environment, (i.e. whether it is a city or a country), and much less whether it is a city that would descend from the sky or be found on the ground. “City” is just a designation for that environment, and not the only one, as it later says:
For people who speak thus make it clear that they are seeking a homeland. (Heb 11:14)
But as it is, they desire a better country, that is, a heavenly one. (Heb 11:16)
(*) This enables us to understand why Abraham’s obedience to God’s command to offer Isaac as a burnt offering (Gen 22:2) was compatible with the commandment ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself’ (which had not yet been positively stated by God but is engraved in human nature). Because God knows infinitely better than we do the optimal course of action that we can follow to procure someone’s good. Therefore, if God tells Abraham «Do X to Isaac», Abraham knows with absolute certainty that ‘doing X’ is the best he can do FOR Isaac, and by ‘doing X’ he is optimally fulfilling the commandment ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’
Noting that God did not ask Abraham to just “kill Isaac” but to “offer him there as a burnt offering” (Gen 22:2), even from a purely human viewpoint it is wholly plausible that Abraham reasoned that God, being infinitely powerful and good, when offered at his request an innocent son as a burnt offering, would bring that person back to life in a better, higher, more exalted way. Which is precisely what Hebrews says of the event:
“having reasoned (logisamenos) that God was able even to raise him out from the dead,
from where he received him also in a figure.” (Heb 11:19)
Therefore, Abraham was willing to live in tents because he believed that God Himself would build the environment for his descendants, and was willing to offer his ‘son of promise’ as a burnt offering because he believed that God Himself was going to re-build that descendant, that is to raise him out from the dead.
Disclaimer: THE PLAIN WORD may quote an outside article(s) or provide references to outside materials, which indicate that we stand behind the content of that particular article or reference; but it is not an endorsement by The Plain Word of the author’s opinion, lifestyle or work published elsewhere.
2 Timothy 2:15, “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” AND 1 Thessalonians 5:21, “Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.”