BLOG

Zionism in biblical prophecy, part 3

Israel was originally just one man named Jacob. The term was later extended to his household—not just his sons but his entire village/city. Recall that Abraham himself, two generations earlier, had 318 men born in his house who were of military age, and these were sent to set Lot free (Genesis 14:14). If we include women, children, and older men, Abraham’s household of faith (as Paul would call them) must have numbered at least 2,000 people.

Genesis 46:1 says that “Israel set out with all that he had” and “took their livestock and their property” (Genesis 46:6). It is not likely that he left the herdsmen in Canaan. If there were about 2,000 people in the early days of Abraham’s sojourn, how many were there two generations later in the time of Jacob? My guess is a minimum of 10,000.

These went to Egypt with Jacob, though only his immediate family (“from the loins of Jacob”) was numbered in Exodus 1:5. By the time they left Egypt under Moses, they numbered about six million. Most of these Israelites were not directly descended from Jacob-Israel. Jacob’s sons were the leaders of the tribes, but the majority of the Israelite tribes were not actual family members.

In other words, Israel had become a nation, and it is often referred to as a nation. Many years later, Isaiah tells us that foreigners were welcome to join the nation of Israel (Isaiah 56:6) as equal citizens of the Kingdom. Their status is clarified further in the New Testament, especially through the ministry of the apostle Paul with his teaching on “one new man.”

The modern notion that one is an Israelite only if he can trace his genealogy back to Abraham or Israel has no biblical foundation. The term is national, not racial.

Confusing Israel and Judah

One of the most egregious mistakes that Christian Zionists made is by confusing Israel with Judah. After the death of Solomon, after a dispute over high taxes without representation, ten of the tribes refused to recognize Solomon’s son, Rehoboam, as their king (1 Kings 12:16). The kingdom was divided, and because Jacob had given his name Israel to the sons of Joseph, the northern tribes retained this name. The other two tribes had to settle for the name of the dominant tribe, Judah.

Only those in unity with the sons of Joseph could call themselves Israelites from that point forward, and all of the prophets reflected this. The modern term, Jew, is short for Judah. When the nation was divided, the Jews were no longer (national) Israelites. It is only when the prophets spoke of a future reunification that the Jews could be termed Israelites.

Yet when the Assyrians conquered Israel and deported them to Halah, Habor, and by the river Gozan, never to return to the old land, the Jews increasingly began to think that they had replaced the Israelites in the matter of the birthright. After all, God had divorced the house of Israel (Jeremiah 3:8; Hosea 2:2). Dr. A. Neubauer wrote in 1888,

“The captives of Israel exiled beyond the Euphrates did not return as a whole to Palestine along with their brethren the captives of Judah; at least there is no mention of this event in the documents at our disposal” (The Jewish Quarterly Review, 1888, Vol. 1).

The first-century Jewish historian, Josephus, wrote this about them:

“Wherefore there are but two tribes in Asia and Europe subject to the Romans; while the ten tribes are beyond Euphrates till now; and are an immense multitude, and not to be estimated by numbers” (Antiquities of the Jews, XI, v, 2).

The Israelites were not yet lost during the first century. We get the impression that their population far exceeded that of the Jews in the land of Judea, although they were actually known by other names which tended to hide their identity.

Much could be said about this, but the point is that the Jews and Israelites were not the same people, though in modern times the Jewish state has taken for itself the name Israel without first being reunited with the tribes of Joseph.

A good example of such misidentification can be seen in church expositions of Jeremiah 18:1-10 regarding the Potter and the clay. The passage is about the House of Israel (Jeremiah 18:6), pictured as wet clay that was marred in the hand of the Potter. The Potter beat down the jar and remade it into a new vessel, prophesying how God would eventually reconstitute the nation of Israel. Modern Christian Zionists point to the Jewish state as the fulfillment of this prophecy.

However, Jeremiah 18:11 to the end of chapter 19 is a parallel prophecy that applies to Judah and Jerusalem. This is the prophecy that Christian Zionists should point toward as applicable to the modern Jewish state. It is a long indictment for the sin of Judah and for the child sacrifices being offered to Molech in the valley Ben-hinnom outside of Jerusalem. The prophet pictures Judah as an old earthen vessel—not wet clay—which, once broken, cannot be repaired again (Jeremiah 19:10, 11). Instead, it was cast into the valley known in Greek as Gehenna.

This is the real fate of Jerusalem. The wet clay of the House of Israel is NOT the present Jewish state which men call Israel.

Two Jerusalems

The Hebrew word for Jerusalem is Yerushalayim. It literally means two Jerusalems. The ending, ayim is a dual. They also have another ending, im, which makes a word plural.

The Old Testament prophets never explain the distinction between the two Jerusalems. One must study Galatians 4 or Revelation 21 to distinguish between the two cities. John in particular quotes Isaiah’s description of the restored Jerusalem but applies it to the New Jerusalem.

Zechariah is probably the most difficult to understand. He moves seamlessly from the earthly city to the heavenly city. As a general rule, when the prophets speak of Jerusalem as a wicked city, it is speaking of the earthly city which brought about divine judgment; when they speak in terms of glory and restoration, it is speaking of the heavenly city.

We would not expect Jews to agree with this, of course, because the distinctions are unclear until the New Testament reveals this. Christians have less excuse. The underlying principle behind this is seen also in the fact that our “old man,” carnal in nature, must die in order to make way for the “new man” to be raised in glory. God is not going to save the “old man.” He has already sentenced him to death, and this will not change. Salvation is about being begotten by the Spirit, which creates a “new man,” or a new creature, something distinct from the old man that was begotten physically by our fathers.

So also is it with the two Jerusalems.

The Cursed Fig Tree

In Matthew 21:18, 19 reads,

¹⁸ Now in the morning, when He was returning to the city [Jerusalem], He became hungry. ¹⁹ Seeing a lone fig tree by the road, He came to it and found nothing on it except leaves only; and He said to it, “No longer shall there ever be any fruit from you.” And at once the fig tree withered.

Jesus had been looking for fruit on the “fig tree” of Judah during His entire ministry (Luke 13:6-9). He found “leaves only,” which are no substitute for fruit. In fact, fig leaves have been a problem since Adam (Genesis 3:7). Leaves represent a false covering for sin and shame.

The nature of Jesus’ curse indicated that the Judah fig tree would never bring forth fruit. Yet later, Jesus prophesied that this fig tree would indeed return to life. Matthew 24:32, 33 says,

³² Now learn the parable from the fig tree; when its branch has already become tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near. ³³ So you too, when you see all these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door.

It is almost universally recognized that the Jewish state, founded in 1948, fulfills this prophecy. I agree. It has indeed put forth more leaves as it has come back to life. But the question is whether this tree will bear fruit or just more leaves—which occasioned Jesus’ curse in the beginning.

I know that there are many individuals who surely bear fruit in Jerusalem, but as a nation represented by the fig tree, Jesus’ prophecies give no indication that it will bear fruit. In other words, Jerusalem and the Israeli state as a whole will not repent and turn to Christ.

This past week, Rick Joyner of Morningstar Ministries, told of a vision that he received some time ago in which he saw the nuclear destruction of the “city of wickedness,” which he understood to be Jerusalem. His stated view is that this will prompt the Jews to repent and turn to Christ. I hope he is correct, and I have no doubt that many will indeed turn to Christ. After all, only a minority of Jews live in the Israeli state, so they would not be directly affected by such a nuclear attack.

Joyner also cites Paul saying, "all Israel will be saved," applying it to the Jews. Indeed, all will be saved, Jews included, but most will have to wait to the great Creation Jubilee. Yet Paul was not speaking of Jews but of all the Israelites dispersed after the Assyrians exiled them. This is Paul's main focus, but few see it unless they know the distinction between the Jews and the Israelites.

I like Rick Joyner and so not want to be critical of him, but his view is based on the common faulty view that the Jews are the biblical Israelites. In the end, the carnal has to die in order that we might change our identity to the new creation man.

Cast Out the Bondwoman

Paul tells us in Galatians 4:22-26 that Abraham had two wives, a bondwoman and a free woman. The bondwoman he identifies as the earthly Jerusalem; the free woman is the heavenly city. The children of the bondwoman are the unbelieving Jews, along with all who consider the earthly city to be the “mother church.” These are called children of the flesh (Galatians 4:29), that is, people who were born of earthly parents in a natural way. But we, as believers, have a different mother, called “the Jerusalem above… our mother” (Galatians 4:26).

Paul’s conclusion, quoted from Genesis 21:10, is given in Galatians 4:30,

³⁰ But what does the Scripture say? “Cast out the bondwoman and her son; for the son of the bondwoman shall not be an heir with the son of the free woman.”

Christian Zionists continue to appeal to God for Hagar and her son to be the heir of the birthright. Those who are in agreement with the word of God and with Paul have come into agreement with God to “cast out the bondwoman and her son.” This was difficult for Abraham himself, so we know that this may also be difficult for Christian Zionists today who love the children of the flesh (spiritual “Ishmael”).

Nonetheless, no flesh will glory in His sight.