RELATIONAL LEADERSHIP The Professional Model

RELATIONAL LEADERSHIP The Professional Model

When I attended the Presbyterian Seminary from 1972–1974, we were taught that we were professionals and should not develop personal friendships with the elders or the people. We were to maintain a professional distance for counseling, preaching, and leading board meetings. Friendships were to be cultivated with other pastors and people outside the congregation. I call this an organizational professional model.

When I was in graduate school from 1969–71, I developed a vision that was the opposite of this. I saw in the model of Yeshua a friendship relationship model. He lived with the disciples for over three years. They developed a deep friendship with Him and with each other. In John 15:15, Yeshua calls His disciples friends and says that as a friend He tells them what He is doing — what He is planning.

The Acts 2:42 Model

In Acts 2:42 and following, we read that the new community was continually together, met from house to house, shared meals, and gave themselves to prayer and the apostles’ teaching. In that era, my student friends were reacting against what we called the plastic, the artificial, the inauthentic in relationship. We saw an alienated population driven by economic motives. We wanted to see a lasting biblical community that brought humane living for God’s people. We called this developing a community characterized by covenant love relationships that would last a lifetime. In such a community, love would be tested, people discipled, and lives grown into the likeness of Yeshua. Open, transparent relationship would be the key. New people would be won to Yeshua and added to the community.

This is certainly the model we see with Paul. Note how he expresses his father’s heart to the Corinthians (1 Cor. 4:15). Note also how Paul wept when parting from the elders of Ephesus in Acts 20. This is not a distant professional model.

Implementing the Acts 2:42 Model

My first opportunity to implement this vision came when I was called to the First Hebrew Christian Church in Chicago in 1972. I didn’t yet have a method for raising leaders — I only knew to call those who were willing to live nearby and form a proximity community, within walking distance of one another. Forty-five people heeded that call. I developed discipleship lessons, and from those who were responding to the vision — now a Messianic Jewish vision — elders were nominated from among those who seemed mature enough. Two of the key couples were young and as yet had no children; our first child was born in 1975. But the idea of long-term community and raising our children together inspired us all.

Then, to our surprise, we were called to move from Chicago to lead Beth Messiah Congregation in the Maryland suburbs of D.C. The question now was how to build community and develop elders in this new context. My heart’s prayer was that God would give us a group of elders who would walk together in a covenant love relationship for a lifetime.

A Growing Understanding of Developing Leaders

In the early years at my new congregation, I discovered a network of congregations that emphasized raising leaders. If we are to grow in a community-oriented way, we are limited by the number of elders and home group leaders we can raise. Here is what I learned.

Preach radical commitment and dedication to the Lord, and submission to His will in leading us in service within the congregation.

Find those who are willing to be raised. Look for four characteristics: A. Worshippers of God. B. Teachable. C. Marriage and family in order. D. Intellectual capacity to lead and articulate.

If no one yet fit the criteria, then it was my job to find those closest to qualifying. The key was to spend time with them, invest in them, and build relationship while discipling them toward that mark. This sounds exactly like what Yeshua did — and it worked. Not only did we raise elders and shamashim (deacons), but we built covenant love relationships that have lasted in many cases to this day, forty-five years later. Home groups became the basis for intimacy, love, and transparency among members.

This covenant love connection extended into a network of congregations, the planting of new congregations, and even ministry stretching across the ocean to Israel — where I now serve alongside my right-hand and left-hand leaders from that early season, together with people who were in my congregation then and are now part of our congregations there.

The Mystery of the Lost Tribes

The occasion of this article is a book I read by an Antiochian Orthodox Christian theologian/pastor, Stephen De Young, The Religion of the Apostles: Apostolic Christianity in the First Century. Dr. De Young wrote another book, St. Paul the Pharisee: Jewish Apostle to All Nations. Both books are quite amazing. The latter sees Paul within Judaism and loyal to the Torah and Jewish traditions. It fits what is today being called the “Paul within Judaism” school of interpretation. The former has some significant insights into the plurality of God in the Hebrew Bible and also puts forth a theology of the Council of God.

In dealing with the so-called lost ten tribes of Israel, the author asserts that the fulfillment of the promise of their regathering is in the Church. Since the lost tribes were scattered to the nations, their separate identity was lost, and now their DNA is mixed with the DNA of many nations. Their physical DNA has been greatly diminished and their ethnicity also lost. However, through the spread of the Gospel, the nations are gathered, including those with ancestry from the lost tribes. The author is not asserting the Ephraimite movement error claiming that the Church is literally the lost tribes. Rather, those who become Christians are literally their descendants. De Young does not address the prophecies that the scattered northern tribes are promised a regathering to the Land of Israel. He comes very close to replacement theology, or supersessionism. In my evaluation, the mysterious promise of the Bible to restore the northern tribes of Israel remains unsolved. Judah was preserved and brought back to the Land after the Babylonian captivity at the end of the 6th century B.C., as predicted by Jeremiah.

The Thirteen Tribes

The idea of a division into ten tribes and two tribes is simplistic. The south included 3½ tribes—Judah, Benjamin, and Simeon (whose towns were integrated into Judah)—and half of the tribe of Levi. The northern tribes were actually 9½ tribes, since Joseph was divided into two tribes, Ephraim and Manasseh. The Bible promises a restoration to the Land of all the tribes.

The Promise of the New Covenant to Israel and Judah

Jeremiah 31 promises the New Covenant. It is promised to the house of Israel (the northern tribes) and the house of Judah (the southern tribes). The promise continues in verses 35–36 that “Israel’s offspring will not cease from being a nation . . . Only if the heavens above can be measured and the foundations of the earth searched out beneath, will I cast off the offspring of Israel—for all they have done.” This is declared as certain as the fixed order of the sun, moon, and stars (vv. 34–35).

The Prophecy of Ezekiel: The Return of All the Tribes and the Unity of the North and South

Ezekiel 36 promises not only the return of the southern captives from Babylon as prophesied in Jeremiah (the 70 years), but that on the mountains of Israel, God says, “I will settle a large population upon you—the whole house of Israel, all of it.” In Ezekiel 37, the famous dry bones chapter, the bones are the whole house of Israel. God promises in verse 14 to put His Spirit in them, and they will live. The chapter then prophesies the unity of the northern and southern tribes—the two sticks of Joseph representing the North, and Judah the South—and they will become one stick.

Solutions to the Mystery of the Northern Tribes

I do believe that the return of the Jewish people to the Land is a fulfillment of prophecy. But what of the northern tribes? Several solutions have been proposed.

People of the northern tribes came south during the revivals of King Hezekiah and King Josiah and celebrated the Passover. Some stayed and were integrated into the South. Thus, they became one stick. The return to the Land today, then, does include all the tribes of Israel.

There is yet a regathering of the northern tribes to come. We see this also in the return of the B’nei Menashe from India, who have been received in Israel. At the beginning of the Millennial Age, there will be more regatherings. The borders promised for a greater Israel could accommodate large numbers.

The spread of the Gospel does gather those from the northern tribes, and many more from the nations who are not from these tribes. The unity of Christians with Messianic Jews is a beginning fulfillment of the Ezekiel texts, since the Church includes the northern tribes. God will someday distinguish those who are descendants of these tribes and bring them to the Land as their place. This could be a millennial fulfillment. The Church as a whole is grafted into Israel and the Jewish people, as foundational to her identity. A Dutch theologian friend of some note suggested a solution like this. It may be that the DNA is not so diminished as claimed by De Young.

The Mystery Remains

The promises that include the northern tribes still remain a mystery. Perhaps the solution includes all three suggested possibilities. However, my reflection after many years is that I just do not know, and I don’t think we can know. But the promises of God remain true, and He will fulfill them according to their contextual meaning, without spiritualization or replacement theology (supersessionism). I should note that there is also much speculation in Rabbinic Judaism as to how this will be fulfilled—its fulfillment connected to the coming of the Messiah.

The Last Days, Islam and George Otis Jr.

In 1966 I visited Rutgers University and attended an InterVarsity Christian Fellowship meeting at the invitation of a friend from my high school church youth group. I was a freshman in college. The faculty sponsor was Edwin Yamauchi, who went on to become a noted ancient Near East and biblical scholar. Soon after, I read a journal article by him arguing that Ezekiel 38 and 39 — describing last wars against Israel — was not about Russia, but that the names pointed to tribes and areas of what is today’s northern Turkey. His linguistic and geographical arguments were persuasive, though some of these tribes could have migrated into southern Russia.

The Final Battle as an Islamic War

Recently, the idea has been put forth that the final battle leading to the return of Yeshua is an Islamic-led war, with Turkey featuring prominently. This fits Yamauchi’s research. Two authors, Joel Richardson and Walid Shoebat, argue for this and note that the biblical descriptions emphasize the surrounding nations. Richardson wrote The Islamic Antichrist. While neither author is conclusively dogmatic about end times details, these books offer a probable scenario. See our book Israel, the Church and the Last Days.

George Otis Jr. and the Last of the Giants

For the past several months, a book by George Otis Jr. — The Last of the Giants — kept coming to mind. It was written over 35 years ago. I referenced another of his books on spiritual warfare, The Twilight Labyrinth, in my own book Powers of Light and Darkness (subtitle: Angels, Demons and Spiritual Warfare: What the Bible Really Teaches). It had been many years since I’d read Last of the Giants, but my memory was that it dealt primarily with Islam and tracked closely with the thesis of Richardson and Shoebat. With the ongoing war against Iran and its proxies, and living here in Israel, I wanted to revisit it. My question: after 35 years, was it still relevant — or had it joined the long list of books on the last days that missed the mark?

I was quite amazed on several points. Otis wrote before the dissolution of the Soviet Union and predicted that the collapse would give rise to a fascist Russia — something we are watching unfold today. He also predicted that the dissolution would greatly strengthen Islam, particularly because several of the former Soviet republics would be Islamic. So while Communism and fascist dictatorships were giants in their time, the last of the giants is the demonic realm behind radical Islam. Otis points especially to the 10/40 window, stretching from North Africa across the Middle East through Pakistan, India, and Southeast Asia. These are the territories of the great unreached people groups — mostly Islamic nations, with the exceptions of India and parts of Southeast Asia (Cambodia, Vietnam, and Thailand).

The Challenge to Reach the People of the Islamic Nations

Otis presents the challenge of reaching these people groups through focused prayer and engagement. He does not call for commanding principalities or princes of darkness — rather, it is about focused intercession and discernment of the power of darkness over territories. He expects a great harvest and calls for supernatural ministry to reach these peoples. He is also clear that these same nations will engage in the last war against Israel.

I was quite pleased that Otis’s book has stood the test of time. Our connected ministries have been sensing that the salvation of Israel will be deeply connected to the witness of former Muslims, and especially Arabs. A few weeks ago, the Jerusalem Post featured an article by a former Muslim who had been part of Iran’s terror network and participated in hangings. His supernatural vision of Yeshua — and the full weight of his testimony — was compelling. May we see many more such testimonies widely reported in the Jewish press.

Maria Woodworth Etter: A Key Figure in Pre-Pentecostal and Early Pentecostal Ministry

For many years I have heard the name Maria Woodworth Etter. I first heard about her at a Kenneth Hagin conference on healing at Rhema Bible School in Oklahoma in 1983. I heard the story about her being in a trance for a long period of time — someone said it was for days. Something pricked my interest in recent months, and I decided to look into this noted evangelist and revivalist. I did not find the report of her being in a Holy Spirit trance for days.

Why Study Maria Woodworth Etter?

It is well to study this amazing woman and her ministry for insight into the great outpouring of the Spirit in Pentecostalism. It was even much greater than I had imagined.

For the last two years I have been studying the miraculous in the advance of the Gospel of the Kingdom — healings, outpourings of the Spirit, supernatural phenomena, revivals and more. Professor Craig Keener, one of the world’s leading New Testament theologians, published a massive two-volume set documenting the most wonderful miracles. His book is entitled The Credibility of New Testament Miracles. One could misunderstand the title. It is not a defense that the miracles recorded in the Bible really happened — there is already a good bit of writing on that. Rather, Keener’s book is about New Testament miracles happening in our day. Keener traveled the world to document and confirm.

Many point to the revival at Azusa Street in Los Angeles as the launch of the Pentecostal movement, where healing miracles and other supernatural events were widely reported. Yet the movement of healing and miracles did not begin with Azusa Street — one can point to the Faith Cure Movement of the 19th century. The Pentecostal movement, however, was so very important. Fr. Peter Hocken, in his book Azusa, Rome and Zion: Pentecostal Faith, Catholic Reform and Jewish Roots, argues that the Pentecostal movement, the charismatic movement, and the Messianic Jewish movement are intersecting with great implications for the return of Yeshua. It is a profound book.

Maria Woodworth Etter — Etter from this point forward — was pre-Pentecostal. She had a dramatic baptism in the Spirit, heard the voice of the Spirit calling her to evangelism, and received revelation that preaching on healing and praying for the sick were to be central to her ministry. I read two biographies and then her own massive account of her ministry. Etter was licensed by the Church of God, Anderson, Indiana, which in those days was more oriented to the supernatural works of the Spirit. The stories are amazing, and Etter sought documentation from doctors and detailed, credible testimonies.

When the Pentecostal movement began, she had questions — were tongues, which she practiced and promoted, really the essential sign of the baptism in the Spirit? Eventually she identified with the Pentecostals, and for the last ten to fifteen years of her ministry until her death, that identification was clear.

The Believable Accounts

The accounts are believable. I think she may have been the most effective healing evangelist in the history of the American Church. Reading through the credible accounts is like drinking from a fire hose. Instant healings of terrible conditions — blindness and deafness from birth, paralysis even from birth, and multiple serious diseases — are documented page after page. In all of her meetings, many fell under the power of the Spirit. She did experience trances, and a few times maintained an impossible posture, standing rigid for hours. Her ministry was a key example and inspiration for Aimee Semple McPherson, who founded the Foursquare Church denomination.

She lost all her children at young ages, save one daughter, yet she carried on — indefatigable. She kept a schedule that was superhuman, traveling from east to west and north to south.

Etter’s Theology

What about her theology? She maintained an orthodox Pentecostal confession. Her sermons, several of which appear in her book, show she was totally immersed in Scripture and could bring text after text from memory spontaneously and at an amazing level — this without a Bible college education. I take little issue with most of her preaching, though her exegetical accuracy is not the highest; more than 85% solid, in my view. One notable point: she proclaimed that Jesus was coming soon. This was the message given in tongues with interpretation, in prophecies, and in multiple visions. It may seem in part unfulfilled, yet the soon return of Yeshua is always the orientation of disciples — indeed, it is the very word of Yeshua himself, spoken 2,000 years ago. Sometimes Etter presents a pre-tribulation view of the rapture of the saints; other texts suggest a post-tribulation view. She did believe in the regathering of Israel and, even at that early stage of the return, pointed to its significance as fulfilled prophecy.

A Window into the Early Pentecostal Movement

Etter is a great window into the early Pentecostal movement. There was more amazing power, more outpourings, and more miraculous workings than I had imagined. Pentecostalism, including the newer charismatic streams, now comprises the majority of the Protestant evangelical world. At the Pentecostal World Fellowship in Finland last May, we heard wonderful stories of the advance of the Gospel with signs and wonders — most coming from the Southern Hemisphere, from Global Christianity.

My Great Desire, Hope and Prayer

So how does this fit my calling and our work in the Land of Israel? It is part of increasing my faith that a great signs-and-wonders movement of the Gospel will return to Israel. I long to see it and to be part of it before I die. As it was in the days of the Apostles — may it be so again, and as amazing and powerful as those old Etter meetings!

The Myth of Recent Origins for the Theology of the Restoration of Israel

The catalyst for this article was my search for a piece on the views of the Wesleys — the founders of Methodism — on the Jewish people and their restoration. A very good article by Asbury Seminary professor Nicholas Railton, Charles Wesley and the Jews, turned up in my search. I had not really looked into this before, but several of Charles Wesley’s hymns pointed clearly to the restoration of the Jewish people. I was right, and Railton’s article confirms a very robust affirmation in Charles Wesley. See the link here: https://place.asburyseminary.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2638&context=asburyjournal

One of the pervasive myths now gaining new traction on social media is that belief in the election of the ethnic Jewish people is a theological aberration of recent origin, traceable to John Nelson Darby in the mid-19th century (the founder of Dispensationalism). Tucker Carlson, who now platforms antisemites, has asserted this as well — going so far as to call Christian Zionism a “brain disease.” He is no biblical theologian. But more credible voices repeat this falsehood too, among them Munther Isaac of Bethlehem Bible College. One of the most common errors across many fields of knowledge is putting forward theories and narratives that fail to account for all the evidence. In the theory of knowledge, we call this the criterion of comprehensiveness (see my book The Biblical World View: An Apologetic).

The history of the historic Protestant Evangelical view on Israel is somewhat complex. Yes, there were Protestants who continued to teach that the Church was the Israel of God and had superseded ethnic Israel, which was no longer God’s elect people. But many Protestant thinkers and biblical theologians disagreed.

Back to the Bible

The Reformation was a back-to-the-Bible movement. Its doctrine of grounding all teaching in Scripture alone (sola Scriptura) meant that many came to their understanding by reading the Bible in context and accepting the plain meaning of the text — unless the text itself indicated analogy or symbol. One of the finest books on this subject is The Puritan Hope by Iain Murray, which surveys Puritan thought from the late 1500s through the 1600s. Murray argues that the consensus affirmed the continued election of ethnic Israel and their eventual turning to the Lord — and several Puritans argued for a literal return to the Land. English Puritans like Elnathan Parr and Samuel Rutherford were very clear on this. The founder of Harvard, Puritan Increase Mather, could not have been plainer in his exposition of Romans 9–11.

Murray does not extend his account beyond the Puritans, but the story continues. The Lutheran Pietists — Jacob Philip Spener, August Hermann Francke, and the commentator J. A. Bengel — embraced restorationist ideas as well. These men were among the influences on Ludwig von Zinzendorf, who became the leader of the Moravians. His commitment to the Jewish people was passionate; he even planted several Messianic Jewish congregations. He, in turn, influenced the Wesleys.

The Growing Consensus in British Christianity

By the 1800s, these convictions about the election of the Jewish people and their restoration to the Land had gained wide adherents across Great Britain. This was part of the background for the joint German Lutheran Pietist–Anglican effort to found Christ Church near the Jaffa Gate in Jerusalem (ministry beginning in 1842, the center completed in 1849). The British Parliament passed legislation to establish this church. Queen Victoria was involved and endorsed it. The project was undertaken in anticipation of the Jewish people’s return to the Land and their coming to faith near the time of the Second Coming. Christ Church in Jerusalem stands today as a monument to that history — and it was certainly among the currents that shaped Britain’s Balfour Declaration supporting a Jewish homeland in the Land. This history is well told in Oskar Skarsaune’s book Israel’s Friend. Sadly, this fine work by the former dean of the Lutheran theological seminary in Oslo exists only in Norwegian.

In any case, all of this history — except for Balfour itself — predates any influence of Darby. I only wish that those who oppose the doctrine of Israel’s restoration would at least tell the truth, rather than advancing a partial and misleading narrative.

Today, even the Roman Catholic Catechism affirms the election of the Jewish people and declares that God’s gifts and call to Israel are irrevocable (Romans 11:29). It cites Romans 9 — “to them belong the covenants.” Does that include the promise of the Land? It is not stated explicitly, but the implication is plain, and some Roman Catholic leaders have said so. The Catechism also ties the return of Yeshua to the Jewish nation’s turning to him (see paragraphs 674 and 839).

So let us be bold. Our view of Israel’s restoration is not some recent aberration — it is a classical Protestant position with deep and distinguished roots. Let us learn this history and defend our theology. For a summary, see my book Passion for Israel.

Why I Avoid Teaching a Detailed Scenario on the Last Days and Today’s Wars in the Middle East

The doctrine of the last days, or eschatology, is an important study in biblical theology. There is now an overwhelming consensus in biblical scholarship that the last days began in the first century with the coming of Yeshua—His ministry, death, resurrection, and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the Feast of Shavuot (Pentecost). The Kingdom of God has come, but in an “already and not yet” way. We are invited to live in and from the Kingdom under the rule of Yeshua, to live in Kingdom community.

There is, however, much in regard to the Kingdom that is not yet. Until the Age to Come, after the return of Yeshua, this “not yet” will continue. There will be a final intervention at His return that brings His Kingdom rule in fullness. We are the players on the stage of last days/eschatological history who, by fulfilling the will of God and extending the Kingdom of God, move history toward the climax of His coming again. I am happy to say that there is broad consensus on this understanding.

The Last of the Last Days

However, there is still the matter of the last of the last days and the description of battles or wars that are part of the events at the end of this age leading to His coming. One of the key events is the turning of the Jewish nation to Yeshua. This last-days event is described in the Roman Catholic Catechism, paragraph 674, as key to His return. He will not return until His ancient people recognize Him. Yes, even the Roman Catholic Catechism notes that the end of this period is connected to the Jewish people.

I do want to address the detailed scenarios that some put forth about the last of the last days, especially those connected to events in the Middle East and the nation of Israel. In this time of war with Iran, many seek to find these events predicted in the Bible. When I was a teenager, concentration on end-times scenarios was a major emphasis. For those who did not live through that time, it is hard to imagine. There were regional prophetic conferences. Detailed scenarios were presented about the lineup of nations against Israel—a restored Roman Empire of nations, the importance of Russia as a key invader from the north, and China from the east.

I was intrigued and made special efforts to attend—sometimes at the summer camp where I was a counselor and sometimes in New York City. During my college and graduate school years, after reading many interpretations, I came to the conclusion that we are not meant to know the detailed sequence of events, but only a broad outline.

Ezekiel 38 and 39 provide one example. Do these events, describing an invasion of Israel from the north—Gog and Magog—occur before the time of the Antichrist and then lead to a lull? Note that it takes Israel seven years to burn the weapons of the defeated invaders (39:9–10). There is no description in these texts of the coming of the Messiah in glory (Zech. 14).

Three primary interpretations are common. The first is that this is simultaneous with the battle for Jerusalem and the defeat of the forces of the Antichrist—simply describing a parallel battle in the mountains of Israel. The burning of the weapons then takes place during the beginning of the Millennial Age. The second, as described above, is that this battle takes place some years before the battle for Jerusalem in Zechariah 12 and 14. The tribulation and the Antichrist come later as a separate matter. The third is that it is symbolic of the final war before the Age to Come, and we are not to pin down specifics at all.

Dr. J. Barton Payne was a brilliant professor of Old Testament at Wheaton College Graduate School. I highly recommend his volume, An Encyclopedia of Biblical Prophecy. Payne interprets every predictive prophecy in the Bible and presents a case for the time of fulfillment for each one. He lists 15 periods of fulfillment. The Ezekiel passage is placed at the end of the Millennium as the final rebellion—the same as the rebellion after the 1,000 years in Revelation 20.

Well, I have to say that after reading these various views, I am not convinced that I know. I lean toward the second interpretation.

Who are the nations that Ezekiel describes? Traditional prophecy conferences from the 1960s identified this as a Russia-led alliance. But convincing arguments have been put forth by Walid Shoebat and Joel Richardson that Turkey is the nation involved, and that the descriptions and language better fit tribes in northern Turkey. I think there is credibility to their arguments. Classical Dispensationalism argued that the Antichrist would arise from a revived Roman Empire, not this coalition. Richardson, however, argues that the Antichrist is Islamic.

The Broad Outline

I have come to the conclusion that it is not important to know the detailed sequence of the last events before the return of Yeshua, and that we should not spend much time trying to figure it out. However, I do believe in a broad outline that guides my response to events today.

First, the Body of the Messiah will be completing its task of preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom in all the nations as a witness (Matthew 24:14). Secondly, many Christians will partner with Messianic Jews to make Israel jealous (Romans 11:14). This witness will be accompanied by revivals and outpourings of the Spirit (Joel 2:28–30). Israel will be prepared to corporately call on Yeshua (Matthew 23:39).

Thirdly, there will be invasions and wars (Ezekiel 38–39) leading to a final invasion where the forces of the Antichrist reach Jerusalem. Multitudes from the nations will be involved (Joel 3). The Jewish people will be anointed to fight (Zechariah 12), but the defeat of their enemies leads to tearful repentance and looking upon Yeshua whom they pierced. A parallel passage in Zechariah 14 describes the final invasion and the coming of Yeshua, who stands on the Mount of Olives and defeats all the invaders (Zechariah 14; Revelation 19).

I do not think we need to concern ourselves with more than this broad outline.

In this light, how should we view the war with Iran and its proxies? It is one of those last-days wars and does foreshadow more to come. But I believe there will also be a time of peace. I would simply say: keep your eye on Turkey. I thought this even before they became more radically aligned in the Muslim world and moved away from their earlier alliance with Israel.

Israel’s Restoration, Historic Protestant Teaching

Arguing Against the Election of Ethnic Israel by Refuting Dispensationalism

Most proponents of supersessionism—the doctrine that Israel is re-defined after the first century and consists only of those who follow Yeshua—hold that ethnic Israel is no longer elect. Some call this replacement theology. Usually, those who argue for this view contrast it with Dispensationalism, a system of theology that dominated American Evangelicalism in the 20th century. It had its origins in the mid-1800s and was first put forth as a systematic theology by John Nelson Darby.

In my evaluation, Dispensationalism presents many problematic views. For example, it posits two separate peoples of God: the Church and Israel/the Jewish people. This separation is so complete in classic Dispensationalism that one cannot be part of both. A Messianic Jew, in this framework, is not spiritually part of Israel but instead part of the destiny of the Bride, the Church.

Robert McKenzie’s Presentation and a Rejoinder

A recent book by Robert McKenzie, Identifying the Seed: An Examination and Evaluation of the Differences Between Dispensationalism and Covenant Theology, argues that there is now one seed of Abraham that counts—those who follow Jesus. This is also the view of classical Reformed Calvinism. It is one of the strongest books I have read supporting Reformed Covenant theology and one of the most persuasive presentations of replacement theology.

It is persuasive, in part, because it leaves out the evidence of many texts that simply cannot be fit into the system. One of the points the author misses is how a non-Dispensationalist understands the election of both the Church and Israel. We do not see these elections as implying permanently separate peoples. Rather, we see an intersecting—and ultimately one—people.

I argued this in my book Jewish Roots, first published in 1986. The Messianic Jew is both part of the Church and part of the nation of Israel. In addition, when all Israel is saved, the Jewish people will be part of the Church while still being preserved as a distinct nation. This is because nations or ethnic groups are part of God’s enrichment of humanity and are preserved in the New Jerusalem.

Israel is a nation qua nation among the nations and an instrument of God through which He will gain total victory and submission from all nations. The Church is also an instrument of that victory—not as a literal nation, but as a saved remnant from every nation. In one dimension, Israel and the Church will be one, yet Israel and the nations are also preserved as nations.

McKenzie does not address God’s purpose for nations. This is well addressed by R. Kendall Soulen in The God of Israel and Christian Theology. Israel and the nations form an eternal dyad that shows God’s love for distinct nations and corporate peoples, which He preserves. Ultimately, Israel and the nations will come into a place of mutual blessing, as predicted in the prophets. Soulen, it should be noted, is not a Dispensationalist.

McKenzie objects to the premillennial view in which all the promises are fulfilled for Israel in that age, while the Church is absent. Yes, classic Dispensationalism held this view. However, a better view holds that Israel and the Church rule together in that age: the Church representing all nations, while Israel continues in its national life as well.

The Election of Ethnic Israel Held by Non-Premillennialists

However, I do not think it is wise to make premillennialism so primary that without it we cannot defend the election of Israel. Richard Lovelace, the late professor of Church History at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, and the late J. Rodman Williams of Regent University both held a robust view of the election of ethnic Israel and the fulfillment of her destiny as a nation in the New Heavens and New Earth.

The Roman Catholic Church also affirms the continued election of ethnic Israel. All three are amillennial—that is, they do not hold to a literal 1,000-year period before the New Heavens and New Earth. Do I believe this is the best view when considering all the evidence? No. But the election of Israel is more important to our argument and is not dependent on premillennialism.

McKenzie does not take texts in their natural sense but redefines their meaning in accord with a supposed New Testament reinterpretation. These new applications, however, do not change the original meaning or the fulfillment of what was prophesied. We argue for taking biblical texts in their natural sense.

Historic Ethnic Israel Restorationism

Christian Zionism is the modern term for Christians who believe that the Bible predicts the regathering of the Jewish people to their ancient Land. They support Israel and this regathering on a biblical basis. However, before this term was used, many in Church history—long before Darby—believed in the election of the Jewish people, and some also believed in their return to the Land. This was called Restorationism.

We can trace the beginnings of Restorationism to the Puritans, who were not premillennialists. This history is well recounted in The Puritan Hope by Ian Murray. Romans 11 is a prominent text for these expositors. In the 1600s, we find this view clearly taught. Most notable is Increase Mather, founder and first president of Harvard. Others include the expositor Elnathan Parr and the famed defender of the Law of God, Samuel Rutherford.

This perspective influenced Lutheran Pietists in the 1700s, such as Philipp Spener. Jonathan Edwards also embraced the continuing election of ethnic Israel. Indeed, “Though they are enemies of the Gospel… they are beloved and elect” (Romans 11:29). In the same period, Ludwig von Zinzendorf, leader of the Moravians, was firmly committed to this view and influenced by the Pietists.

In the early 19th century, this perspective became strong among Anglicans. My book Passion for Israel provides a summary of this history.

One Body Plus Ethnic Israel

Rightly defining the Body—the one new humanity of Jew and Gentile—while maintaining the national election of Israel/the Jewish people is key to answering McKenzie and others who argue similarly.

I am convinced that our view rests on the overwhelming evidence of Scripture. Some years ago, I presented a paper laying out this evidence to the Anglican Archbishop Rowan Williams. After hearing it, he confirmed that what I presented reflected the right understanding of Paul and the Bible.

Separation of Church and State — Again

This follows an earlier article. Readers should understand that my position is informed first by the Bible, then by the Reformed Protestant consensus that influenced the early formation of the United States constitutional system, and finally by the history of how this separation was interpreted.

The Bible and the prophets make clear that nations are accountable to God and to basic universal laws of righteousness. Whatever human governments might arrange, the Bible is our ultimate authority on this issue. A recent, insightful book on the formation of the U.S. constitutional system by Jewish and Christian authors illuminates the founders’ thinking (Wilfred M. McClay, Jewish Roots of American Liberty).

Reformed theology developed a correct understanding of separation. It held that three necessary spheres of authority exist: the family, the state (civil society), and the religious sphere (the Church). Each sphere is largely autonomous and accountable to God’s law within its own domain. There is mutual influence and some overlap, but one sphere should not control another. The state, for example, does not preach the Gospel — that is not its sphere.

This understanding aligns with the Declaration of Independence, which affirmed that all human beings are created equal and that rights are God-given, not granted by the state. That assumption underlay the Constitution even if it was not explicitly stated. Therefore, laws had to be measured against Biblical civil law for legitimacy. The battle against slavery manifested this understanding. Many founders repeatedly affirmed that the Republic’s success depended on the morality of the people, and that morality was sustained by religious faith. Morality would falter without that religious foundation. Washington, Adams, Franklin, Adams (again), and even the heterodox Jefferson strongly affirmed this. The state’s function, within its sphere, was to provide order in which religion could flourish — by religion, they assumed the religion of the Bible. The state’s accountability to God was acknowledged in congressional prayers, prayers at national celebrations, and acknowledgments by political leaders until recent times.

The laws for the state derived mostly — though not exclusively — from the Hebrew Bible. Part of that understanding is that the state would make no laws undermining the foundation and prosperity of marriage and family, since family stability was essential to the functioning of the state. Today, the breakdown of the family correlates with the breakdown of law and order. The state should make no law impeding the religious sphere. The religious sphere has a teaching and prophetic function to call the state to obedience to God in its domain. Laws promoting gender fluidity, transgenderism, or same-sex marriage, in this view, undercut reverence for marriage and family. Without the Law of God, civilization becomes like a cut flower — there is no measure to determine unrighteous law. The Bible warns against such unrighteous laws.

We speak of the Laws of God for the state as universals, not the time-limited statutes. This begins by recognizing that all human beings are created in the image of God and deserve equality before the law. It includes those commandments from the Ten Commandments that apply to the civil sphere: no stealing, no bearing false witness, not murdering, and honoring God (for example, oaths in courts). It includes just weights and measures (honesty in business), honest judges and courts where two or three witnesses are necessary in capital convictions, and the rejection of trial by ordeal. It sets up sufficient lower courts for accessible justice with appeals to higher courts. It enjoins severe penalties for murder, rape, and kidnapping. We take these standards for granted but many societies did not practice them. In the Bible, might does not make right; the ruler is accountable to God’s law, not above it. There is also a separation of powers and checks and balances in a decentralized system. The United States even applied the Sabbatical-year law for debt relief in bankruptcy filings, though only every seven years.

I believe the state is duty-bound to acknowledge accountability to God and his law. Hence we read “In God We Trust” and “one nation under God.” How should the state treat those who do not believe in God or his law? As citizens created in God’s image, they are due equal rights and dignity. They may opt out of the state’s confession of God, but they must recognize the majority will when the polity acknowledges the state’s accountability to God. The system we promote is possible only when the majority of citizens embrace it; the founders understood this. I again call for a more accurate historical understanding of the separation of church and state and of the Jewish-Biblical foundation of society.

https://restorationfromzion.com Theology of Hymns

The Theology of Hymns

The Bible’s Detractors
Detractors claim that the Bible presents us with a cruel God, even a sadistic God, and that biblical faith is evil. This is because they read texts about the command of Israel to wipe out different ethnic groups that inhabited ancient Canaan, and passages about the hard judgment that awaits evil people either after death or at the final judgment. I wrote about this issue recently on this website. This reaction is focused on less than 10% of the hard texts in the Bible. There are good explanations for these texts. See Walter Kaiser’s book on The Hard Sayings of the Bible. There are many writers who address these issues. Yes, a fearful judgment awaits those who reject God and the truth.

The Canonical Thrust of the Bible
Some years ago, Dr. Brevard Childs of Yale Divinity School argued that our theological convictions should be based on the overall thrust of the Bible on particular subjects. He called this the canonical thrust of the Bible and argued that we should submit ourselves to the teaching that arises from this canonical thrust. However, without belief in the full authority of all biblical texts, there is too much subjectivity in the selection and judgment of what that thrust really is. This does not lead to being true to the canonical thrust.

Theology through the Hymns
I want to propose that we look at the issue of the canonical thrust of the Bible through the hymnology of the people of God. There is a great compendium of hymns from the Middle Ages to today. It is painful to me that the place of the great hymns in many congregations has been lost. One writer wrote, for example, that Methodists learned their theology from their hymns. I would venture that this was true for many others, not only Methodists. The hymns give us a good sense of the canonical thrust of the Bible. Some topics are left out, but so much is included.

What Do the Hymns Present in Theology?
They present God as a God of love who gave His Son as a sacrifice. We read from Wesley, Amazing Love, How Can It Be. They present the suffering of Yeshua for us in a deep and touching way, as in the Bernard of Clairvaux and Bach hymn, O Sacred Head, Now Wounded. God is presented as a God of miraculous intervention and as One with whom we can have an intimate, conversational relationship. In I Come to the Garden, we sing, “He walks with me, and He talks with me and tells me I am His own.” He is our provider in God Will Take Care of You: “Be not dismayed whatever be, God will take care of you.” He is faithful in Great Is Thy Faithfulness. He is our mighty fortress in A Mighty Fortress Is Our God. He is majestic in How Great Thou Art. Yes, God is the true and righteous Judge, but the greater emphasis is on the offer of salvation, not condemnation—though that danger is certainly present, as in Sleeper’s Ye Must Be Born Again. He is coming again, “with power and great glory.”

I would urge the reader to purchase a great book of hymns, such as Hymns for the Living Church. Read through it devotionally and see the theology of the Bible expressed in hymns.

The Canonical Thrust of the Jewish Worship Book
I would also recommend purchasing a Jewish worship book, the Siddur. In this devotional book, we see how our people put the theology of the Hebrew Bible into worship. It is the canonical thrust as perceived by classic Jewish devotional writers.

How did our most spiritually in-tune people read the Bible? This is such an interesting study. Be encouraged.

Judaism, Christianity and the Decline of Western Civilization

I recently read a profound book by Melanie Phillips. I am familiar with her mostly from op-eds she has written for the Jerusalem Post. She is a Modern Orthodox Jew and a moderate conservative, a British Israeli. I usually find her writings convincing and insightful. Her thesis in this book is profound, and I agree with about 90 percent of it. It is very much in line with my own views.

Western Civilization Is Based on the Bible

The best of Western Civilization is based on the Bible, especially the Hebrew Bible. The failures of Western Civilization are due to a failure to live up to biblical law and values, while progress comes when people recognize the disparity and seek to more fully implement biblical norms. This was the case in the fight against slavery. I think of William Wilberforce in England, a deeply committed Anglican Evangelical, and Harriet Beecher Stowe, who wrote Uncle Tom’s Cabin and also composed hymns.

For Phillips, Judaism provided the world with these laws and values, and Christianity was key in mediating them to the Western world. Civil society should acknowledge God and His law as the source of our law and values. This provides the best foundation for rights and responsibilities, separation of powers, the worth of every human being, and much more. I would add the American Declaration of Independence, which affirms that every human being is created equal and that basic rights are endowed by the Creator.

A Wrong Understanding of the Separation of Church and State

For Phillips and for me, the prevailing understanding of the separation of Church and State is a profound mistake. The West should acknowledge and honor the source of its laws and values: fair courts, checks on power, and rulers who are under the law rather than above it. Morality, the family, and biblical sexual ethics are all crucial to a future, prospering society.

She calls for a partnership between conservative Jews and Christianity to restore biblical norms as the foundation of society and for this foundation to be publicly acknowledged. Minorities who do not believe in God or the Bible can still embrace these values, and minority rights must be protected so that religious faith is not forced on anyone.

There are many historians who have acknowledged this positively. One of the more famous is Herbert Butterfield of the University of Cambridge, who recognized this foundation as key to the origin of science and the progress of Western civilization. More recently, atheist British historian Tom Holland has acknowledged that only societies influenced by the Bible practice human rights. Phillips is therefore in good company.

Neo-Marxism Marches Through Western Institutions

What happened? There has been a march through Western institutions of neo-Marxist ideas and grievance culture. This is expressed in “human rights” gone off the rails, such as DEI, which seeks quotas and equal outcomes among races and ethnic groups; the loss of the definition of sexual identity as male and female; sexual fluidity and the trans movement; the breakdown of marriage and family; and anti-white, anti-colonial ideology.

All whites are deemed guilty of the sins of centuries past. This teaches Westerners to despise their heritage. Without courage rooted in the good of that heritage, the West is adrift, with nothing left to preserve. The absurdity of blaming all whites—including those with no ancestors who practiced slavery or came from nations that never engaged in colonialism—is ignorant and foolish, yet the idea prevails.

For neo-Marxism, one is either an oppressor or the oppressed. Women, blacks, other minorities, homosexuals, transsexuals, and even those with bipolar disorder are to be affirmed exactly as they are. They are categorized as the oppressed. Meritocracy is rejected, and this will lead nations into economic and social decline. Preserving national identity is worthless to them. They embrace transnationalism, universalism, and relativism. No culture is better than any other—really? Even head-hunting cannibal cultures? Or cultures that enslave women?

This leads to the open-borders orientation of the West, where massive immigration erodes the culture of the host country. Immigration is no longer governed by the expectation that newcomers integrate and support the culture of the nation, as was the norm in the past. This is especially evident with Muslim immigration. Some of these immigrants seek to destroy the West and replace it with radical Islam and Sharia law. Muslim fascists are not relativists but absolutists. They exploit Western relativism and weakness, using Western elites as useful idiots.

The October 7th Genocide

The response of many in the West to the October 7th genocidal attack against Israel two years ago illustrates the bankruptcy of moral thinking in the West and underscores the urgent need for restoration. Israel, as a nation, is key to that restoration. Phillips’ presentation of Israel’s importance is profound: Israel represents a life-affirming society, not a culture of death.

The Call for Jewish and Christian Cooperation to Save Western Civilization

Phillips therefore calls for a great movement of Jews and Christians to fight back and restore Western Civilization. She calls for Christianity to be pro-Jewish and pro-Judaism and to repudiate its historic anti-Semitism.

Weaknesses in Her Book

So far, so good—amen. But there are weaknesses. Phillips criticizes Christianity for being too heavenly minded, echoing the old phrase about being “so heavenly minded that one is no earthly good.” She defends a more Jewish, this-worldly focus and downplays the importance of eternal life. She has a point with respect to some Christians, but she is partly wrong.

If we lose the hope of eternal life, we will lose the courage needed to affect this age and this world. C. S. Lewis argued that the most effective people have one foot in heaven and one on earth. Phillips even suggests that belief in eternal life is not essential for social transformation and that Judaism functions without this focus. I would argue that Judaism does emphasize one’s state in the Age to Come.

The great philosopher Immanuel Kant saw this more clearly than Phillips. While Kant could not embrace the importance of the sacrificial death of Yeshua, he grasped key truths. In his Critique of Practical Reason, he argued that three beliefs are necessary to sustain a humane and ordered society: God, freedom, and immortality (life after death). In this life, people do not receive just reward for their good or evil deeds—so why be moral? True moral motivation requires belief in life after death, where justice will ultimately be rendered. Second, freedom is necessary for real moral responsibility. Third, belief in God as the moral judge who rewards good and punishes evil is essential. These beliefs are foundational for civilization as opposed to barbarism. I agree with Kant.

Another missing piece in Phillips’ work is revival and evangelism. The only way to turn the tide against the neo-Marxist onslaught is for a sufficiently large portion of the population to push back—and push back hard. Without revival and successful Christian evangelism, this will not happen. This is why preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom with power and genuine outpourings of the Spirit is essential. In American history, such revivals have repeatedly led to profound and positive social change.