Copyright 2024 JosephShulam.
The relationship between the New and Old Covenants in God's plan of redemption has been somewhat obscured by the historically and Biblically false teaching that the Church has inherited Israel. This teaching of the "church" has been the ideological basis for the Anti-Semitism of "Christianity" and the misunderstanding of the doctrine of
dispensationalism.
ISRAEL HAS BEEN CONSIDERED A NON-ENTITY BECAUSE IT BELONGS TO THE OLD COVENANT.
To belong to the New Testament faith automatically cuts all relationships with the Jewish Old Testament. When a Jew became a believer in Yeshua HaMachiach, he was quickly told that he was free from the Law and did not have to observe any of it any longer. Even in the Laussane Committee for Jewish Evangelism, a statement was made that it is much easier to convert "the Secular Israeli" because they are no longer observing the Law.
This lesson will examine the relationship between the Old and New Covenants and Israel's unique situation.
I do not believe God made a mistake when he chose Israel. The "Christian" attitude makes God as having made a mistake and then killing his only Son to correct it.
Jeremiah 31: 31-24:
"The days are surely coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. 32 It will not be like the covenant that I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt—a covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, says the Lord. 33 But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put my Law within them, and I will write it on their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 34 No longer shall they teach one another or say to each other, "Know the Lord," for they shall all know me, from the least to the greatest, says the Lord, for I will forgive their iniquity and remember their sin no more.
The expectation of the New Covenant is part of the Old Plan. God always planned to have a suffering servant who would save the world.
The salvation of Israel and the Election of Israel are not the same.
The fact that one holds that Israel is God's elect was and will be forever God's elect does not preclude that they are also automatically saved, and this has not been true in any part of Israel's relationship with the Almighty God.
Psalm 95:10-11:
"For forty years, I loathed that generation
and said, "They are a people whose hearts go astray,
and they do not regard my ways."
Therefore, in my anger, I swore,
"They shall not enter my rest."
Hebrews 3:18,19:
"And to whom did he swear that they would not enter his rest if not to those who were disobedient? 19 So we see that they could not enter because of unbelief."
Israel's election is not based on merit but on God's promises to Abraham.
The Law did not cancel God's promise to Abraham.
Galatians 3:19-21:
"19 Why then the law? It was added because of transgressions until the offspring would come to whom the promise had been made, and it was ordained through angels by a mediator. 20 Now, a mediator involves more than one party, but God is one.
21 Is the Law then opposed to the promises of God? Certainly not! For if a law had been given that could make alive, then righteousness would indeed come through the Law."
We really see this in the Book of Revelation in the song that all the saints will sing before the throne of God: "The Song of Moses and the Lamb." However, the most evident passage to prove this is Romans 11:28:
" As regards the gospel, they are enemies for your sake, but as regards election, they are beloved for the sake of their ancestors."
The Torah has never provided eternal life but has always sought a better relationship with God.
For example, Rashi's commentary on Leviticus 26:9:
"I will look with favor upon you and make you fruitful and multiply you, and I will maintain my covenant with you. 10 You shall eat old grain long stored, and you shall have to clear out the old to make way for the new. 11 I will place my dwelling in your midst, and I shall not abhor you. 12 I[a] will be your God, and you shall be my people,
Rashi comments,
"This is the New Covenant of which Jeremiah the prophet has spoken: 'I will make a new covenant with them.'" The Jewish Rabbis understood that salvation can not come to one nation alone. If it is real salvation, it must be universal. "The whole earth shall be filled with the knowledge of the Lord." This is Israel's salvation.
There is an irrational fear from dispensationalists. The fear is that if a person is an observant Jew, he is "Under the Law"; he cannot accept the Gospel, and he is a threat to Christians.
The early disciples of Yeshua in the First Century CE were observant Jews.
Most of them did not come from Hellenistic ranks. They were from the middle class, spiritually hungry, life-seeking, and looking to please God.
If Yeshua came and destroyed the Law and the Old Covenant, would this not make Yeshua dishonest? Did He not say that He did not come to destroy the Law and the Prophets?
Paul has contributed more than any biblical writer to this gross misunderstanding.
Let's look at the book of Acts and see how Paul acted in light of this theology.
Acts 16:2: Paul circumcised Timothy because of the Jews. Do you think Paul was afraid of his Jewish brothers?
Acts 17:2,21: Paul went to the Synagogue as it was his custom, and in the Synagogue, he taught them for three weeks from the scriptures. Do you think that they would have received him and heard his teaching if he had acted like a non-Jew?
Acts 20:6,16: Paul went to Jerusalem to keep the traditions and the Passover.
Acts 21:20-21: We hear no condemnation of the Jews in Jerusalem who were all zealous. On the contrary, we see that Jacob is bragging about the fact that there are so many Jewish believers.
Acts 22:3; 24:14-18; 25:8; 26:20: In all these passages, we see Paul living a Jewish life and claiming to believe everything written in the Law and the Prophets. Was Paul a backslider from his own Pauline Theology? Or perhaps Pauline Theology backslid from Paul?
Comments