One For Israel

Sean McDowell: Now would you view Israel being back in the land as a fulfillment of prophecy?

Carmen Imes: The modern-day state of Israel is a secular state. I don't think it's automatic that we should see the secular modern state of Israel as the heirs of those covenant promises. People might think we mean Old Testament Israel, and this isn't that.

Seth Postell: Carmen is making an assumption that I think is seriously problematic. It's seriously flawed.

Eli Haitov: Is modern-day Israel a fulfillment of prophecy? I'm here with Dr. Seth Postell, the Dean of Israel College of the Bible. My name is Eli Haitov. I'm a lecturer at Israel College of the Bible, and today we're going to talk about this very important and provocative question.

Seth, recently it was claimed in a podcast by Sean McDowell and Carmen Imes that because Israel does not follow God, it cannot be the fulfillment of prophecy. In other words, to enjoy God's promises in this land, Israel must be faithful to God. Because it hasn't happened yet, modern-day Israel is not the fulfillment of prophecy. What do you think about that?

Seth Postell: I saw the podcast. First of all, I definitely want to say thank you, Sean McDowell, and also Carmen. Carmen Imes is a great Old Testament scholar, so I really appreciate the fact that both of them were very clear in their affirmation that Israel has a future. This is really refreshing in a time where more and more evangelicals are basically questioning Israel's relevancy in the program of God. In that sense, I definitely see the podcast that they did was very encouraging.

But here's where we need to address Carmen's claims. It is important. Again, the argument is that she saw that the promises to Israel are unconditional, and yet she argued that modern Israel, established in 1948, there was a question as to the name, whether it would even be called Israel or not, many founders of Israel were either secular or didn't believe in God. How can modern Israel be a fulfillment of prophecy? She assumes based on certain passages of eschatological promises that only when Israel believes will they be brought back to the land.

Here's where I find that there's a flaw in the thinking here. It has to do with how we read scripture. Are there rules of interpretation? If you look at Micah chapter five, according to Micah chapter five, where is the Messiah supposed to be born?

Eli Haitov: Bethlehem.

Seth Postell: Is that a literal Bethlehem or a spiritual Bethlehem?

Eli Haitov: Matthew seems to suggest that it's literal.

Seth Postell: It's not a spiritual Bethlehem. It's a literal Bethlehem. Here's what's interesting from a literary standpoint. I would imagine Carmen would agree with me. Scholars see that there is a uniting of these books together. Michael Shepherd in his commentary on the 12 minor prophets brings that out. It's hard to deny some kind of literary unity. If I'm looking at the Book of the Twelve as a book, and I look at Micah and I say Micah chapter five is literal Bethlehem, then we come to Zechariah chapter 12 and Zechariah chapter 14.

The question then becomes, the Messiah is coming to where? He's returning to the Mount of Olives. Now my question is this, is that a literal Mount of Olives or a spiritual Mount of Olives? How do we decide? We cannot pick and choose and say that place is literal, but this place is figurative. My question to Carmen or any Bible scholar would be, why is it that Micah chapter five is a literal Bethlehem, but Zechariah chapter 14 is a spiritual Mount of Olives?

Interpretively speaking, I need to understand why would that be a spiritualization of a unique place in God's geography? Let's grant that Jesus is coming back to the Mount of Olives. If we've assumed, and I think it's a correct assumption interpretively, explain to me why one has to be spiritual when the other one is physical? If that's the case, that it's a literal Mount of Olives, then we have to take a pan back and say, then if that's the case, why is Yeshua returning? He's returning to a people that need salvation.

In other words, the minor prophets assume a time when Israel will be back in the land, and the Messiah will come at a time when they don't recognize him. Zechariah chapter 12 and Revelation chapter one understands Zechariah 12 as something that will be fulfilled in the future. Zechariah 14, when the Messiah returns, it's then when the Jewish people will finally recognize their Messiah.

Zechariah's eschatology assumes a regathering when Israel will be in the land as unbelievers. It assumes a period of time when Israel will be hated by all nations and assumes that it's at that time when Israel's back in the land that they will accept Yeshua as the Messiah. Carmen's argument that the Bible assumes that only when Israel is faithful to God will they be back in the land and therefore modern Israel has nothing to do with fulfillment of prophecy is flawed.

Can we prove that modern Israel is a fulfillment of prophecy? Of course we can't. But that's not the issue. The issue from my perspective is that Carmen is making an assumption that I think is seriously problematic. It's seriously flawed. I deeply respect Carmen Imes. The podcast was very well done with humility, but I think the claim that modern Israel is not biblical Israel is seriously flawed on the basis of her argumentation.

Eli Haitov: In other words, we're not claiming that there is this prophecy that says Israel is going to be regathered in 1948. But we are saying that there are prophecies that presuppose that the nation of Israel is here in unbelief and then come to repentance.

Seth Postell: Correct.

Eli Haitov: Another claim was made, and that is that there is this continuity between the Abrahamic covenant in Genesis 12 and the Mosaic covenant. There's this tension here I see because the Abrahamic covenant seems to be unconditional, but the Mosaic covenant seems to be conditional. On the one hand, the promise is unconditional. Israel is going to possess the land. On the other hand, when you look at the Mosaic covenant, the possession of the land is conditioned on Israel's faithfulness. How do you reconcile that?

Seth Postell: It was interesting to watch her with Sean McDowell. They obviously disagree in terms of their understanding of the relationship between the New Covenant and the Sinai covenant. I'm here with Sean, and I would argue that the Sinai covenant is definitely conditional, whereas the Abrahamic covenant is unconditional. I realize that's a debated issue among biblical theologians, but I do find it interesting that within the Hebrew Bible, whenever the prophets appeal to God on behalf of Israel in terms of their being in a situation of covenantal disobedience, and there's an appeal to God to be faithful, there's always an appeal to the Abrahamic covenant and never an appeal to the Sinai covenant.

The prophets themselves seem to be seeing the Abrahamic covenant as completely unconditional, whereas the Sinai covenant seems to come with conditions. Also, the way I understand the book of Hebrews is that the Sinai covenant and the New Covenant are different covenants. They have a different priesthood, they have different sacrifices. There I would argue with Carmen's reading that the Sinai covenant is a conditioned covenant. It is in some sense related to the Abrahamic covenant, but it's a conditional covenant, whereas the New Covenant is a new covenant.

But here's another thing that I think is really worth pointing out in terms of the ways in which the prophets appeal to the unconditionality of the Abrahamic covenant. Paul does the same thing. If you look at his argument in Romans chapter nine through eleven, I realize that people make a big deal out of Romans 9:6, "For they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel," and that's where people want to force Paul into saying that the church is the new Israel.

The problem is it's not a close enough reading of the text because what does he do? He defines his terms as he defines the Israel from Abraham to Isaac, from Isaac to Jacob, and basically argues that Jacob was chosen in the womb. When Jacob and Esau were together in the womb before they'd done anything good or anything bad, but just in terms of God's election, God chose Jacob. When he quotes then Malachi, "Jacob I loved, Esau I hated," it's clear that he's not talking about the individual. He's talking about the nations, Edom as a nation, Jacob as the nation of Israel.

The point then, why does he cite this and bring it to Jacob? The point is that if Jacob as a nation was chosen unconditionally without any kind of connection to works good or bad, then that means that the descendants of Jacob cannot lose their election, covenant disobedience included. Why would I argue that's the best interpretation of that passage? Because that's exactly how the passage ends. In Romans chapter 11 verse 28 and 29, he says, "From the standpoint of the gospel, they, the nation of Israel, are enemies for your benefit, for your sake."

Salvation has come to the Gentiles because of Israel's disobedience, the rejection. Indeed they're enemies of the gospel for your benefit. But then he goes on to say, "But from the standpoint of God's election, God's choice, they are beloved for the sake of the fathers." It's clear here he's talking about a national election. He's saying that there's a people that are enemies of the gospel that are still elected because of the choice of the fathers, the beloved from the choice of the fathers, for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.

The point being that whereas Israel has failed under the conditions of the Mosaic covenant, which is Paul's point in Romans 1 through 3, they're condemned under the Sinai covenant, but that doesn't mean that they've lost their election. Even the nation that has not received their promised Messiah, Paul insists that the promises and the election still stand, the national election. I would argue Paul doesn't appeal to the unconditionality of the Mosaic covenant to insist that Israel's election is unconditional and still stands today. He appeals to the Abrahamic covenant.

Eli Haitov: In other words, you're saying Romans 9:6 when it says that not all Israel are Israel, it's not actually expanding the meaning of Israel, rather you're saying...

Seth Postell: He's defining it on the basis of election. That's really important. He's not creating a new Israel, he's not expanding a new Israel, he's not saying that there's a spiritual Israel here because Jacob wasn't chosen on the basis of him being a believer. They want to argue that the new Israel is on the basis of being believers, like everybody that's a believer in Jesus, but that's not how he defines Jacob. Jacob is elected simply on the basis of God's election without any regards to his good works, bad works, whether he believes or he doesn't believe.

The whole of Romans 9 through 11 is framed with Israel's election remains secure because Jacob didn't do anything to receive it and therefore he can't do anything to lose it.

Eli Haitov: And then you pointed out that Romans 11, how it ends, when it talks about the election there, it's negated with the gospel because it's not about election to salvation or spiritual. It's election towards vocation.

Seth Postell: Correct. It's a national election and it's rooted not in the Sinai covenant. They're condemned under the Sinai covenant. That's Paul's point. Salvation is through Yeshua. But Israel's national election is irrevocable because it's tied to God's unconditional election of Jacob.

Eli Haitov: Let's go back to talk about modern-day Israel because many today are dismissive of modern-day Israel. It's not the biblical Israel. But let's talk about our experience here as Jews who live here in Israel. What is God doing here?

Seth Postell: What I find to be really interesting is that believers are following a lot on the news and they're watching things going on in the land of Israel and the conflict. But I think what many believers simply don't know, and perhaps Carmen wasn't even aware when she argues that modern Israel is not biblical Israel, is what's actually going on here. One of the things that we are watching is a resurgence of real hunger for the gospel. We have a YouTube channel that's only for Hebrew speakers. We do many videos where we're explaining the gospel in Hebrew to Israelis.

We just this week crossed over a million subscribers. We have over a million subscribers in a Hebrew-alone YouTube channel. If you look at all the biggest YouTube channels in Israel, there's a YouTube channel that's devoted to sharing the gospel in Hebrew. I think there's only nine million Hebrew speakers in the world. We have a YouTube channel of over a million followers with people constantly writing us and asking us questions. We're watching every week Israelis coming to faith.

To dismiss Israel and say it's not even a part of God's plan, let's even say that modern Israel isn't a fulfillment of prophecy, we would disagree, but why not get excited about what God's actually doing here in reaching Israelis? The second thing that people fail to realize in criticizing Israel, believers that are criticizing Israel, they fail to realize that Israel still is a democracy where we actually have freedom of religion. Not only freedom of religion, we have even freedom to change our religion.

That means it's the only country in the Middle East where Muslims are free to become followers of Jesus. A whole component of our ministry here is outreach to Muslims. We have a Facebook devoted to sharing the gospel with Arabs and Arabic speakers and Muslims. We have to date 414,000 subscribers. We've had people from all over the Middle East contacting us. We've had imams coming to faith in Jesus, people from Gaza, people from all over the West Bank, people that after they come to faith in Jesus are at risk for their very lives.

These are the same people that are coming to faith in Gaza, that are coming to faith in the West Bank, that don't have the freedoms that we have in Israel, that would give anything to come and live in Israel where they could freely live their faith as followers of Jesus. When believers are so critical of Israel, they fail to realize that God is actually really at work here. They ought to be very excited about the Great Commission in the land of Israel and from the land of Israel.

Eli Haitov: And there's also this myth that Israel is persecuting Christians and Jews here hate Christians and they spit on them on the street. Let's address those claims. For instance, this idea or claim of hatred towards Christians, where does this come from?

Seth Postell: It's really important. Let's go back to Zechariah. Zechariah assumes a time when Israel will be here in unbelief. It's true our people as a nation, our leaders did not accept Jesus. We've had a terrible history. There's been a terrible history of persecution. The church has done some horrific things to Jews in Jesus' name. Is there a history of persecution? Of course there is. Does our nation love Jesus? Of course they don't. Is there a remnant of Jews who love Jesus here? We're sitting right here. We love Jesus.

I don't know why people would expect that as a nation we're going to love somebody that we have yet to recognize as the Messiah. It is clear that at times Christians are mistreated and we have these videos. We can't deny the fact that there was a nun that was beaten up. It was horrific. There was a soldier that defaced a statue of Jesus. It's horrific. We condemn that. Those are despicable actions. But what ends up happening is that becomes the narrative. The despicable actions of a few people then become supportive of this false narrative that all of Israel is like that.

What they fail to realize is that Israel is still a democracy. Here we are, two Jews, Israelis sitting in Israel talking about Jesus. We have total freedom here. It doesn't represent the policy of Israel. By the way, those soldiers were punished. It doesn't represent even the society of Israel. True, there is this group who are very radical. We have many groups in Israel who oppose the gospel, but it doesn't even represent the society. My neighbors see me on YouTube all the time and they ask me about it. So far they've never beaten me up.

In this sense, I don't walk around afraid that somebody's going to kill me even though my face goes all over YouTube. I'm not afraid for my life. Israel still is a democracy. We're protected. There's freedom of religion. There's freedom to change our religion. In that sense, I think there tends to be a focus, like a mad obsession, where you're looking for any evidence to prove a narrative. What they also fail to realize is that maybe we have sometimes people that spit on us, but what about the Muslims who come to faith in Jesus in Syria?

What about the Muslims who come to faith in Lebanon? What about the Muslims who come to faith in Iran? What about the Muslims who come to faith among our Arab neighbors? What freedoms do they have? What protections? They're not spit on, they're just killed. What about all the persecution of Christians, actual Christians and Druze in all the neighboring countries? There's zero freedom of religion there, zero opportunity for the church to expand and to grow among Muslims in the neighboring countries.

Who's the only country in the Middle East actually encouraging church growth among Muslims among our neighbors? Israeli Jewish followers of Jesus. I think people fail to recognize that actually if you're a supporter of the gospel, if you love the Great Commission, of course you're going to support Israel. If you long to see Muslims come to faith, support Israel.

Eli Haitov: One last thing, Seth, it's important that we do talk about the Aliyah. When Jews come to Israel, it's claimed that they cannot make an Aliyah, they cannot come here unless they deny their belief in Yeshua.

Seth Postell: Again, let's be honest. As a nation, our people don't accept Jesus as the Messiah. One of the things that's been a defining factor of who's a Jew and who isn't within our people is faith in Jesus. If you put your faith in Jesus, you've joined another religion, you're no longer Jewish, which obviously there's a problem thinking there. Typically your Jewishness is not tied to what you believe, it's your ethnicity. That's what Hitler did. He killed Jews regardless of what they believed. Usually when Jews make Aliyah, it doesn't matter if they're atheist, doesn't matter if they're Buddhist.

But yes, Jewish believers as believers cannot make Aliyah. They can't immigrate. That is true. There's no lie about that. It breaks our heart, it grieves us, of course, but again, let's face it, our nation has yet to look upon him whom they've pierced. That said, and this is really important, Jewish believers here in Israel have full freedom. We are completely protected under law and the church is growing rapidly. In this sense, I believe that the church absolutely should support a democracy in the Middle East where you can openly engage in the Great Commission.

Number two, I think it's a matter of prayer. I think Christians should be praying, "Dear God, please open the eyes of those that are making decisions in the Ministry of Interior to understand that Jewish people that put their faith in Jesus are Jewish, completely Jewish." In that sense, we wouldn't want to deny that that's true, but again, I think typically it's hyper-sensationalized in order to create this narrative that Israel's this evil, anti-persecuting Christian state, which it's not. Contrary to some who claim that we are allegedly in a risk of being deported because we believe in Jesus, that's false.

We're still here. With everything going on and the growing hatred, where are we going to go? It's the only place as Jewish followers of Jesus where we can openly be Jewish followers of Jesus. Another thing that really needs to be stated in terms of the whole issue of immigration. The Ministry of Interior, those that are responsible for Jewish immigration, they typically represent a minority position of what most Israelis think. They do have power. They do make a decision who comes and who doesn't come. Mostly the Orthodox parties.

But here's the reality, that most Israelis if they actually hear, "Wait a minute, a Jewish person who believes in Jesus can't make Aliyah?" They're shocked and they'd be opposed to it. My neighbors have never once questioned my Jewishness. Never. The average Israeli would say, "Okay, we don't agree with you," but they would never think that we're not Jewish. Even here again, there's a tendency to kind of have a narrative and people already have this narrative that Israel's terrible, they hate Christians, and then they focus on these specific issues and they turn that into the narrative, that's what all Israelis think, which is simply not true.

Eli Haitov: Seth, let's wrap it up. Is modern-day Israel the fulfillment of prophecy?

Seth Postell: In wrapping it up, I would just simply say here's where we disagree with Professor Imes, and that is she dismisses the possibility because she argues that Israel has to be covenantally faithful in order to enjoy the promises. But what we're arguing is that's not exactly the picture that the scriptures give. Given Bethlehem as a literal Bethlehem, then the Mount of Olives is a literal Mount of Olives, which means that the scriptures assume that Israel will be back in the land as unbelievers and only then the Messiah will return and they'll understand, "Ah, he is our Savior."

We're arguing that Carmen Imes presents a picture that I think is not entirely accurate to scripture. That's the first thing. The second thing, we would look at the Abrahamic covenant as something completely unconditional regardless of Israel's obedience or disobedience. We talked about the distinction between the Sinai covenant and the Abrahamic covenant or the New Covenant as unconditional covenants.

But I'd say the bottom line, and this is where it all lands, people, believers who love the Lord and believe that they're saved by grace and believe that God's love is unconditional, for whatever reason they want to turn God's love for the Jewish people as conditional. I realize that people are looking at Israel today and they're only focused on certain things, but what they fail to see is in the midst of a lot of turmoil and a lot of hurt and a lot of challenges, that God is at work. That shows that God is faithful and believers ought to be incredibly encouraged that God is faithful to his promises to all of us.

Eli Haitov: Amen.