“A future time when God restores national, fleshly Israel to its former place of grandeur and pre-eminence over all the nations of the earth; that it will be a day when Jesus will come back to earth, physically, at which time, He will take his place upon David’s literal throne as King, in the earthly city of Jerusalem, where He will reign for a thousand years etc..”

The root of all the elements of this understanding go back as far as Abraham in Gen. 12:3 and God’s promise to him. God told him that because of his implicit faith:

“I will make you a great nation and I will bless you, and make your name great, and so you shall be a blessing; And I will bless those who bless you, and the one who curses you, I will curse…“

However, perhaps the most often cited passage in support of this belief is God’s promise to him in Gen. 13:14-17 where the Lord said:

“Now lift up your eyes and look from the place where you are, northward and southward and eastward and westward; for all the land which you see, I will give it to you and to your descendants forever.”

Certainly, upon just a cursory reading of these passages, it’s not difficult at all to come away with the understanding that God did in fact give to Abraham and his fleshly descendants all of that land for an eternal or everlasting possession. And this is why so many Christians, today, are convinced that the Jews will assuredly possess this land forever; that it belongs to them; that by Divine right it is theirs by way of an everlasting promise from Jehovah. And consequently, that is why many precious brethren reason that this is truly “The Hope of Israel!”

It’s quite possible that this may also be your understanding of “The Hope of Israel” as well. And if it is, then you may have arrived at that understanding as a result of intense, in-depth Bible study. Or, it may be for the same reason that I once believed a number of the things I did in my younger days, because it was how my parents understood them, and their parents before them.. And thirdly, it may also be because it’s part of the belief system of the church of which one is affiliated. But regardless of the reason, it certainly doesn’t hurt for us to investigate any teaching, whether it’s something we already believe, or even something contrary to what we already believe, no matter what the subject is. As for myself, I pray that our Father will give me the grace, wisdom, and humility of mind, to be always open to the possibility that I could be mistaken about things which I believe at any point in my life. Truthfully, at one time in my spiritual journey, I would have thought that to be such minded, was to be wishy-washy, indecisive, or weak in the faith. Some would even say “double minded.” But today, as I reflect on those days gone by, I now see that it was spiritual growth. Just try to imagine, if you can, what our present spiritual condition would be if we, over the course of our lifetime, never altered our thinking each time we learned we were mistaken about something in matters of faith. I ask you, “Could a person such as that, have realized any spiritual growth whatsoever?” Why, of course not! Oh yes, we need to remember that we all have need of spiritual growth. Not even one of us began our spiritual walk fully grown; not even one of us has arrived at all the truth! Yes, we are all ignorant--but simply about different things.

Now, as to the understanding mentioned above regarding “The hope of Israel,” it’s remarkable just how that understanding has flourished over the past hundred and fifty years or so, and especially in the past one hundred years! It seems that it got its greatest boost from the advent of the Scofield Bible by Mr. Cyrus Ingersoll Scofield in 1908, an avid Zionist, and also a zealous promoter of the dispensational pre-millennial view. Quite effective in this endeavor, were his copious pre-millennial dispensational notes and commentary right along with, and in many cases, even inserted into the text of the King James Bible. Sadly enough, it seems that many disciples accepted his notes and commentary almost to equal degree to which they did of the inspired text. Because of this factor, this teaching spread rapidly among disciples of the 20th century. An enormous number of these Bibles have been sold over the years, evidenced by the fact that it is now in its 7th or 8th edition. Incorporated into this dispensational pre-millennial view was Mr. Scofield’s belief of a future “rapture” of the saints; a teaching based on John N. Darby’s interpretation of 1 Thes. 4:13-18, back around the year 1830. Consequently, this view of a future “rapture,” being now a part of Mr. Scofield’s bible, has garnered the support of many in Christendom, where such had not been the case before.

At this point, let’s go back to the question regarding “the hope of Israel,” and the view that we put forth in the first paragraph of this thesis. What about that understanding? Is it the correct one? Well, if you would be so kind as to indulge me just a few lines, there are some things that I believe, when carefully examined, would be useful toward our determining whether or not this belief also enjoys the support of Scripture. We won’t go into an extensive study of it because of time and space constraints, even so, we will examine it enough so as to reach a fair and informed conclusion as to its validity! From the outset, I want to say that I believe the Scriptures do serve as their own best commentary as well as their own best interpreter letting Scripture interpret Scripture. I think you will agree with me, that it really doesn’t matter what I may think about any particular bible matter, because if it doesn’t measure up to the standard---our Father’s Word---then it counts for nothing. As Paul said in Rom. 3:4, “…let God be found true, though every man be found a liar…” In other words, if I say one thing about some matter, but our Father’s Word says something different; well, let’s just say it‘s “strike three“ for me! Alright?

There is considerable ground to cover in this topic, and I sincerely hope that you will stay with me in this because, unless I’m badly mistaken, before we finish with this little essay, some of you may indeed be surprised by what our Father declares this hope of Israel to be.

In dealing with old testament passages, let me say that I make no claim of being a Hebrew scholar or linguist, but I have taken the time to examine the things that those who are scholars have to say about the meaning of the words “everlasting” and “forever” as used in our old testament English translation of these passages. And, what I have learned is that these two English words [everlasting and forever] both come from the Hebrew root word “olam,” which they say literally means: “a long period of time or, age,” but almost always, does not express “endlessness.” These scholars offer the Greek word “aion” in the new testament scriptures as the counterpart to “olam,” which also means “age or age lasting.” So, then, let’s now solicit the services of some of the other old testament passages which employ this word “olam,” to see if we can get a better grasp on its meaning. For example, when The Lord gave to Abraham, the “covenant of circumcision“ in Gen. 17:13, He said: “…thus shall My covenant be in your flesh for an everlasting [olam] covenant.” Now, with passages like that, I’m beginning to get a sense of what The Lord is really saying in such verses where He used this Hebrew word “olam.” Now, for certain, none of us would conclude that the covenant of circumcision is still around today. To the contrary; we understand that it was to last until the end of Israel’s old covenant age.

Now, let’s look at another example. In Num. 10:8, God spoke to Moses regarding the assembling of the people. He said: “And the sons of Aaron, the priests shall blow with trumpets, and they shall be to you for an ordinance forever [olam], throughout your generations“ Here we see very plain language stating that this ordinance of the priests blowing the trumpets, would be an ordinance for those priests “forever.” However, as we read on, we see that Jehovah had no plans for it to be an “eternal” ordinance. He allows the language to simply explain itself for us; He says, “throughout your generations.” This suggests to me that God is saying that the ordinance would continue on till the consummation, or completion of the old covenant age; that age in which they lived. As we read through the old covenant scriptures, we find them to be replete with such examples as this.

Now, concerning the “land promise” that God had made to Abraham and his descendants; many today are told that God has not yet given Israel all of the land that was promised. They say that they received ”part” of it, but not “all” of it. But our Father’s Word tells us different. In Josh. 21:43, 44, Joshua declared: “So, the Lord gave Israel all the land which He had sworn to give to their fathers, and they possessed it and lived in it. And the Lord gave them ‘rest’ on every side, according to all that He had sworn to their fathers etc…” I believe that this passage speaks for itself. Yahweh, did, in fact, give Israel all the land He had promised them. But does that mean that the “physical” land of Canaan was to be an “eternal” possession of old covenant Israel? I must confess to you that I really don’t believe that’s the case. I believe that we will shortly see what The Lord had in mind for Israel, something far more precious than a plot of ground or real estate!

I believe that one important fact which is being missed, and that is central to our understanding God’s ultimate purpose, is the fact that The Law consisted of mere “types and shadows,” which were symbols or signs of the better things which were to come later under the glorious New Covenant of Jesus Christ [see Heb. 10:1]! Please consider this: In the Josh. 21:43, 44 passage earlier, Joshua speaks of “the rest” which Israel was given of the Lord upon entering the land of Canaan. However, that “physical” rest, mentioned by Joshua here, was a type, symbol, or sign, that signified something else. Furthermore, we understand that a sign does not signify itself, but rather something of greater value than itself. And, such is the case with the “physical” rest given to old covenant Israel. To illustrate this, let’s look at Heb. 4:8,9, where the Hebrew scribe says: “For if Joshua had given them rest, he would not have spoken of another day after that. There remains therefore, a Sabbath rest for the people of God.“ Can you see from this that the “rest” that was given old covenant Israel, was merely a type of the “spiritual rest” which the Hebrew writer says was then soon to be enjoyed by Yahweh’s people [spiritual Israel] under the New Covenant; that same covenant of which he spoke in Heb. 8:8-13? The writer there intimates that this “new” covenant was to come as soon as the old covenant [which was becoming old and ready to disappear--v-13] was completely fulfilled and removed. I’m so confident that these passages clearly show a transition from the “physical” of the old covenant law to the “spiritual” of the New Covenant. If we miss that, I believe that we are missing the high purpose which God has for those who are of the faith of Abraham!

Speaking of Abraham, I am made to wonder in his case: If the “physical” land of Canaan was to be the ultimate prize for Abraham and his descendants, then why did the Hebrew scribe say that, “he was looking for the city which has foundations, whose architect and builder is God.”? [Heb. 11:10] Would we suppose even for one moment, that Abraham had in mind, the “earthly” city of Jerusalem and the “earthly” land of Canaan? Well, actually we’re not left to wonder because the writer answers that question for us. Watch carefully what he says, not only of Abraham, but of all the giants of faith mentioned in Heb. 11. Here’s what the writer says:

“But, as it is, they desire a better country, that is a heavenly one.” [v-16]

When one reads and pays close attention to detail, one finds, beautifully woven through the marvelous tapestry of the new covenant scriptures, a fine linen thread of fulfillment of the “natural and temporal,” and a transition to the “spiritual and eternal.” But this is no accident, because our Father’s concern is not for “the flesh,” but for “the spirit.” For example, one cannot read the book of Hebrews and not see this principle applied time, after time, after time. But sadly enough, it is the case that, when we read those things from the old covenant scriptures, it seems to escape our notice, those marvelous “spiritual” realities that our Father had in store for His people. Yes, and we, in so many ways, are not unlike the Jews of old., for most of them, too, missed the “spiritual” significance of God’s message. Just listen to what our Master said to them [1st century Jews] in Jn. 18:36. He said:

“My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, then my servants would be fighting, that I might not be delivered up to the Jews, but as it is, My kingdom is not of this realm.”

Do you see what I’m getting at here? So many disciples are still waiting for Jesus to come back to earth and set up His kingdom in Jerusalem as though He is interested in an earthly, physical kingdom. But don’t you see that such an idea flies right into the face of our Father’s Word? I pray God will help us to see the great “spiritual” lessons in the words of His dear Son.!

If our Master clearly declared that His kingdom was not “of this realm” [physical or natural realm], wouldn’t that, of necessity, mean that it is of the “spiritual realm?” Please consider that. Please think for a moment about Nicodemus, a man who was a Pharisee and a teacher of the people. Let's not forget that he was already a citizen of the earthly, fleshly kingdom of Judah. But didn’t Jesus let him know, unequivocally, that his physical or fleshly pedigree was not sufficient for him to gain entrance into The Kingdom of God? Didn't He tell him plainly that he had to be “born again.?” And didn’t Jesus make it clear that it was not Nicodemus‘ “flesh” which had to be born again, but rather it was his “spirit?”

You may recall that Jesus told him: “…that which is born of the flesh is flesh; but that which is born of The Spirit [Holy Spirit] is spirit [man‘s spirit].” Yes, Jesus said that he had to be “born of water and The Spirit.” Please read Jn. 3:3-6. Now, if it was Nicodemus’ “spirit,” and not his “flesh” that had to be born again in order for him to enter the Kingdom of God, wouldn’t we be compelled to reason that The Kingdom would have to be a “spiritual” kingdom? This is why I am fully persuaded, that God’s Kingdom was not to be “physical” but rather “spiritual.” Does that make sense? As Paul told the saints in the province of Galatia: “Are you so foolish? Having begun by The Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh.” [Gal.3:3]“ Jesus blistered the chief priests and elders of the Jews in Mt. 21:43, with regard to this matter of a “fleshly, national kingdom” vs. The Kingdom of Heaven. He said: “Therefore, I say to you [1st century fleshly, national Israel], the Kingdom of God will be taken away from you, and given to a nation producing the fruit of it.” Did you catch that? Jesus is so very clear here in speaking to those 1st century Jews.

Now listen to what He told His little band of disciples [the remnant] in Lk. 12:32: “Do not be afraid, little flock, for your Father has chosen gladly to give you the kingdom.” What a beautiful and marvelous declaration! Do you see the connection between these two passages? In Mt. 21:43, Jesus says that His Father is going to take the Kingdom from the unbelieving, or apostate Jews [those who rejected Christ esp. their religious leaders]. and then turn right around and give it to “the little flock“ [those Jews who did accept Christ i.e., the remnant]. And, this would all culminate in the new “spiritual Israel,” when Jesus would establish a new covenant for this coming Kingdom, bringing together the remnants from both, the house of Judah and the house of Israel, the fullness of the gentiles. [see Ezek. 37:16-25; Hos. 1:9-11; Heb. 8:10-13; Rom. 2:27, 28; 9:6-8; 11:25-28]

I do understand that one of the great tenets of the futurist view is, that the Kingdom of Christ was put on hold because of the Jews rejection of Jesus as their King and Messiah, and so Yahweh then established “the church” as a substitute until the time would come, in which Jesus would come again [second-coming], and then, supposedly, the Jews would all then at that time turn to Jesus and accept Him as their King and Messiah. Of course, more than 20 centuries have come and gone since that perceived substitution. But I would like for you to examine with me, very closely, a parable that speaks to both, Christ’s receiving His Kingdom, and His second-coming, as King, in His Kingdom.

In Lk. 19:11-27, Jesus responds to the idea held by some of the Jews that the kingdom of God was going to immediately appear. His response was by way of a parable of Him, as the “nobleman“ going to a far country to receive His Kingdom, and to then return, which, of course, was the fulfillment of Dan. 7:13, 14, where Jesus, upon His ascension, came with the clouds, before the Ancient of Days (The Father), to receive of Him, a Kingdom. In Jesus’ parable, when the nobleman departed, he called his slaves [His servants] to Him, and gave to them the responsibilities of doing His business until He came back. However, as we see in the parable, those servants, whom He left to do His business, were anything but well-received or respected by the citizens [the unbelieving Jews]. These wicked citizens [the Jews], according to v-14, literally hated the nobleman [Jesus], sending a delegation saying, “We do not want this man to reign over us.” Now, I don’t believe that there is any serious student of the Word, who would disagree with the things that we have established in this parable up to this point. I say that because I believe that the facts speak for themselves.

The parable is self-explanatory But what I want us to clearly understand here, is the fact that nowhere in this parable, does it ever say, imply, or even give the slightest hint to, the notion that our Father put the Kingdom on hold because of the unbelieving Jews rejection of The Christ as King. Please notice here that even though the unbelieving Jews did literally hate our Lord, rejected Him, and clearly declared that they did not want Him to reign over them [v-14], it still did not, in any way whatsoever, deter or thwart God’s plans regarding the coming of The Kingdom of His Son! These are not just words of speculation. And, I don’t want you to just simply take my word for this, but I would implore you to please read this account again for yourselves. As you read the rest of this parable, you will notice that in the very next verse [v-15] Jesus states that the nobleman [Jesus], in fact did receive the Kingdom “and returned.” And, notice that upon His return, there was the Judgment. Now, please look at v-27 and read it and just see if you get any sense that God put the Kingdom on hold because of the rejection of His Son by the unbelieving Jews. No, but to the contrary; Jesus said, “But of these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slay them in my presence.” Yes, it just seems so clear to me from vs. 14 and 27, that God carried out His promise regarding His Son’s Kingdom, and He destroyed those, whose desire it was, to preclude it from coming to pass. And, beloved, I sincerely believe that it did come to pass in 70 A.D.

Those mentioned as the “little flock,” to whom it was given, would be those of whom Paul speaks in Rom. 2:28, 29; 9:6-8 as “true Jews” and “true Israelites,” not those who were simply the “fleshly descendants” of Jacob or Abraham, but rather those who were of “the faith” of Abraham; those who sought salvation by grace through faith as opposed to works of law. Doesn’t this, again, evidence the fact that God’s coming Kingdom was going to be “spiritual” in nature and not “physical?“ And isn’t it also a beautiful thing how that God saw fit in His “mystery,” that you and I, as Gentiles, would also be grafted into the same good olive tree, and made to be fellow-heirs and fellow-citizens of that same Kingdom? Yes, both Jew and Gentile of the faith of Abraham, coming together into one as the true “Israel of God”; that nation to whom Jesus said the Kingdom would be given and who would “bring forth the fruit of it.”

Now, as mentioned earlier, there are many folks out there who understand the Kingdom as not yet having come, and that when it would come, that it would do so with great fanfare and with great pomp and circumstance. But, do you remember what Jesus told the Pharisees in Lk. 17:20, 21? They had asked Him, “…when the kingdom of God was coming?” He answered them and said, “The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed; nor will they say, Look, here it is! or There it is! For behold, the kingdom of God is in your midst” I ask, could language be any more transparent? Would you please read Col. 1:13; Heb. 12:18-28; Mt. 16:27, 28; Mk. 8:38-9-1; Rev. 1:9, and just see if you don’t also conclude that The Kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ is here, presently, and that every person of any nation on earth who is a Christian, is in that Kingdom! And also, doesn’t the Lk. 17 passage clearly indicate that this Kingdom is “spiritual” in nature and not “physical?”