The Israel Debate Is Broken. Let's Start with the Bible | Blaine Braden

Episode Summary:

Are Christians reading current events concerning Israel into the Bible? What if the biggest mistake in the Israel debate is failing to define what "Israel" even means?

Everyone has an opinion about Israel. Few begin with Scripture.

This week we're joined by Pastor Blaine Braden to cut through the noise surrounding Israel, Christian Zionism, replacement theology, Bible prophecy, and Israel's current conflicts. Instead of repeating internet talking points, we rebuild the conversation from the ground up with careful biblical interpretation from Genesis through Revelation with and a particular emphasis on Romans chapters 9-11.

In this episode, we discuss:

• Why the Israel debate exploded after October 7 and how online tribalism fuels confusion
• Christian Zionism, replacement theology, and the importance of sound hermeneutics
• The different biblical meanings of "Israel" and why categorizing definitions matters
• Why "chosen" does not mean "saved" and why salvation comes through Christ alone
• Romans 9-11, the unfulfilled promises for Israel
• How to think biblically about the modern nation-state of Israel
• Why Christians should pursue justice without favoritism or conspiracy thinking
• What it really means to bless Israel according to Scripture

If this episode helps you think more biblically, subscribe, share it with a friend, and leave a review to help others discover the show.

To support the Disciple Nations Alliance through our Matching Challenge, tap here.

Who is the Disciple Nations Alliance (DNA)? Since 1997, DNA’s mission has been to equip followers of Jesus around the globe with a biblical worldview, empowering them to build flourishing families, communities, and nations. 👉 https://disciplenations.org/

🎙️Featured Guest: 

Pastor Blaine Braden serves as the Lead Pastor of Eastmont Church in Bend, Oregon. A graduate of The Master's University with a degree in Biblical Exposition, Blaine has spent more than sixteen years in pastoral ministry, leading with a passion for expository preaching, discipleship, and equipping the local church in an increasingly post-Christian culture. Under his leadership, Eastmont Church has experienced significant growth and continues to emphasize authentic community, gospel-centered ministry, and the faithful teaching of Scripture.

Blaine and his wife, Justine, have three children and enjoy taking advantage of all that Central Oregon has to offer, especially mountain biking, dirt biking, and great coffee.

📌 Recommended Resources:  

     👉 Matching Challenge: Donate - Disciple Nations Alliance 

     👉 Recommended Episode: Is God Finished with Israel? The Modern State Explained | Redeeming Truth

     👉 Blaine's Recent Sermon on Israel: Church & Israel | Part 1

     👉 Darrow Miller’s New Book: Occupytillicomebook.com

💻 Follow Us:

     📸Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/disciplenations

    📽️YouTube:https://www.youtube.com/c/DiscipleNationsAlliance/

     📲Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/disciplenations

📩 Ask us anything: info@disciplenations.org 

Episode Webpage

Transcript

Blaine Braden 0:02

Yeah, I've had people in the lobby tell me that I was I've been bought off by Jewish money. I've had emails that you couldn't even believe. Being chosen does not mean saved. And I think this is where a lot of people get really confused. When we say that Israel are God's chosen people, we are not saying they are his redeemed people. We're not saved through a spiritual right and we're not saved through genealogy. We're saved through faith. I think this is one of the major contentions that's happening in the conversation is that we actually don't know what we mean when we say Israel. So the question for the Christian church today is what does it mean to be a blessing to Israel? Well, I don't believe it means that we are to sign off on everything that the nation-state of Israel wants, because the Bible clearly tells us what that means. It means that we are to preach Christ crucified to them so that they might turn from their sin and trust in the Savior. We should be a fair and reasonable people that hold all things to the authority and the standard of God's word, and that we show the same level of criticism to all nations, which include Israel. So we don't show favoritism, nor do we show a unique disdain.

Luke Allen 1:11

Ladies and

Podcast Mission And Overview

Luke Allen 1:12

gentlemen, welcome back to another episode of Ideas Have Consequences. This is the podcast of the Disciple Nations Alliance. As Christians, we all know that our mission is to spread the gospel around the world to all the nations. However, our mission, the Great Co-Mission, also involves working to transform our cultures so that they increasingly reflect the truth, goodness, and beauty of God's kingdom. Tragically, the church has largely neglected this second part of her mission, and today most Christians are having little influence on their surrounding cultures. Join us on this podcast as we rediscover what it means for each of us to disciple the nations and to create Christ-honoring cultures that reflect the character of the living God. Hi guys, thank you for joining us today for this episode. As you saw there in the intro and in the title of this episode, this is gonna be a hot topic episode today, so we thank you for your bravery uh joining us today. We just uh hope that you guys will be open-minded as we enter this episode and uh listen to the whole thing. I think there's a lot of interesting uh points that were brought up in this episode. Before we get into the summary of the episode, I just want to introduce ourselves. My name is Luke Allen. I'm one of the co-hosts here on the show, also the producer, and I'm joined by my dad and the president of the ministry we work for here, the Disciple Nations Alliance, Scott Allen. Hi, Dad. Hey, Luke. Hey, good to be with you today. This was a fun episode. Um, Dad, would you mind just giving people a little bit of uh blow by blow of what we're gonna get into? I know this is a little bit of a long episode, guys, uh, so we just want to summarize what we're about to get into here in the table of contents.

Scott Allen 2:41

Yeah, today we had the privilege of uh having on as our guest uh our our own pastor, uh Pastor Blaine Braden of Eastmont Church in Bend, Oregon, uh, a man who we love and deeply respect. And uh Blaine has been preaching uh in the church through the book of Romans, and uh we are currently in the chapters 9, 10, 11, uh actually just nine, but uh in the chapters where uh the topic is Israel, which is the hot topic in the culture right now, especially amongst uh younger folks, young men in particular. Um, and Blaine has put a lot of great thought into both what the Bible is teaching uh on this subject and the current debate around Israel. So we just wanted to get his thoughts, and he had, I thought, really beautiful, deep biblical thoughts to share with us today on this subject. And uh, so I hope it's useful for folks.

Luke Allen 3:35

Yeah, exactly. We we talked about things like uh just theology, theological camps, uh the uh uh how useful those are. We talked about how theology does engage in culture and how we should always start with theology when we're talking about cultural topics. Ideas have consequences, and make sure your ideas are rooted in the Bible. We also talked about the Abrahamic covenant, talked a little bit about the land promises made to Israel. We talked about an anti-Semitism. We also did I thought uh one of my favorite parts was Blaine defined what is Israel. That term obviously is the term we're discussing here, and yet hardly anyone will actually define that well when they're entering debates on this topic, which is very frustrating. Uh so making sure that you're defining the terms well is yeah, extremely important. Yeah.

Scott Allen 4:17

Really good job on that. And I also love that part where we uh got into the question of what should how should Christians think about the current state of Israel, um, the modern state of Israel. And I thought Blaine had some really good things to say about that as well, Luke.

Luke Allen 4:29

Yeah, the practical application points at the end of this were really helpful, so make sure to stick around until the end,

Summer Matching Challenge Invitation

Luke Allen 4:34

guys. Before we jump into today's discussion, I did want to share with you guys uh that we are running a $50,000 matching challenge right now this summer here at the Disciple Nations Alliance. The goal is to help us at the DNA continue to equip more believers with a biblical worldview. One of our generous regular listeners recently shared how the DNA has impacted her in a little testimony when she said, The DNA has helped me know and love God and people better. The good news is much more than a safe ticket to heaven. I now understand why I am here, to know God, enjoy him, and partner with him in his work here on earth. She went on to say that Scott Allen and the DNA, through books, podcasts, studies, has broadened my understanding of the Bible and its application to all of life. Not just for the future, but for the here and now. I only wish that I had learned these things sooner. If this resonates with you, we'd like to invite you to join this matching challenge. Our ministry is supported by faithful individuals just like yourself. To do so, just tap on the link in the show notes that says matching challenge, or you can head over to our website, disciplenations.org, and click on the donate button. Thank you so much for considering that. And now without further ado, let's hop into the discussion with Blaine Braden.

Welcoming Pastor Blaine Braden

Scott Allen 5:49

So excited to have back with us on the podcast after uh too long, but uh uh we're we're really thrilled to have with us Pastor Blaine Braden of Eastmont Church in Bend, Oregon, uh, which happens to be Luke and I's home church. So, Pastor Blaine, it's uh great to have you, our our own pastor back on the podcast. Thanks for taking time.

Blaine Braden 6:11

Thanks, guys. I appreciate it.

Scott Allen 6:12

Yeah, this is great. Um, for those of you who uh may have missed that earlier podcast, um Blaine is uh uh a pastor, obviously graduate of uh Master's Seminary, uh native of Southern California, married three young children. Um and Eastmont is probably the fastest growing church in Bend, I would guess. Blaine, is that correct? Who knows?

Blaine Braden 6:37

You know, I don't know. Uh uh who knows right now. Right now, the as we talk, the church is under construction. We go back to church indoors this weekend and have no bathrooms. And so I think we're gonna see a lot less people this summer than normal.

Scott Allen 6:50

Anyways, it's been a really exciting season. Um, Blaine, you've done such a great job at the church leading through these tumultuous times, really. I mean, going back to COVID and even before, um, and uh just really providing inspired leadership, I think, uh, to the church. We're so grateful, Luke and I, to to be there to be part of East Mont and um and just to sit under your teaching. So thanks for thanks for coming on today. And we are going through uh the book of Romans uh right now in the sermon series. And we just hit uh the uh the the passages, the chapters uh nine through eleven uh where where Blaine has been talking about Israel. And um, since that's been a topic of the podcast here uh of late and just such a hot topic in the church and in the culture, we thought uh Blaine we'd have you on and and um uh benefit from your wisdom on this subject and your your recent learning as you did the deep dive into into the book of Romans. I guess where I'd like to start with, and Luke, I want you to just jump in too, by the way, on this, just to make sure you're asking your questions. But

Why The Israel Debate Blew Up

Scott Allen 7:56

um this has become in a in a real crazy way a really hot topic. And Luke, you can speak to this even more than I can because it's especially your um you know, uh young men your age, I think, have really this is just uh there's a ton of passion on this topic, uh and in an ironic way, kind of since the horrific attack about two years ago um on Israel by uh the Palestinians from Gaza, uh the October, is it October 7th? Um October 7, 2023 attack. It seems like everything kind of blew up since then, and in the ironic in the sense that you would expect Israel to be uh r recipient of some kind of uh sympathy. Yeah, thanks. That's the word I'm looking for, Luke. But it's and it's kind of turned out the opposite. Uh, you know, so Blaine, I guess the question just to begin with is what what do you make of all this? What w the why is it such a hot topic right now, especially since 2023 and the attack? Um just your thoughts on that in general.

Blaine Braden 9:01

Yeah, I mean, we we didn't intend, uh obviously when we started the Book of Romans, we didn't intend to be, we weren't trying, there's no like plan to be in Romans 9 through 11 when we got to you know this time in this culture. We had no idea that this would be as contested as it is. Um, you know, I think I think there's a few things that are happening. I think post-COVID uh we we live in a very online group. Churches had a ton of movement post-COVID, a lot of tribes grew out of that, a lot of uh, I think anger. I think some of it justified and and rightfully so. Um, and I think a lot of people are looking to the voices that they hear on the internet for guidance and for clarity. And so um, yeah, and I think I think if you if you kind of zoom out, really soon after October 7th, I think there was a general widespread support of Israel. Um I think if you were to kind of go back to October, now there was some still some fringy stuff that that was not good. If you remember the, I think it was the Chicago chapter of BLM, uh, you know, posted a uh a silhouette of a man on a hand glider showing solidarity and support for Hamas. But but if you were to just pull the average American, the average Christian, you you probably wouldn't find any kind of consternation or turmoil there. I think as time has gone on, as the uh fighting and the war has continued on, I think there has been um just a fracturing of perspectives and views. And I think this has really weighed its way into the church because as different political entities and podcasters and pundits uh are weighing in on the nation state of Israel, uh they're then looking through that lens to the churches, the way they talk about Israel. And so I think my two cents as a pastor is I don't think that we're very nuanced or careful with our language. I don't think we're very um clear and articulate in what we actually believe. And so I think there's a lot of strawman arguments that are being built on both sides and then attacked by the other side, and it's very tribal. And so what I've what I hear is just an oversimplification of what Christians believe. Well, you either believe that the church is the new Israel, or you believe that only Jews can be saved. Like that's actually not really what anyone's saying, but that it gets a lot of clicks and a lot of views. And then when people, podcast hosts are having people on, they they are interviewing people asking only one side of the story, they're not asking good probing questions, we're not serious about um understanding the other side, which leads to I think when you genuinely understand the theological position of those who you disagree with, it creates charity and and hopefully kindness and an extension of good grace where you understand their positioning. But I think what we see online specifically is very tribal. And a lot of people who actually haven't studied the Bible speaking about the Bible, but they start with the culture first and work their way out rather than starting with the scriptures first and then working their way out. So I I think there's a ton of confusion in this uh topic right now, for sure.

Scott Allen 11:54

Yeah. Yeah, no, I think I think you're right, Blaine. I think that people are there's a we we are used to now getting information online, podcasts. Uh I know for myself, you know, I would listen, I used to listen fairly frequently to Tucker Carlson. Um but I just can't listen to him anymore. He's been and he's got a huge audience. Uh I mean, this is just one example, but for some reason it's just like he started becoming at first kind of softly anti-Semitic and then kind of more overtly anti-Semitic to the point where I was like, what in the world is happening to you? Um and again, that's just one data point, but it's not a small one. I mean, he's got again a large audience, there's many others. Um but it's been puzzling to me, like, where's this coming from? Why why all of a sudden are we having this kind of turn? Uh and then you see it in the church, right? You see Christians kind of picking it up in a soft way um but but but but be kind of a you know becoming more overt, I guess. Uh and then yeah, it seems to me you're correct that they're going to the Bible after that to try to justify their positions. Luke, is that kind of you've had a lot of discussions on this, I know. Uh is that the way you kind of are seeing it as well?

Luke Allen 13:10

Um that's my guess. Yeah. Uh I like what you just said, Blaine, about how we should always start with theology and then work out into culture and not go the opposite way. That's a base principle that we should operate off of. But it does seem like I mean, so for today's discussion, just for everyone listening, we are hoping to stick in the stick in the world of theology here in in the Bible. And what is the Bible talking about when it's talking about Jews, Israel, what what do these terms mean, what is the New Testament referring to when it's talking about the the people of Israel, so on and so forth. Uh, and then from there, of course, we can work that out into culture and geopolitics and so on and so forth. Um, but uh a theological stream that has been around for a a long time uh has been this view of looking at the Bible and seeing uh Israel through the supersessionist standpoint or replacement theology as some people call it. Um that's been a theological view for a long time, and yet it's spiked big time, especially amongst young men in the last few years. And yeah, I guess this is what we're all getting at here, but that to me seems like the spike wasn't out of just genuine curiosity and sincere hermeneutical search for what is this supersessionist thing. Because if you wanted to do that, you could have done that ten years ago. Uh but it's spiked right now, and to me that it feels like that's um not genuine interest, it's it's it's uh pre preconceived notions about what's going on in the Middle East, kind of your geopolitical views, or even just much more cynically, an animosity towards Jews, and then you're finding a theological framework that somewhat fits with that, and then you're really interested in it, which is kind of starting with culture and go back theology. Is that fair, Blaine?

Speaker 14:56

Yeah, I think so. I I listen to the uh I I don't follow Tucker. I I don't have social media. Uh I actually think that that's a good thing for most people. Um I I don't follow anyone online. I really don't. So I I did listen to the uh the last podcast. I think it was with J.D. if my recollection is correct, with Tucker. I think it had almost a million views on YouTube, at least at that point. Um, and they were talking about dispensationalism and covenant theology. And Tucker even said at the opening of that, I think I want to be fair too, I think what his what he would say, he would he would say, because of this Christian Zionist uh theology, it has an impact on the country that I love, and it's you know, we're now in wars, and and so his argument is actually, yeah, I'll look at the culture around me and the country that I live in, and it's being shaped and influenced by what he perceives to be a theological framework. And so if you listen to that um that podcast, there are some things I agree with, there are some things I disagree with. The hard thing for me is that there wasn't a fair uh representation of both sides of the uh of the theological position on this. And so um Christian Zionism becomes this kind of catch-all for anyone who doesn't believe in uh the replacement theology of you know the church becoming the new Israel. And that's that's simply not a very scholarly or theological way to talk about things. It's a very much a pop culture way to talk about things infused with the Bible. And then and then the Bible is, you know, passages are picked, but but no one speaks to the counter-argument to give the audience who's listening a an ability to go, hey, based on all of the available uh scholarly work, here's where I land. And so we call dispensationalism a kind of a fringe new idea. Um, and so my my argument will always be what does the Bible teach?

Hermeneutics Before Hot Takes

Speaker 16:47

There's no shortage of Christians who will debate different theological constructs, different terms, different systematic ways of understanding theology throughout all of church history. Uh many will look to church history and they'll look to, well, what was happening in the fifth century, in the seventh century, what was happening in the first and second century, and they're always looking to that. And the good news for the Christian, if you're a Protestant Christian who believes in the authority of God's word, is that you have God's word in your lap. Um you can be like the Brians, you can go back to the scriptures and see what it actually says. And so I'm not reliant upon someone to tell me what to believe. Um, I want to hear what they say, and then I want to go back to the scriptures and go, okay, but is that actually a faithful understanding of the scriptures? And really I think that this ties into with the Christian phrase we use is hermeneutics. It's how we study the Bible, it's the lens in which we come to the scriptures and read them. And uh, and I've told you guys, I'm in the I'm in the camp, I believe in a historical, grammatical, literal interpretation of the Bible. And so that will put me in agreement with dispensationalism as it pertains to Israel. Not because I start with dispensationalism or Darby or Schofield and I'm now being, you know, this new fringe theology that happened 120 years ago and now I'm jumping on the bandwagon. That's not at all what I'm saying. I'm saying the New Testament seems to be clearly teaching a distinction between Israel and the church. And I want to be faithful to how the Bible teaches that. And so I really do think that the most important thing for the Christian, if you're listening to a podcast, is the podcast host, if they're using the Bible, um, take it and go back to the Bible and see what they're saying is true. You know, one of the one of the lowest hanging fruit for this is when someone says, Well, you know, Paul makes it really clear in the in the book of Galatians, there's neither Jew nor Gentile. Well, I agree with that. He's talking about as it pertains to access to salvation through Christ alone, by faith alone. This is what he's arguing. And some have taken that and they'll go, Yeah, it's so clear right here in the Bible, there's neither Jew nor Gentile. But if the hermeneutic is that Paul is actually erasing the distinction between Jew and Gentile so that they are categories that no longer exist, then you have to apply that to the other parts of the verse, which would include male or female. And the great irony is if if you affirm the male-female binary and you use that part, that verse, you can't then shift your hermeneutic halfway through the verse to now mean that it actually is an eraser of all things. In fact, I think it's James Talerico down in Texas who uh who's gotten hot water. It's not hot water for him, I think because he's, you know, he professes to be a Christian and doesn't believe in Christ. But he said that God is non-binary and he uses the verse. There's neither male nor female as an evidence of that. But the the the irony is that that's the same hermeneutical principle being applied to the same verse, and you're getting two very different outcomes. And so the really important thing is when you come to the scriptures, how do you interpret them? How do you apply them? What is the lens in which you look at that? Uh, my group is often criticized, I think, for being uh for being kind of simple, uh uneducated, not very bright. And the idea is that, you know, we don't understand the literary um styles of the Bible. And so because we're literalists, we end up, you know, reading into things that are clearly meant to be spiritual or metaphorical, you know, an example being that, you know, Israel is the church, and you're reading into this all these things that are literal when they should be seen as allegorical or spiritually fulfilled in the church. And and I would just push back that the literal understanding doesn't mean that we don't understand genre. It doesn't mean that we don't understand literary style, but it does mean that there is a literal application of even the spiritual verses. Maybe a good example if this is helpful for those who are listening. If you look at the book of Daniel, um the book of Daniel is a very complicated and difficult book. It's it's the opening act, I believe, to the book of Revelation. It's it's got a lot going on. It's not written, even the way the chapters are ordered, it's not chronological. So there's a lot of work you have to do as you study the book of Daniel. Um, the book of Daniel speaks about literal things that will happen using figurative language. Maybe the great example is if you read, is it Daniel 7 about um Alexander the Great. Now, Alexander the Great, we know is in the text, and we see it, he is the goat who is, you know, comes from the east and he moves so fast that uh you know his feet don't even touch the ground. And we go, well, that's okay. When we say that the Bible is to be taken literally, we're not saying that there's an actual flying goat that's gonna show up and you know conquer the world. We see that as a metaphor, a picture, a word picture for Alexander the Great. And it's in it's in it's actually in Daniel 8. Um, and what's interesting is if you read Josephus, who I believe to be a credible Jewish historian, he actually talks about Alexander the Great in the intertestamental period, uh, when he finally turns towards Jerusalem to conquer in his conquest, he is uh he's encountered by some priests who read to him out of Daniel 8 and they show him himself in the text. And in fact, from what we know from Josephus, that that is so impactful. He sees himself as the one who would go and and conquer and Rule, that he actually gives them a pass. They're allowed to continue to worship the way they want. He kind of gives them a carve-out, a cutout. And then after he dies, we know that the horn is broken into four pieces. After Alexander the Great dies, his four generals take over. It's one of those generals who will rule over Judea, uh, will start to push Hellenization. That's going to happen after Alexander the Great, because Alexander the Great gave him a pass because he saw himself in the text. This is all of this is leading to the time of Jesus, right? The Maccabean Revolt, Jesus coming into a world that is torn apart by their hatred of Rome and their understanding of temple worship and all this kind of stuff. I simply point that out to say that the Bible talks literally figuratively at times. So there's a literal application to it that we may not fully understand. And one of the other things that I think happens in this is to get to a point where the church has replaced, you have to allegorize parts of the Old Testament that I don't see being able to allegorize. Another great example will be Ezekiel 37, the Valley of Dry Bones. We have worship songs about this. Maybe we've talked about this in church. And what many people think is they go, well, it's just a spiritual analogy for being, you know, spiritually dead but then being made alive. But if you read it, the context is not you and me. He tells Ezekiel, these bones are the house of Israel. So the context is not this is a future-coming reality in the church, but rather this, this analogy, this picture, this vision that you're having is a picture of the house of Israel. And so when we take a passage like that and we go, well, actually, what that means to me is it's just a picture of spiritual deadness in the state of organ. And I want to preach Jesus until the dead bones of organ come to faith. Well, that's actually not a faithful handling of the text. Um, and so we've taken something that actually has a very specific meaning, I believe, a future that has not yet come to pass, and we end up allegorizing it spiritually. The same thing happens in Deuteronomy 30, where Moses is talking to the Israelites about a future restoration, and we read it and we go, okay, he's clearly talking to this group at this time, not to the church. And it's it's a promise that hasn't yet come to pass. And I think that this actually, if you'll let me just kind of ramble for a second, by the time you get to Romans 9, I think Paul is affirming all of this. Because it's important to note that when Paul writes Romans 9 through 11, he's writing post-resurrection to a Gentile church. So the argument that the church has replaced Israel kind of falls apart because Paul is writing it in a chronology that doesn't make sense. If Paul really believed that the church had replaced Israel in its standing and in its position, then he would have said that those promises have come to

Prophecy And Romans 9 Through 11

Speaker 24:49

fulfillment. But he actually doesn't say that. He says the opposite. He starts talking about his kinsmen and how he wishes that he himself could be accursed for them. And I think another really important thing is that he acknowledges their rejection. In Romans 11, he is very clear that the nation of Israel is in a state of rejection. Romans 11, 25. That this rejection is temporary and it's partial. We know this because of the book of Acts. I think it's Acts chapter 6, there's a great number of priests that are coming to faith. Acts chapter 2, an entirely Jewish congregation, which means not all Israel is rejecting Jesus. Some have responded. The entire early church, by the time you get to Acts 15, the first Jerusalem Council, is almost exclusively Jewish. So Paul is not saying that the entirety has rejected, but the majority. Now, if that is to be allegorically applied to the church, the question is, why is Paul talking about it to a church post-resurrection? The context doesn't seem to fit. And so when people say, well, you know, dispensational theology is, you know, whatever, uh I don't like the labels. I think my label is just what does the scripture clearly teach? I will agree with dispensational theology where it clearly is taught in the scriptures. And so for me, those are passages that I'm going, someone has to give an answer to that. And we can we can dig into that even more. There's a lot going on, there's different interpretations of all that, but I think this is a counter argument to the way that we're hearing it phrased about Christian Zionism. I am not saying that I believe that the saved redeemed people of God are the Jews. I'm not saying that. I don't know a pastor that does say that. We believe that you get saved by faith alone and Christ alone. Um, and this is how salvation comes to both Jew and Gentile. And in Romans 11, he uses the idea of this olive branch, which I believe is a picture of the redeemed people of God that we are grafted into, both Jew and Gentile, which affirms what Paul teaches in in the book of Galatians, that there is neither Jew nor Gentile as it pertains to salvation, because salvation now is to Christ in Christ alone. And so, um, yeah, I mean I'm kind of rambling, maybe some long-winded answers here, but I think the hermeneutic is really important here.

Luke Allen 27:10

Yeah, you got right to the heart of the discussion, um, which is the Jews were God's chosen people throughout the Old Testament, everyone agrees on that. But now we're in the New Testament, and just to kind of steal man, I think the argument we're trying to argue against here in Galatians 3, I don't hear many people besides James Cesalarico say that the categories don't exist anymore when it says Jew nor Greek, male nor female, slave nor free. I think they recognize the categories. They're just saying, which I agree with, we're all one in salvation. So I agree with that statement, but that doesn't mean that just because we're recognizing the categories and we're saying that we're all one in salvation, that the Jews are fulfilled. That's the word they often use and it's done. And now we're all one in Christ. So so there's the replacement part. And in as such, they would say that there are no promises left for the Jewish people as a separate entity from Christians. So it's helpful to make a distinction between the arguments in the New Testament about salvation, which there's plenty, um, which when you look at those, you you in a way are like, oh, this seems like it's replacing Judaism. And it's like, yes, it is, it's Christianity. Uh, but the Jews are still singled out, as you just mentioned a bunch of examples of, in a distinct way that we don't see, you know, the Hittites or the Amorites or the Persians or whatever. There's still the Jews, they're still distinct, and there are still promises. I think we we all agree on this at least. There are still promises for the Jews that don't pertain to salvation. What are those? And I think that's really the heart of the matter here.

Speaker 28:44

Yeah, no, I think you're I think you're right. I I think um the question that has to be answered is what do we do with seemingly unfulfilled prophecy concerning Israel? Right? Um because if if there is still future unfulfilled prophecy, well, God is faithful. He keeps his word. And so either it's allegorical, speaking about a spiritual fulfillment in the church age, or it's literal, speaking to a future coming fulfillment. Now, the problem is if if you think that the church has genuinely replaced Israel in the in the entire redemptive purpose of God, then you would say, well, there can't actually be a literal one because now there's a new Israel. And so you see it as a spiritual fulfillment. Um so again, I think the hermeneutic here is pretty important, is is what do you think the author meant? What did the audience mean? And I think maybe to answer this, I am good friends with guys who are covenant theology guys that love the Lord, um, that we're gonna spend eternity with. Uh no doubt about that. And so these are these are discussions that I think need to be had with charity and with a deep desire to understand what the scriptures teach. My contention would be that many Christians, most Christians you talk to, if you ask them, what are some of the reasons that you believe in the Lordship of Christ, that you believe that Jesus is the promised Messiah? Most of us would go, well, there's fulfilled prophecy, right? That there's so much promises in the Old Testament about the coming of Christ that it could not be chance or happenstance. It has to be Jesus, because Jesus fulfilled all of the, even if you just take the ones about Jesus, where he was born, and all the different details about the life and ministry of Christ, you would go, there's compelling, overwhelming evidence of a divine intervention in human history, evidenced by prophecy that came to fruition. Now, prophecy is always clear post-fulfillment, correct? Right? We we look upon him who he pierced. And most of us go, yeah, that's so clear. It's the crucifixion. Right? We read Isaiah 53 and we go, man, it was like it was written at the foot of the cross. Because it essentially was. Because God is outside of time, and these promises that in their time were confusing. For Daniel, like a goat whose feet don't touch the ground can feel a little complicated. The Medo-Persian Empire being reflected by this ram who has two horns, but one is bigger than the other. And we go, what in the world is this? Nebuchadnezzar's dream about a statue, and it has these different metals, and the Bronze Age and the Iron Age, and it explains those even in the feet that are mixed with clay, the slow and gradual collapse of the Roman Empire, where we have the privilege of hindsight. We can look at the Psalms and we hear, we see David, you know, talk about being pierced, and we go, well, for us, that's a clear reference point to the crucifixion of Christ. But for David, it was before crucifixion had been invented. Now, so so all of a sudden, we are able to look back and see this prophetic thing applied so clearly because we've seen its fulfillment happen. However, when you have the prophecy without the fulfillment, there is confusion. In fact, we know this because in Jesus' first coming, everything promised about Jesus' first coming was written down by the time he came, right? But the disciples are confused. We know this because multiple times they are asking Jesus, what is this? When is this going to come to pass? In fact, after the resurrection, is it now that you're going to bring in an usher and the kingdom, which is a really big important topic, too, of the kingdom. Um, but they don't even understand it. John writes multiple times in his gospel. It wasn't until the after the resurrection that these things made sense. I mean, Jesus is looking at them going, how long have I been with you? And yet you still do not see it. The prophecy that they had was true and right, but their understanding of it was limited. And I think there are unfulfilled prophecies in the Old Testament that have not yet come to pass that that when we try to say they have, whether we look at AD 70 and Titus conquering Jerusalem and go, well, that's the fulfillment in all in its entirety. I go, I that feels like you're really trying to force the issue. If you're saying it's fulfilled allegorically, to me that feels kind of lazy because this is why they missed Jesus the first time, because everything was allegorical, right? So it's like Isaiah 53 was actually not about the coming suffering servant because they were expecting a conquering king. So actually it was just about how to suffer well through, you know, persecution. That's actually not what it's about. And so I think you and I live in a time where those unfulfilled prophecies are confusing and they they will be confusing until they are fulfilled. That doesn't mean that God isn't faithful to his word. It doesn't mean that his word isn't true and right. It just means that we haven't seen the actual uh application come to play in the same way that the Old Testament uh reader wouldn't have understood those things with the clarity. And this is why Paul talks about how there's this mystery that has been revealed in Christ. It doesn't mean that the Old Testament wasn't clearly pointing to Jesus or that it had errors. It meant that the application of that couldn't have even been guessed at. But when Jesus came, he was the perfect application of all of those prophecies. So I think that's an important part too in this conversation that we have a little bit of humility when we see something, but I haven't seen this come to pass. The temptation is going to be jumped allegory because that's the easiest way to answer something that feels spiritually confusing, as opposed to going, I actually don't know the specific details, but I do think that this is going to come to pass in a way that I probably won't be able to nail down perfectly. That's why we have to be humble in our eschatological conversations. We need to be humble when it comes to prophecies. But when I read um Ezekiel 37, when I read Deuteronomy 30, uh, when I read, you know, a myriad other passages in Jeremiah that are talking about the future restoration of Israel, and then I see Paul in Romans 9 go, it hasn't happened yet. It hasn't happened. They're rejecting chapter 11 in a future tense, all Israel will be saved. I'm going, there's still some that haven't come yet to pass. And so I'm waiting with humility there. And then the last thing I'll say on this, because I think this is important, is the idea of the new covenant and the old covenant. Right? Um, I believe that in the new covenant, which is established at Jesus the night before he was uh arrested and betrayed, Jesus institutes the Lord's table. Right? This is my body, this is my blood. And he says, this is a new covenant in my blood. Um, this new covenant speaks to the way that we come to good standing with God, that we are saved by faith alone in Christ alone. Now, Paul will make the argument throughout the book of Romans, there's not a new way to be saved. You always got saved the same way. It was by faith. And he and he points out how did Abraham got saved? He got saved by faith, faith in the promise. And and he died. Hebrews 11 tells us that he died, him, uh, Isaac, and Jacob all died believing yet not seeing the promise come to pass. And so it was faith that he put in God for a future coming Messiah, though he didn't know his name, and that faith was credited to him as righteousness. In the same way, you and I look backwards to Christ, we put our faith in the finished work of Jesus, and his substitutionary work on the cross is credited to us as righteousness. And so the the new covenant is the fulfillment of all of the Old Testament covenants, that Jesus has now come. Um, but that doesn't mean, in my opinion, that their future promises are now null and void. In fact, this is a talking point you'll hear. You'll hear, well, Israel has rejected Jesus, and so they are no longer inheritors of the covenant. But the problem is that violates the way that God speaks. I'm the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow. In fact, when he makes the covenant with Abraham, it's very clear, I will keep it even when you break it. And some people will go, well, no, no, no, that was made to Abraham exclusively. But that's not true, and we know it's not true because throughout the Old Testament, the phrase Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob reaffirmed in Hebrews 11 that they all died believing the same promise. So this promise, initially made to Abraham, would go through the go through Isaac, would go through Jacob to the 12 tribes, but they were always meant to be a missionary nation to the world, right? And so this promise is now given to them, it flows through them, but their ultimate rejection of Christ is what ushers in the new covenant. And so the old covenant, yes, points us to Jesus, but there are specific promises that I think have not yet come to pass. And I think we see this in Daniel, we see this in Revelation. And one last evidence of this, and then I'm rambling again. Um the book of Revelation, the apostle John knows who the church is, right? Like some of you have probably heard of sermon series about the seven churches, right? It's like that's the easy part of Revelation to preach, and then you get into the like more complicated stuff, right? And and so clearly John knows what a church is. He writes to churches in in his letters. John knows who the church is, but then the church disappears in the book of Revelation, not to show up until chapter 20, I believe, or 21. Well, who is he talking to? It just seems that Paul or that John is talking to someone. He's talking, I believe, to um to Israel. And and one, maybe one, this is my last point, one common mistake I think that is is read into this is they go, well, what you're saying is that the church is some kind of afterthought. No, I I don't think that. I think it's always been got part of God's plan that he would choose a people for a purpose. And

Chosen People Versus Redeemed People

Speaker 38:19

being chosen does not mean saved. And I think this is where a lot of people get really confused. When we say that Israel are God's chosen people, we are not saying they are his redeemed people. And we know this because Paul in Romans 9, not all Israel is Israel. Just because you are a descendant of Israel doesn't mean that you are instantly saved. In fact, Paul speaks to this in the book of Romans as well, that we're not saved because of our genealogy, that we're sons of Abraham, and we're not saved through circumcision. We're not saved through a spiritual rite, and we're not saved through genealogy. We're saved through faith. And so being chosen, the question is chosen to what purpose? And I would argue that being chosen, that Israel was chosen to be God's vehicle to bring the good news and the hope of the Messiah to the world. This is why Abraham is told in Genesis 12, in you all the families of the earth will be blessed. Well, that's only a reality if Israel fulfills its mission to be a missionary nation. And the way I explained it to our church is that in the final rejection of Christ, Israel became a cul-de-sac and not an avenue. And so what we see in the book of Acts is that God is now going to, through the church, bring the good news to the nations. In fact, the Great Commission seems to echo Genesis 12, right? That you go into all the world and preach the gospel. And last thought on this is that when we get to chapter 10 of questions of the world.

Scott Allen 39:45

Exactly.

Speaker 39:46

You guys are big on this. You know what I'm talking about. Um, that the church is now taking that mandate to bring the good news of the Messiah to the entire world, including chapter 10 of Romans, the Jews. So the question for the Christian church today is what does it mean to be a blessing to Israel? Well, I don't believe it means that we are to sign off on everything that the nation-state of Israel wants, because the Bible clearly tells us what that means. It means that we are to preach Christ crucified to them so that they might turn from their sin and trust in the Savior. And we see this when Paul talks in chapter 10 about how are they going to respond if they've never heard the good news and how are they going to hear if no one brings it to them. Blessed are the feet of those who bring the good news. That, yes, has principles that apply to evangelism more broadly, but he's specifically talking about the work of the church in preaching Christ, the Messiah, to the nation of Israel who has rejected their Messiah.

Luke Allen 40:39

Hi, friends. I wanted to invite you to help the Disciple Nations Alliance meet our $50,000 summer matching challenge. Many of you are listening to this podcast because you care about a biblical worldview, about discipling the nations, and helping Christians live faithfully in every area of life. And that's exactly what the DNA exists to do. Last year, an independent impact study confirmed what we have been hearing again and again from people around the world. The DNA's training is helping Christians break free from a compartmentalized faith to applying biblical truths to their family, work, church, community, and culture. When Christians embrace a biblical worldview, they live differently. And when believers live differently, that transformation ripples outward. Now through August 15th, your gift can help us meet this $50,000 challenge and multiply this impact. To give, just tap the link in the show notes that says matching challenge. And thank you so much for standing with us here at the Disciple Nations Alliance.

Dispensationalism Covenant Theology And Baptism

Scott Allen 41:45

But I I kind of want to go back and just unpack it a little bit piece by piece. Um just just for the sake of just trying to to build a building kind of brick by brick here a little bit, even though you've done really that was powerful the way you just kind of went through all of that. Uh I'm I'm honestly I'm kind of like stunned that you can just uh stream of consciousness do that kind of kind of uh well I I talk too fast and I know that, so uh I will try to slow way down now.

Speaker 42:12

But forgive me for that.

Scott Allen 42:14

Just a quick question. If I could go all the way back, you began um by talking about uh biblical interpretation or the the the fancy word hermeneutics, and you said, you know, the important thing is just to go to the Bible, be careful about kind of landing in a particular uh hermeneutical camp like dispensationalism, covenant theology or whatever it is, you know, the the the point is what is the Bible teaching? Um and be ready, you know, be ready if you're in one of those camps to kind of hey be um you know corrected, if you will, based on the scriptures. Do you uh are there areas where you because you've you you said hey, I'm kind of a I'm I'm in from the dispensational camp in terms of interpretation of the Bible, or are there areas where you struggle with that a little bit or where you're challenged by that? I'm just kind of curious. I I you know I tend to come probably more from that covenant side, although I I personally I'm very leery of because I think people put way too much emphasis on their particular school of theology, right? You know. Um and and but but I'm just kind of curious, are you are there areas where you are you you bleed over a little bit into the covenant side, or or is it are you pretty pretty clear on on the dispensational side? I'm just curious.

Speaker 43:32

Yeah, you know, I I think that um a lot of times guys, especially seminary guys and and guys who love the Bible, they end up starting with the theological framework and then they argue, right? So are you a five point Arminian? Are you a five point Calvinist? Are you covenant? Are you dispensational? Are you in the and so we start with the camps and we work our way backwards, you know, and some of the hardline positions I think are logical conclusions of the Framework that's being built. So I think if you were look at maybe classical dispensationalism, there's probably parts I would disagree with. Like they would, they would, I think they would say, I could be wrong on this, but I think they say that, for example, Jesus' teaching on the Sermon on the Mount has nothing to do with us. Um, because that's you know, that's not for us. And I would probably disagree with that. There are some things I would disagree with. However, I do think that there are a lot more Christians that assume things downstream without realizing what theological hermeneutic it puts them in. So for example, baptism. Baptism's a great example of this actually being played out, right? Um and for Covenant, like my like our Presbyterian friends, um R. C. Sprawl, I've got good friends in town who are Presbyterians. I love them, they're godly men. And uh I was telling uh one of our pastors, if I if I didn't go to East Mon, I might even go to uh the Presbyterian church down the street because I just love their pastor so much. He's just a dear friend, and we disagree on this. They baptize infants. Now, they don't baptize infants the way that the Orthodox Church does or the way the Catholic Church does, because they don't believe it's salvific. They still believe it's symbolic, but they believe it's covenantal and not confessional. And so maybe a way I like a way I can explain this in baptism is if you were to draw a kind of a quadrant, you have um you have symbolic and you have salvific, and then you have uh confessional and covenantal. And and you can kind of put all Christian denominations in one of those four boxes, with the exception of uh maybe some charismatic denominations that believe in a second baptism, but for the most part, the question becomes why do we baptize infants? Now, Catholics and uh Lutherans and the Orthodox Church will say, but Catholic, we actually baptize infants as a way to remove original sin, that it is baptism along with a profession in faith that saves. But Protestants, like us and Presbyterians, would go, no, no, no. You're saved by grace alone and faith alone, right? That there is no act that you do that is necessary to accompany, because that would mean that there is works type. But so then why do Presbyterian churches baptize infants where Baptist churches will only baptize professing believers? And the answer is how you interpret Israel, right? So if we have taken the role of the new covenant people of God, circumcision was the sign of the covenant, and it didn't save you, but it was a symbolic act of being brought into this covenant family, they would say, by then extension, we baptize our infants as a symbolic gesture of them being part of this covenant family. And they are not saved by that, but when they finally do, if they do, make a profession of faith in Christ, they don't need to be baptized again because they were already baptized into the covenant, and now that baptism has found its legitimate, you know, kind of covering in their faith in Christ alone. Whereas I would say, well, I don't believe that because I think that what we see in the New Testament exclusively is believer baptism. Now we can look at Acts 10 and they can say, well, their household was baptized, but but you're arguing from silence that I think what we see in the New Testament is when you make a declaration of faith in Christ, you should be baptized. And baptism is an outward uh declaration of an inward decision. So it's not covenantal, it's confessional, and it's not salvific, it's symbolic. And so those are differences that are actually downstream of this argument, but they actually apply to the same hermeneutic. And so for many of your listeners, they they may have thought that all people who are baptizing babies think that it saves their babies. The Presbyterians don't believe that. We actually believe in justification the same as them. They believe it's a sign of a covenantal relationship into the family and the covenant of God. And so those are some downstream distinctions that are tied to hermeneutics. And a lot of Christians don't realize that. They just go, well, that's strange that you don't baptize infants, or it's strange that you do baptize infants, but they don't realize that there's actually a hermeneutic system upstream that's influencing both their view of Israel and baptism and likely uh end times and eschatology as well. So there's a lot of this woven together in how we interpret. And my argument is just go back to the scriptures to see what is true and let your systematic theology be informed by your biblical theology. Systematic theology is important and good, but it needs to always have its primary rooting in your interpretation and faithfulness to God's word.

Scott Allen 48:25

Yeah. And I one one of the things I try to do, Blaine, is I always say, what, you know, rather than right or wrong, oh, this is wrong. You you've got that wrong uh biblically. Um but rather what can I learn from that? You know, maybe they're seeing something that my kind of hermeneutic excludes, and what can I learn from that? You know, the idea of of the covenant and the covenant, you know, between a child and parent, um, you know, raising them in the faith. You know, maybe there's something I can learn from that that would make me a better parent and help me to be a little more intentional about the way I raise my children or something like that. So I always I always I always kind of try to be generous, and I'm sure you do too. Like, what can I what can I learn from from that rather than kind of that's wrong, and we're just excluding that.

Six Biblical Meanings Of Israel

Scott Allen 49:12

But back to back to this the the discussion of of Israel, I one of the first building blocks I think I think we need to do is, and you did this in your sermon series really well, but just define we gotta define terms. What is Israel? Uh it's funny how in this discussion people can get really bent out of shape, even on that. You know, what are we talking about? How do you I think you had six different definitions. If you could cover that briefly, um if you recall that, I don't know, I don't want to put you on the spot here, but how did you how do you define Israel?

Speaker 49:41

Yeah, I'll do my best. Yeah, I think, and again, I think um if you're listening to podcasts, you're listed listening to the pundit class, um, just because we're using the same words doesn't mean we have the same meaning. Right? And so I think one of the really good discipline for every Christian, um, I mean, the book of James tells us to be quick to listen and slow to speak. Um, I think that's a good principle. I know I need to work on that in my life. But when you when someone says something, ask a clarifying question. That's not, I don't have to be antagonistic or hostile. I'm actually seeking clarity. So when someone says, you know, there's now an infamous quote or uh interaction between Tucker Carlson and Ted Cruz about Israel. And it for me as a pastor, it was just it was painful to watch. It was hard to watch. Um, and it just kept going. It was like watching someone fall down the up escalator. It just kept happening, you know? And it was like, well, our who is Israel? And Israel's Israel. And we're using circular definitions to actually try to define what we mean. And so I think this is one of the major contentions that's happening in the conversation is that we actually don't know what we mean when we say Israel. So um if I can give a few different things.

Scott Allen 50:47

I mean, this is not a small um uh uh issue. You this is a really important issue because the Bible as a whole, I mean, Israel factors in in a huge way, the entire Old Testament and a lot of the New Testament. So understanding this correctly is really important, isn't it?

Speaker 51:02

Yeah. And so to start, obviously, you know, an Old Testament survey, God comes to a guy named Abram uh in the Mesopotamian desert and calls him and says, I'm gonna make you a nation, and and in you all the families of the earth will be blessed. And and he tells him you're gonna have a son. And right, if you know the story of Genesis, him and his wife are it says that he's old and she's advanced in years, which is like hilarious, the way the Bible talks about how they're both old. And you know, Sarah laughs at God when they're promised uh a son. What we see early on is that Abraham decides he's gonna take matters into his own hands, Sarah and Abraham to come up with a plan. This is where we get Ishmael, uh, right? He takes Hagar because Sarah's beyond childbearing years. And and what we see in the initial promise of God is that with man this is impossible. With God, all things are possible. And this would, this is a shadow of the coming of Christ, that that that Jesus' birth would be supernatural, not natural. It wouldn't come through human means, it would come through divine power. And then we get Isaac. Isaac then has uh sons, and and Jacob, his son Jacob, who is the uh younger, who ends up with the blessing because God doesn't choose the strong and the powerful, he chooses who he chooses. We see this in in Romans. Jacob's name is changed to Israel. And the first time we see Israel in the Bible is Jacob having a formal name changed. So the first time we actually see it is in Genesis 32, uh, where his name is changed to Israel. And and then later on in the same chapter in Genesis 32, Israel is then used to speak to his descendants. And in so it uh because it talks about how what the Israelites can and cannot eat, and it says the Israelites, so within the same chapter, Israel is a is a proper name, it's Jacob, followed by his physical descendants, the Israelites, seen right there. And we see this again throughout the Bible, that the physical descendants. In fact, I think this is what Paul is saying in Romans 9. If you read Romans 9, he opens by talking about my kinsmen. He's clearly speaking to his the ethnic descendants of Israel, not the ethnic descendants of Jacob, of Abraham, because Abraham has Ishmael and Isaac. We're talking about the descendants of the promise, which is the Israelites. And this is why Paul says the Israelites to them were given the covenants, to them were given the promises. Um another way that we see it, we see Israel as a nation, right? The nation of Israel. And it kind of if you fast forward through the Old Testament story, uh, Israel, I believe, is the only legitimate theocracy that could ever exist and will ever exist in human history, because God is their king. Now he speaks to them through prophets, Moses being the first one, through judges as we get to the time of the conquest. But by the time we get to the life and ministry of Samuel, the people don't want God to be their king. They want a human king, which is the worst trade in all of the world, right? To trade God for some lesser version. And I've told our church it's because they wanted a coin and they wanted someone on a horse and they wanted someone, they wanted to be like the nations rather than being the unique nation that they were. Samuel says this is a the this is a terrible idea. I'm paraphrasing obviously. Um God says, give them what they want. And they choose Saul. And Saul becomes the king of the nation of Israel. So we have Saul, David, Solomon under the kind of united kingdom of Israel. Uh so we we talk about Israel as a nation. After Solomon, Jeroboam and Rehaboam will take over and they will divide the kingdom, and the kingdom will split, and you'll have Judah and you'll have Israel, the two kingdoms that will that will cease to exist slowly at different times through conquest. And so the nation of Israel ceases to exist. And this is what the Pharisees are longing for when Jesus shows up. They don't want a Jesus who heals them from their uh spiritual like condition. They don't want someone who will redeem them from their sin. They want a king. They want a conquering king who drives out the Romans, and this explains the triumphal entry, right? Jesus is riding into Jerusalem, they're putting palm branches down, it's a nationalistic symbol. We want a kingdom like David. And because the promise to David was one's gonna kill, there's gonna be a king who's gonna come, who's gonna reign forever. Yeah, and so the third way is a nation. The fourth way that Israel is used is it's it's used to speak of the land, right? If you're talking to a Christian, you go, have you ever been to Israel? Well, clearly you're speaking about the land. But the the Bible speaks about the land this way too. In um in the book of Genesis, uh, in Genesis 12, obviously Abram is told to go, and he's going to give him a land that clearly has an actual physical place. And in the book of Numbers, in Numbers 34, it opens with parameters of the land. It gives kind of these markers and the the geographical spread of the land, right? Joshua leads the people of God, leads Israel into the land of Israel. Right? So Israel is being used a few different ways. Um, fifth, the fifth way we see is unique to the New Testament because it's the spiritual family. Now, this is a passage that gets quoted pretty regularly by guys who disagree with me. And they would go to Galatians and in Galatians 3. Um, I can I can find it. Um in Galatians 3, Paul is speaking of the church. Yeah, the Israel of God. He talks about the sons of Abraham, and he and he says it's not the seeds plural, it's the seed singular. And and so, yes, we see this as a spiritual reality. And and in that spiritual reality, the true sons of Abraham, in the spiritual sense, are not those who are ethnically Israel, but those who have put their faith in the Messiah that Abraham put his faith in. We see this in Hebrews 11, right? Abraham put his faith in the Messiah. In fact, Jesus even tells a story of it. I actually don't think it's a parable, I think it's a real story, uh, Lazarus and the rich man, because there's a there's a name given, Lazarus. Usually parables don't have formal names. But the way that Jesus explains heaven, right? To be absent from the body, to be present with the Lord, he says Abraham's bosom, right? Like that's kind of an uncomfortable way to word it, but that's the way that he words it, that to be with Abraham, because Abraham was this father of a spiritual nation. And there's space for that as you read the Bible too. And then lastly, in the sixth category is I think the one we're all fighting over, which is the nation-state of Israel. And that is unique and distinct from all the other categories that we have talked about as well, though it may encompass some of the land and some of the ethnic people and even some of those who have put their faith in Christ. Um, so that is where I think most of the fighting is happening. And I think what's happening is that sixth definition is being then uh imposed on all of them. And so when we're talking about Israel, we're talking about the Israel nation state, the modern nation-state of Israel, which is where there's a lot of confusion, I think, in the conversation.

Luke Allen 57:54

Totally. Yeah, the only one that's not mentioned in the Bible is the one that's kind of behind most of the conversations. Yeah, exactly. That's tough.

Scott Allen 58:02

What what advice would you give just on that? I want to go back to these categories a little bit blame, but just quickly, what what advice would you give to Christians about how to think about the modern state of Israel? Uh, the nation-state of Israel, Ben Benjamin Netanyahu, you know, the wars with Gaza, all of the foreign policy that they're involved in, you know, of course. What what any thoughts or advice on that? How do we think about the modern nation-state of Israel as Christians?

Speaker 58:26

Yeah,

Modern Israel Fair Standards Not Favoritism

Speaker 58:27

that's great. I think this is where I'm going to sound maybe more like my Covenant brothers. Um I think that Christians should think justly and rightly about every nation and every people group on the face of the earth. Um, that we should seek justice, love mercy, that we should be peacemakers in our time, and that we should support what is good and reject what is evil, regardless. And so I I gave an example in our in our church service that that the current modern nation state of Israel is in rejection of Christ.

Scott Allen 59:02

Yeah, largely secular. Right, yeah.

Speaker 59:04

Yeah, that doesn't mean that there aren't Christians in Israel. It doesn't mean, but they are rejecting Christ. I think you guys probably saw this, that they're holding, uh I think they probably are doing it soon. The the largest pride parade, pride festival in the Middle East is going to be held at the Dead Sea, which is quite close to the historical location of Sodom, which is not good to do this again, right? That's rejection of Christ in a secularistic, atheistic kind of way. But there's also the Orthodox version, which talks about how Jesus is, you know, being tortured right now by God for his rebellion. That's that's also rejection. And so the modern nation state of Israel has rejected Christ by and large. Um, and so I think Paul tells us how we should respond. It's in Romans 10. We should share the gospel with them. We should preach to them, we should reason with them from the scriptures that Jesus was the Messiah so they might turn from their sin and put their faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Right? So I do think as we think about the modern nation state, if there is something that that the Bible calls evil, we call it evil.

unknown 1:00:07

Right.

Speaker 1:00:08

If there's something that is good, we don't call it. We don't have a divine mandate to support everything that the Israeli government does. Right.

Scott Allen 1:00:17

At the same time, we do we don't write them off, because I think that's a tendency to, oh, look, they're persecuting Christians. This is an evil nation, let's just write them off. I mean, the modern state of Israel in its position of uh you know having abandoned God or, you know, deeply secular, uh that's not new, right? I mean, they if you read the Old Testament, it happened over and over again, and that's why they were uh, you know, cast off the land into exile. But God never wrote them off, right? You know, and I think that's important. He always was faithful, and we'll go back to that in a second. But uh God remained faithful even through their disobedience. And uh so I think that should that should shape right the way we think about them today, even.

Speaker 1:01:00

Yeah, and I think Christians need to be honest that the standard that you hold to Israel needs to be the standard held everywhere.

Scott Allen 1:01:06

Right.

Speaker 1:01:06

Right? So if you're gonna say, well, Israel is a uniquely pagan nation, I'm going, I think you can make a similar argument about the state of Oregon.

Scott Allen 1:01:14

Right.

Speaker 1:01:15

I think you can make a similar argument about the United States.

Scott Allen 1:01:17

Right.

Speaker 1:01:18

One of the things that I think that there's, you know, uh Twitter or X does not is not conducive to reasoned, thoughtful, charitable conversation, right? It is created for chaos. And the more chaotic it is, the more, the more polarizing it is, the more clicks it gets, the more, right? So I think there are some who I think uh who are Christians, who love the Lord, who are maybe haven't thought deeply about any of this, um, do give kind of a blank check to the nation of Israel, the nation-state of Israel. They don't think in any kind of way, they just go, actually, we need to support them no matter what, because if we support them, we're supporting God. And I reject that. But then I think you have the other side which is rising up, which is Israel is uniquely evil among all the nations of the earth. They're worse than every nation on the earth. Anything evil that is happening has got to be tied to Mossad or some kind of Israeli intervention. It's conspiratorial, and they are they are the worst. And I think even if you listen to Tucker, one of the confusing things that I think happened for a lot of Christians is Tucker is now talking more positively about Islam than he talks about Judaism. Right. Right. Right? Now, both of them are rejections of Christ. But if you're trying to claim that Christians should should hate Israel because they are uniquely evil, but actually should embrace Islam because they love Jesus too, that is that's demonic. Because the Jesus that Islam believes in is not the Jesus of the Bible. And to get Jesus wrong, whether it be in Mormonism or it be in uh Islam or it be in Orthodox Judaism, if you get Jesus wrong, you get Jesus wrong. Right? You either come to Jesus, the real Jesus. Paul even says this to the church in Corinth. It talks about them preaching another Jesus. And then he says, as if there actually is another one. There isn't. There is one Christ, there is one God, there's one Lord Jesus Christ. And so I do think that there is, we should be a fair and reasonable people that hold all things to the authority and the standard of God's word, and that we show the same level of criticism to all nations, which include Israel. So we don't show favoritism, nor do we show a unique disdain. I think the Christian response should be one that is measured and appropriate. Even the entire concept of a just war is a Christian concept, right? And so when we talk about warfare and what's happening in Gaza, what's happening in Israel, I think Christians have the capacity and should be the people on earth that are not swayed and influenced by a unique love that is blinding them from evil, nor a unique disdain that causes them to treat Israel worse than any other nation, but to be level-headed, think biblically, and apply the scriptures and the standards of justice that we have in God's word to the world around us. And so I think I just don't think it's that complicated. I think we call good good, we call evil evil. And and Romans 10 tells us that the way that we um are to serve God's people, Israel, who are in a state of rejection is by preaching Christ to them unapologetically.

Luke Allen 1:04:22

Yeah. And yet, I mean, to this argument of they're uniquely the worst, I I I I'll give I'll give people one one point here. I'm not a moral relativist. So in the sense that all people who haven't, you know, aren't Christians need to come to a saving, you know, faith in Jesus, I love all people and I want all people to be saved. And yet when I'm looking at all the other religions out there, I'm not gonna say they're all the same. You know, where would you rather go on vacation? Uh in Iran or in Thailand, you know, like ideas have consequences. And uh the the worldviews, depending on how much truth is in the soil of a worldview, will create a society that's either a little bit more just or a little bit less just. So uh, you know, there's there's not there's not an equal playing field. And I would say if we're gonna look at, you know, Judaism, practicing Judaism, people who still adhere to the Torah, there's a lot of truth in it. There's a lot of goodness in it, and I I think we can see that in the modern state of Israel, even though it's very distorted. And I just do not understand the arguments that say that the Jews, it's usually just the Jews, uh like the ethnicity, are uniquely evil. Where's that coming from? I don't get that.

Speaker 1:05:34

Yeah, and there's a lot there in the middle of the year. Yeah, no, I I think you're right. So to the first thing is would you rather go vacation in Mosul, Iraq, or would you rather go vacation in Tel Aviv? The reality is you'd rather go to Tel Aviv, right? Um, you know, are Christians always treated favorably in Israel? Not necessarily, right? Are they treated better than they are in Iran? Sure. To conflate the two together is And act as if we are all equals here, I think is unfair. Even if we talk about military and war and conquest, there should be criticism on both sides. But I found that there's seemingly no criticism of those who hide behind their own children. There's seemingly no criticism of those who hide arms depots under hospitals. There's seemingly no calls for them to lay down their weapons and surrender, which just shows a bias here that is not that is not accurate or appropriate.

Scott Allen 1:06:30

You know, this the multiculturalism, kind of this desire to kind of be cultural relativists, uh doesn't apply to two countries, Israel and the United States, right? We come in for a harsher judgment, let's just say, for whatever reason. So um and I I think there's a there's a there's a reason for that, actually. I think it has to do with God and the Bible, um, and just a rejection of God and a rejection of the Bible in a fallen in the fallen world.

Luke Allen 1:06:54

So I would say 100% that's quite the statement, Dad. Dig into that a little more. Yeah. What do you what do you mean when you say that?

Scott Allen 1:07:01

Well, you know, I mean, right, the fallen heart of man, you know, is just it's it's a it's a rebellious heart against God and against and therefore by extension against God's chosen people, Abraham, and against the people that have been grafted into that family through faith in Jesus Christ, Christians. And and so there's a unique kind of unwillingness, at least amongst contemporary multiculturalism, you know, uh, to to to apply that to Israel and the United States. They're always going to be vili vili or the United States, uh, yeah. Well, I guess United States, they're gonna be vilified. There's at least right now in our contemporary culture. But Blaine, yeah, back to back to the definition, I think that's really helpful. And I heard uh one um theologian recently use the the acronym ENT, and it really stuck with me. I I found it super helpful, ENT ethnicity, nation, territory. And you've you've expanded that, and I think in a helpful way, but just when we're talking about Israel biblically, uh this kind of ENT, and uh if I could just quickly this is I'm just repeating what you said, but e ethnicity has to do with bloodline and descendants, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and the descendants. Although there is an asterisk here biblically beside this one, because um uh, you know, the there's a lot of people that come into the nation of Israel that aren't blood descendants, right? You know, after the uh exodus from Egypt, a lot of Egyptians come in with of Israel into the promised land. Or you've got, of course, Rahab and you've got uh Ruth, right? Um so this there is there is uh an asterisk beside ethnicity. Nation, as you said, is a little bit different. Nation when we're talking about nation, we're we're adding things like kings, governments, uh languages, common languages, common government, common law. Um the that that that's the stuff of nations. And so we're you know, Israel is a nation, and then of course, territory, the land. Um so yeah, I always like ENT, Israel ENT.

The Abrahamic Covenant And Everlasting Promises

Scott Allen 1:09:04

That helps me a little bit when we're talking biblically about Israel. Um I want to talk a little bit about the Abrahamic covenant you already did, Blaine. Um to me, this is so critical. And I I there's a lot of promises that God makes to Abraham when he raises his him up uh and promises to make him into a great nation. Um it's so critical. I mean, just understanding this is so critical in the overall redemptive narrative of the Bible from Genesis all the way through to Revelation, just understanding this. Um But I I think I I I of late have been kind of honing in on Genesis 17, 7 through 8, one aspect of that, one or one telling of that promise. Because it uses the word everlasting, you know, this everlasting covenant. God says, I will make an everlasting covenant between me and you and your descendants after you, the descendants here talking about the ethnicity, right? Uh that covenant is that I will be your God and you will be my people. And then he goes on and he says, the whole land of Canaan, where you are now residing, that's Abraham before uh, you know, he was taken into uh they they went into Egypt, of course, but this and then they came back out, and that was uh that became the land. Um I will make, I will give this to you as an everlasting possession to you and your descendants. And um, you know, again, we see in the Bible disobedience to God in that covenant on the part of of Israel, and then exile, but then God brings them back, right, into the land, and that's a that's kind of a repeated pattern. And you even see that, you know, here in our day, so to speak, you know, with Israel now being back brought into the land after World War II in the 1950s. So um, but but talk to me a little bit about what this to me clarifies a lot. Everlasting covenant between me and you and your descendants. That word everlasting, uh it makes things pretty clear, right? God's got a purpose for this ENT Israel that goes all the way through, right? What what are your what where does that get when we kind of overlay that with um replacement theology, where where where does that get confusing? Is is it that um no, it's it's been fulfilled in the church, and so now we're not talking about ENT Israel any longer, but this everlasting promise now applies just to the church, but not to Israel. Well help me out here a little bit.

Speaker 1:11:31

Yeah, I think this is muddy. Um, you know, I think everlasting means everlasting.

Scott Allen 1:11:35

Yeah.

Speaker 1:11:36

I don't think it means less than that.

Scott Allen 1:11:38

Right.

Speaker 1:11:38

And so there's there's a couple different, you know, if you read the comment sections of videos and podcasts, it's interesting just to hear how people respond in in one sentence. And in most will, you'll see a lot of comments that simply say, yeah, they rejected God, so God has rejected them. Well, that but that violates the promise he made because the promise he made is I won't reject you, even though I know you will reject me. I will be faithful when you're faithless, right?

Scott Allen 1:12:00

The covenant which is part of the concept of covenant, which is such a deeply biblical word, such an important word, right?

Speaker 1:12:08

Totally. And so I think that that the first category is, well, because they because they rejected God, he's rejected them. I just don't think that holds water if you're serious about studying the Bible. I think if you want to hold that position, you can hold that position, but you can't hold it and prove it with the Bible. It just is an impossible position to hold, and which leaves two more options. Either there's still some future promises and God has not forgotten, or secondly, he's faithful, but the everlasting covenant has now been uh kind of like consummated with Christ. And so now they've been it's been spiritually uh fulfilled in Jesus. And so because of Jesus and the new covenant, now there's a new covenant people that are with him, and so God is still faithful, and and he's moved from Israel to now the church. Um, but I I think that based on the reading of the text, the plain reading of the text, there are future promises. In fact, um Jesus is.

Scott Allen 1:13:03

I completely agree with that, Blaine, and I just think that's so important, you know, that this is God's word. He makes a covenant, a promise that's everlasting. And that means something. And it was, yeah, it it's to this people, right? To you and your descendants. So uh, anyways, to me that's that's quite plain, yeah.

Speaker 1:13:22

Yeah, and there I do think there is some um, I think there is some genuinely uh nuanced conversation here, right? So, because the question would be well, the land, is that still the dirt? Is there still a title deed? Do they have a divine right to it? And and maybe by extension to that question is should we as citizens of a different nation be willing to go to war, send our sons and daughters to go defend a divine title deed? And maybe to add to that, before we answer it, is well, was 1948 a an actual fulfillment of a prophecy that we see in Ezekiel 38, 39? Or is it Deuteronomy 30 where God's gathering his people back or not? And I I'm not as convinced of that. I think that what we see mostly through human history is God's providence. That the fact that there is a people who still exist, to me, demonstrates God's faithfulness that he will not let them ever cease to exist on the face of the earth. But I think it is quite possible that that Israel, even if it lost its its land, that there would still be a regathering at this at the second coming of Christ. There seems to be this idea of the second coming of Christ. And for what it's worth, Jerusalem is a major location in the Bible, right? Jesus himself says, I'm gonna come back here to this actual physical location. Um, you know, I heard, I heard, I think it was that podcast with Tucker and uh and um the guy that he, the pastor he was, I can't remember his name, and they talked about how Jesus referred to himself as the son of man. He didn't refer to himself as you know a Jew, he referred to himself as the son of man. And to me, that that was just such a dishonest way to talk about the messianic title, son of man. The son of man is tied to the book of Daniel. Yes, and and the son of man who will come back riding on the clouds. This is a messianic claim to deity. I mean, when Jesus calls himself the son of man, the Pharisees want to kill him. They understand that he is speaking as if he is God. But in the New Testament, he ascends from the Mount of Olives. The two angels tell the guys that are gathered around, why are you looking into heaven? The same Jesus who left is coming back the same way on the clouds. This is a reference to the book of Daniel, to some future unfulfilled reality of the second coming of Christ. And when he comes back, he comes back to that location where he comes back not as the suffering servant, but as the conquering king. Um, and so I do think there's a lot of eschatology tied to all this too. So, but to answer the question, does America have a divine, or like have a divine mandate to go to war for certain lands? I'm not as convinced of that because I don't think that the scriptures give a mandate there.

Scott Allen 1:16:03

And I don't see that either. I I I maybe my reading is too simple, but I see this promise back in Genesis, uh, you know, where uh, you know, I will give you this land. That's the land where Abraham is standing at that time, the the the land of Canaan, uh, the land that after they um after the uh Exodus um uh you know with Joshua, that's the land that they conquered, that basic same land, that same territory, God will give them as an everlasting covenant. It doesn't mean that they've remained there the entire time, they have not, um, because of their unfaithfulness. And God promised that in Deuteronomy. You know, he said, if you are unfaithful to me and to my covenant, if you break my law, uh you will be exiled. I'll cast you out of the land. But then God, because of the covenant, brings them back. And you saw that they were resettled on the land. And then, of course, after the crucifixion of Christ, right, this is again a time of deep disobedience. Uh you know, 80, 70, they're cast, they're cast out of the land, but God remaining faithful to his covenant brings them back. It took a long time, but they, you know, he brought them back. I I see it kind of as simply as that. Uh, does that mean that we, the United States or any nation, I guess, has a mandate to to go to war to protect them in that land? No, that's God's business, I guess. But but I'm just the way I'm thinking about it here, Blaine.

Speaker 1:17:29

Yeah, yeah, I think I think maybe one last kind of detail to add to that biblically, just to make sure that the framing for all of this is in the scriptures is is about the kingdom. Um

The Kingdom Comes With The King

Speaker 1:17:40

the the concept of the kingdom, the idea of the kingdom, the teachings on the kingdom are throughout the New Testament. Right? We see it, it starts in 2 Samuel 7, I believe, because we're told that David is told there's going to be a little bit of context. And 2 Samuel, David builds his own house, right? He builds his king's house, the king's house, and then he realizes the tabernacle is still where God is. And so he's like, Well, I gotta build God a nice house too. We should both have nice houses. It's a strange thing when you read it as you read through. And it and what happens is Samuel goes to David on behalf of God and says, Listen, God wants you to know he's gonna build you a house, right? And what he's speaking to is a spiritual reality of a coming kingdom. So the idea of the kingdom is instituted with with David. Now, this is skewed and misunderstood because by the time of Jesus' arrival, because of the Maccabean Revolt and some other things that have happened, they see the king as the one who would drive out the oppressive force, which would be Rome at the time, to help establish a sovereign nation kingdom. And this is confused, I think, in two primary groups. I would say, and I live in Oregon, we all live in Oregon, so it's a little weirdo up here, but you know, on one side of maybe the liberal side of Christianity, you'll hear people talk about the kingdom, and they're talking about shalom and harmony and social justice, and we're gonna bring the kingdom in. Um, and then you have guys on the on the post-mill side of eschatology believing that they will usher in the kingdom through elections and through um, you know, restoring Christendom back to the United States. But I actually think both of those are wrong because I think the kingdom comes with the king. And so I actually would argue that the future prophetic land deed comes with the king on a biblical standpoint. We'll come back to like some reasonable ways to think about the culture, but I think that to talk about ushering in, you know, a divine right to the land without the king himself starts to get a little dicey because the king is the one who brings the kingdom. It's very clear if you read in the end times prophecies that when Jesus comes back, he comes back to Jerusalem to his city, right? In fact, Revelation 21 and 22 tell us there is a new Jerusalem, right? So the the new heavens and the new earth that God will reign from Jerusalem and he will be with his people. And so I think it's important to understand the idea of kingdom, I believe, is a future unrealized reality that Christ, when he returns, he ushers in the kingdom. So when we pray, your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven. That's actually, I believe, an eschatological prayer. We're praying for the return of Christ. Now we want to honor Christ, but the way we honor Christ, according to Paul, is we are ambassadors, right? We're in a foreign land. We live under the power of the prince of the air, not the kingdom of God. This Jesus who came the first time to save sinners from themselves is in their sin, is coming again to reign and to rule, right? And in fact, Luke 14, Jesus says, What should you do if you know an army is coming at you and will conquer? Well, you better make terms of peace. This is why we preach Christ to all who will listen, so they might be restored to relationship with God. So when Christ comes back. So I do think all that is biblical language. So then the question is, I think more broadly, culturally, well, do the Jews have any right to their ancestral homeland? Let's just say, if you take the Bible off of the table, do they have a right? And I found it interesting that some of those who are on the right side of the aisle who are very critical of Israel will also say things like, um, America is where my grandparents and my great-grandparents and my great-great-grandparents are buried. This is my land, right? They're gonna make that kind of statement, but then they're gonna look at the the Jews and go, why don't you guys go settle in Eastern Europe somewhere? Right? And so even that, that so even if you take the Bible off the table, there is an there's not a fair treatment of the Jews. And to say that the Muslims have more of a right to the promised land than the Jews, I think is a statement that is not either borne out in history nor in the scriptures. You don't have to be a Christian Zionist to hold that position. I think you can just go, I think if we're talking about who has the right. And then the other reality is no one has a right to anything, right? This is the story of human history. You have a right, essentially as a nation, to what you can defend, right? And and so if Israel defends its land and holds it, then then it's theirs. And I think the criticism of that would be, well, then why does they can only hold it if America supports them? And and so you get into foreign policy conversations, but I think in all those conversations, Christians should be thinking biblically, righteously, with an equal application of justice to all parties involved, as opposed to having a unique disdain for the nation of Israel, which is what I think we see today.

Scott Allen 1:22:33

We're running

Already Not Yet And Spiritual Warfare

Scott Allen 1:22:34

out of time. No, it's true, I know, it's true. But what do you make of Christ's claims of authority in the present or even you know in the past? But you know, I go back to the Psalms. God has established his throne in heaven and his kingdom rules over all. That's a present tense kind of a claim. Uh, not not when Jesus comes back, kind of a claim. Uh what do you make of those?

Speaker 1:22:58

Yeah, I think there's two realities both presented in the scriptures, right? He is the king of kings, the lord of lords, right? There is no rival to his power or his authority. There is one God, uh no, and he doesn't share his glory with another, right? That is true, always has been true, always will be true. Um, but in this time and season in which we live, we live under the dominion and the power of the prince of the air, right?

Scott Allen 1:23:21

Like Paul tells us But but just if I could, Jesus has claimed to defeat him uh on the cross decisively. You see that in Colossians as well. And I know he's a roaring lion. I mean, he's still around and he's still causing damage. But do you see Satan as a defeated enemy or one that actually in some ways does rule even over Christ right now in this world?

Speaker 1:23:43

Yeah, that's a that's a really good question. So I think um, and I think how we answer that really actually has pretty significant implications for how we think about this topic.

Luke Allen 1:23:52

That's another podcast, though, I think. Yeah.

Scott Allen 1:23:55

Maybe my my short answer is true. We've gone on, we've gone, you've been so generous with your time, Blaine. I think there's no love to get into this, though, yeah. Uh-huh.

Speaker 1:24:02

And maybe we should do this another time. I my my short answer being already not yet, that the promise made in 2 Samuel 7 to the future coming Christ in his kingdom, um, I believe is fully realized in the second coming of Christ. I believe that that is when the kingdom of God is established with authority and dominion and power, and that right now uh Satan is not bound. I believe that Satan will be bound at a future time. He will ultimately be thrown into the uh the pit of hell. The lake of fire is reserved for Satan and the demons who have opposed God. But right now, I mean, Paul even tells us that our war is not against flesh and blood, but against the powers and the principalities that are at work in our present age.

Scott Allen 1:24:42

And so I do think that there is a but Jesus says all authority and heaven and earth has been given to me present tense when he rises from the grave and he meets his disciples on the shores of Galilee, not Satan. Uh uh I I anyways, I I'd love to continue this discussion. I think this one really matters because because in in the work that we've done over the years, um, there is this pessimistic kind of idea that we are nothing we do is really going to matter until Christ comes back. So kind of what's the point? It's just gonna get worse and worse and worse. And what I've found very practically is that people that hold to that view, they talk themselves into this very disengaged and passive kind of form of Christianity that I think is it's it's unfaithful and harmful, you know. And I'm not saying you do, Blaine, but I just I would love to talk more about that with you.

Speaker 1:25:33

So yeah, no, I think it's I think it's a really good one. I I think that I think that because we live in a unique time in human history, in between, I think that at the cross, Jesus conquered Satan's sin and death. It is finished, that his power is, he sits at the right hand of the Father in completed authority and power. But you and I live in a time where he has not established his rule and reign in a way, right? So he is the fullness of it.

Scott Allen 1:26:00

We would call it the consummation of it. It's yeah, right.

Speaker 1:26:03

Yeah, the consummation of all things has not yet come to pass. And I think that this is why Paul Peter tells us live like aliens and strangers in this foreign world. We represent King Jesus in a kingdom that we have not yet seen come to its fullest fruition. So, yes, I do think that on the spiritual front, Jesus has conquered and defeated our greatest enemy, and yet the future coming of Christ has not yet been realized. So there's a there's a you know, there's a it's kind of the difference between like if we think about American politics, we have um we have the election and then we have the actual inauguration. I think that we sit in between those stages, and and I think what happened in the in the triumphal entry is a demonstration of the misunderstanding of what Jesus was doing, that he had come to conquer and to conquer Satan, sin, and death to save and redeem a people to himself, and that you and I are now citizens of uh a home that we have not yet been to, that we have not experienced. And so we are uh 2 Corinthians 5, we are ambassadors of this message. We are aliens and strangers, and the fullness of the kingdom of God is realized when the king returns in his power and glory and establishes his rule and reign.

Scott Allen 1:27:10

Yeah, well, I certainly agree with that. I I I tend to take the there's a there's a uh a now and there's a not yet. There there is there is a definite now though. That I mean Jesus does rule and reign over uh over the the world. His you know, he has all authority. Thank God for that, by the way. Um you know, that uh when um you know before he goes to the cross, Jesus says of Satan, the ruler of the world is coming for me, he has no claim on me. And I believe that Christians because we have Christ that lives within us through the power of the Holy Spirit, make the same claim. He has no power over us, that is Satan. Um even though you know he still roars around and causes damage, ultimately he has no claim on us. Um and so anyways, but yeah, we can we it'd be good to talk about this blank. And I think this is a really important

Why Truth About Israel Shapes Faithfulness

Scott Allen 1:28:01

one. But back to Israel, if we could just wrap up our discussion on Israel, I why why does this matter, do you think? If I I know this is a big, broad question, but what what this whole discussion of Israel that's so hot right now, wh why does it ultimately matter to everyday Christians in terms of their faithfulness?

Speaker 1:28:21

I think the answer to your question in the right here right now is it is one of the most talked about and contested topics. And, you know, uh there's two things that are being said simultaneously by um especially the pundit class who are not Christians or who will make the claim that I'm new to the faith, I'm a baby Christian, you know, I'm learning, but it seems really evident to me that we're the new Israel, and if you don't agree, you're a heretic. Well, that's that's a bold claim to say I'm an I'm a new infant Christian who doesn't understand really a lot of the Bible, but then also claims that if you believe what, you know, I believe that I'm a heretic, though that is a massive um point. I would say this matters because truth matters, right? And I think in every season and in every war that the church will ever find itself in, um, the authority of the Bible is constantly under attack, and the truthfulness of the claims of the Bible are under attack. And so that doesn't mean that all fights are equal in their theological significance, but truth matters. And so because there's so many, I mean, I as a pastor of a local church, uh, I mean, I've I've had some crazy things happen. I've had people in the lobby tell me that I was I've been bought off by Jewish money. I've had uh emails that you couldn't even believe. Um, because and I haven't changed my theological position since I was in Bible college. And so there it is a contested issue. So I think it matters for the Christian to always contend for the truth on the battlefield that the war is actually raging on, right? Christians are notorious for showing up 20 minutes, uh you know, 20 years late to the fight and then declaring how brave they are that they have now spoken against whatever it might be. So I think where the battle rages, that's where you actually need to actually fight. Um the proverbs tell us that that if your if your heart fails in the day of adversity, your faith is small. Well, this is the this is a day of adversity for us. And then secondly, I think that um uh I want to have a robust understanding of um the gospel and and what redemption is and what it means to be saved, and and and to miss the beauty of God's redemptive plan through the old testament that culminates in the finished work of Christ, uh, and to see my privileged position because of Christ alone is I think would be a tragedy for a Christian to never understand the beauty and the depth of God's redemptive love that is woven through the Old Testament that includes you and I because of our faith in Christ. So I think it's an important issue because truth matters, that's probably the most important thing.

Scott Allen 1:30:56

I love I love both of those answers, or all three of them, maybe you touched on three things, but they were all super important. And I I yeah, good for you, Blaine. Thanks for the just the really uh solid biblical clarity, I think, on this subject today. That's been really helpful. Luke, any final questions or thoughts as we wrap up with Blaine today? Pastor Blaine?

Luke Allen 1:31:16

Uh thank you for your time. We've taken a lot of it. Yeah, you've been so generous, Blaine. Yeah, really helpful, though. I'm excited to re-listen to this one. There was a lot of nuggets throughout the whole thing. Uh my notes are very full, so thank you.

Speaker 1:31:30

Yeah, thank you, guys. Appreciate it.

Scott Allen 1:31:32

God bless you, Blaine.

Speaker 1:31:34

You too.