Israel and the Church: the Differences

http://www.levitt.com/essays/israel-church.html ^

[topcat54]

Provan should have looked at THESE Scriptures that the author of this review wrote. He's pointing out the blind spots in Provan's book.

I didn't quote from Provan's book per se. I just listed all the Scripture passages he used to support his thesis. You have not interacted with any of them. Perhaps they are a bit overwhelming.

[fishtank]

I will address 3 passages (of your choosing) from the Provan article if you address the three passages in post 40.

[topcat54]

How would that be fair, since the preponderance of evidence from Mr. Provan is overwhelming?

This is the difference between the historic position on Israel and the church and the dispensational position. In the former it all hangs together. If you leave off all that other stuff it won't make sense.

Dispensationalism works well when you chop the Bible into little pieces and only address the parts that fit with your system.

[fishtank]

I guess you don't play poker.

Are you scared that my three of a kind would beat your three of a kind?

[topcat54]

There are so many deficiencies in this article it is hard to address them all, so I won't take the time, but I will point out a few.

1) Like most anti-historicists, the author can only think in terms of "replacement" although Mr. Provan and others who support the historical church view never refer to the church "replacing" Israel (at least not the way these folks use the term). Supersessionism is a more accurate term since it connotes the continuation of one into the other.

Supersessionism is the traditional Christian belief that Christianity is the fulfillment of Biblical Judaism, and therefore that Jews who deny that Jesus Christ is the Jewish Messiah fall short of their calling as God's Chosen people. ...

The traditional form of supersessionism does not theorize a replacement [emph. added]; instead it argues that Israel has been superseded only in the sense that the Church has been entrusted with the fulfillment of the promises of which Jewish Israel is the trustee. All Western Christian sects and denominations have held some version of this belief, which has served not only as the explanation for why believers in Christ should not become Jews, but is also the rationale for attempting the conversion of Jews to Christianity. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supersessionism)

The author says, "To be fair to Mr Provan, he allows "racial Jews" a place in the Church and, unlike some replacement theologians[emph. added], expresses the view that the responsibilities as well as the privileges of Israel have been transferred to the Church." When is a replacement theologian not a replacement theologian? Who knows?

2) The author quotes very little from Mr. Provan's actual words. He seems content to build strawmen and knock them down. For example, the author says, "Nowhere in the book does the writer take into account Romans 11:1: 'Did God reject his people? By no means!' " But the entire thrust of Provan's book is that God has not rejected Israel by making provision for them in His Church!! That is also Paul's basic thesis in Romans 9-11, the notion of ingrafting. The result is not two people ala dispensationalism, but one people of God (as it has always been).

3) The author says, "[Provan], however, appears unable to think in categories other than "either/or"." But this is precisely the alternative offered by dispensationalists. Rather than seeing one people of God continuing from Israel of the old covenewnt to the church of the new covenant, they propose that the people of God must be either earthly or heavenly.

[LiteKeeper]

read later

[topcat54]

Hardly. You only have three cards. Provan has the rest of the deck!

[Zack Attack]

Very good article, but I think it and Provan are still missing a key to the picture, which is that there are two houses of Israel, called Israel and Judah. When this distinction is made apparent, so much of this scripture clears itself up.

The House of Israel(Ephraim) became a "wild branch" or a "degenerate vine" and was divorced. Judah was never divorced. A kinsman redeemer was needed to bring the House of Israel back into the fold. Messiah Yeshua fulfilled this role and stated that He came "only for the lost sheep of the House of Israel".

When Israel is restored unto Judah, they will return to Torah observance. Do not confuse this with the old British-Israel movement. I have shared this with quite a few Orthodox and Hassidic Jews who are looking at the same picture...though they still do not recognize Messiah.

Deut 30 (1) "And when all these things come upon you, the blessing and the curse, which I have set before you, and you call them to mind among all the nations where the LORD your God has driven you, (2) and return to the LORD your God, you and your children, and obey his voice in all that I command you this day, with all your heart and with all your soul;

The House of Israel is what is referred to as the "wild branches". Provan also mentions the priesthood and attributes it to the church:

1 Peter 2 (9) But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God's own people, that you may declare the wonderful deeds of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light. (10) Once you were no people but now you are God's people; once you had not received mercy but now you have received mercy.

Paul also quotes this, right out of the Hosea "Not my people" and "No mercy" prophecy. Yet, the prophecy states to the House of Israel that it would one day be said to them that they would again receive mercy and be called the people of God. It is into this commonwealth that gentiles were to be grafted in with. Provision has always been made for the foreigner to join with Israel.

[fishtank]

Romans 9:1-5

"1 (1) I am telling the truth in Christ, I am not lying, my conscience testifies with me in the Holy Spirit,
2 that I have great sorrow and unceasing grief in my heart.
3 For (2) I could wish that I myself were (3) accursed, separated from Christ for the sake of my brethren, my kinsmen (4) according to the flesh,
4 who are (5) Israelites, to whom belongs (6) the adoption as sons, and (7) the glory and (8) the covenants and (9) the giving of the Law and (10) the temple service and (11) the promises,
5 whose are (12) the fathers, and (13) from whom is the Christ according to the flesh, (14) who is over all, (15) God (16) blessed forever. Amen. "


Hi malakhi,

No need for me to become Jewish, but this passage proves that God had and still has a special place for the physical nation of Israel.

[fishtank]

By the way, do you know when Provan stopped being a Holocaust denier?

[topcat54]

Frankly, I don't keep track of all Mr. Provan's views. He is a resource, like other resources. I take the best (i.e., what agrees with Scripture) and leave the rest.

[topcat54]

No need for me to become Jewish, but this passage proves that God had and still has a special place for the physical nation of Israel.

Where exactly does it say in that passage, or any other passage in Romans or the rest of tthe NT, that God has a special place for the physical nation of Israel?