Loading...I continue here my post from yesterday, explaining the Christian background to U.S. Support of Israel, taken from my recently-published book Armageddon: What the Bible Really Says About the End
******************************
It is important to stress that evangelicals think God is faithful to Israel even if Jews are not faithful to God. He has fulfilled and will continue to fulfill his promises that Israel will have the Promised Land. But Jews who reject his messiah cannot possibly be saved. That is not God’s fault. He is not the one who broke the eternal covenant. Jews did when they rejected their own messiah. Therefore, they will be punished.
To evangelical readers that is clear from the book of Revelation, which describes “the End” as standing in straight continuity with and in fulfillment of “the Beginning.” As we have seen, according to Revelation, the only inhabitants of the earth who will be saved are those who refuse the mark of the beast and instead receive the seal of God. In Revelation 7 the two groups of these divinely sealed saints are discussed. The larger group is “a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages” (Revelation 7:9). These are explicitly not the people of one nation (such as Israel); they are from around the world, everyone made pure because “they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb” (Revelation 7:14). The other group is smaller, but still sizeable: 144,000 Jews who receive the “seal of God” on their head and so become “slaves of God” – twelve thousand “people of Israel” from each of the twelve tribes (7:4-8).
Thus, God is faithful to the end. A large,
Get access to Dr. Ehrman's library of 4,000+ articles plus five new articles per week about the New Testament and early Christianity. It costs as little as $2.99/mth and every cent goes to charity!
Unlock 4,000+ Articles Like This!
So I grew up in an evangelical church that also heavily supported Israel. Interestingly, the reasoning wasn’t based on the end times prophecies. My church based it on Genesis 12:3. Essentially, by supporting Israel God would keep that promise and therefore further bless the United States. Conversely, if one opposed Israel, then again by Genesis 12:3 one risked their nation being cursed by God. I have talked with a lot of other ex evangelicals that recall the Israel support and most do remember the reasoning being the end times prophecies in the new testament. It seems like my church must have have been the outlier by basing it on the promise to Abraham. I wonder if any readers of this blog had a church with a similar take on US-Israel relations and Genesis 12:3.
Yes, that was the basis for the original support of Israel among Evangelicals — and was the reason (along with prophecies from Jeremiah and Ezekiel, etc.) for Christian Zionism. The establishment of Israel as a state in 1948 was seen as the fulfillment, and the Israeli-Palestinian issue is discussed in realtion to Gen 12:3 and the prophecies; but the additional piece, a rather important one, is that the Temple has to be built. A lot of evangelicals — esp. those not overly concerned about the coming apocalypse (including pastors) — don’t realize that that’s a major part of the reason evangelical leaders push for the support of Israel.
The push to restore the Jews to the Promised Land is a lot older than the evangelicals, almost as old as Protestantism itself. (Catholics still held to Augustine’s witness doctrine.) I’ve traced it as far back as 1615, when Thomas Brightman’s pamphlet, Shall They Return to Jerusalem Again?, was published (posthumously). And in 1669, Increase Mather that the Jews will be brought back to “their own Land” and that this will be followed by a great battle between the “converted” Jews and their enemies. After that, the resurrection of the dead will begin. (The Mystery of Israel’s Salvation Explained and Applyed [sic])
In my evangelical church we were told that God blesses those who bless Israel and curses those who curse Israel. All of Palestine, from the Jordan to the Mediterranean, from the Sea of Galilee to the southern border of ancient Judah belongs to the Jewish people.
Yup!
The term “Jews” means from Judah. In the original UN charter them gaven all of Israel is bogus.?!
Professor, within those millions of believers (evangelical Christians) there appears a sub group we today call the Christian Right… and at least part of that includes Christian Nationalist who walk around with tiki torches chanting “Jews will not replace us”. They emulate the straight arm salute of a Bohemian Corporal who tried to exterminate those same Jews and would seem to agree with that policy – rather than supporting Israel. But, I’ll bet they hold dear the very same Bible cited above.
Any thoughts on how that works?
Yup, lots of thoughts about it. I deal with it a bit at the end of my book; and in the section on Israel I point out how many of the most vehement Zionist fundamentalists today (e.g., John Hagee) are firm that Israel has to be supported with everything we’ve got, and all Jews who do not follow Jesus will roast in hell.
Thanks for these posts that explain much about the passion among evangelicals for Israel over the plight of Palestinians and others. It seems that no suffering is too great a burden to inflict on a people in order to make misunderstandings reality.
It is remarkable how interpretations of ancient texts, divorced from historical context, can attract the support of people through webs of false meanings and false associations. “Faith” is the glue that keeps the web in place and allows it to be constantly repaired by the soothsayers. To surrender “faith” and accept logic feels like a betrayal of the Divine, causing some to accuse logic itself of leading them astray (that is a tough battle to win based on arguments with my family and during a period of my own fanatical beliefs).
Many of the verses used by Hal Lindsey and others to predict what is to happen at the “end” are used in the theology of Sun Myung Moon to “predict” that he is the “third Adam” (Jesus having been the second) coming from a suffering nation (Korea). In his “Divine Principle” theology, the promise of the kingdom passed to Korea when Israel failed to believe in Jesus.
I’m looking forward to that, and I really hope that they don’t forget about the healing river when they rebuild a new tempel described in great detail in Ezekiel 47:1-12. This river flows from the Temple and heads towards the Dead Sea, and it is said that creatures will live in the river forever. This is something that must come first, and it is important to remember that the leaves of the trees by the river will not wither, nor will the fruit fail.
Personally, I am more curious about the river than the new Temple.
It seems so easy to be a literalist and forget about the natural world around us, but that would be one problem less!
Maybe Messianic Jews view themselves as the 144,000?
I’m not sure — there are numerous messianic Jewish groups. Jews for Jesus are mainly gentiles, oddly enough.
About Jews for Jesus being mainly non-Jews, that is very interesting Bart! Why do you think that is the case?
Because most Jews aren’t interested in following Jesus, but gentiles who believe in Jesus can be convinced that it makes sense to follow Judaism.
Okay that makes sense.
So God will show his faithfulness to the Jewish people by killing most of them and converting the rest to Christianity! Wow, the disingenuity and cynicism of the relationship between American Evangelicals and the Israelis is a marvel to behold. Doubtless both sides regard the other as “useful idiots”. The irony of their relationship is that it is predicated on the expectation of each that the other cannot get what they want. A partnership made in…well, not in Heaven.
I am afraid that if the Jews destroy the Dome of the Rock, it will be Armageddon indeed. All Arab countries will raise against Israel, and one of them (Pakistan) has nuclear arms.
Dr. Ehrman,
You said: “…the book [2 Thessalonians] tries to explain to readers that the end of the age will not come right away, nor will it happen without warning (contrary to what Paul himself says in First Thessalonians, 4:13-5:11).”
What would you say in response to the charge that your claim that there is a contradiction between 1 and 2 Thessalonians fails to recognize a distinction Paul makes between those “not in darkness” (1 Thessalonians 5:4-5) and those “like Gentiles who do not know God” (1 Thessalonians 4:5)? As a friend of mine put it, “To the former, the day of the LORD will certainly NOT come like a thief. The former are those who are awake and alert and self-controlled, who have set their hopes on that day. This is perfectly consistent with the message of 2 Thessalonians. The latter, however, will have that day come upon them suddenly while they are saying “peace and safety”.”
I”m not sure how that resolves the difference? 1 Thessalonians warns that it will come suddenly when no expects it, and so believers have to be alert so as not to be caught unawares; 2 Thessalonians indicates that believers will be by no means caught unawares because they will see the antecedent events, the rise of the lawless one, his entry into the temple to declare himself God, etc. If Paul had told the Thessalonians that to begin with then they would not be surprised that some of their members had died and he wouldn’t need to tell them that they have to be alert since it could happen at any time.
Israel didn’t fail God. God failed Israel, breaking the Covenant when the Holocaust occurred. We don’t know the reason why this happened. It is also not clear if the (“miraculous”) birth of the State of Israel rectifies God’s position or not.
As for the Anti-Christ and the rebuilding of the Temple, couldn’t the Vatican or another mega-church fit the bill?
Jesus died in Jerusalem, but the centre of Christendom moved to Gentile lands.
The Third Temple is considered by most Israelis and Diaspora Jews to be the actual State of Israel.
So it is seen by the US Government.
“The Third Temple Holy of Holies: Israel’s Nuclear Weapons”
US Air Force
https://media.defense.gov/2019/Apr/11/2002115467/-1/-1/0/02ISRAELSNUCLEARWEAPONS.PDF
No “ Third Temple” will be rebuilt in Jerusalem, surely not at the expense of the Dome of the Rock, however offensive its sight and existence is to many Jews. Attacking the mosque would bring World War III.
Armageddon, indeed.
In the series “Left Behind”, the Anti-Christ is “Nicola Carpatia”. Quite arbitrary, I would think. If these Christian faithful creators of the phenomenally successful tale feel free to fashion their Anti-Christ in whichever way, we might imagine just any such evil figure for the role.
Political “evil” candidates – also Popes- there have been plenty.
Even as we enjoy our “suspension of disbelief” when we traverse ancient texts, dealing with their characters as if they existed in reality, it may profit us to remember that, until quite recently, two cataclysmic World Wars followed one another in quick succession, the second one providing the scenario for the first atomic bombs detonated on civilian populations.
Moreover, once already, Israel stood on the brink of annihilation, a time in which it considered the use of nuclear weapons, a “worst case scenario” of weapons designed for deterrence, not for actual use.
What I try to say is that a real Armageddon is not only plausible , but possible. Our civilisation’s barbaric recent history proved how fertile the ground is still. Just think of Putin and his nuclear threats.
I’m fascinated, but also a little embarrassed…as an RC, I’ve never heard this line of reasoning before (probably wasn’t paying attention). I’m also a little confused…if what you say is true, as long as the Dome of the Rock remains intact, the world is safe from Armageddon. So, why support Israel unless you wanted the world to end soon?
Fundamentalists DO want it to end soon.
it will be interesting to see how Israel and it’s American allegiance will devise a plan to rid of the Dome and replace it with the Temple. It sounds like an all out war with Islam. Bart,what intersest do Muslims have here(Dome) when Mecca, is regarded as their holiest place ? Good read!!
There are a number of Islamic holy sites around the world, and the Dome of the Rock is one of the big un’s.
I’ve been surprised learning about the Rock’s meaning in Islam… e.g. here’s the Metropolitan Museum’s description:
“The edifice is situated on top of the Temple Mount (the site of Solomon’s and Herod’s Temples) in Jerusalem, framing a rock that holds sacred significance for all three monotheistic religions. In the Judeo-Christian tradition this rock marks the place where Abraham came to sacrifice Isaac; for Muslims, it came to be thought of as the site of the miraj, the Prophet Muhammad’s miraculous [night journey and] ascension to heaven with the angel Gabriel and his faithful horse Buraq.” [my interpolation] https://www.metmuseum.org/exhibitions/listings/2012/byzantium-and-islam/blog/where-in-the-world/posts/dome-of-the-rock
Sounds like it would be great artistic loss to obliterate it — I wonder if there could ever be a joint reworking for the three Abrahamic faiths?
Ah, the idea is not to wipe out the geological structure but the building on top of it.
O dear I wasn’t clear! Apologies! I was thinking the loss of the building would be a great artistic loss and wondering if the three faiths could ever add or renovate in a way to commemorate the rock for all three faiths. Sharing the site among the Abrahamic faiths is logically obvious — if right now almost unimaginable. But hope springs eternal! Thank you very much and apologies!!!
Knowing the history of these three faiths, I’d say the chances are, well, remote. (OK, I’d personally say impossible. It ain’t gonna happen)
Having spent 38 years in the Baptist church, I can say that Christian zionism is likely the most destructive thing to humanity around the world.
It has been the driving force for all things political in this nation, and the root cause for endless and unjust wars upon innocent humans.
In my book I don’t take a stand on it, or on the Israeli-Palestinian issue generally; but it’s an issue that certainly raises lots of emotions.
The great multitude were Israelites. According to Rev 14:3, only the redeemed could sing the new song. According to Rev 14:4, the 144K were redeemed.
According to Heb 9:15, redemption was for sin done under the first covenant. Only Israelites sinned under the first covenant.
According to Dan 9:7 (among many others), Israelites were dispersed among the nations.
Rev 5:9 says that the redeemed came out of / from the nations.
Rev 7 says that the great multitude come out of the nations and we see them singing the redemption song too.
It follows scripturally and logically that the redeemed of Rev 5:9, Rev 7, Rev 14 and the great multitude are the same group. Israelites… the only people that Jesus warned about judgement. Some of them were Jews. Others were descendants of Ephraim.
Where did John get the concept for being unable to count the number of the great multitude?
Gen 32:12 But you said, ‘I will surely do you good, and make your offspring as the sand of the sea, which cannot be numbered for multitude
Where else could John have gotten the concept of not being able to be numbered?
Hos 1:10 Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be like the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured or numbered. And in the place where it was said to them, “You are not my people,” it shall be said to them, “Children of the living God.”
It looks like John got the concept of “cannot be numbered” (associated with Israelites) from at least two places in the Old Testament. So we have another line of scriptural evidence that both the 144K and the great multitude were Israelites. Simple stuff folks.
Jesus said it would happen in that generation. John said it would happen soon. The judgement happened in AD70 and the bible’s redemptive narrative ended.. The Christianity that followed is a complete fraud.
It’s a bit hard for me to understand how a multitude of people of all nations and all tribes could all be Israelites.
It’s not hard once you see that throughout the New Testament, the metanarrative was about gathering the elect before the end of the age (Mat 24:34), that the elect were Israelites (Isaiah 45:4) that Jesus came to redeem those under the Law (Gal 4:4) which were only Israelites, that Jesus was sent ONLY to the lost sheep kg the house of Israel (Mat 15:24), that the promises and covenants were for Israel (Rom 9:3-4) only Israel was promised the Spirit in the last days (according to Joel 2), that only Jews and non-a Jewish descendants of the tribes of Israel were warned about judgement, that Jesus said the twelve tribes would be judged (not all humanity – Luke 22:30) and that only the twelve tribes could sing the redemption song and the new Jerusalem only had gates for the twelve tribes. There simply isn’t any room for non-Israelites in the New Testament’s redemptive narrative beginning or end.
There was a promise made back in Genesis 48 that the descendants of Ephraim would become “A MULTITUDE OF NATIONS”..
“But his father refused and said, “I know, my son, I know. He also shall become a people, and he also shall be great; but truly his younger brother shall be **GREATER** than he, and his descendants shall become a ***MULTITUDE OF NATIONS***.” Gen 48:19
Do you think that has anything to do with the fact that the 144k of Israel were being gathered in from all nations and were referred to as “a GREAT MULTITUDE”?
Also Rev14 doesn’t say anything about a second group getting to sing the salvation song
“No one could learn the song except the 144,000 who had been redeemed from the earth.”
The end of Rev7 says the bride came of out the great tribulation, then Rev14 states only one group is learning the salvation song, not two.
Rev 14 states only the 144k could learn the salvation song and we see the great multitude singing that song in Rev 7, clearly the same group.
We see some of them from “every nation under heaven” gathered in the day of Pentecost (Acts 2).
Well, I don’t see how a “multitude that no one can count” can possibly be the “144,000” Israelites that he has just counted.
There’s a book coming out probably this year (I’m the chief editor) presenting the AIO view (ancient Israel only), a view that corrects the presentism of today’s scholars and two thousand years of error. It will show from start to finish that the entire bible is ancient Israel’s redemptive narrative, one that ended in AD70, and that today’s so-called Christianity is based on a fraudulent version that around up around AD70, developed further by Greek cultured Jews who reinvented Israel’s redemptive narrative to include people not under the Law. It will be the Christianity killer.
OK, good luck with that!
You don’t see it (and probably don’t want to see) beyond the culturally ingrained tradition you have adopted, of assuming that the bible story is about all humanity when in fact from start to finish it’s Israel’s redemptive narrative. The gentiles who were called, sealed, saved and redeemed were non-Jewish descendants of the ten northern tribes of Israel, referred to as gentiles because they had stopped being Torah observant and had stopped practicing circumcision. Gentiles in the ordinary sense were never under the Law, weren’t law violators, weren’t in danger of an end of the age judgement and didn’t need salvation.
The story began with heaven and earth and ended with heaven and earth… which for the entirety of scripture, was how ancient Jews referred to the old covenant religious system and temple community.
To the issues at hand…John HEARD the number was 144,000 then he LOOKED at the “great multitude”. John couldn’t count the “great multitude” and that’s why an “angel” told him the number.
Actually, I’m just reading the text wihtout any personal stake one way or the other. actually considered your view seriously two years ago and was happy to go with it, but after studying teh passage intently, I realized it can’t be right, in part because of the point I made in my last response (which you haven’t addressed) But, as we say in the South, it don’t signify: we aren’t going to agree on this, so I’d suggest we simply move on to other issues.
Bart.. you didn’t make a point. You said you had difficulty understanding (which I agree) and asked a question, which I proceeded to answer. If the bible’s redemptive narrative was really about all humanity, it would be much easier to show from the scriptures. But the reality is, people have been merely reading themselves into a redemptive narrative that never had them in mind. It’s what religion does.
I told you what the problem with your interpretation is — how a “countless multitude” could ALSO be a multitude that he has just counted as 144,000. A counted total is not countless. They are two different groups.
Yes, they are two different groups within the scope of all of Israel. The 144 is the totality of all Israel that was saved, 144K is one of many symbolic numbers denoting completeness and fullness. The great multitude are a subset of that, descendants of Ephraim, those who were dispersed among the nations. Your problem is that you’re still thinking in the western, literal interpretive mindset… while John was reaching into the Old Testament to get his terms and imagery.
Gen 32:12 But you said, ‘I will surely do you good, and make your offspring as the sand of the sea, which cannot be numbered for multitude
Hos 1:10 Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be like the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured or numbered. And in the place where it was said to them, “You are not my people,” it shall be said to them, “Children of the living God.”
John got the concept of “cannot be numbered” (associated with Israelites) from at least two places in the Old Testament. So we have another line of scriptural evidence that both the 144K and the great multitude were Israelites.
What do scholars/historians know about the non-Jewish population in Second Temple First Century Palestine?
A good bit. They weren’t dominant and were nmainly locate din teh urban areas of Sepphoris and Tiberius, e.g., Mark Chancey has a full study of the issue, based on literary texts and archaeology. If I recall it’s called The Myth of the Gentile Galilee.
Does not the nt have jesus say that the land will be given to other than the jews?
IT says that Jerusalem will be destroyed by the gentiles for a time; is that what yo uhave in mind?
hi Bart,
although the title mentions the dome of the rock the rock but the article does not mention it.
What people have been made to beleiove is that The dome of the rock and Alaqsa mosque where all the pillaging and massacres are taking place on a daily basis are one and the same thing. It is good to clarify that that Al aqsa mosque the oldest one further down fro m the down of the rock on the same compund holds greater value to islam than the dome of the Rock. and this is why we see all the pillaging going on there and not the moque wit the golden dome, that is a front fpr those who do not know. They will see it intact and think well nothing has been destroyed. Well no Al aqsa mposque is the real target. according to islam that is where Muhammad (pbuh)led the prayer with all the prophets who were raised specifically for that occasion. Now christians and jews may think that is nonssense but that is our theology.
(to be continued)
Jamal
That mosque is what is mentioned in the quran as the furhtest mosque and it is in a basement,we also beleive that in the same area was where mary Motrher of jesus had her quaters whewre she lived prior to giving birth to Jesus (pbuh) since she was devoted to God by her parents from a young age to worship and serve the one true God . This is what the fuss is all about not the dome of the rock. Alaqsa mosque is what they want to destroy and according to islamic escatology the destruction of The alqsa Mosque and trhe building of the temple is what will usher in the anti christ.
regards
Jamal
That mosque is what is mentioned in the quran as the furhtest mosque and it is in a basement,we also beleive that in the same area was where mary Motrher of jesus had her quaters whewre she lived prior to giving birth to Jesus (pbuh) since she was devoted to God by her parents from a young age to worship and serve the one true God . This is what the fuss is all about not the dome of the rock. Alaqsa mosque is what they want to destroy and according to islamic escatology the destruction of The alqsa Mosque and trhe building of the temple is what will usher in the anti christ.
regards
Jamal
A thought struck me, which causes me to go back to this old post to ask the question.
Aren’t both 2nd Thessalonians and Revelation believed to be written after 70 CE, that is, after the Roman destruction of Jerusalem, including the Temple?
But 2 Thess seems to imply that the lawless one will soon be revealed. But he cannot take his seat in the Temple, since it is destroyed. 2 Thess says nothing about rebuilding the Temple, and that would take many decades anyway.
Even if the author of 2 Thess pretends to be Paul and to have written this long before 70 CE, it still seems strange that he would talk about events which will take place in the Temple in the future, when the Temple didn’t exist when this was written in reality.
Isn’t that strange?
Yup, it would be strange except for the fact you mention that the author wants his reader to think he’s Paul, who was known to have died before the temple wsa destroyed. The fact that it was ruined and not yet rebuilt will be evidence for precisely what the author was trying to say: the end cannot come any time soon.
Thanks for your reply.
So you mean that the author of 2 Thess, just like the contemporary evagelicals you write about above, believed (and wanted his readers to believe) that first the Temple will be rebuilt, and then the lawless one will take his seat there?
I’m guessing at that, since surely he knew there wasn’t a temple any more.