The Future of National Israel -- By: H. Wayne House

Journal: Bibliotheca Sacra
Volume: BSAC 166:664 (Oct 2009)
Article: The Future of National Israel
Author: H. Wayne House


The Future of National Israel

H. Wayne House

H. Wayne House is Distinguished Research Professor of Biblical and Theological Studies, Faith Evangelical Seminary, Tacoma, Washington.

The existence of the modern state of Israel is nothing short of miraculous. It is a land of slightly under eight thousand square miles,1 or slightly smaller than the state of New Jersey,2 directly surrounded by six Muslim Arab states, in a region of twenty-two Muslim countries. Since its founding in 1948, Israel has been invaded by armies vastly superior in number, and it has often been attacked by terrorists bent on destroying the nation. Israel was founded and continues as a democracy, even including in its government individuals who do not entirely support its existence.3 Despite all this, Israel has not only survived, but has also prospered. But will the Israel of end-times prophecy differ from the Israel of today?

The question of the future status of Israel—the land and the people4—continues to be a point of discussion and disagreement among theologians.

Positions Regarding the Future of Israel

Some say Israel does not have a national, political future, and others say that it does. Under these two general themes, four majority positions are held: covenant theology, replacement theology, classical dispensationalism, and progressive dispensationalism. In the first view, covenant theologians see little or no distinction between the Old and New Testaments; they emphasize the continuity of the two. Most covenant theologians say the physical nation of Israel has no place in God’s future plans (though some say Israel’s blessings in the land will be experienced in the eternal state).5 Thus Old Testament verses about the future of Israel are said to refer to the church.

The second perspective, replacement theology, or supersessionism, teaches that the church has replaced, or superseded, Israel in God’s future plans. Supersessionism does not share with covenant theology its understanding of theological covenants whereby the people of God in both testaments are one covenant community. Israel as a nation rejected the Messiah, and therefore lost its inheritance. The modern state of Israel, then, is no more significant in God’s view than any other modern nation.6

The third and fourth views,...

You must have a subscription and be logged in to read the entire article.
Click here to subscribe
visitor : : uid: ()