…not devoting themselves to Jewish myths and the commands of people who turn away from the truth. – Titus 1:14 (ESV)

The following is an excerpt from a wonderful work by Phillip Mauro entitled “The Hope of Israel”. Link to the entire work is available online in both HTML and PDF and can be found at the bottom of this article. I encourage all those interested to read this masterful refutation of a resurrected, silly Jewish fable.

IN a previous chapter it was pointed out, from the repeated utterances of the apostle Paul recorded in the last six chapters of Acts, that “the hope of Israel” is identical with “the hope of the gospel,” which hope is, of course, the resurrection. We recall that to the Jews at Rome Paul said: “For this cause therefore have I called for you, to see you and to speak with you; because that for the hope of Israel I am bound with this chain” (Acts 28:20).

What he had preached as the hope of Israel is clearly stated in previous chapters of Acts. Thus, in chapter 23:6 he had said, “Of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question” (see also 24:14,15). And in replying to his accusers before Herod Agrippa he said: “And now I stand and am judged for the hope of the promise made of God unto our father, unto which our twelve tribes instantly (or intently) serving God day and night hope to come. For which hope’s sake, King Agrippa, I am accused of the Jews. Why should it be though a thing incredible with you that God should raise the dead?” (Acts 26:6-8). And in the same address he solemnly affirmed that in all his testimony, both to small and great, he had said “none other things than those which the prophets and Moses did say should come” (v. 22).

Thus the apostle proclaimed everywhere, both by word of mouth and by letter, that there is but one hope for all mankind, a hope which indeed had been promised by the O.T. Scriptures to Israel only, but which, according to the now revealed “mystery of Christ,” is preached to Gentiles equally with Jews. He taught that just as there is but “one faith” for both Jew and Gentile, so likewise there is but “one hope of your calling” (Eph. 4:4), which “calling” (as Chapters I-III were written specially to show) embraces both Jews and Gentiles upon identically the same terms (Eph. 3:6).

This, however, was directly contrary to the doctrine of the scribes and rabbis. According to their carnal interpretation of the Scriptures the promises concerning “Israel,” which Paul applied to a spiritual people, were to have a material fulfilment; and “the hope of Israel,” according to them, was the national restoration of the Jewish people. The difference between “the hope of Israel” as held and taught by them, and “the hope of Israel,” as preached by Paul, was so radical as to arouse against him their bitterest hatred, insomuch that they denounced him to the civil authorities and plotted to take his life.

ANOTHER HOPE

In view of these facts, so clearly set forth in the Acts and Epistles, it is a matter of deep concern that in our day there has been a revival (and that among evangelical groups of Christians) of the preaching of a distinct and different hope for the natural descendants of Jacob. Thus the preaching of the one and only gospel, with its “one hope” for all mankind, the only gospel and the only hope preached or recognized by the apostles, has been so far set aside in our day as to make room for the very same hope which the Jewish teachers held in Paul’s day. And not only so, but out modern teachers support this radically different “hope of Israel” by the very same process of carnalizing the O.T. prophecies and promises which Paul denounced and refuted in his day. It was for this cause that he suffered persecution and imprisonment; for it is certain that, had Paul preached the same “hope of Israel” that is now commonly preached from orthodox periodicals, he would have been honored by his fellow countrymen, rather than persecuted.

NOT IN THE NEW TESTAMENT

It is admitted by those who teach a distinct hope for the Jewish nation apart from the “one hope” of the gospel, that there is nothing in the N.T. to support that doctrine. They admit that the N.T. will be searched in vain for any statement to the effect that, when the day of grace is ended and the Lord Jesus Christ is revealed from heaven in flaming fire, He will convert the whole Jewish nation then on earth, and re-establish them in Palestine.

This admission that the doctrine we are discussing is not found in the N.T. is fatal to it. For the prophecies concerning the second coming of Christ, recorded in the Gospels, Epistles, and Revelation, are so full and detailed that, if the national restoration of the earthly Israel were part of the program of the second advent, it would most certainly have been clearly set forth therein. And beyond all doubt Paul would have mentioned it in the eleventh chapter of Romans, where he speaks distinctly of the future of Israel. Moreover, he would surely have proclaimed it when put on trial as to his teaching concerning this very matter, first before the Sanhedrin at Jerusalem, and then successively before Felix, Festus, and Agrippa. We have seen that on all those four occlusions the apostle maintained, and at the peril of his life, that the “hope of Israel” was a radically different thing from what the Jewish leaders supposed.

For those who accept the teaching of Paul this should be decisive of the question we are now examining. But we propose to go further than this, and to show that the doctrine of national restoration for the Jewish nation at the beginning of the next dispensation, is directly contrary to the plain teaching of the New Testament as a whole. And if we can show this, then it must be contrary to the O.T. also; since there can be no disagreement between the two.

The present writer received the doctrine of the future restoration of “Israel after the flesh” as part of a system of teaching which he accepted in bulk because of the soundness and excellent of reputation of those who sponsored it. But, having now learned to his sorrow and mortification that he has held and taught error of a serious kind, it is his duty thus to confess it, and also to do what in him lies to establish the truth of the matter.

NO SECOND CHANCE

In the first place then, we affirm with all possible emphasis that for those who now reject the offer of God’s mercy in the gospel of His grace there is no second chance. This is the truth of God as revealed in every part of the New Testament. It applies to Jews and Gentiles alike; for there is absolutely “no difference” of any sort, kind, or description. All are in precisely the same condemnation; and likewise, to each and all, the gospel of Christ offers precisely the same salvation, with precisely the same eternal consequences for all who refuse it. “For,” says the apostle, “we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles that they are all under sin” (Rom. 3:9) and from that starting point of perfect equality in guilt (“all the world guilty before God”) he proceeds to declare the one ground of pardon for all, “the redemption that is in Christ Jesus,” and the one condition upon which it is bestowed, “through faith in His blood” (Rom. 3:23-25).

Moreover, the apostle shows in this very passage that the true meaning of God’s promise to Abraham was not that his natural seed should possess the land of Canaan, but that his spiritual seed (believing Jews and believing Gentiles forming one family) should share with him “the promise that he should be the heir of the world” (Rom. 4:13-17; and cf. Rom. 8:17). And finally he shows that the promise was to be fulfilled in the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead (4:24,25).

According to the modern teaching we are now discussing, those who are saved through the gospel are forthwith incorporation into the church, which is the body of Christ, and these will be in the highest sphere of blessing and glory hereafter; and those who reject Christ now, if Gentiles, will be lost finally and forever, but if Jews, they will be converted in a body at some time subsequent to the second coming of Christ. Now we are quite at a loss to perceive wherein this doctrine differs from that of “Russellism,” or “Millennial Dawn,” excepting that the second chance which the former limits to the natural descendants of Jacob, is by the latter extended to all mankind. Indeed we think the view of the Russellites would be easier to support from Scriptures than the other; seeing that it is at least consistent with the principle that God is no respecter of persons, and that all natural and national distinctions have been forever abolished by the cross of Christ.

But to the entire doctrine of another chance, whether to all mankind, or to a select portion of the human race only, we oppose the plain and unimpeachable truth of the Scriptures that, in “the day of God, Who will render to every man according to his deed” (Rom. 2:5,6) there will be no salvation or mercy for any who reject God’s offer of pardon and life now. We affirm that, in that day, so far from there being any special salvation for the Jew, God will visit “indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, OF THE JEW FIRST, and also of the Gentile” (id. vv. 8,9). We affirm that “now is the accepted time, and now is the day of salvation”; and there is no other day or hour of salvation for any individual, or for any section of the human race. We affirm that, since the sacrifice of Jesus Christ upon the cross, and by reason thereof, God now recognizes no man after the flesh; and particularly that the old covenant and everything connected with it, including the forfeited promise and hope of earthly blessing to Israel after the flesh (which when given was conditioned upon faithfulness and obedience on their part) has been abolished finally and forevermore.

Does the New Testament teach that “Israel after the flesh” will be converted after the second coming of Christ? and will be then reconstituted as an earthly nation, and re-established as such in Palestine? Or does it, on the contrary, teach that Christ’s coming the second time will be for the eternal salvation of all those who look for Him (whether by nature they were Jews or Gentiles), and for the eternal condemnation of all, both Jews and Gentiles, who have not believed on His Name? Does it teach that there will be given to the Jews, after the ending of the day of grace, another opportunity to believe on Him and be saved from the wrath to come,, and opportunity from which they who are by nature Gentiles will be excluded? Will the coming “day” be one of mingled wrath and mercy? the former for all unbelievers who are Gentiles in the flesh, and the latter for unbelievers who are Jews in the flesh? These questions truly are of great moment; and it must be that clear answers to them can be found in the New Testament Scriptures.

(You can read the entire work here.)

Related Posts:

Phillip Mauro: The Authority of the Bible to Control the Actions of Men

Phillip Mauro: What the Fathers of Israel Were Looking For