Quick recap of the sermon, followed by various notes on the “Israel issue,” the “Jewish Question,” and anti-Semitism:
The NT presents Jesus as the true Israel. He takes up Israel’s mission and fullfills it by keeping covenant with his Father in just those ways that ways that Israel historically broke covenant with God. He becomes Israel for the sake of Israel to save Israel. Just as David summed up Israel in himself and represented the nation when he did battle with Goliath, so Jesus is a corporate person, who embodies the nation, doing for Israel and as Israel when she could not do for herself.
In Jesus, Israel undergoes death and resurrection and is transformed. The old covenant prophecies about the coming kingdom are fulfilled in this transformed Israel.
The NT shows us that Gentiles get grafted into this transformed Israel. They do not need to be circumcised; Gentiles as Gentiles are invited into this new Israel. When Gentiles becomes Christians, they get Israelitized. They become heirs of the Abrahamic promises. They receive the blessings promised to Israel. They are integrated into the story of Israel. The church is not something other than Israel; it is the continuation of Israel in new form. Israel is to the church as the bud is to the flower, as the caterpillar is to the butterfly, as the toddler is to the mature adult, as the sapling is to the full grown tree. The connection is organic — as Israel morphs into the church, there is continuity and discontinuity, just as there is in a living organism over time. What God started in Israel, he completes in the new Israel, the church. The church does not replace Israel; she fulfills Israel.
Paul makes this argument several places, most especially in Romans 4, Galatians 3, and Ephesians 2. In Romans 4, Paul points to the fact that Abraham was still a Gentile when he was justified by faith, so he can be the father of all who have faith, whether circumcised or uncircumcised. In Galatians, Paul shows that God’s plan all along was to bring Gentiles into the family of Abraham, making them sharers in the same blessings (forgiveness and the Spirit). In Ephesians, he argues that the dividing wall of hostility and the law of enmity have been taken down in Jesus’ death and resurrection so that Gentiles who were once alienated from the commonwealth of Israel have now been brought into Israel. The church does not replace Israel; the church is Israel, enlarged, expanded, and transformed. If God can make sons of Abraham out of stones, he can certainly make sons of Abraham out of Gentiles — and this is exactly what he has done.
The NT makes clear that not all who say they are Jews are really Jews. Not all who are Israel are Israel. Jews/Israelites who did not trust in Jesus as Messiah are broken out of the covenant tree; they are still beloved but have no special claim to be God’s people while they persist in unbelief. Gentiles, who are wild olive branches, get grafted into the covenant tree when they trust in Jesus. But just as the natural branches were broken out because of unbelief, the grafted in branches must stand firm in the faith, or they can also be broken out. The natural branches that were broken out can be grafted in turning to Jesus — which Paul says will happen someday. The true Israel is defined by faith in Jesus. Jesus is the true Israel; we are members of Israel as we are untied to him by faith.
—
Here’s another line of argument that the church is the new Israel:
The promises of the new covenant in Jeremiah 31 are made to the house of Israel and the house of Judah. Jeremiah says nothing about a covenant Gentiles. So Gentiles must be incorporated into Israel/Judah to be in the new covenant.
Jeremiah suggests this in 31:34. The promise of the new covenant is addressed especially to exiles, who would be living near pagans. Jeremiah expects the Jews to evangelize those pagans and they will be so successful that there will come a time when evangelism is obsolete: “No longer shall each one teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest.’” The least probably means those of low status, especially children. The greatest are obviously the powerful, such as civil rulers. The great majority will know the Lord — the promises and prophecies of the new covenant are very optimistic and hopeful.
But then consider what Jesus does in the upper room with his disciples when the transforms the Passover into the Lord’s Supper. He gives them the “cup of the new covenant.” But if the cup is tied to the new covenant Jeremiah promised is for Israel and Judah, and Gentiles are partaking, it can only be because Gentiles have now been grafted into Judah/Israel. Every time we take the Lord’s Supper, we are confessing the church is the new Israel.
—
God’s game plan all along was to bring worldwide salvation through Abraham’s seed. He intended to bless all families and nations through Abraham’s seed.
The nation of Israel was set aside for a time to be the people through whom the promised seed came. But once that promised seed arrives, Israel must undergo transformation because everything that foreshadowed the coming of the seed is now obsolete.
Circumcision no longer functions as the sign of the covenant once the seed comes. Circumcision was instituted in Genesis 17, right after Abraham tried to keep the seed line going by having a child with Hagar. Circumcision was a sign the promised seed would come through the power of the Spirit, not the flesh. It was an implicit threat (cf. Galatians 5:12). When the promised seed comes, it is through a virginal conception — not through the power of a man’s flesh. The promised seed is a gift of grace, not a human achievement, as Abraham learned.
But now that the promised seed has come, there is no need for the bloody sign of circumcision. Paul says the family of Abraham is now marked out by baptism (Galatians 3:27-29).
Likewise, the bloody animal sacrifices, the priests who offered them, and the temple at which they were offered, are now obsolete. There can be no going back, as the book of Hebrews argues. We still have sacrifices — our liturgical sacrifices (Hebrew 13:10, 15; Philippians 4:18; etc.). We still have a priesthood (1 Corinthians 9:13ff; 1 Peter 2:5; etc.). We still have a temple — in fact, we are the temple (Ephesians 2:11ff; 1 Peter 2:5ff). Jesus did not abolish the law or its institutions; he fulfilled them, and in fulfilling them, transformed them.
—
In the sermon, I pointed out that even in the old covenant, Israelites could be cut off from the covenant (Genesis 17:14; Hosea 1:9; etc.). And Gentiles could be grafted in. The covenant included blood lines, but never in absolute way. There are plenty of examples of faith interracial marriages in the old covenant, e.g., Judah married a Canaanite woman named Shuah; Joseph marries an Egyptian woman names Asenath who became the mother of two tribes of Israel (!); Boaz married the Moabitess Ruth; Salmon married the Canaanite Rahab; David married the daughter of the king of Geshur, Maacah; etc.
It’s also important to understand that even in the old covenant era Gentiles as Gentiles could be saved. Gentiles could worship Israel’s God without becoming Israelites. These people were known as God-fearers. The court of the Gentiles in the temple was set up for them and they could offer sacrifice (cf. 1 Kings 8:41ff; the temple was to be a house of prayer for all nations even in the old covenant). They could participate in Israel’s feasts and festivals, excepting Passover. Examples of Gentile God-fearers include Melchizedek, Jethro, Uriah the Hittite, the Ninevites who repented at Jonah’s preaching, the Ethiopian in Acts 8, Cornelius in Acts 10, etc. Psalm 135:19-21 recognizes the different categories of people that existed under the old covenant, with varying degrees of access to God’s presence in the temple and symbolized by different types of animals in the Levitical code: The house of Aaron, house of Levi, house of Israel, and those (Gentiles) who fear the Lord.
In other words, we must resist the facile equation that Israel = saved and Gentile = lost under the old covenant. Many Israelites were condemned (cf. 1 Cor. 10:1ff). Many Gentiles were saved. The new thing in the new covenant is not the possibility Gentiles being saved as Gentiles, but (a) the fact that Gentiles now have equal access to God with believing Jews/Israelites, and (b) the hope of unprecedented success in the mission to the Gentiles.
—
What then of the modern nation-state of Israel? As I pointed out in the sermon, it was something of an accident of history that the newly formed nation took the name “Israel.” You can read some details about that here, including Harry Truman’s press release on May 14, 1948, acknowledging the new nation: https://martinkramer.org/2020/04/27/1948-why-the-name-israel/.
It was probably a good idea to give the Jewish people a homeland after WW2 — though the wisdom of putting them in a place where they would be surrounded by enemies was questionable. Yes, they had a historic connection to that land, but a lot of water had gone under the bridge since they had last lived there (most especially the rise of Islam).
There is no reason to think the establishment of a Jewish homeland as a secular nation-state has any relation to biblical prophecy. Scripture does speak to the future of those who are genetic descendants of Abraham (Romans 11) — they will be converted in the future. But until that happens, they are outside of Christ and outside of the covenant. Politically speaking, modern Israel must be treated as any other nation.
Should America be an ally of Israel? A good case can be made: Israel is the only Western-style nation in an otherwise volatile region. Islam, especially the kind of radical Islam that is common in the Middle East today, poses a far larger and more direct threat to Christians and to America than Israel. Islam is not compatible with Western civilization. But we must also be alert to ways in which Israel exerts influence over American politics. Concerns about Jewish lobbying groups are not unfounded; Pat Buchanan once referred to Congress as “Israeli occupied territory” and that’s not too far off the mark in many cases. The data demonstrates it.
It’s interesting that while many in America today believe that Israel has far too much influence over American politics, many in Israel believe America has too much influence over them. We should be wary of Israeli influence American politics, the same way we should be wary of China or Big Pharma having undue influence. But that does not mean that breaking off our relationship with Israel would be wise. Cutting off Israel would probably mean Israel would be far more aggressive in the region, simply as a way of ensuring survival. But whatever we do in our relationship with Israel going forward, the arguments in favor of continuing to treat Israel as a close ally cannot be based on misreading of biblical texts (like Ted Cruz’ horrific use of Genesis 12:3 or Lyndsey Graham’s specious argument that, “If we pull the plug on Israel, God will pull the plug on us”). Rather, the case must be based on prudential and pragmatic arguments that it serves the interest of the American people. The sad irony of American politics is that we treat many religious issues as if they were secular (like marriage and abortion) and we make other issues religious in a way that they should not be (namely, our “special” relationship with Israel).
—
Why do so many American evangelicals believe that the modern-nation state of Israel is “God’s people” and we must bless them to be blessed by God? The same reason so many Christians think there is a rapture happening at any moment: dispensationalism
Dispensationalists are orthodox Christians on the basics, but its system of eschatology is novel. Whereas historic covenant theology sees the Bible as one story, with one people, and one way of salvation, dispensationalism breaks up history into a series of discrete dispensations. For our purposes, the most important feature of dispensationalism is its sharp separation of Israel and the church. Israel is an earthly people with its own way of salvation. The church was unforeseen by OT prophets and is completely distinct, with its own way of salvation. So the church and Israel do not mix or connect in any way. Some extreme forms of dispensationalism teach that Israelites are saved unconditionally because of their Abrahamic descent.
Dispensationalism is a novel view historically, tracing back to J. N. Darby in the 19th century and getting popularized in America by the Scofield reference Bible, the Left Behind series, etc. As dispensationalism infiltrated the church, it also infiltrated culture and politics. Of course, dispensationalism is not the only factor driving America’s foreign policy towards Israel, but it has been a major one, especially for evangelicals. This needs to change.
Good critiques of dispensationalism have been written by many others, so I will not repeat that work here. The one point I will make is this: attempts to base American foreign policy towards Israel on Genesis 12:3 are a serious mistake. If America wants the blessing of Genesis 12:3, we should bless the church, not the nation-state of Israel.
—
How should we view modern secular unbelieving Jews? For the most part, the same way we view other secular progressive people. Most Jews in the world today, especially in America, are not religious. Highly observant, religious Jews tend to be pretty conservative politically (e.g., Ben Shapiro, Yoram Hazony) and might be allies in America’s culture war to some degree. But secular Jews have also been at the forefront of pushing all kinds of highly destructive movements. The rise of cultural Marxism is due to secular Jews who fled Germany and came to American during WW2, particularly to Columbia University (the Frankfurt School). These Jews were Marxists; they saw that economic Marxism would not work in a highly prosperous nation like America — we were too comfortable for that kind of class warfare. So instead, they pushed for divisions along the lines of sex and race. The Civil Rights Movement corrected some grave injustices in American history, but was largely a plot to make America communist by other means. (MLK was propped up by a Marxist Jew, Stanley Levinson.) The civil rights movement created a rolling revolution that continues to find new victim classes to champion, especially LGBTQ+. The same is largely true of feminism and the sexual revolution — Marxists knew that for their program to advance, they would have to destroy the family and “liberate” women from sexual morality and the home. We can see today the kind of ruin cultural Marxism has wrought, and many Jews are implicated in the mess. Secular Jews have been heavily involved in academia, Hollywood, the pornography industry, etc. Dennis Prager, a politically conservative Jew, has pointed that Jews are behind most every “-ism” of the modern world, including Marxism, socialism, feminism, environmentalism, globalism, etc.
But we should not draw the wrong conclusion from these facts. While we can acknowledge ways in which Jews have been a corrupting influence, we must also recognize that they have done many good things. David Azerrad admits Jewish have been a powerful driving force on the left:
“Jews—more specifically, Ashkenazi Jews—are vastly overrepresented in all left-wing movements. I teach a class on “American Progressivism and Liberalism,” and about a quarter of the authors on the syllabus are Jewish (in a country where Jews make up about 2 percent of the total population). Marx, Lassalle, Trotsky, Luxemburg, and countless other leading communists were at least ethnically Jewish (Marx’s family had converted to Lutheranism and he was baptized). The godfather of the sexual revolution, Sigmund Freud, was a Jew, as was the renegade disciple who actually coined the term, Wilhelm Reich. The two most important American feminists of the twentieth century, Betty Friedan and Shulamith Firestone, were both Jewish. Emanuel Celler, one of the two Congressmen who introduced the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, was a Jew. The list goes on.
Thus, the conclusion is reached, either explicitly or implicitly, that were it not for the Jews, there would not have been a left. And without this Jewish left, America would today be a healthy republic, rather than a decaying empire. Seen in this light, the JQ becomes the issue, the root cause of it all. Everything else is either epiphenomenal or unimportant. Hence, the JQers’ singular fixation, not to say monomaniacal obsession, with the Jews, both at home and in Israel.”
Today, anti-Semitism is on the rise, not just on the left (where we expect it), but on the far right (especially among young men). Many have decided Jews are to blame for everything that has gone wrong. The “never again” mantra after WW2 created the “post-war consensus,” which has in turn been used to destroy patriotism, promote globalism, and weaken the family. Some buy into conspiracy theories that “Jews run the world” and are solely to blame for the decline of the West.
But there are many problems with this thesis. it would be unfair to ignore the positive contributions of Jews. Again, Azerrad:
“JQers, for example, notice all the Jews on the left, but somehow manage to overlook all the Jews on the right, including those on the anti-establishment right. The greatest living paleoconservative after Pat Buchanan, Paul Gottfried, is a Jew, and he has written more against neoconservatives than anyone else. The most principled Trumpist in the administration—at times even more Trumpist than the president himself—is Stephen Miller. In France, the most formidable French nationalist and fiercest public critic of immigration, Éric Zemmour, is Jewish. Jean-Marie Le Pen endorsed him over his own daughter in the last presidential election.
Looking beyond these narrow confines, it is hard to find any realm connected with man’s higher faculties in which Jews have not disproportionately excelled since they were permitted to leave the ghettos of Europe—so much so, in fact, that the term Jewish overachievement is an understatement. In his comprehensive survey of human excellence in the arts and sciences, Charles Murray notes how the Jews’ contributions to civilization are completely out of proportion with their relatively small number: a statistically insignificant, if not invisible, share of the world population (0.3 percent) produced a quarter of all notable human intellectual accomplishment in the modern period. In America alone, 38 percent of all Nobel laureates in the hard sciences and economics have been Jews. Discoveries made by Jews, from Jonas Salk’s polio vaccine to Karl Landsteiner’s identification of blood groups, have saved billions of lives.
The Jewish contribution to Western civilization is of such great magnitude that even those most hellbent on not noticing it are sometimes compelled to do so.”
Azerrad points out that anti-Semitisim is an attractive option, especially for young men today, because it gives us a scapegoat. But this is a failure to take responsibility form our own problems. Even if Jews have exerted a disproportionate influence in pushing America leftward, it is still our fault for letting it happen. The “Jewish conspiracy” makes Gentiles look rather dumb, since the Jews have so easily duped them. If Gentiles are as stupid as various Jewish conspiracy theories make them out to be, maybe Gentiles have no business running anything. Again Azerrad:
“The problems we face are so daunting, the odds so overwhelming, that it is easier to rail against the Jews than to undertake the Herculean task of revitalizing the dying nations of the West. The JQers simply don’t have the stomach to consider that, in fact, it may well be our fault. We Americans and Westerners are the ones who squandered our inheritance, defiled our countries, and replaced our populations. We elected—and re-elected—the leaders who launched reckless wars and embraced foolish policies. They were not hoodwinked by the Israel lobby, and they would not suddenly become prudent statesmen if all Jewish influence were expunged from our politics.
The JQ is ultimately yet another species of victimhood politics. By teaching that we are victims of Jewish plots, it denies us agency and promotes the mental habits of servitude: impotence and resentment. The JQ isn’t just a stupid conspiracy theory, it’s an affront to the American spirit.”
I suggest reading Azerrad’s entire article: https://www.compactmag.com/article/the-return-of-the-jewish-question/.
It would be much more honest and fair to simply admit that Jews are a high achieving people, sometimes for good and sometimes for bad. They have definitely played a role in secularization, but were by no means alone. Many nations that have virtually no Jewish influence have followed the same secularizing path as those that have larger Jewish populations. And whatever corrupting influence Jews may have had in places where it is indisputable (e.g., Hollywood), it is Gentiles who largely provided the demand for the trash the Jews were peddling. Trying to apportion out blame for the West’s decline based on race or ethnicity is not particularly helpful. It is much better to tie it to worldview and religion — the real factors, the deeper factors. The culture war is not Jews vs. Gentiles; it is not quite even progressives vs. conservatives. It is really secular progressive people vs traditional Christians. Only by properly diagnosing the problem and properly identifying the combatants can we fight to win. We will do absolutely nothing useful by by focusing our energies entirely on the Jews and their machinations. It would be much better to take responsibility for our own problems and simply work at solving them in practical ways. Saying “the Jews made us do it” is no better than saying “Satan made me do it.” When the Israelites were influenced by foreign pagan powers, God never let that be an excuse; he held them accountable for opening themselves up to such demonic influences. Pointing out those who shaped us into the corrupt people we are today is not an excuse; it’s one more sin to confess. The whole “Jewish Question” easily becomes a distraction from the real work we should be doing.
—
Paul warns against anti-Semitism at the very time Jews are trying to kill him (Romans 11:17ff). Paul refuses to turn against his own people the same way David refused to turn against Saul. Paul is willing to be damned if it would bring salvation to his people (Romans 9).
Paul knew that Gentiles who had been grafted into the tree would be tempted to boast against those Jewish branches that had been broken out. He reminds Gentiles believers that they have Jewish roots and a Jewish Messiah. They are living in a story that traces back through the Jewish people and their history. It is arrogant to look down on them — the Gentiles who have been grafted in can be broken out if they do not stand firm in the faith, and Jewish branches can be grafted back in any time they turn to Jesus in faith.
—
The term Judeo-Christian is confusing and should generally be avoided. Christians do not a religion, a holy book, or an ethical system with non-Christian Jews. Someone might object: Don’t we share the OT? Not really. We see the OT as incomplete with the NT, and we see the OT as a Christian boo, bearing witness to Christ. Jews do not actually practice the religion of the OT (which is impossible after 70AD). The overlay the Talmud on top of the OT, completely distorting it. We should avoid “Judeo-Christian” to make clear that Christian faith and various forms of Judaism are deeply opposed to one another.
Culturally, we might have more in common with conservative Jews. But all forms of Christless conservativism are ultimately bankrupt.
—
The OT is chock full of prophecies that point to a future ingrafting of the Gentiles (cf. Romans 15:9-12): Genesis 12:3, Psalm 2, Isaiah 11:10, Isaiah 60:3, Isaiah 49:6, Amos 9:11-12, Psalm 86:9, Isaiah 9:1-2, Isaiah 42:1-6, Hosea 2:23, Isaiah 2, etc. Simeon recognized this when Jesus was still a baby; cf. Luke 2:30-32. Jesus alluded to the coming inclusion of the Gentiles, e.g., John 10:16. The book of Acts records the inclusion of the Gentiles. Paul was the apostle to the Gentiles. Jesus send his disciples out to the nations to disciple the nations, to bring the into the Israel of God.
—
In Hebrews 12, Paul says in the new covenant worship we come to “the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumbersvle company of angels….”
If we worship in the new Jerusalem, we must be Israelites.
—
“The church of Christ is now the true seed of Abraham, the people and the Israel of God.”
— Herman Bavinck
—
“The church is the true Israel, not by replacing it, but by being the organic continuation of God‘s covenant people.”
— Herman Bavinck
It’s impossible for the church to “replace” old covenant Israel because that would imply two distinct peoples of God. The church does not replace old covenant Israel; the church fulfills and enlarges old covenant Israel in a new form. The story of Israel continues on in the church. The church is Israel dead and resurrected. The patriarchs of Israel are the fathers of all believers. There is one family of God, one family of Abraham.
Unbelieving Jews have been cut out of the covenant tree. Believing Gentiles have been grafted in. But there is only one tree. The new covenant is not God cutting down the old tree and planting a new one; it is a pruning and grafting process. Jesus took the kingdom from those who did not believe and gave it to a people who would bear fruit (Matthew 21:43). But it was the same kingdom.
The modern, secular nation-state of Israel has no relationship to biblical prophecies and promises (not even most non-Christian Jews thought the formation of the nation in 1948 was the fulfillment of anything at the time). All the promises of God are Yes and Amen in Jesus. There are biblical reasons to hope for a future conversion of Jews en masse, but until then, unbelieving Jews are branches severed from the covenant tree, and “enemies of the gospel,” as Romans 11:28 puts it.
The Israel of God is Jesus. He is the seed of Abraham. Those who are in Jesus, united to him by faith, are the Israel of God.
Not all who claim to be Israel are Israel (Romans 9:6). Not all who the Jews are really Jews (Revelation 3:9).
Romans 4 shows us the children of Abraham are those who have the faith of Abraham, whether circumcised or not. Paul shows Abraham was justified while he still a Gentile, before he was circumcised – so he the father of all who believe whether circumcised or uncircumcised.
Galatians 3 shows the family of Abraham is made up of those who belong to Christ by faith. If you Christ’s by faith, then you are Abraham’s seed and heir of his promises.
All of this is rooted in Genesis 12:3. The plan from the beginning was to use Abraham’s family to bring blessing to all the world by bringing the promised Seed (Jesus) into the world.
Again, Jesus is the True Israel. The most fundamental claim the New Testament makes about Israel is this: Jesus is both Israel and Israel’s God. The eternal Son of God becomes an Israelite to fulfill Israel’s mission, to restore Israel, and to open Israel up the nations.
—
“Anti-Semitism” has become about as useless as the term “racism.” While there is such a thing as anti-Semitism, and it is a grievous sin, not everything labeled as anti-Semitism really is. Some clarifications:
It is not anti-Semitic to teach that Jews can only be saved by becoming Christians – by repenting of their sin and trusting in Jesus.
It is not anti-Semitic to notice various ways in which unbelieving Jews have contributed to the degradation of American society.
It is not anti-Semitic to criticize policies of the modern nation-state of Israel — indeed, there is long tradition of Jesus and the prophets criticizing Israel.
It is not anti-Semitic to deny that the creation of the modern nation-state of Israel fulfills biblical prophecies/promises; all the promises of God are Yes and Amen in Christ, so as long as modern Israelis reject Christ en masse, their presence in the land has no connection to any biblical prophecy.
It is not anti-Semitic to teach that unbelieving Jews are branches broken out of the covenant tree.
It is not anti-Semitic to question the wisdom of America’s foreign policy towards Israel, including our “special” relationship with them.
It is not anti-Semitic to notice how much money the Israeli lobby pushes towards American politicians to influence them in various ways.
On the other hand, it is anti-Semitic to refuse to acknowledge various positive contributions Jewish people have made in various fields. Jews have been a high achieving group – sometimes for ill, but sometimes for good. The good should be recognized.
It is anti-Semitic to blame the Jews for problems for which we should take responsibility; even if Jewish influence on America has been uniquely malevolent, it is our fault for allowing it to happen, and pointing to Jewish influence is no excuse for personal or cultural apostasy.
It is anti-Semitic to refuse to acknowledge the place the nation of Israel has played in redemptive history. Salvation is of the Jews because Jesus, the Savior, is a Jew. Paul warns Gentiles against an anti-Semitic posture when he warns “do not be arrogant toward the [natural, Jewish] branches. If you are, remember it is not you who support the root, but the root that supports you…” (Romans 11:18ff). And note Paul warned Gentiles Christians against anti-Semitism at the very time Jews were seeking to kill him and were persecuting Christians.
It is anti-Semitic to refuse to allow the nation-state of Israel the right to defend itself and seek its own interests, like any other nation.
It is anti-Semitic to deny that Jews can be grafted back into God’s covenant tree by turning to Jesus in faith and repentance.
—
There is a definite order and logic to events laid out by Paul in Romans 11.
Israel’s unbelief brought salvation to the Gentiles through Christ’s crucifixion (Romans 11:11, 12, 15, 30).
When the fullness of the Gentiles comes in, it will provoke Jews to jealousy, resulting in their conversion.
The conversion of the Jews results in life from the dead – the return of Jesus and the resurrection. The Jews were first in the old covenant; they will be last in the new covenant.
Paul sets it up like dominoes: When the first falls, the other are sure to follow. It’s like a Jew/Gentile dance through history.
TPC Pastor's Page 