TryingToLearn
Puritan Board Freshman
For months now, I've been trying to form a theology of the salvation of the Jewish people from an amillennial perspective. I would agree with pretty much all of Beale's commentary on Revelation, so I hope that helps give perspective to where I'm coming from. However, I cannot seem to figure out exactly how the Bible conceives of Armageddon as it relates to the salvation of the Jews. On the one hand, I would agree with Beale that the final battle of Revelation 19 & 20 (which itself draws from places such as Ezekiel 38 and 39 and other places in the Old Testament that mention the gathering of nations against Jerusalem in one final eschatological battle) as symbolic for the war of the Antichrist's forces on the saints. On the other hand, there seems to be good reasons to take the New Testament as also conceiving of a physically-located battle that takes place in Jerusalem prior to or around the time of the salvation of much of the nation of Israel.
Just a couple places where I see the NT speaking of the salvation of many ethnic Jews:
“For I tell you, you will not see me again, until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.’” (Matthew 23:39, cf. Luke 13:35). He had already entered Jerusalem previously (21:9). Here, Jesus prophecies that Jerusalem will one day welcome Him in again in another triumphal entry.
I do not have the time to try to defend the future mass-conversion view of Romans 11, but I spent about 2 months doing nothing but studying the different interpretations here and I would say with a large degree of confidence that this is the correct one. Therefore I would see Romans 11:26, “And in this way all Israel will be saved, as it is written, ‘The Deliverer will come from Zion, he will banish ungodliness from Jacob’”, as referring to the salvation of ethnic Israelites when Christ comes from Zion to Zion. In fact, I would say that “from Zion to Zion” is exactly what Paul is trying to convey here because the original quotation in Isaiah says “The Deliverer will come to Zion”, which Paul changes to “from Zion”. The Divine Deliverer comes down from the Heavenly Zion to the Earthly Zion.
But things get tough when we come to Zechariah:
Behold, a day is coming for the Lord, when the spoil taken from you will be divided in your midst. For I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem to battle, and the city shall be taken and the houses plundered and the women raped. Half of the city shall go out into exile, but the rest of the people shall not be cut off from the city. Then the Lord will go out and fight against those nations as when he fights on a day of battle. On that day his feet shall stand on the Mount of Olives that lies before Jerusalem on the east, and the Mount of Olives shall be split in two from east to west by a very wide valley, so that one half of the Mount shall move northward, and the other half southward. And you shall flee to the valley of my mountains, for the valley of the mountains shall reach to Azal. And you shall flee as you fled from the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah. Then the Lord my God will come, and all the holy ones with him (14:1-5).
The reason I say this is because the canon would seem to interpret this in 2 different ways at the same time. On the one hand, “I will gather the nations against Jerusalem to battle” is interpreted in the end by Revelation 20 (drawing off Ezekiel 38-39) as a war by the forces of the Antichrist against the saints who are the “beloved city”. This would seem to indicate a worldwide context to the “battle of Armageddon”, which Revelation sees as worldwide persecution of the Church.
On the other hand, the canon would also seem to interpret this as a specific literal event that would involve Jesus returning to the city of Jerusalem as it is destroyed, and once he does so, the Jews are converted. This speaks of the “Day of the Lord”, and in context seems to speak of the final eschatological “Day of the Lord”. We know Jesus will return literally and physically, as the text says, “all the holy ones with him”, when He comes again with us. Acts 1:11 states that after Jesus ascended, two angels said,
“Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into heaven? This Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way as you saw him go into heaven.”
The fact that Jesus ascended from the Mount of Olives and the fact that Zechariah says that the Lord’s “feet shall stand on the Mount of Olives that lies before Jerusalem”, would seem to indicate that when Jesus returns to the Earth, He will return to the mount of Olives (again, “from Zion, to Zion”), which would seem to indicate that the mount of Olives will in fact be literally split in half in the same way that the Red Sea was split in half, creating a “final Exodus”. Since the Lord returned with His saints, this means that the ones escaping through the valley created by the splitting must be the Jews who come to salvation only after His return, when “The Deliverer will come from Zion” and banishes “ungodliness from Jacob”. I understand that many wouldn't take this literally, but it's inescapable that when Christ literally returns to the Earth, which this passage speaks of, He will have to land at a literal and specific location. It does not seem to me to be merely a coincidence to me that Acts 1:11 seems to connect to Zechariah 14; so I would not consider this to be "selective literalism" anymore than I would consider Zechariah 12:10 to be "selective literalism" when applied to Christ literally being pierced by a Roman soldier, which we know to be true through the further progress of the Biblical canon.
So the way I see this is that the Bible seems to interpret the “final battle” in 2 different ways: in one sense it’s a war against the saints by the beast and his satanic forces, as Revelation seems to clearly interpret it in 19 & 20, but other parts of the Bible seem to conceive of it as a literal physically-located battle that takes place in Jerusalem prior to Christ’s physical return to Jerusalem, after which many Jews will be saved.
I'd appreciate any thoughts here and I'm curious if anyone else would agree with my general assessment here. I don't really know how to work everything out because it would seem to me to be much cleaner if the Bible interpreted the "final battle" only in the sense of the persecution of the Church, but it does indeed to me seem to suggest a literal surrounding of the city of Jerusalem prior to Jesus' return to the actual mount of Olives as well. Perhaps some sort of "type" and "antitype" distinction would work here, where the Bible predicts both the persecution of the Church as well as an actual battle prior to Christ's return in Jerusalem? Would appreciate any help.
Just a couple places where I see the NT speaking of the salvation of many ethnic Jews:
“For I tell you, you will not see me again, until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.’” (Matthew 23:39, cf. Luke 13:35). He had already entered Jerusalem previously (21:9). Here, Jesus prophecies that Jerusalem will one day welcome Him in again in another triumphal entry.
I do not have the time to try to defend the future mass-conversion view of Romans 11, but I spent about 2 months doing nothing but studying the different interpretations here and I would say with a large degree of confidence that this is the correct one. Therefore I would see Romans 11:26, “And in this way all Israel will be saved, as it is written, ‘The Deliverer will come from Zion, he will banish ungodliness from Jacob’”, as referring to the salvation of ethnic Israelites when Christ comes from Zion to Zion. In fact, I would say that “from Zion to Zion” is exactly what Paul is trying to convey here because the original quotation in Isaiah says “The Deliverer will come to Zion”, which Paul changes to “from Zion”. The Divine Deliverer comes down from the Heavenly Zion to the Earthly Zion.
But things get tough when we come to Zechariah:
Behold, a day is coming for the Lord, when the spoil taken from you will be divided in your midst. For I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem to battle, and the city shall be taken and the houses plundered and the women raped. Half of the city shall go out into exile, but the rest of the people shall not be cut off from the city. Then the Lord will go out and fight against those nations as when he fights on a day of battle. On that day his feet shall stand on the Mount of Olives that lies before Jerusalem on the east, and the Mount of Olives shall be split in two from east to west by a very wide valley, so that one half of the Mount shall move northward, and the other half southward. And you shall flee to the valley of my mountains, for the valley of the mountains shall reach to Azal. And you shall flee as you fled from the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah. Then the Lord my God will come, and all the holy ones with him (14:1-5).
The reason I say this is because the canon would seem to interpret this in 2 different ways at the same time. On the one hand, “I will gather the nations against Jerusalem to battle” is interpreted in the end by Revelation 20 (drawing off Ezekiel 38-39) as a war by the forces of the Antichrist against the saints who are the “beloved city”. This would seem to indicate a worldwide context to the “battle of Armageddon”, which Revelation sees as worldwide persecution of the Church.
On the other hand, the canon would also seem to interpret this as a specific literal event that would involve Jesus returning to the city of Jerusalem as it is destroyed, and once he does so, the Jews are converted. This speaks of the “Day of the Lord”, and in context seems to speak of the final eschatological “Day of the Lord”. We know Jesus will return literally and physically, as the text says, “all the holy ones with him”, when He comes again with us. Acts 1:11 states that after Jesus ascended, two angels said,
“Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into heaven? This Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way as you saw him go into heaven.”
The fact that Jesus ascended from the Mount of Olives and the fact that Zechariah says that the Lord’s “feet shall stand on the Mount of Olives that lies before Jerusalem”, would seem to indicate that when Jesus returns to the Earth, He will return to the mount of Olives (again, “from Zion, to Zion”), which would seem to indicate that the mount of Olives will in fact be literally split in half in the same way that the Red Sea was split in half, creating a “final Exodus”. Since the Lord returned with His saints, this means that the ones escaping through the valley created by the splitting must be the Jews who come to salvation only after His return, when “The Deliverer will come from Zion” and banishes “ungodliness from Jacob”. I understand that many wouldn't take this literally, but it's inescapable that when Christ literally returns to the Earth, which this passage speaks of, He will have to land at a literal and specific location. It does not seem to me to be merely a coincidence to me that Acts 1:11 seems to connect to Zechariah 14; so I would not consider this to be "selective literalism" anymore than I would consider Zechariah 12:10 to be "selective literalism" when applied to Christ literally being pierced by a Roman soldier, which we know to be true through the further progress of the Biblical canon.
So the way I see this is that the Bible seems to interpret the “final battle” in 2 different ways: in one sense it’s a war against the saints by the beast and his satanic forces, as Revelation seems to clearly interpret it in 19 & 20, but other parts of the Bible seem to conceive of it as a literal physically-located battle that takes place in Jerusalem prior to Christ’s physical return to Jerusalem, after which many Jews will be saved.
I'd appreciate any thoughts here and I'm curious if anyone else would agree with my general assessment here. I don't really know how to work everything out because it would seem to me to be much cleaner if the Bible interpreted the "final battle" only in the sense of the persecution of the Church, but it does indeed to me seem to suggest a literal surrounding of the city of Jerusalem prior to Jesus' return to the actual mount of Olives as well. Perhaps some sort of "type" and "antitype" distinction would work here, where the Bible predicts both the persecution of the Church as well as an actual battle prior to Christ's return in Jerusalem? Would appreciate any help.