King's Evangelical Divinity School

7 December 2019

Updated Church and Israel Bibliography

Here's a list of titles I consider useful for anyone interested in exploring the relationship between the Church and Israel/the Jewish people. I add new items from time to time son this bibliography will continue to grow.

Broadly Nonsupersessionist or Christian Zionist

Scott Bader-Saye, Church and Israel After Christendon: The Politics of Election (Eugene, Oregon: Wipe and Stock, 1999).

Colin Barnes, They Conspire Against Your People: The European Churches and the Holocaust (Broadstairs: King's Divinity Press, 2014).

Darrel L. Bock and Mitch Glaser, eds. Israel, the Church, and the Middle East: A Biblical Response to the Current Crisis (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Kregel Publications, 2018).

Darrel L. Bock and Mitch Glaser, eds. The People, The Land, and the Future of Israel (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Kregel Publications, 2014).

Ronald Diprose, Israel and the Church: The Origins and Effects of Replacement Theology (Waynesboro, Georgia: Authentic Media, 2004).

Barry Horner, Future Israel: Why Christian Anti-Judaism must be challenged (Nashville: Broadman and Holman, 2007).

Gerald R. McDermott, ed. The New Christian Zionism: Fresh Perspectives on Israel and the Land (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 2016).

Calvin L. Smith, ed. The Jews, Modern Israel and the New Supercessionism: New Revised and Expanded Edition (Broadstairs: King's Divinity Press, 2013). 

R. Kendal Soulen, The God of Israel and Christian Theology (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1996).

David W. Torrance and George Taylor, eds. Israel, God’s Servant (Milton Keynes: Paternoster, 2007). 

Michael Vlach, Has the Church Replaced Israel? A Theological Evaluation (Nashville: Broadman and Holdman: 2010).

Paul Wilkinson, For Zion’s Sake: Christian Zionism and the Role of John Nelson Darby (Milton Keynes: Paternoster, 2007).

Critical of Christian Zionism and/or Israel

Naim Ateek and Michael Prior, eds. Holy Land, Hollow Jubilee: God, Justice and the Palestinians (London: Melisende, 1999).

Colin Chapman, Whose Promised Land? (Oxford: Lion, 1983, 2002).

Victoria Clark, Allies for Armageddon: The Rise of Christian Zionism (New Haven: Yale 2007).

Stephen Sizer,Christian Zionism: Road-map to Armageddon? (Leicester: InterVarsity Press, 2006). 

Timothy Weber, On the Road to Armageddon: How Evangelicals Became Israel's Best Friend (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker 2004).

Other Related Works (including Messianic Studies)

Darrell Bock and Mitch Glaser, eds. To the Jew First: The Case for Jewish Evangelism in Scripture and History (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel, 2008).

Jacques B. Doukhan, Israel and the Church: Two Voices for the Same God (Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson, 2004).

Richard Harvey, Mapping Messianic Jewish Theology: A Constructive Approach (Milton Keynes: Paternoster, 2009).

Mark. S. Kinzer, Post-Missionary Messianic Judaism: Redefining Christian Engagement with the Jewish People (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Brazos Press, 2005).

David Rudolph and Joel Willitts, Introduction to Messianic Judaism: Its Ecclesial Context and Biblical Foundations (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2013).

Marvin R. Wilson, Our Father Abraham: Jewish Roots of the Christian Faith (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eermands, 1989).

Peter Ochs, Another Reformation: Postliberal Christianity and the Jews (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker/Brazos, 2011).

Historical Studies

(NB Most of the publications here draw upon historical material and insights. However, the items listed in this section focus primarily upon historical research rather than theological or political enquiry and opinion.)

Edward H. Flannery, The Anguish of the Jews (New York: Stimulus, 1999).

Donald M. Lewis, The Origins of Christian Zionism: Lord Shaftesbury and Evangelical Support for a Jewish Homeland (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014).

Some Other Useful Titles

(eg exploring the historical Jewish presence in the land, Zionism and Mandate Period, Palestinian religion and politics)

Arnold Blumberg, Zion Before Zionism, 1838-1880 (Jerusalem: Devora, 2007).

Hillel Cohen, Army of Shadows (University of California Press, 2008).

Moshe Gil, A History of Palestine, 634-1099 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997).

Raphael Israel, Green Crescent Over Nazareth: The Displacement of Christians by Muslims in the Holy Land (London: Frank Cass, 2002).

Loren D. Lybarger, Identity and Religion in Palestine: The Struggle Between Islamism and Secularism in the Occupied Territories (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2007).

Ray A. Pritz, Nazarene Jewish Christianity: From the End of the New Testament Period Until Its Disappearance in the Fourth Century (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, Hebrew University, 1992).


«Oldest   ‹Older   601 – 643 of 643
Anonymous said... has an article headlined
"The Jews Who Did Not Deny Jesus" by
Shira Sorko-Ram

Anonymous said... has an article headlined
"Your View: Antisemitic" on
March 13, 2023 the article says

"To the Editor,

I have always wondered how people who call themselves Christians can possibly be antisemitic; it doesn’t make sense. Many Christians accept the Bible as absolutely true as it is written. In Deuteronomy, it is written that the Jews are God’s chosen people. Being antisemitic goes against the will of God.

The Christian doctrine of the Trinity is the central doctrine concerning the nature of God in most Christian churches, which defines one God existing in three coequal, coeternal, cosubstantial divine persons: God the Father, God the Son (Jesus Christ) and God the Holy Spirit, three distinct persons.

We all know that Jesus was Jewish, his earthly parents Mary and Joseph were Jews and all his disciples were Jewish too. If Jesus was one with God and Jesus was a Jew, it follows that God is Jewish. So, if you are antisemitic, you are also anti-God too so you cannot consider yourself a Christian.

I have heard people who are antisemitic defend themselves by saying that it was the Jews who crucified Jesus. Since that was over 2,000 years ago, you would be hard pressed to find any Jews today who were alive when Jesus was crucified. Blaming Jews who are alive today for Christ’s crucifixion is totally illogical. It is like blaming all Christians alive today because we killed Muslims during the Crusades a thousand years ago.

I would like to think that everyone who is antisemitic is just ignorant, but I am not so sure. They are adopting an evil Fascist ideology that the Nazi’s adopted in the 1930’s.

So, does that make them evil too? Maybe so."

Mary Cox

Wood River

Anonymous said... has an article from July 2020 headlined
"The Church History They Don't Teach You" by
Shira Sorko-Ram about the Horrible History of Christian Anti-Semitism

Anonymous said...

A Christian recently typed on
" The scenes in the gospels that appear to cast Jews as villains cannot be interpreted to be condemnatory against Jews as a people, culture, or religion. Anti-Semitism in any of its stripes or shades is deeply un-Christian.

It's Lent again, which means that nefarious folks in Christian garb are going to be being anti-Semitic while non-nefarious Christians are going to be being accidentally anti-Semitic. Let me attempt a little inoculation by looking at a single word in the Gospel according to John which showed up in last Sunday's lectionary text.

In John 3, Nicodemus, a member of the "Pharisees" (the philosophical and practical forerunners of modern Rabbinic Judaism) comes to Jesus in the night and curiously says " 'WE' know that you are a teacher who has come from God."

John's intent behind this phrasing is pretty clear when you know the broader context of Johannine literature in the New Testament. John's gospel and letters are written at a time where the church was under great persecution by the Romans and had tension with the other Jewish sects (Christianity was at this time considered a sect of Judaism).

John's Gospel also practices the great tradition of "apocalyptic" literature at the time, in which peoples and movements were described in dramatic, dualistic symbols- Jesus is the LIGHT, the world is DARK.

Appropriate for John's time but unfortunate when that time is no longer understood, John used various groups as dualistic "foils" for Jesus and the nascent Christian movement. That includes the Romans, and that also includes "the Jews."

But therein lies the important point in interpreting John: "The Jews," be they Pharisee or not, are to John only representative of those in the dark who have not seen the light. John uses the particular Jews of his day as a symbol.

That symbol was never, ever intended to be used as a blanket condemnation of the Jews as a people, religion, race, nation, or culture. It's a dangerous misinterpretation of the Bible to read it this way.

Meanwhile, nearly every positive character in John is Jewish: John the Baptist, the Disciples, Jesus' mother, the women at the tomb, Joseph of Arimathea, and Nicodemus- who helps to bury Jesus without ever making a confession of faith to him (and is canonized as a saint in the Catholic and Orthodox churches).

And also, again for the record, Jesus WAS Jewish in any sense of that word.

And remember, as Paul says: as Christians, we are grafted onto their vine, NOT the other way around. Judaism remains a vibrant mix of nation, culture, and religion that honors and worships God.

Don't let your sermons and readings allow anti-Semitism to flourish in Lent, friends."

Anonymous said... has an article headlined
"Christian Zionists Call Out Jordanian King for Suggesting Israel Threatens Christianity"
By Kassy Dillon | Sep 22, 2022
Pro-Israel Christians Refute the Lies and Hate of the
Jordanian "King"

Anonymous said...

The Jerusalem Post , has an article headlined
" The 19th-century British Christian Zionist who nearly founded Israel"
About the British Christian Zionist Laurence Oliphant

Anonymous said...

The Gainesville Sun has a Letter to the Editor on
December 9, 2012 titled
"True Christians support Israel
In his Nov. 30 letter Doug Nyland points to a letter by Christian leaders sent to Congress supposedly criticizing U.S. aid to Israel.

A true Christian leader is a follower of Christ Jesus and his word, the Bible. I have yet to hear a Christian leader speak against Israel and any support the U.S. offers.

The Bible voices love for the Jewish people. In Genesis 15:18 God promised the Jewish people (Abram later called Abraham) the land from: “river of Egypt to great river Euphrates,” a fraction of what they hold today.

In the book of Revelation, God is seen fighting for Israel in the end of days in battle of Armageddon and later sets up his capital in Jerusalem. Furthermore, God is referred to in Psalm 41:13 as “the God of Israel.”

Do you see a pattern here? True Christian leaders support Israel!"

Charles Risk Jr.,


Anonymous said... has an article by Tuvia Book headlined
"My Response to a Confused American Jew. Yes, Anti-Zionism is Antisemitism!"
MAY 24, 2021 about how
Israel is Always Morally and Legally Superior to it's Enemies

Anonymous said... has an article headlined
"God protects Israel | God will defend Israel in the Future"

Anonymous said... has an article headlined
"Providence: Amazing Stories of How God Protects Israel"
on September 5, 2019

Anonymous said...

Christians for Israel International has an article headlined
"Five Bible Texts about God's Protection of Israel" on
April 2, 2019

Anonymous said...

Chambersburg Public Opinion has an article headlined
"Letter: God protects Israel" on November 8, 2015 the letter says

"Iran said recently that Israel will not be a nation in this world in 25 years. Hogwash! When are those people going to wake up?

Before Jesus was born God made a covenant with Abraham that the land Israel occupies today will always belong to Israel. The Jewish people have been scattered to all countries in the world. It is amazing how the Jewish people from every country in this world have returned to Israel and when the rapture takes place and Jesus comes back to earth the second time, Israel will still be here.

God himself will protect Israel as he has in the past. From this point on, no country will prevail against Israel and their people will never be scattered again. For Israel, it is now survival.

God does not have a military budget. When needed he just whips up a hailstorm as big as rocks and pours them down on the enemy and it doesn’t cost him one cent. Joshua 10 tells us that God defeated five armies in one day in the Gog-Magog war of Ezekiel 38. God personally destroyed the Iranian and Russian armies that invaded Israel.

In 1967, when most of us were still living, seven Arab countries proclaimed on their radio station, “As of today there no longer exists an international force to protect Israel. We shall not complain to the U.N. about Israel. We shall apply total war which will result in the extermination of Israel’s existence.” The seven Arab armies surrounded Israel with 465,000 troops, more than 2,800 tanks and 800 aircraft. The war was over in six days. The news journalists called it the “war of miracles.”

Because of space I will share only one miracle. An Israeli sergeant said an Egyptian halftrack came upon them. This Israeli sergeant said they had only light weapons and could not stop the halftrack. No shots came and the halftrack came to a halt. The Israelis found 18 armed soldiers in it with a petrified look on their faces. The Israeli sergeant said, “Why didn’t you shoot at us?” The Egyptian leader said, “I don’t know. My arms froze. They became paralyzed.” There were many miracles in those six days.

In March this year, Netanyahu spoke to our Congress and said if Israel has to go to war alone, they will do so. He knows how God has protected Israel from the beginning of time. You hear people say there are not any miracles anymore. Wake up! They are all around you. Prophecy has been fulfilled now."

Glenn W. Angle, Chambersburg

Anonymous said... has an article headlined
"Inspiration from Zion: This is a Love Story" This article says:
"An age is called dark not because the light fails to shine but because people refuse to see"

Miracles are real
Posted on August 16, 2014 by Forest Rain The Full article is online and is a Must Read about God Protecting Israel , Long Article but worth reading

Anonymous said...

Rock of Ages Church has an article headlined
"God Protects Israel"
Feb 19, 2023 with a link to an article by Pastor Leslie Chua

Anonymous said... has an article headlined
Robert D. Pace

Anonymous said... has an article headlined
"God Sends a Storm Pillar to Protect Israel from ISIS" by
Eugene Bach

Anonymous said...

Intersessors for Israel has an article headlined
Table of Contents
What is Replacement Theology?
Why Replacement Theology is Unbiblical
What is blasphemy?
Why Replacement Theology is blasphemous
What Replacement Theology distorts
God's essential nature never changes
Has this covenant-making and covenant-keeping God turned against His people?
Replacement Theology is dangerous
Is now the time?" The Full Article is online, Long Article but Worth Reading

Anonymous said... has an article headlined
"Acts 1:6-7 and the Restoration of Israel"
June 21, 2012 by
Matt Waymeyer

Anonymous said... has an article headlined
"Acts 1:6-8 meaning"

Anonymous said... has an article headlined
"Lesson 2: A Question About the Future – Acts 1:6-8"
by Pastor Ricky Kurth

Anonymous said... has an article headlined
"Who's Protecting Israel?"
by Dr. Gerald Schroeder about God's Protection of Israel

Anonymous said... has an article headlined
"Israel's Top 50 Christian Allies - 2022"

Anonymous said...

The Harvard Crimson has an article headlined
"Why We Stand With Israel"
June 24, 2021 by
Rebecca S. Araten &
Sarah Bolnick

Anonymous said...

The Israel Forever Foundation has an article headlined
"Why It Is as Moral Obligation to Stand With Israel"

Anonymous said...

1. Charisma Magazine has an article headlined
"Moral Reasons Why Christians Support Israel"
May 25, 2022 by
Shawn Akers

2. The Jerusalem Post, has an article by Arab Supporter of Israel
Fred Maroun on
May 15, 2025 headlined
"Israel is the indictative moral struggle of our time"

3. The website has an article by
Yaron Brook headlined
"Israel has a Moral Right to it's life" on June 24, 2002 Links to many other good articles

Anonymous said... has an article headlined

"The Changing Face of Dispensationalism" March/April 2018 Randall Price This article says

"Years ago, a dispensationalist was someone who consistently viewed the church as distinct from Israel. Today there is CD and PD—and it’s important to know the difference.

*For definitions see Glossary.

A student recently came to my office and told me he had been to a conference with pastors from mainline churches. When he mentioned he was taking a course on Dispensationalism from me, one of the pastors replied, “Does that still exist?”

Dispensationalism,* which holds to a literal interpretation of Scripture, is one of the most maligned and misunderstood theological concepts in the church today. Many Christians have abandoned it, while others seek to redefine it.

The Big Retreat
Anglican evangelicals, such as popular theologian N. T. Wright, regard the American form of Dispensationalism (what they call “Left Behind theology”) as “bizarre” and contend it is unknown in British circles. However, long before Wright made his observation, American Reformed* theologians—such as John Gerstner and R. C. Sproul, who have shaped the thinking of today’s generation—had labeled Dispensationalism heresy.1

Get the full picture of this theological concept in Dispensationalism by Charles Ryrie.

The Emergent Church* has discarded Dispensationalism altogether as an obstacle to inclusiveness. And the modern church, appealing to millennials who largely steer clear of eschatology* (the study of future things), has little room for the broader teaching of futurism, much less the distinctions of Dispensationalism.

These trends, coupled with the recent popularity of Reformed teaching, have caused many seminaries and Bible colleges to retreat from defending Dispensational Theology.

In addition, more than two decades earlier, a reformulation of Classical Dispensationalism* (CD) had already spread throughout dispensational institutions. Known as Progressive Dispensationalism* (PD), this view attempts to understand the core tenets of Dispensational Theology through a so-called complementary interpretation, a confusing term in itself because it seeks to explain the equally confusing idea of an “already/not yet” and “both/and” eschatology.

PD’s central tenet teaches that the Abrahamic, Davidic, and New Covenants are already being progressively fulfilled today and will also be fulfilled in the Millennial Kingdom. Thus PD’s concept of futurism includes an aspect of present fulfillment in the church for the biblical covenants made with national Israel, while CD holds that the biblical covenants find their fulfillment exclusively in the Millennium."

Anonymous said...

the article continues
"Historical Overview
The first half of the 20th century witnessed a retreat from futurism with C. H. Dodd (1884–1973) and his “Realized Eschatology,”* which taught that the eschatological passages in the New Testament (drawn largely from the Old Testament) do not refer to the future but, rather, to the experiences of Jesus and the New Testament church.2

Many liberals, who preferred the principles of love and peace to the expectation of future apocalyptic destruction, embraced Dodd’s position. His view continues to influence evangelicals today through the writings of Wright and his “Kingdom Now” theology,* which largely characterizes the 21st-century “millennial” churches.

A different form of Kingdom Now Theology that also sees some or all Bible prophecies as fulfilled in historic events of the past is Preterism.* Once the provenance of liberal scholars, Preterism is now advanced by the teachings of conservative Christians such as radio “Bible Answer Man” Hank Hanegraaff and the late R.C. Sproul.3

Another evangelical, historic premillennialist,* Gordon E. Ladd, promoted Oscar Cullman’s “Inaugurated Eschatology,”* a view that taught the promises of the Kingdom Age were initially being realized in the Church Age.4 Many well-known, evangelical, premillennial scholars, such as D. A. Carson, have promoted this view, which forms the substance of Progressive Dispensationalism. It retains the CD distinctive concerning the future Kingdom, but also embraces a spiritual fulfillment of those promises within the Church Age.

Progressive Dispensationalism
Progressive Dispensationalism debuted in the 1990s as developed and defended in the works of evangelical scholars Craig A. Blaising (Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary), Darrell L. Bock (Dallas Theological Seminary), and the late Robert L. Saucy (Talbot Seminary).

These authors claim their view simply revises the core tenets of Dispensationalism. But PD’s inclusion of tenets from opposing systems of interpretation obscures CD’s distinctives and makes possible a progression toward the next inevitable position: Amillennialism* or Postmillennialism.*

Evangelical theologian Walter A. Elwell observed, “The newer dispensationalism looks so much like non-dispensational pre-millennialism that one struggles to see any real difference.”5

Postmillennialist Keith Mathison stated,

In my opinion…progressive dispensationalists have moved closer to Reformed theology on a number of doctrines. They now acknowledge that the kingdom has been inaugurated and that there is a present as well as a future aspect of the kingdom. They have also recognized the two-peoples-of-God theory* to be unbiblical, which, ironically, brings us to the negative side of progressive dispensationalism. If the defining doctrine of dispensationalism is the two-peoples-of-God theory, then to reject that theory is to reject dispensationalism itself.6

CD vs. PD
Classical Dispensationalism has three essential distinctives:

It makes a clear distinction between Israel and the church in God’s purposes.
It employs a consistent, literal hermeneutic* (method of interpretation), especially when it comes to the prophetic Scripture.
It maintains a doxological focus that sees the ultimate purpose of God as bringing glory to Himself.7

Let’s look at these three distinctives in greater detail.
1. Israel and the Church. Theologian Charles C. Ryrie said,

The one who fails to distinguish Israel and the church consistently will inevitably not hold to dispensational distinctions; and one who does will. Progressive dispensationalists seem to be blurring this distinction by saying that the concept is not in the same class as what is conveyed by the concepts of Gentiles, Israel, and Jews.8

Anonymous said...

the article continues
"Progressive dispensationalists maintain that the “one new man” of Ephesians 2:11–22 refers to the church as a continuation of believing Israelites in the Old Testament. Therefore, believing Jews and Gentiles constitute the “one people of God.”

This concept may be true on a redemptive level, but Gentiles and Jews are distinct historic people groups with distinct callings and promises within the biblical covenants. PD correctly sees the church as consisting of both the believing remnant of national Israel and the believing remnant of Gentiles, but it incorrectly views this unity as an “initial fulfillment” of the New Covenant, which God specifically made with Israel:

Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah….I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people….For they all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, says the LORD. For I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more (Jer. 31:31, 33–34).

The church’s participation in the New Covenant is a present, partial guarantee of the future, full realization of the promise in the Millennial Kingdom. It cannot be fulfilled literally until the Lord forgives the sins of the entire remnant of Israel and Judah, “from the least of them to the greatest of them” (a universal expression).

The apostle Paul said the present believing remnant of Jewish people exemplifies the future, full inclusion of national Israel. The Gentile nations are included through the spiritual promise to Abraham (Gen. 12:3):

At this present time there is a remnant according to the election of grace. Now if [Israel’s] fall is riches for the world, and their failure riches for the Gentiles, how much more their fullness! For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery,…that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And so all Israel will be saved (Rom. 11:5, 12, 25–26).

This text reveals the New Covenant cannot find initial fulfillment until the Second Advent of Messiah since Israel now remains blinded during the Church Age.

2. Literal Hermeneutic. Dispensationalism uses a consistent, literal method of interpreting Scripture. It takes the biblical text at face value, without imposing on it a theological interpretation foreign to the text. However, PD’s “complementary hermeneutic” redefines the understanding of the Old Testament through the lens of the New Testament.

It argues that Christ currently occupies King David’s throne in heaven. But the normal reading of the Old Testament understands David’s throne to be an earthly one promised to the Davidic dynasty in national Israel, even under the New Covenant (Jer. 33:17–22). It also views Christ as David’s descendant reigning in Israel as a Messianic promise to be fulfilled in the Millennial Kingdom (1 Chr. 17:14; cf. Ezek. 37:25)."

Anonymous said...

& continues
"Classical dispensationalists argue that the Bible never says David’s throne is in heaven during the Church Age. Instead, it specifies Christ will rule over “the house of Jacob”: “He [Jesus] will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. And He will reign over the house of Jacob forever” (Lk. 1:32–33). While PD still views Christ’s reign as a future reality (both/and), it changes the text’s plain meaning to accommodate its theology that the Kingdom’s initial fulfillment has already begun.

PD contradicts the fact the apostle Peter tied the Messiah’s return to set up His earthly Kingdom to Israel’s national repentance (Acts 3:19–21). How could the Kingdom be inaugurated in the Church Age if national Israel remains under divine discipline and its national repentance will take place only at the end of the Tribulation?* (See Matthew 24:29–30 and Luke 21:28.) Likewise, if Messiah’s reign on David’s earthly throne depends on Israel’s repentance, then Messiah cannot be sitting now on the throne of David.

PD confuses this distinction. One of PD’s formulators conceded the fact in a theological debate with an amillennial theologian. He said the term Israel is symbolic. Later, I asked him what he meant by that statement. He simply replied, without explanation, “It is both/and.”
PD’s “complementary” hermeneutic permits its adherents to call their view Dispensationalism, while embracing views from an opposing theological system whose core tenets spiritualize Israel.

In other words, PD teaches Israel both symbolizes the church and literally refers to national Israel as distinct from the church. PD’s “complementary” hermeneutic permits its adherents to call their view Dispensationalism, while embracing views from an opposing theological system whose core tenets spiritualize Israel."

Anonymous said...

& continues
"3. Glory to God. Dispensationalism focuses on God’s glory as the ultimate purpose for His divine plan. Progressive Dispensationalism’s rejection of this doxological purpose reveals the extent to which its system functions more like Reformed Theology than Dispensationalism.

PD, like Reformed (Covenant) Theology, sees humanity’s redemption as the goal of “salvation history.” CD sees humanity’s salvation as a means to an end—God’s glory—not the end itself. As Ryrie stated, “Scripture is not man-centered as though salvation were the main theme, but it is God-centered because His glory is the center….The Bible is not centered in salvation history…but in God Himself.”9

Classical Dispensationalism sees God’s purposes with Israel and the church as distinct plans in history designed to bring Him glory only when each purpose is fulfilled (Rom. 11:30–33).

Cautionary Note
I want to caution those who hold to Classical Dispensationalism against overstatement in their critique of progressive dispensationalists, who may represent the dominant view of evangelical churches and seminaries today. Most advocates of PD hold to a pretribulational Rapture and believe in Messiah’s Second Coming to establish His Millennial Kingdom for Israel and the nations. They are also among the leading defenders of the evangelical faith and strong supporters of the Jewish people and the State of Israel.

My concern is for the next generation of progressive dispensationalists who may move beyond the theology of the founders. In his treatise Theology Adrift: The Early Church Fathers and Their Views of Eschatology, D. Matthew Allen explains that the eschatological shift in the ancient church from Premillennialism to Amillennialism began when the church lost its understanding of Israel as a uniquely chosen people of God with specific promises from God yet to be fulfilled.10

Hopefully, recognizing how redefinition has occurred may aid this generation of Bible students against further redefining terms and encourage them to rethink how perceived progress may in fact be a retreat from established truths."

Anonymous said...


*See Glossary.

John H. Gerstner, Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth: A Critique of Dispensationalism (Brentwood, TN: Wolgemuth & Hyatt, 1991), 68.
C. H. Dodd, “The Kingdom of God Has Come,” Expository Times 48, no. 3 (1936) and H. G. Wood, The Kingdom of God and History (London: Allen and Unwin, 1938).
R. C. Sproul, The Last Days According to Jesus: When Did Jesus Say He Would Return? (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1998). Hank Hanegraaff, The Apocalypse Code: Find Out What the Bible Really Says About the End Times and Why It Matters Today (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 2007).
Ladd taught the “already/not yet” view in his essential writings on eschatology: Crucial Questions about the Kingdom of God (1952); Jesus and the Kingdom (1964); A Theology of the New Testament (1974); The Meaning of the Millennium: Four Views (1977); The Last Things (1978); The Blessed Hope (1990); The Gospel of the Kingdom (1990); and his most influential book, The Presence of the Future (1996).
Walter A. Elwell, “Sidebar: Dispensationalisms of the Third Kind,” Christianity Today, September 12, 1994, 28.
Keith A. Mathison, Dispensationalism: Rightly Dividing the People of God? (n.p.: P&R Publishing, 2012), Appendix A, 135.
These are the three sine qua nons given by Charles C. Ryrie. See Ryrie, Dispensationalism (Chicago, IL: Moody Publishers, 2007), 39–40. I also am indebted to H. Wayne House for many of the contrasts between CD and PD found in his paper “Danger of Progressive Dispensationalism to Pre-Millennial Theology: Reflections of a Pre-Progressive Dispensationalist,” Pre-Trib Research Center, December 2003 .
Ryrie, 39.
Ibid., 40.
D. Matthew Allen, Theology Adrift: The Early Church Fathers and Their Views of Eschatology,, May 25, 2004 .

Dr. Randall Price is a well-known author and world-renowned archaeologist. He is also the founder and president of World of the Bible Ministries (

Anonymous said...

Another good book published in
2016 is titled
"Refuting the Anti-Israel Narrative: A Case for the Historical, Legal and Moral Legitimacy of the Jewish State"
by Jeremy Havardi

Anonymous said... has an article headlined
"Five Key Biblical Arguments For Israel’s Right to the Land"
by John S. Kanter, M.A.

Anonymous said... has an article headlined
"Christian churches back Jews facing anti-Semitism in Hungary"
By Tom Heneghan on May 14, 2013

Anonymous said...

Another good website is & Also

Anonymous said... has an article headlined
"Vatican adviser says Catholics must take seriously the biblical promises to Israel"
by Christopher Lamb on
13 January 2018 has an article headlined
"Catholic Zionism" by
Gavin D'Costa in
January 2020

Anonymous said... has an article headlined
"Today's Muslim antisemitism sounds a lot like Christian antisemitism in England in the 1750s" on
Friday, March 10, 2023

Anonymous said... has an article headlined
"The Origins of Christian Anti-Semitism"
Prof. Pieter van der Horst, May 5, 2009

Anonymous said... has an article headlined
"Blaming Jews for the Crucifixion of Jesus is the Ugliest Form of Antisemitism" on
May 5, 2022

Anonymous said... has an article headlined
"EASTER REFLECTIONS: Who killed Jesus?"
MARCH 28, 2022
By Will Hall

Anonymous said... on
December 29, 2022 has an article headlined
"Who Killed Jesus?"
by Clarence L. Haynes Jr.

Anonymous said...

The Jerusalem Post , has an article headlined
"Who killed Jesus: The Romans or the Jews?"

Anonymous said... has an article headlined
"Who Killed Jesus?" this article says
"The Gospels provide a detailed portrait of Jesus Christ’s last twenty-four hours, including his execution (Matthew 26-27, Mark 14-15, Luke 22-23 and John 18-20). Scholars are nearly unanimous in their interpretation that the Synoptic Gospels indicate that a Roman execution squad killed Jesus on Passover in Jerusalem sometime around AD 30.

However, the authors of the Gospels highlight a conspiracy to arrest Jesus that included some Jewish leaders in Jerusalem (Matthew 26:3-4); at least one of Jesus’ own disciples, Judas Iscariot (Matthew 26:14-16); and Pontus Pilate, the Roman governor. The New Testament contains additional references to Pilate’s involvement (see Acts 3:13; 4:27: 13:28; 1 Timothy 6:13).

Beginning with His arrest in Gethsemane, the Gospels note how Jesus was handed over to various parties again and again and eventually handed over to those that physically put him to death.

From at least the Middle Ages, European Christians, now virtually one hundred percent non-Jewish, began to demonize all Jews, past and present, for the death of Jesus as they focused on a few particular passages in the New Testament that they read as anti-Jewish, if not anti-Semitic.

These interpreters seemingly forgot that Jesus was a Jew as were all of his disciples. The New Testament text, unlike portrayals on stage and screen, reveal a complex response to Jesus by His own people to His mission; some believed He was the long-promised Messiah, others accepted him as a holy man, a prophet, healer and teacher. Some were ambivalent to his message and a few were openly hostile.

However, this rather small, but powerful group were often afraid of the “people” (Matthew 26:5), suggesting most Jews living in Jewish-Palestine were at least somewhat sympathetic to Jesus. Other Jews, living in the Mediterranean Basin and the Middle East, obviously had little knowledge, if any, of His activities and the events surrounding His arrest and execution until well after the events.

It seems that no one person or group was solely and completely responsible for Jesus Christ’s death but that many individuals and various groups were involved in the terrible events on that fateful Passover that ended in the cruel crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth.

“After a messianic entry into Jerusalem just before Pesah in 30 CE, he was arrested as a potential revolutionary and executed (by crucifixion) by order of the Roman procurator Pontius Pilate, probably at the instigation of Jewish circles who feared the Roman reactions to messianic agitation.”

R. J. Zwi Weblowsky and Geoffrey Widoder, eds. , The Oxford Dictionary of the Jewish Religion (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997), p. 368

“It is sometimes asserted that even if ‘the Jews’ killed Jesus (as described in John’s gospel), that must be a good thing, since it led to the resurrection. But whether any effect is good or bad, responsibility for the crucifixion’s cause must be assessed honestly. Further, may post-Vatican II Catholics and liberal Protestants understand ‘the Jews’ as standing in for ‘all of us.’ As we will see below, there is profound truth in that corporate responsibility interpretation, but it can never excuse incarnating such universal accountability in any specific group, and certainly not in “the Jews.” by
John Dominic Crossan

«Oldest ‹Older   601 – 643 of 643   Newer› Newest»