Understanding Israel from Scripture, Part Two
A Biblical, Christo-centric Hermeneutic Vs. a Dispensational, Israel-emphasized Hermeneutic
PREFACE
Lord willing, and God helping me, I will attempt to offer an explanation why a Christ-centered interpretation of Scripture is essential in understanding Israel’s role in prophecy, and a future end times scenario.
What troubles me is how dogmatic we as Christians have become over something that has not happened yet. How easily we have forgotten that the disciples, who walked with Jesus on the shores of Galilee as well as during the heated opposition found in Jerusalem, were just as confused about His first coming as we are about His second coming.
Satan has even hurled spiritual darts at us upon our initial confessions of faith, making us believe that Jesus was crucified on Friday. This couldn’t be, according to Scripture. I’ve taught, preached, and written about this extensively over the past twenty-five plus years, so I won’t exhaust the point here. Nevertheless, since most dispensationalists insist on a literal interpretation of Scripture, few dispensationalists take the Lord Jesus’ words literally, when He refuted the religious leaders who sought a sign of His messiahship (Matt 12:38). Jesus said:
“An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign, but no sign will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.” Matthew 12:39-40
Jesus, the second Person of the Trinity, literally created the heavens and earth, defining the 24-hour night and day as having twelve hours during the daylight (John 11:9). Was He mistaken or being allegorical when He said that He would be buried for three days and three nights? I hardly think either was the case. Wednesday, the middle of the week literally fulfills Palm Sunday and the examination of the paschal lambs requiring four days kept in the home before they were slaughtered (Ex 12:3-6). A Friday crucifixion makes that literally seven days since Palm Sunday. Was that allegorical? If the chief priests and Pharisees asked Pilate for a guard for Christ’s tomb after Jesus was crucified (Matt 27:62-66), a Friday crucifixion would literally cause them to ask for this guard on Saturday, the Sabbath. How could they violate the Law of Moses in this way when John tells us in his gospel account that they would not enter the governor’s headquarters, “so that they would not be defiled, but could eat the Passover” (John 18:28)? Would these legalistic Jews, so meticulous in keeping the Law for the Passover, being those who opposed Jesus at every turn for healing on the Shabbat, would they now be so lax in their hatred of Jesus that they would defile themselves by breaking the Sabbath commandment? I hardly think so. Jesus’ own commentary of their religious observance was that they were meticulous to the smallest seed and grain of spice (Matt 23:23). Moreover, since the women who went to the tomb arrived while it was still dark on Sunday, the first day of the week (John 20:1), when did they have an opportunity to buy the spices to anoint the Lord Jesus (Mark 16:1-2) since no store would be open until after sunup on Sunday? They didn’t buy them beforehand because everyone of Christ’s disciples were shocked and dismayed by His crucifixion. I won’t go into this at length because I have written about it in The Simple Gospel, the eBook being available free on various platforms including Amazon.com (you can get it here).[1]
To be fair, many Reformed covenant theologians, who are amillennial or historical premillennial, still hold to a Friday crucifixion as well.
Does this mean that those who believe in a Friday crucifixion are not saved? God forbid. Why then are we so grounded by this kind of tradition that opposes Scripture? Two reasons: First, Satan, the accuser of the brethren (Rev 12:10), attempts to foil us with a twisted view of Scripture from the very beginning. After all, that’s what he did to Adam and Eve in the garden (Gen 3:1-5). He desires to set us at odds with one another because he defies God’s authority, especially as it pertains to His holy Word. Second, our good and sovereign God allows it so that we may trust in Him alone for our guidance into all truth (John 16:13).
Now, I’ve just cited John 16:13 above. Let’s look at that for a moment. Jesus said,
Howbeit when He, the Spirit of truth, is come, He will guide you into all truth: for He shall not speak of Himself; but whatsoever He shall hear, that shall He speak: and He will shew you things to come. John 16:13, KJV
Having been a pastor of a church in the Bible-belt, Sovereign Grace Baptist Church in Anniston, Alabama (2009-2018), I encountered a lot of church folks who applied this verse to a literal extreme. Several pastors and Sunday school teachers (mostly among Baptists) would not teach on or even talk about the Holy Spirit because of the underlined and highlighted text above. This is absurd. Was Jesus violating what He said in the verse by teaching the disciples some of the most direct and detailed information about the third Person of the Trinity? Of course not.
My point is this: Some Scripture must be taken literally. Some Scripture must be taken allegorically, figuratively, and/or spiritually. And some Scripture may contain elements of both literal and allegorical. Our heads may swim in dizzying circles with that thought since we know that there is a lot of information in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments. How is one to know that he or she is guided by the Holy Spirit into all truth? That’s a fair question, but the Lord Jesus also tells us of another work of the Holy Spirit. Again, speaking of the Holy Spirit, the Lord Jesus also said,
“He will glorify Me, for He will take what is mine and declare it to you.” John 16:14
There it is. If Jesus isn’t glorified by our interpretation of Scripture, either our biblical hermeneutic is off, or something in the corruptions remaining in our mortal flesh is perverting our perspective for exalting self and not Christ. That statement is in direct opposition to what the late Dr. John MacArthur preached at the Shepherd’s Conference in 2007[2] and continued to believe when I attended the Shepherd’s Conference in 2023.[3]
To explore this topic, I’m using several quotes from the late John F. MacArthur, Jr. This is not meant to be a dig against the late Dr. M., but he had been for years one of the leading voices in promoting dispensational theology in general and pre-tribulation premillennial eschatology in particular.
Therefore, I’m not picking on the late Dr. M. In fact, I’m grateful that his ministry at Grace to You has been so open with their material, as it is easily accessible and may be readily referenced.
PRINCIPLES OF DR. MACARTHUR’S HEREMENEUTICS
One of John MacArthur’s most frequently repeated hermeneutical principles was that Scripture should be interpreted according to its normal grammatical and historical meaning unless the text itself indicates otherwise. I pray that I am not oversimplifying Dr. MacArthur’s teaching but since he had ministered for nearly 6 decades, wading through all the doctor’s work is far too voluminous than my physical ailments can endure. Nevertheless, Dr. MacArthur’s hermeneutical principles can be exemplified by these five particular.
First, “to be able to interpret [Scripture] accurately”[4] Dr. MacArthur presents literal, historical, grammatical, synthesis, and practical principles in his hermeneutic.[5] Concerning the Literal principle, he writes:
“In simple terms, this means you take the words of Scripture in their literal, normal, natural sense.” —Grace to You[6]
This may be one of the clearest and most concise statements behind Dr. MacArthur’s hermeneutic.
Concerning the next two principles of interpretation, the words of the announcer for the Grace to You radio broadcast summarize Dr. MacArthur’s perspective of the historical and grammatical principles in his hermeneutic:
“ At the heart of our hermeneutics is this basic assumption—when God revealed truth, He intended to communicate to us. He used the normal conventions of human language common to the people and time when His revelation came.
“That’s why we employ the grammatical-historical method of interpretation (the rules of grammar and the facts of history) to discern the meaning of Scripture.” —Grace to You[7]
Concerning the fourth principle, synthesis, Dr. MacArthur writes:
“If the Bible is God’s Word, it must be consistent with itself. No part of Scripture can contradict any other part. It was all inspired by one Author—the Holy Spirit—and consequently, it reflects a marvelous, supernatural unity.” —Grace to You[8]
In another Grace to You broadcast, aired from a Sunday evening sermon, concerning this synthesis principle Dr. MacArthur taught:
“I often tell ministers the meaning of the Scripture is the Scripture.” —Grace to You[9]
Concerning the fifth principle, the practical method, Dr. MacArthur writes:
“Once you’ve considered the literal meaning of a passage, its historical and grammatical context, and how it harmonizes with the rest of Scripture, you need to draw out the practical implications for your life. That’s what productive Bible study looks like—digging down to the original meaning of a text and applying it to your life.” —Grace to You[10]
Here, I don’t disagree with any of these principles above, per se. Nevertheless, if they stand alone “as is,” it may, in my humble opinion, lead the interpreter of Scripture to draw conclusions like this one, a hermeneutic that leads to these kinds of statements with regard to eschatology:
“What I’ve been saying is pretty simple: if you get Israel right, you’re going to get eschatology right; if you don’t get Israel right, you will never get eschatology right.” —Grace to You[11]
These principles, if not centered in glorifying Christ from the text, may cause the congregants to this method of interpretation to readily agree that this is uncompromised truth.
Again, Dr. MacArthur said this:
“The key to eschatology then is Judeo centrism—if you want to coin a phrase. The key to eschatology is Judeo centrism, which alone provides the cohesive base to integrate the various features of biblical prophecy.” —Grace to You[12]
This becomes a difficulty for me, because of what I’ve already mentioned in the Preface, and what we will look at in the section after this next one.
In the lecture Dr. MacArthur delivered at the Shepherd’s Conference in 2007, 17 minutes, 29 seconds into the message he stated,
“Israel always means Israel, never means anything but Israel.”[13]
When he says this, he is talking about ethnic descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He clarifies it by this statement:
“As it does, the perpetuity of the elect church to salvation glory, so the Scripture in similar language and by promises from the same God affirms the perpetuity of ethnic Israel to a future salvation of a generation of Jews that will fulfill all divine promises given to them by God.”[14]
So that you have context for the former statement, I will give you a fuller quote from the lecture.
“If you get eschatology right it’s because you get Israel right. You get Israel right when you get the Old Testament covenants and promises right. You get the Old Testament covenants and promises right when you get the interpretation of Scripture right. You get interpretation of Scripture right when you’re faithful to a legitimate hermeneutic… and God’s integrity is upheld. Get your hermeneutics right, you’ll get the Old Testament promises right. Get promises right, you’ll get Israel right. Get Israel right, you’ll get eschatology right. The Bible calls God the God of Israel over 200 times. The God of Israel. There are over 2,000 references to Israel in Scripture, not one of them means anything but Israel. Not one of them, including Romans 9:6 and Galatians 6:16 which is the only two passages that amillennialists go to trying to convince us that that cancels out the other 2,000. There is no difficulty in interpreting those as simply meaning Jews who were believers; the Israel of God. Israel always means Israel, never means anything but Israel. Seventy-three New Testament uses of Israel always mean Israel.” [15]
First, I have a difficulty with the statement, “Israel always means Israel, never means anything but Israel.” Let’s consider this for a moment. The first time “Israel” is used in the Scripture does not speak of the nation of Israel. This I mentioned in Part One of this series of articles. It was the name given to Jacob by a pre-incarnate appearance of Christ, a Christophany:
And He said, Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel: for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men, and hast prevailed. Genesis 32:28, KJV
There are other verses we can say are certainly more scriptural exceptions to “Israel” meaning the ethnic nation of Israel. Here are a few more.
When Israel was a child, I loved Him, and out of Egypt I called My son. Hosea 11:1
Matthew’s gospel account tells us that this verse was about the Lord Jesus Messiah, when He was a child, as it is written,
And he rose and took the child and His mother by night and departed to Egypt and remained there until the death of Herod. This was to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet, “Out of Egypt I called My son.” Matthew 2:14-15
While certainly the children of Israel’s deliverance from the bondage in Egypt is spoken of in Hosea 11:1. Yet the people of God under Moses’s leadership was only a shadow of things to come, a prophetic picture of the Messiah to come. The young Lord Jesus must be removed from the Land of Promise to dwell in a land of sinful, idolatrous men only to come forth in the fullness of the time to grow up in Nazareth to fulfill more Scripture (Isa 11:1; Matt 2:23); and then fulfill more Scripture by beginning His ministry in Galilee (Isa 9:1-2; Matt 4:12-17).
Yet another Old Testament portion that speaks of Messiah Y’shua is this one:
Yet now hear, O Jacob My servant; and Israel, whom I have chosen: Thus saith the LORD that made thee, and formed thee from the womb, which will help thee; Fear not, O Jacob, My servant; and thou, Jesurun, whom I have chosen. For I will pour water upon him that is thirsty, and floods upon the dry ground: I will pour My Spirit upon thy seed, and My blessing upon thine offspring: Isaiah 44:1-3, KJV
Notice that YHVH God promises to pour out His Spirit upon “thy seed,” which is also translated “your offspring” (ESV).[16] In Hebrew Isaiah 44:3 is translated literally “thy seed,” a singular possessive, זרעך (zar-E-kha); and what is said by YHVH God here very much resembles what He said to Abraham centuries earlier, using the same term: זרעך (zar-E-kha), as it is written,
And I will establish My covenant between Me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee. Genesis 17:7, KJV
Now, Paul explains that the covenant promises to Abraham were fulfilled in, by, and through the Messiah, and I suspect that he would have made the same arguments concerning Isaiah 44 above. But why would he need to? He made a more powerful argument by going to the source: Abraham. It is written:
Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. Galatians 3:16, KJV
Not to “seeds” plural or “offsprings” (ESV), but singular because Jesus is the ultimate fulfillment of Israel (as already mentioned in Part One).
The late Dr. MacArthur, as he did throughout his lifetime of ministry, preached passionately for a shade under 80 minutes on March 7, 2007 to open the first general session of the Shepherd’s Conference that year.[17] Interestingly, he walked through the Abrahamic Covenant in Genesis during the lecture but mentioned nothing of what the Holy Spirit reveals to us through Paul.[18]
Sadly, however, his lecture contained various logical fallacies—generalizations, ad hominem, straw men, slippery slopes, cherry picking, etc.—to bolster his heartfelt and enthusiastic position.
To be honest, and to be fair, I haven’t performed an exhaustive deep dive into the late doctor’s preaching on his hermeneutics, his eschatology, or his dogmatic stance concerning ethnic Israel as a nation. But frankly, I wouldn’t have the desire to read or listen to more than I had because it was heartbreaking. I don’t doubt His salvation. That’s the beauty and glory of God’s amazing grace in Christ. Nevertheless, according to Dr. MacArthur, not only from his 2007 message, but also the one I heard as I personally attended the 2023 Sheperd’s Conference.[19] Sixteen years had not changed his position whatsoever.
According to Dr. MacArthur, though he follows the hermeneutical method mentioned above, he implies that even our salvation is predicated upon God’s fulfillment of His promises to Israel as a nation. He gives himself away concerning his hermeneutical emphasis with statements like…
“Seventy percent of Scripture is the story of Israel, and I think that the whole point of the story is to get to the ending, and it doesn’t go up in smoke.”[20]
With statements like this one, the emphasis of Dr. MacArthur’s hermeneutic was the ethnic descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. But his reasoning, albeit noble, he was an apologist for the sovereign election of ethnic Israel by God. He sincerely believed that if Israel, mentioned in the Scriptures over 2,000 times, is the basis for his eschatological hermeneutic; however, everything he presented in March 2007 shows that Israel, exemplified by the statement above, also drives his entire hermeneutic. That is troubling.
I know I have written it in Part One of this series, but I need to place it here as well. In answer to a question concerning Israel, I wrote:
“…Jacob’s renaming presents several important truths: first, Jacob becomes a type of Christ as it foreshadows the Messiah to come. Jacob was to be ‘governed by God,’ which is what yisrael means. Jesus was the only Man ever completely governed by God (John 8:29). Second, the name was given to a single man, again, to show that salvation comes through a single Man, Jesus. Third, it demonstrates the offspring of Messiah, viz, His progeny would be governed by God, viz, Jesus is the Head of His church; He commands us, not the other way around. There are more things that this speaks of, but it is clear by these three perspectives that modern, unsaved Israel does not fall into this prophetic typology.”
While Dr. MacArthur proclaimed emphatically that salvation was by grace alone, through faith alone in Christ alone, according to Scripture alone, for God’s glory alone, the faithfulness of God to elect Israel was never connected with Christ’s fulfillment. They still run parallel in MacArthur’s hermeneutic. In an effort to be literal, consistent, and reasonable by his interpretation of Scripture, Dr. MacArthur becomes unreasonable by insisting that Israel and Christ’s church have two destinies.
One of the interesting illustrations of the people of God under the New Covenant is the olive tree. In it, we do not see two olive trees, but one. A natural olive tree with unnatural branches grafted into it:
11So I ask, did they stumble in order that they might fall? By no means! Rather, through their trespass salvation has come to the Gentiles, so as to make Israel jealous. 12Now if their trespass means riches for the world, and if their failure means riches for the Gentiles, how much more will their full inclusion mean! 13Now I am speaking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch then as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry 14in order somehow to make my fellow Jews jealous, and thus save some of them. 15For if their rejection means the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance mean but life from the dead? 16If the dough offered as firstfruits is holy, so is the whole lump, and if the root is holy, so are the branches. 17But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, although a wild olive shoot, were grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing root of the olive tree, 18do not be arrogant toward the branches. If you are, remember it is not you who support the root, but the root that supports you. 19Then you will say, “Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.” 20That is true. They were broken off because of their unbelief, but you stand fast through faith. So do not become proud, but fear. 21For if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will He spare you. 22Note then the kindness and the severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen, but God’s kindness to you, provided you continue in His kindness. Otherwise you too will be cut off. 23And even they, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God has the power to graft them in again. 24For if you were cut from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and grafted, contrary to nature, into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these, the natural branches, be grafted back into their own olive tree. Romans 11:11-24
Christ is not the essential center nor exalted emphasis in Dr. MacArthur’s interpretation of Scripture. He does not see it in Scripture because he cannot see it; and therefore, he’ll miss things in Scripture that his Bible book commentaries will never address.
Much of what he teaches are things I would agree with whole-heartedly. Even some of these quotes have elements in them that I could say yea and amen to; however, his meaning, in several instances, is different because, for the late doctor, it was more about interpreting Scripture literally, grammatically, and historically, so that when it came to certain passages that required Scripture compared with Scripture, the passage would either be ignored or grossly misinterpreted if there was something nuanced in it concerning Christ. This, I will attempt to justify in the next section.
“What about the over 2,000 references to Israel Dr. MacArthur mentioned in the quote you provided?” someone may ask. We will cover that in the next section as we examine the importance of a Christ-centered hermeneutic.
PREEMINENCE OF CHRIST IN A SOUND, BIBLICAL HERMENEUTIC
Early in his lecture at the opening session of the 2007 Shepherd’s Conference, Dr. MacArthur stated:
“Does the end matter? Does it matter to God? Should it matter to us? I think it matters to God. I think it’s the whole point of history. I know it’s the whole point of history…. Some say, ‘Nearly one-fourth of Scripture relates to the prophecies of the end.’”[21]
Not only was Dr. MacArthur’s hermeneutic based upon literal, historical, and grammatical interpretive methods of understanding Scripture, not only was God’s election upon ethnic Israel emphasized, but his hermeneutic was also driven by end times prophecy. In other words, his eschatology drove his theology, and not the other way around.
Jesus is the reason for everything. He is God-incarnate, the second Person of the Triune God, who breathed out the Scripture. Jesus Himself said about Himself that He is the center of Scripture:
“You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about Me,” John 5:39
Jesus wasn’t saying something fresh and new. Though He didn’t quote it literally, He said nothing different from what the Holy Spirit inspired the psalmist to write about the Messiah:
Then I said, “Behold, I have come; in the scroll of the book it is written of Me: I delight to do Your will, O My God; Your law is within My heart.” Psalm 40:7-8
The writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews testifies to the fact that this portion was specifically about the Lord Jesus Christ (Heb 10:7-10). This writer to the Hebrew believers in Messiah implied at the very beginning of his epistle that the Scriptures were about the Son of God:
Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days He has spoken to us by His Son, whom He appointed the heir of all things, through whom also He created the world. He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of His nature, and He upholds the universe by the word of His power. After making purification for sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, Hebrews 1:1-3
With regard to prophecy, again, it must glorify the Lord Jesus Christ in some way, shape, or form (John 16:14), as it is written,
For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy. Revelation 19:10
Dr. MacArthur made a common mistake that we frail preachers are prone to make. He believed that by emphasizing the faithfulness of God concerning His promises to Israel, it would bolster the hearing congregant’s faith and prick the unbeliever’s heart that has been prepared by the Holy Spirit so they may be won to Christ. His hermeneutic, therefore, effected his homiletic, and basically resulted in denigrating Christ. God’s faithfulness is most exalted by the truth of His faithfulness to bring about the fulfillment of all prophecy through His one and only Son.
I said that it was a common mistake. I’ve heard several ministers make a similar mistake in preaching, passionate though they might be, feeling that it was absolutely necessary to emphasize the worldwide flood of Noah’s day in order to emphasize God’s judgment upon an evil and wicked world. If the text has us preaching Genesis 6-9, by all means preach it, but the greatest judgment the world has ever seen, and will ever see, occurred on a tree of wood in Jerusalem some 2,000 years ago. No man ever walked more intimately with God the Father than the Lord Jesus of Nazareth (John 1:18). He was pleasing to the Father in all He thought, said, and did, even when Jesus suffered the holy wrath of God for sins He did not commit. Therefore, when Jesus suffered on the cross, that disparity between the intimate, loving, fellowship He had known with the Father and the holy wrath from the Father was so great that all the collective torments suffered by every God-hating, Christ-rejecting soul sent to eternal punishment will never come close to comparing with what Christ suffered on Calvary’s cross.
God the Father is most glorified in the Son. It is written,
Therefore God has highly exalted Him and bestowed on Him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. Philippians 2:9-11
Israel hasn’t been replaced, as John MacArthur assumed concerning the beliefs of all amillennialists and historical premillennialists. Some do, but not all. Many believe as I do, that Israel is fulfilled in Christ, being made up of believing Jews and non-Jews, like the illustration earlier of the olive tree and its branches. It is written,
For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. Romans 1:16
This is what I call fulfillment theology, not replacement theology. Yes, there are those in various Protestant denominations that believe Israel has been replaced by the church. I do not believe the Scriptures bear that out. They cannot with a Christ-centered hermeneutic.
And certainly, as “not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel” (Rom 9:6), not everyone who attends church services, or even joins as a member, is saved. Thus, we can also say, “Not all who are in the church are the church” (see Matt 7:21-23).
If Christ Jesus is the center, emphasis, and very testimony of Scripture, then it would make sense that “Nearly one-fourth of Scripture relates to the prophecies of the end.” The testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.
Israel יִשְׂרָאֵל (yis-ra-ĀL) is mentioned 2,505 times in 2,230 verses of the Hebrew Scriptures, and written in every book of the Old Testament except for Esther, Job, Jonah, Habakkuk, and Haggai. Israel Ἰσραήλ (is-ra-ĀL) is mentioned 70 times in 68 verses of the Greek Scriptures, written in thirteen of the twenty-seven books of the Christian New Testament.
If Jesus is the ultimate fulfillment of Israel, ruling as a Prince with God because He is Lord of all, and having been governed by God as the perfect and sinless Man while He lived and minstered upon the earth, living the righteous life that you and I cannot possibly live on the planet earth, then it would make sense that Israel is mentioned so many times in the Bible. Because it’s all about Jesus, and Israel was meant to be a prophetic foreshadow of Jesus, the Jew who fulfilled God’s promises.
Even the wickedness of Israel is reflected in Christ, since Christ suffered for those sins as well when He hung upon the cross. Now how does apply this sixth hermeneutical principle of being Christ-centered work? Let me give you an example. While this verse doesn’t mention Israel, per se, it does use a term that is often used of those ethnic descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. The word is Jew. It says,
For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical. But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter. His praise is not from man but from God. Romans 2:28-29
The apostle here was not giving us new revelation by the Spirit. This comes from the Hebrew Scriptures. In the Torah, before entering the Land of Promise, YHVH God gives His people an impossible command. Moses tells the children of Israel,
Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no longer stubborn. Deuteronomy 10:16
The literal, grammatical, and historical principles of Dr. MacArthur’s hermeneutic fails here apart from applying a Christ-centered hermeneutic. “How can one do that?” the children of Israel ask, scratching their heads. They cannot literally do this, and we cannot literally understand it. Nevertheless, YHVH God provides the answer through their prophet, Moses, who says:
And the LORD your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your offspring, so that you will love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, that you may live. Deuteronomy 30:6
That’s regeneration (Ezek 36:26-27) and it is fulfilled in Jesus Messiah according to the prophecy concerning the New Covenant, spoken by YHVH God through Jeremiah (Jer 32; Heb 8:1-13).
As mentioned in Part One, Jesus is, was, and evermore shall be YHVH God’s plan before He said, “Light be!” (Gen 1:3), as it is written concerning Jesus,
He was foreknown before the foundation of the world but was made manifest in the last times for the sake of you who through Him are believers in God, who raised Him from the dead and gave Him glory, so that your faith and hope are in God. 1 Peter 1:20-21
The truth of God’s Messiah proclaimed in the garden after Adam and Eve had sinned, some two thousand years before Jacob was named Israel, not only declares salvation for sinners, but establishes the precedent for our Christo-centric hermeneutic:
And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her Seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise His heel. Genesis 3:15, KJV
There’s that word “Seed” again (see Gen 17:7; Isa 44:3; Gal 3:16).
A Christ-centered hermeneutic allows us to understand why the heavens, earth, and man was created in the first place. Our frail and finite minds think about the fall of man in the garden and it prompts us to think, if not ask altogether, “If God is sovereign, why didn’t He just do something to keep Adam and Eve from sinning?” A Christo-centric hermeneutic helps us to understand that it was to manifest God’s greatest glory through the Son of God, the “Seed” of the woman. How so? Through this episode of original sin in the garden, God illustrates to us that perfect, dusty man living in the perfect environment (Eden), with the perfect companion (Eve), and fellowship with God (Elohiym), that apart from the Lord Jesus Messiah and salvation through Him, all man is capable of is being deceived, dishonoring God by disobeying Him, and bringing death to both himself and to others.
Let’s take a look at one more example of shedding light on a Christ-centered hermeneutic in Scripture. This one should serve nicely for this paper because of Dr. MacArthur’s passionate and continued emphasis on the faithfulness of God in fulfilling His covenant promises to Israel. With regard to faith, yours and mine is weak. Our faith is frail and often falters or even fails. The faith of the Lord Jesus Messiah, as perfect and sinless Man, never failed. Because He was faithful, His faithfulness is imputed to us, that is, placed upon our account as believers in Christ, as it is written,
looking to Jesus, the Founder and Perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is seated at the right hand of the throne of God. Hebrews 12:2
From the original Greek, Jesus is the Founder and Perfector of… faith, or “Author and Finisher of… faith” The word “our” is not in the original text. It’s alright that it is included because this entire verse speaks of imputed righteousness. Jesus went to the cross, not for Himself, but for our sakes; and He did so with joy over the salvation of His creation. You and I would have gone to the cross begrudgingly, kicking and screaming. We don’t despise the shame of sin, but Jesus did; and He did so on our behalf so His holy attitude and His righteous behavior would be placed upon your account and mine. Now, Christ being the Founder and Perfecter of faith, let’s take a look at faith. It is written,
Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. Hebrews 11:1
Another English version translates it in this way:
Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. Hebrews 11:1, KJV
The English words “assurance” (ESV) and “substance” (KJV) are translated from the Greek word ὑπόστασις (hoop-OS-ta-sis).
It is used two other times in this Epistle to the Hebrews, in chapter one and in chapter three. First, in chapter one we read:
He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of His nature, and He upholds the universe by the word of His power. After making purification for sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, Hebrews 1:3
Who being the brightness of His glory, and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; Hebrews 1:3, KJV
Hoopostasis is also found in the third chapter (and is also translated similarly as “confident” in 2 Corinthians 9:4 and as “confidence” in 2 Corinthians 11:17):
For we have come to share in Christ, if indeed we hold our original confidence firm to the end. Hebrews 3:14
For we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end; Hebrews 3:14, KJV
While faith is certainly a “confidence” and “assurance” that something is true, biblically speaking, faith also contains the very “substance,” “person,” and “nature” or the Lord Jesus Christ.
Therefore, when we see examples of faithful men in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, that faith is not merely a grace imparted to us from the Holy Spirit to believe (Gal 5:22-23; Eph 2:8-9), it is not only an assurance and a confidence that what God has said and promised is so, it includes the very substance, person, and nature of Christ. This is why the Word of God tells us that it is all about Jesus (Psa 40:7-8; John 5:39; et al). Let’s take a brief look at a few of these faithful folk.
By faith Abel offered to God a more acceptable sacrifice than Cain, through which he was commended as righteous, God commending him by accepting his gifts. And through his faith, though he died, he still speaks. Hebrews 11:4
The faith of Abel is a picture of the perfect faith of Christ. His acceptable sacrifice reflected Christ’s perfect sacrifice of Himself, and though Christ died, He rose again to show us Himself in the prophetic life of Abel.
By faith Enoch was taken up so that he should not see death, and he was not found, because God had taken him. Now before he was taken he was commended as having pleased God. Hebrews 11:5
The faith of Enoch is a picture of the perfect faith of Christ because Enoch was commended as having pleased God. Jesus was always pleasing to the heavenly Father in all things, never once being unpleasing in His thoughts, words, and deeds (Matt 3:17; 17:5; John 8:29).
By faith Noah, being warned by God concerning events as yet unseen, in reverent fear constructed an ark for the saving of his household. By this he condemned the world and became an heir of the righteousness that comes by faith. Hebrews 11:7
The faith of Noah is a picture of the perfect Person of Christ because Noah constructed an ark of wood to save his family and condemned the world for its evil and adulterous wickedness. Faithful Jesus came to the earth from heaven, saved His family by a cross of wood, and by His holy and reverent fear of God, condemned sin by His suffering God’s wrath, dying a horrible death as a Man, and shedding His blood for the forgiveness of sins.
I could go on, not only for the rest of Hebrews, but throughout the Scriptures. But I will end this portion here, as this portion of the series has already gone longer than I intended.
Finally, let’s take a look at possible erroneous suppositions if we fail to interpret Scripture with a Christ-centered hermeneutic.
POSSIBLE ERRONEOUS SUPPOSITIONS
While there are a large number of examples I can give concerning erroneous suppositions we might make when not using a Christo-centric hermeneutic, I will close this section of the series with one particular problem from Scripture that has arisen in preaching of late. Questions from congregants and ministry friends concerning this perspective; and because it has become so prevalent in preaching today, I’ll address it here. It stems from a misunderstanding and misinterpretation of this verse of Scripture:
You who are of purer eyes than to see evil and cannot look at wrong… Habakkuk 1:13a
Some have concluded by this verse because of the “purer eyes” wording, that the Father could not look at Jesus when He suffered on the cross because Jesus bore our sin. This is preached from a number of pulpits, and from what is presented in this portion of Habakkuk, it is preached, taught, and expounded upon because of a literal, grammatical, and historical hermeneutic. It’s quite a quandary for feeble-faithed men, such as we are.
Yet in the verse itself, the prophet not only says that God’s eyes are too pure to look upon evil, he also says that YHVH God looks upon the Babylonians idly—that He looks upon wretched idolators, who are more evil than the wicked in Judah, and that He’s using these sinners in order to bring about judgment upon Judah (Hab 1:5-11). Here’s the full verse:
You who are of purer eyes than to see evil and cannot look at wrong, why do You idly look at traitors and remain silent when the wicked swallows up the man more righteous than he? Habakkuk 1:13
So, first, we already have the proof from Habakkuk 1:5-13 that this cannot be truly applied as a literal restriction concerning YHVH God.
Second, Satan entered the very presence of God at least twice since the fall, recorded in the book of Job (Job 1:6-12; 2:1-7), and possibly more than we know (Rev 12:10). I think we can agree that as far as evil is concerned, Satan is the worst of the worst, yet he conversed with YHVH God, and moreover, conversed with the Lord Jesus Christ (Matt 4:1-11; Luke 4:1-13). Satan’s staining heaven with his presence is why the sacrifice of our Lord Jesus is also the propitiation for the whole world (1 Jn 2:2); because in the regeneration, a new heaven and new earth will be cleansed by the omnipotent power of Christ’s precious blood.
And though I will not give exhaustive proof texts for YHVH God looking upon evil, here are a few:
You have set our iniquities before You, our secret sins in the light of Your presence. Psalm 90:8
The eyes of the LORD are in every place, keeping watch on the evil and the good. Proverbs 15:3
“But they do not consider that I remember all their evil. Now their deeds surround them; they are before My face.” Hosea 7:2
Thirdly, to suggest that the Father could not look at Jesus on the cross would imply that Jesus did not pay the penalty for sins He did not commit but actually became sin itself; and that would in turn imply that Christ’s righteous act was not the delight and satisfaction of Father God. If Jesus was at any time unpleasing to the Father (Matt 3:17; John 8:29), even on the cross, His substitution means nothing (1 Pet 3:18), and you and I have no hope of salvation at all. If Jesus was not pleasing to the heavenly Father on the cross, this would make Jesus a liar when He said the last part of this statement:
“And He who sent Me is with Me. He has not left Me alone, for I always do the things that are pleasing to Him.” John 8:29
Was the vindication of God’s justice not pleasing to the Father? Will the righteous Judge on that Day be unable to look at the sinners He’s condemning to eternal punishment? I think not.
Since I cited the entire verse, I must mention this about John 8:29. We do know that Jesus was forsaken of the Father (Psa 22:1; Matt 27:46; Mark 15:34). That’s because the first part of John 8:29 was true of Jesus right up until the cross. Jesus walked intimately with the Father (John 1:18; Heb 1:3), so much more intimately than any man, including Adam; so that when Jesus was forsaken of that relationship, the suffering of all men collectively who have rejected Christ and will be sent to eternal torment in that Day could never come close to matching the wrath that Jesus suffered when He was forsaken by God. What that exactly entails is a heavenly mystery that is infinitely beyond our finite grasp. Yet we will chase down that infinitely glorious truth of Christ crucified for all eternity.
Again, we have a verse of Scripture that specifically states that YHVH God looks upon His “Seed” (KJV) or “Offspring” when He (the LORD) puts Him (Seed, or Offspring) to grief:
Yet it was the will of the LORD to crush Him; He has put Him to grief; when His soul makes an offering for guilt, He shall see His Offspring; He shall prolong His days; the will of the LORD shall prosper in His hand. Isaiah 53:10
Fourth, this doctrine of the Father not looking at Jesus would devilishly assault the nature and character of the Father because to suggest such a thing would cause the Father to tell us to do something He couldn’t do Himself—that is, to look upon Jesus Christ crucified, which is our only Hope of salvation. This is what the Father told us to do through the prophet—to look upon Jesus to be saved:
Look unto Me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else. Isaiah 45:22, KJV
“Turn to Me and be saved, all the ends of the earth! For I am God, and there is no other.” Isaiah 45:22
Both are wonderful English translations of this verse. YHVH God says in Hebrew פְּנוּ־אֵלַי (p’NOO—e-LAĪY), “You face Me.” The command is to “face” God because we are looking away from Him, so therefore, the ESV also is correct because the command implies repentance, turning from our sin and turning to God. But since the Father is spirit and has no body (John 4:24), then the command can only be applied by our looking to Jesus (John 1:18; 14:9; 19:37; Heb 1:1-3; 1 Jn 1:2; et al) with spiritual eyes (2 Cor 5:7).
Finally, that brings us to the last point: why would Habakkuk say such a thing if it is not literally true of the Father? I believe that among the redeemed, even in our misgivings and misunderstandings, we still become a gospel witness for Christ’s sake and for His glory. While every prophet points to Messiah, is a witness of and for Messiah, and in many ways is a type of Christ (John 5:39), the weakness of men is one of the ways God works all things together for good (Rom 8:28). When we see the weakness in Abraham, Moses, Aaron, David, Elijah, Habakkuk, etc., we will depend less and less upon men, less and less upon ourselves, and depend more and more upon the Lord Jesus. Jesus didn’t entrust Himself to men (John 2:24-25), and neither should we.
Jesus of Nazareth is certainly that Prophet foretold to come (Deut 18:15). Jesus is the only Jew who ever kept the whole Law both actively and passively. Jesus is the only Son who was wholly obedient to His Father. Jesus is the only Prophet who had ever spoken the truth of heaven without schism or defect. All others were fallen descendants of Adam. And since the Lord Jesus came, all His ministers continue to fall short of His glory. Habakkuk in his frailty and fallenness only expresses what we do all the time—apply our weaknesses to the immutable God. Habakkuk speaks as if the presence of wickedness is going to change God. Certainly, God is not aloof to our sin, for our sin grieves Him (Eph 4:30); but He cannot be changed by anything. He is complete in Himself. He cannot learn; He’s all-knowing. He cannot be nowhere; He is everywhere-present.
Because we are often driven by the wind and tossed in our situations and circumstances, we sometimes project our weaknesses onto the character of the unchanging God. Thus, Habakkuk points to Christ Jesus in his weakness, because it is only in the incarnate God, Jesus Messiah, who was the faithful, infallible, and impeccable Prophet to the end—when He breathed His last on that tree.
We see these same Habakkuk-like characteristics in our own lives, which when we recognize them, provoke us to surrender unto Christ through the Holy Spirit even more. We know that God is sovereign, but sometimes in our hearts, or even by our actions and attitudes, we may openly or secretly give the impression that Jesus couldn’t build His church without us (Jas 4:13-17). Or we know that truth must be revealed to us by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 2:14), but we sometimes act like or live as if we discovered these treasures on our own (1 Cor 4:7).
Read Part One, “Understanding Israel from Scripture” by clicking here.
FOOTNOTES
[1] Interestingly, although Dr. MacArthur believed in a literal interpretation of Scripture (which we will look at in the next section), for over 56 years as pastor of Grace Community Church, they celebrated “Good Friday,” and the doctor preached a Friday crucifixion.
[2] https://www.gracechurch.org/sermons/332
[3] I was gifted the registration price and the roundtrip travel from Alaska by the saints of Calvary Baptist Church in Ninilchik, Alaska. Before the conference started, Dr. MacArthur suffered a broken wrist, so he only spoke during a Q&A session on the second day and at the final evening service, unveiling a soon-to-be released commentary on Zechariah. Like he had done 16 years earlier, Dr. M. planted a flag upon the hill of pre-tribulation dispensational premillennialism, passionately dogmatic in his conviction. See
.
[4] https://www.gty.org/blogs/B120928/elements-of-productive-bible-study-interpret-part-2
[7] https://www.gty.org/blogs/B100202/good-hermeneutics
[8] https://www.gty.org/blogs/B120928/elements-of-productive-bible-study-interpret-part-2
[9] https://www.gty.org/sermons/80-372/can-we-know-what-the-scripture-means
[10] https://www.gty.org/blogs/B120928/elements-of-productive-bible-study-interpret-part-2
[11] https://www.gty.org/sermons/90-336/why-every-calvinist-should-be-a-premillennialist-part-3
[13] https://www.gracechurch.org/sermons/332
[14] Ibid. (10:29); emphasis added.
[16] There are more sermons out there, in written form and audio recordings, using the KJV “seed” language than the word “offspring,” so I am using the KJV here.
[17] https://www.gracechurch.org/sermons/332
[19] https://www.gracechurch.org/sermons/20936