Ways Christians See It

Israel and the church: one people or two?

Romans 11:17-29

Paul spends three chapters of Romans on a question that will not leave him alone. If the has come and most of his own people have not received him, what happened to the promises? He refuses two easy answers. He will not say God changed his mind, and he will not say the promises were never meant seriously.

What he offers instead is an image. There is one olive tree. Some natural branches were broken off through unbelief, and wild branches from elsewhere were grafted in. The grafted branches are told, in unusually blunt terms, not to be arrogant about it, because the root supports them and not the other way around, and because God is entirely capable of grafting the natural branches back in.

How to read that has consequences well beyond . It shapes how Christians read the Old Testament, what they expect from history, how they pray, and how they relate to Jewish neighbors. It also has a history that anyone handling it should know, because for centuries a particular reading of these chapters was used to justify appalling things.

Romans 11:17-29

¹⁷But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive, were grafted in among them and became partaker with them of the root and of the richness of the olive tree, ¹⁸don't boast over the branches. But if you boast, remember that it is not you who support the root, but the root supports you. ¹⁹You will say then, "Branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in." ²⁰True; by their unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by your faith. Don't be conceited, but fear; ²¹for if God didn't spare the natural branches, neither will he spare you. ²²See then the goodness and severity of God. Toward those who fell, severity; but toward you, goodness, if you continue in his goodness; otherwise you also will be cut off. ²³They also, if they don't continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. ²⁴For if you were cut out of that which is by nature a wild olive tree, and were grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree, how much more will these, which are the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree? ²⁵For I don't desire you to be ignorant, brothers, of this mystery, so that you won't be wise in your own conceits, that a partial hardening has happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in, ²⁶and so all Israel will be saved. Even as it is written, "There will come out of Zion the Deliverer, and he will turn away ungodliness from Jacob. ²⁷This is my covenant with them, when I will take away their sins." ²⁸Concerning the Good News, they are enemies for your sake. But concerning the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sake. ²⁹For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.

World English Bible, public domain. Read the whole chapter →

Where everyone agrees

Common ground here is broader than the disputes suggest, and some of it is recent and hard won. Every view holds that salvation is through Christ, that the God of Israel is the God of the church, that the Old Testament is Christian Scripture and not a discarded prologue, and that believers are latecomers who were brought in by mercy. Every view now rejects the idea that Jewish people are collectively guilty of the crucifixion, a claim that was repudiated by the Church in Nostra Aetate in 1965 and by essentially every other body since. And every view has to reckon with Romans 11:29, that the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable, which Paul says specifically about his own people.

One people, fulfilled in Christ

There has always been one people of God. The church is not a replacement for Israel but Israel arriving at what it was always for, now opened to the nations.

What it claims

The promises were never to ethnicity as such. Paul says not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, and that the true children of Abraham are those who share his faith. Christ himself is the seed to whom the promises were made, so everyone in him inherits them. The tree in Romans 11 is one tree throughout, which is exactly the point: Gentiles do not get their own tree. On this reading the church does not take Israel's place, because the church is what Israel becomes when the Messiah comes and the nations stream in as the prophets said they would.

Who holds it

The majority position historically and today. Catholic and teaching, most Reformed and theology, Lutheran and Anglican traditions, and much of evangelicalism outside dispensational circles.

The texts it stands on

Galatians 3:28-29 If you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's offspring and heirs according to promise.
Ephesians 2:14-16 Christ made the two one and broke down the dividing wall, creating one new humanity in place of the two.
Romans 9:6-8 Not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel. Paul draws the distinction himself.

Strongest case

It reads the New Testament's own habit of applying Israel's titles to the church, chosen race, royal priesthood, holy nation, which are lifted from Exodus and Isaiah and handed to a mixed congregation. It also keeps one story rather than two running in parallel, which is how the New Testament writers plainly read their Bible.

Hardest question

In practice it slid into for most of church history, and the results were catastrophic. If the church simply is Israel, it becomes hard to say what Romans 11:29 is protecting, and easy to conclude that Jewish existence after Christ has no meaning, a conclusion Christians drew and acted on for centuries. Holders of this view today generally insist their position does not entail that, and the burden is on them to show how.

Holding the map

This is one of the places where knowing the history is part of knowing the doctrine. For centuries the first view was held in a form that treated Jewish existence as an embarrassment to be corrected, and the results are on the record. That does not settle the exegesis, and it would be dishonest to let historical guilt do the work of argument. But it does mean the warning in Romans 11 was addressed to the right audience, and that Gentile Christians reading these chapters should notice they are the ones being cautioned.

Whatever you conclude, notice what Paul does with the disagreement he is in the middle of. He does not resolve it into a system. He ends with a hymn about the depth of God's wisdom and the impossibility of tracing his paths, having just said that God consigned all to disobedience in order to have mercy on all. Any position that comes out of these chapters feeling triumphant has probably read them too quickly.

Questions that press on this one

None of these stands on its own. What you conclude here narrows what you can say there.

What is the thousand years of Revelation 20?

A future for national Israel is what most premillennial systems are built to protect.

What are Daniel's seventy weeks?

Daniel's last week is read as Israel's or the church's depending on the answer here.

Where does the church's authority come from?

How the New Testament reads the Old is the underlying method question in this argument.

EKLI serves Christians across traditions. On questions where churches differ we explain how each one sees it and leave the deciding to you.

All 27 questions →