Chizuk Emunah Under the Microscope: Chapter 20

    It shall come to pass in the latter days
        that the mountain of the house of the LORD
    shall be established as the highest of the mountains,
        and shall be lifted up above the hills;
    and all the nations shall flow to it,
        and many peoples shall come, and say:
    “Come, let us go up to the mountain of the LORD,
        to the house of the God of Jacob,
    that he may teach us his ways
        and that we may walk in his paths.”
    For out of Zion shall go the law,
        and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
(Isaiah 2:2-3 ESV)

    “Give attention to me, my people,
        and give ear to me, my nation;
    for a law will go out from me,
        and I will set my justice for a light to the peoples.
(Isaiah 51:4 ESV)

These two sections are used by Christians to argue that the New Testament law will replace the laws of Moses. I myself am not convinced by these prooftexts. Unbelieving Jews will then use their own prooftexts to argue that a new covenant will not arrive, and that the law of Moses will be enforced forever. This is also not true, as the video of J. Immanuel Schochet showed in my last post.

Troki also argues that King Messiah will come and bring peace, judgment, and the like upon the world. While I do not disagree with the prooftexts that eventually, the nations will beat their swords into plowshares. I disagree with the idea that this has to happen immediately when Messiah arrives. There is no independent warrant for that. Troki continues to read his own assumptions into the Bible, and continues to wonder why we keep disagreeing.

Troki also argues that the word "torah" does not always mean law, but means instruction in the book of Proverbs. Troki concludes that no second law will arise. However, Jesus did not come to bring a second law. In fact, the idea of a different kind of Torah existing in the world to come is thoroughly consistent with Rabbinical Judaism.


I think the problem with Troki is that he thinks that Messiah can only be a nationalistic figure. The problem here is that the word "Messiah" is rarely used to describe King Messiah, and so the question as to whether something is a Messianic text is itself highly speculative.

My opinion is that the covenant between God and national Israel is a permanent covenant. There is no biblical reason to think otherwise. However, there is no guarantee that the nation itself is guaranteed to be preserved permanently. This was the purpose of Isaiah's calling, to let the people know that the death which happened to the Northern Kingdom would also happen to Judah, if that kingdom did not repent. That did not work completely, and in the year 70, the rest of national Israel was annihilated as well.

This is not to say that the church is the New Israel. It is Israel in a metaphorical sense, not a literal one. Paul mentioned in the book of Romans that the methods God wants to use to bring his law to the Gentile nations is God's sovereign choice. That, and not individual salvation, is the purpose of Romans 9.

I, and many others, hope that one day Jesus will bring about the resurrection of the nation of Ancient Israel. It has not been accomplished yet. Modern Israel is not a theocracy, and therefore cannot be the same nation as Ancient Israel. Hence, Modern Israel is not the nation of the covenant, but perhaps a precursor to it.