...To The Lost Sheep of the House of Israel

How many times have you read or heard Matthew 15:24?

"He answered them, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the House of Israel."

A companion verse is in Luke's gospel, a little less specific, but similar in tone, "For the Son of Man came to seek and save the lost." (Luke 19:10) In this instance, Jesus is speaking to Zacchaeus, and it is important to note that Zacchaeus was a Jewish tax-collector, Jesus refers to him as a 'descendant of Abraham'.

The question begs itself, what does Jesus mean by "only to the lost sheep of The House of Israel?" I think the answer to this question lies at the very heart of God and demands Gentile believers consider and come to terms with some very difficult truths. These truths have been distorted over the past 2,000 years and the consequences are subtle, yet potentially profound.

The simple fact that no one, Jew or Gentile, would disagree with, is that Jesus himself was Jewish. He was born to Jewish parents, he was a descendant of the House of David, he was circumcised on the 8th day (Luke 2:21) according to Jewish law and tradition (Leviticus 12:3), and he was brought up and raised in the Jewish custom. He went through years of training and school to become a Jewish Rabbi, who were considered the foremost experts in writings of the Law and the Prophets (what we call "the Old Testament") and who were given the responsibility to teach the People of Israel. This would have, most likely, included memorizing the Torah, the first five books of the Bible, along with other writings. There's no getting around it - Jesus was a Jew in every possible way, and not only that, He had been steeped in the entire history and heritage of the Jewish people. He spent the vast predominance of his time speaking to the people of Israel and to their teachers and leaders. Furthermore, all of Jesus' Apostles were Jewish and all of the New Testament writers are Jewish. Paul, in particular, was a Pharisee ("Pharisee of Pharisees" Philippians 3:5) before his encounter with Jesus which meant that he was also an expert in the Law and the Prophets. Before coming to terms with who Jesus was, he was literally killing followers of Jesus because of the claims that they were making about Jesus (namely, that he was the Messiah) - that's how much of a Pharisee he was... Put simply - the ENTIRE Bible is steeped in Jewish culture and thought.

So the questions we must wrestle with are - does the fact that Jesus was Jewish (of the House of Israel) matter? What does removing the Jewishness of Jesus do to our understanding of who he was and what he was doing? Perhaps even, "if we don't acknowledge Jesus' Jewishness, and seek an understanding of the culture He himself was speaking to, is it even possible to rightly understand who He was and what He was about?"

I have few answers, but many questions.

I cannot take credit for this insight, but one thing I have come to realize recently is, you either view the Bible as having continuity between the Old and New Testaments, or you view Jesus as having done something different, or started something new, in the New Testament (discontinuity). Another way of saying it would be - either you view Jesus as further revelation of who God is, providing a perfect sacrifice and then pointing us to His return or you view Jesus (or Paul) as having started something new, changing God's plan part-way through the story.

This leads us to a brief but important discussion on something called 'supersessionism' (also called "replacement theology"). It's a seminarian term that simply refers to this idea, which is running rampant in the church today, which suggests that Jesus ushered in a 'new covenant' which supersedes the 'old covenant' which was made directly and exclusively to the Jewish people. Supersessionism is the ideology of those that claim that The Church is "the new Israel" or that the Israel of the Old Testament has been replaced by The Church. Proponents of this view will point to Jeremiah 31:31-32 and Hebrews 8:8-9 (which quotes the Jeremiah 31 passage):

"The days are surely coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. It will not be like the covenant that I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt - a covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, says the Lord." (Jeremiah 31:31-32)

"For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another. But God found fault with the people and said: "The days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and with the people of Judah. It will not be like the covenant I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, because they did not remain faithful to my covenant, and I turned away from them, declares the Lord."" (Hebrews 8:7-9)

Jesus also speaks of the 'new covenant', when he is eating the Passover meal with his disciples. He says, "In the same way, after supper He took the cup, saying, "This cup is the new covenant of My blood, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins."" (Matthew 26:28) So, Jesus certainly has something to do with the New Covenant, but when you read the totality of Jeremiah 31, an image of Jesus being the fulfillment of this prophecy in his first coming, doesn't make a whole lot of sense. The overall tone and spirit of Jeremiah 31 is that of complete liberation and salvation - much more of a Heavenly motif and feel than an Earthly one. I would like to suggest (and again, this is not my insight but something I have learned from others) that what Jeremiah is referring to is chapter 31 is actually talking about the second coming of the Messiah. Read it for yourself with that lens and tell me that doesn't make more sense. To me, it is an image of God regathering His people to himself and the 'new covenant' he talks about is that of perfect union or marriage. He says, "...no longer will they teach their neighbor, or say to one another "Know the Lord," because they will all know me..." Not only that, but Jesus himself says that the New Covenant is in His blood, but is unto the forgiveness of sins. We are told to, as believers, to ask for forgiveness continually, in this life, but ultimately, we are looking to that Day when we stand before him and our sins are not counted against us, making us worthy to inherit Eternal Life.

What Jesus is doing here (Matt. 26) is revising the sacrificial system, not doing away with the Old Covenant. In ancient times, the Israelites had a system, established by God through Moses for how they could be forgiven of unintentional sin. Depending on who they were - if they sinned and became aware of it, they were to bring an animal to the temple, with the help of the priest they placed that sin upon the head of the animal which was then slaughtered; the blood was sprinkled around the alter and the animal was sacrificed.

Jesus is saying there is now a new way - as Hebrews says, "a new and perfect Sacrifice" - a single Sacrifice that covers all Sin, for all time. He is saying to his disciples, "I will bear your sin, I am the offering to the Lord on your behalf and placing your trust in my sacrifice is how you will be able to stand before me on That Day and not have your sins accounted to you." As Jeremiah says, it is not like the other covenants that God has made, where there was some onus on the people of Israel to hold up their end...no, this Covenant is unilateral. "If you trust in Jesus and in his Sacrifice for you on the Cross, that is the means by which you can stand blameless before him when He returns." Jesus did all the work - our side of the deal is to trust that God accepts Jesus' sacrifice on our behalf. To bring it all the way back around - those who put their trust in Jesus' blood

Are you starting to see what I'm saying when I talk about how critical it is to know the Jewish history and tradition within the Bible in order to accurately and rightly understand what Jesus and his Apostles are saying/doing?

Speaking personally now, I have struggled and wrestled with this a lot over the past several months - currently, I feel I have a strong grasp on the fact that our faith is a Jewish faith, but I'm wrestling with what to do with that, not in a political way, but as a Gentile disciple. It is difficult to wrap our minds around the fact that God would choose to be identified by an ethnicity, of this there is no doubt. But it's true - He is the (self-identified) 'God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob' - he is the 'God of Israel'. He chose Abraham and through that line, came Jesus and out of that comes the offer of salvation to the whole world...but it is still a Jewish faith. The Jewishness of it is the background of the story that we need in order to fully/accurately understand what Jesus, Paul and the other Apostles are talking about. In other words, the 'Jewishness' of the gospel in inextricable - to extricate it is, quite possibly, to have a different gospel than the one Jesus was preaching because it ignores the context and expectation around it.