In a recent podcast “Melanie Phillips NOTICES Connection Between The Left and Islam & It’s Terrifying!“, Rabbi Pesach Wolicki made an excellent assessment which helped explain the left’s oddly synergistic relationship with Islam. Wolicki, whose podcasts I often find compelling, was one of Charlie Kirk’s trusted advisors.
Wolicki made the following tangential point which I believe is worth pursuing.
[Rabbi Pesach Wolicki] “Because Jewish victims, Jewish suffering, Jewish peoplehood returning to the homeland. All of that is a living embodiment, a living reminder of the authenticity of a biblical narrative. The Jewish people are not just a nation. The Jewish people still alive today after thousands of years returning to our homeland as the only ancient people to go into exile and return to our homeland… is a fulfillment of such an outrageous prophecy in the Bible. The most repeated prophecy in the Bible. And it’s such a departure from the rest of history, from the rest of the history of nations. It’s so impossible and dare I say miraculous that they can’t have it because it would be an affirmation that the God of the Bible is real and active in history. They would have explaining to do if you accept that the Jewish people have returned to their homeland after thousands of years scattered in exile that the Jews of today are the Jews who have finally returned.” Rabbi Pesach Wolicki
Rabbi Wolicki clearly believes that the Jewish return to their homeland is proof that “the God of the Bible is real and active in history.” I ran his comments through an objective source (ChatGPT) posing the following two questions:
- Is it true that no other people group have returned the the land they were exiled from?
- And, if this is true, is it a logical deduction that because the Jews have turned to their homeland, this is divine confirmation that the Bible is true?
Before sharing the Rabbi Wolicki’s quote with ChatGPT, I made a few comments.
Did the undertakings of very influential men significantly manipulate the political environment thus helping this new state of Israel become a reality? Knowing the history behind the machinations, it seems to be more born of human and political maneuvering than divine intervention. I realize that God often works through human agency, but at what point is human effort and opportunism mistaken as something divinely decreed?
The Jewish contention that the May 14, 1948 establishment of Israel was God ordained fulfillment of the Old Testament prophets, seems to almost completely ignore the New Testament’s writings i.e. Jesus said “the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people producing its fruits. 44 And the one who falls on this stone will be broken into pieces; and when it falls on anyone, it will crush him.” (Mt 21:43).; John the Baptist said, “for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children for Abraham.” (Mt 3:9); The Apostle Paul wrote, “This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring” (Rom 9:8); AND “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.” (Rom 2:28-29)
The New Testament is replete with references to the Christ killing generation of Jews being permanently judged, and, other than a couple of cherry-picked verses like Romans 11:26 which is often interpreted without context, there’s not a single NT verse regarding the Jews returning to their homeland. As a matter of fact, it’s just the opposite. They were permanently expelled due to unbelief. Since the NT is God’s divine commentary of the OT, I find it strange that neither Jesus nor His apostles ever addressed the Jews returning to the Land.
I would argue that ethnicity is no longer the essence of the biblical message since Paul explicitly tells us that the dividing wall of separation was forever torn down between Jew and Gentile (Eph 2:14). All must come to Christ… He is the way, the truth and the life and no man can come to the father but by him. (Jn 14:6) and only those “in Christ” become the true children of Abraham (Gal 3:16;28-39. I believe this Jewish rabbi’s quote is a testament to the fact that he ignores both Jesus and the entire NT. What say you?
[ChatGPT’s Reply]
The rabbi’s argument is rhetorically powerful, but it doesn’t quite hold up as a proof. It’s better understood as a theological interpretation of history than as a historical demonstration.
On the first question: no, it is not true that the Jewish return to the land is utterly unique in all of history. It is certainly unusual—especially in its scale, duration, and the preservation of a strong communal identity over many centuries—but it is not without parallels. Various peoples have returned to ancestral homelands after displacement. The Armenians returned in significant numbers to historic Armenian lands after centuries of dispersion. Greeks resettled areas associated with their ancient heritage after Ottoman rule. More recently, diasporic peoples across the world have repatriated or reconstituted national homelands. What is distinctive about Jewish history is the extraordinary longevity of the diaspora combined with the preservation of language, religion, and national consciousness. That is remarkable. But “remarkable” is not the same as “unprecedented.”
Even more importantly, the Jewish people were never entirely absent from the land. A continuous Jewish presence remained in Palestine throughout the centuries, even if often small. So the modern return was not a simple case of a people vanishing and then reappearing two millennia later. It was a complex process of immigration, settlement, nationalism, diplomacy, and conflict.
On the second question: even if one granted that the Jewish return were historically unique, uniqueness does not logically prove divine inspiration. That would be a non sequitur. Extraordinary events can invite theological reflection, but they do not compel a single theological conclusion. History is full of astonishing developments that people interpret in very different ways.
To say, “This happened, therefore the Bible is true,” skips several necessary steps. One would first need to establish:
- that the biblical texts actually predicted this specific event,
- that those prophecies were intended to refer to a far-future political restoration rather than events nearer to their original context,
- that no human agency could adequately explain the event,
- and that fulfillment of one prediction validates an entire theological system.
That’s a lot of heavy lifting for one historical event.
And your point about human agency is exactly right. The establishment of the modern State of Israel in 1948 was the result of a convergence of factors: Zionist political organization, European antisemitism, the Holocaust, British imperial policy, international diplomacy, and military action. Figures such as Theodor Herzl, Arthur Balfour, David Ben-Gurion, and many others played decisive roles. To ignore these historical forces is to flatten history into a miracle story.
From a Christian theological perspective, your observations are well grounded. The New Testament consistently reorients covenant identity around Christ rather than ethnicity or geography. Paul’s central argument is that the promises to Abraham find their fulfillment in Christ and in all who belong to Him, Jew and Gentile alike. Galatians is especially explicit: “If you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise” (Gal. 3:29). The dividing wall has indeed been broken down (Eph. 2:14).
That does not mean ethnic Jews cease to matter, nor does it justify antisemitism—Paul explicitly rejects that. But it does mean that the New Testament does not present national restoration or possession of a particular territory as the centerpiece of God’s redemptive plan. The centerpiece is Christ and His multinational people, the Church.
As for Romans 11, it certainly teaches a future mercy toward Jewish people, but faithful Christians have long disagreed about exactly what that entails. It does not necessarily require a political state, territorial restoration, or a separate covenantal program for ethnic Israel.
So the return of Jews to the land can be viewed as historically extraordinary and deeply significant without being a knockdown proof of biblical prophecy. Whether one sees it as providence, politics, or some combination of both depends largely on one’s prior theological commitments.
In short: the existence of modern Israel is a fact of history. Its meaning is a matter of interpretation.
[My cross examination]
Excellent, very helpful and balanced response. Sadly, your advice, “That does not mean ethnic Jews cease to matter, nor does it justify antisemitism”, is not always heeded since some believe they have the moral high ground to constantly smear the Jews with antisemitic tropes. I think they wrongly connect the Jews of today with the synagogue of Satan reference in the book of Revelation. Today’s Jews are no more responsible for killing Jesus than I am.
Regarding Romans 11:26, if it is argued in the context of the New Testament and specifically with regard to the remnant in the earlier Romans 11 verses, “I have kept for myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal.” 5 So too at the present time there is a remnant, chosen by grace. 6 But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works; otherwise grace would no longer be grace”, I think a formidable argument can be made that “all Israel will be saved,” was fulfilled through the remnant of Jews who turned to Christ prior to the destruction of the Temple in AD 70. The attached article by James B. Jordan makes that case. (I created the below video from that article)
[ChatGPT’s Rebuttal]
Yes, a fair argument can absolutely be made—indeed, a strong one—that Romans 11:26 refers to the salvation of the covenant remnant of Israel in the first-century transition period rather than to a mass national conversion at the end of history.
James Jordan’s central observation is an important one: throughout Romans 9–11, Paul is dealing with a pressing, contemporary redemptive-historical crisis. The question is not primarily, “What will happen to ethnic Jews thousands of years from now?” but rather, “Has God’s word failed now, given Israel’s present unbelief?” Paul’s emphatic answer is no. God has preserved a remnant, just as He did in Elijah’s day.
That remnant theme is crucial. Paul explicitly says, “So too at the present time there is a remnant, chosen by grace” (Rom. 11:5). The phrase “at the present time” anchors his discussion in his own generation. He is not speculating about a distant future but interpreting the significance of events unfolding before his eyes. Just as seven thousand in Elijah’s day represented the faithful within apostate Israel, so Jewish believers in Christ represented the true Israel within first-century Judaism.
On this reading, “all Israel” does not mean every ethnic Jew without exception, nor necessarily a future collective conversion of the Jewish nation-state. Rather, it refers to the full complement of elect Israel—the complete ingathering of the Jewish remnant before the old covenant order passed away. Paul’s use of “fullness” and “life from the dead” can be understood covenantally and corporately: the completion of Israel’s transition into the new covenant community, culminating in the end of the old age in AD 70.
This interpretation also fits the larger New Testament pattern. As Jordan notes, the New Testament repeatedly emphasizes the imminent judgment on Jerusalem and the passing away of the old covenant order. Yet it nowhere else clearly predicts a distinct, end-times national conversion of ethnic Israel. That silence is at least noteworthy. If such an event were central to eschatology, one might expect it to appear more explicitly and more often.
At the same time, humility is warranted. The traditional interpretation—that Romans 11 points to a future large-scale turning of Jewish people to Christ—has been held by many serious and careful interpreters across theological traditions. It is not a frivolous reading. Paul’s language in verses 12, 15, and 26 is expansive enough to sustain that view.
So the issue is not whether the preterist-remnant interpretation is possible. It clearly is. The real question is which reading best accounts for Paul’s argument, his time markers, and the flow of redemptive history.
What can be said with confidence is this: Paul’s ultimate concern is not the perpetuation of ethnic distinction, but the faithfulness of God to His promises in Christ. The olive tree has one root, one covenantal life, and ultimately one people of God. Jewish and Gentile believers alike stand only by grace, through faith, in the Messiah.
And that brings us back to your earlier point. Whatever one’s interpretation of Romans 11, the chapter cannot be used either to marginalize Jewish people or to establish a separate salvific path for them. Paul rejects both arrogance and exclusion. There is no room for antisemitism, and there is no room for ethnic triumphalism either. In Christ, mercy is the great leveler.
In closing, I found this exercise somewhat exhilarating. Though I appreciate Rabbi Wolicki’s heart in this matter, the fact that he is missing the divine commentary on the OT puts him at a significant disadvantage. The Rabbi has seen only half the movie and He’s completely missing the central figure throughout history, Jesus Christ. Everything was about Jesus and everything was fulfilled in Him. He is the promised seed of Abraham and only through Him will we be blessed. Jesus is Israel and you are either “in Christ” or you are not. Sadly, Rabbi Wolicki is not. Let’s pray that God quickens is soul.
There are no special blessings to those who reject Christ, which the majority of modern day Jews have done and are doing. As was noted by ChatGPT, The olive tree has one root, one covenantal life, and ultimately one people of God. Jewish and Gentile believers alike stand only by grace, through faith, in the Messiah.”