From Abraham to Christ: The Fulfillment That Zionism Denies
In a moment that quickly ignited debate across religious and political circles, U.S. Senator Ted Cruz appeared on the Tucker Carlson Show to defend what he called a biblical mandate to support the modern state of Israel—citing, albeit vaguely, Genesis 12:3. What followed was a striking theological exchange, as Carlson pressed Cruz on the verse’s meaning, historical context, and relevance to contemporary geopolitics.
In response to the viral clip, Dr. Ali Ataie—a scholar of sacred languages and comparative theology at Zaytuna College—offered a detailed analysis challenging the senator’s interpretation and unpacking the complex history behind Christian Zionist readings of scripture.
Dr. Ataie, who teaches courses in Arabic, creedal theology, Qur’anic sciences, and classical texts, specializes in biblical hermeneutics and comparative theology. A native Persian speaker, he is also proficient in Arabic, Biblical Hebrew, and New Testament Greek. In addition to his role at Zaytuna College, he serves as a visiting lecturer at the Blogging Theology Academy.
The exchange between Carlson and Cruz, just three minutes long, quickly went viral and sparked widespread discussion. Here’s the clip:
[Clip summary – paraphrased for clarity and narrative flow]:
Senator Cruz: “As a Christian growing up in Sunday school, I was taught from the Bible: ‘Those who bless Israel will be blessed, and those who curse Israel will be cursed.’ From my perspective, I want to be on the blessing side of things.”
Tucker Carlson: “Those who bless the government of Israel? The verse says ‘Israel’—not ‘the government of Israel.’ Where is that verse exactly?”
Senator Cruz: “It’s in Genesis. I don’t have the exact scripture off the top of my head.”
Carlson: “So you’re quoting a Bible verse without knowing its context or where it appears? I’m confused. I’m a Christian too—I want to know what you’re talking about. Are you saying we are commanded to support the modern government of Israel?”
Cruz: “Yes. Biblically, we are commanded to support Israel.”
Carlson: “Define ‘Israel.’ That’s important.”
Cruz (frustrated): “Are you kidding? That would be the country we’ve been talking about—modern Israel.”
Carlson: “So the ‘Israel’ in Genesis is the same as the state run by Benjamin Netanyahu today?”
Cruz: “Yes.”
Carlson: “That country has existed since when?”
Cruz: “For thousands of years… though there was a time when it didn’t exist and was recreated just over 70 years ago.”
Carlson: “I think most people understand that Genesis 12:3 refers to the Jewish people, not a modern state. That’s not what it says, though.”
Cruz: “I don’t remember the citation. Maybe Genesis 16 or something.”
Carlson: “So you’re saying that as a Christian, believing in Jesus means supporting the modern state of Israel?”
Cruz: “I’m just explaining my motivation.”
Carlson: “So your theology is: God wants you to support a modern political state because of a verse you don’t know the location of?”
Dr. Ali Ataie:
The verse Senator Cruz was referring to is Genesis 12:3. This verse is considered sacred by Christian Zionists and has been referenced before on Blogging Theology. Just to briefly review: the interpretation of this verse was significantly shaped by the commentary of a man widely regarded as a fraudulent scholar—Cyrus Ingerson Scofield—in his 1909 Scofield Reference Bible.
This infamous Bible edition radically changed the Christian landscape in the West. It transformed generations of preachers and, indeed, Western Christianity itself. That’s not an exaggeration. I highly recommend The Incredible Scofield and His Book, a biography of C.I. Scofield by Joseph Canfield.
Scofield’s Bible was heavily funded by wealthy American Zionists, a point noted by Professor David Lutz in his book Unjust War Theory: Christian Zionism and the Road to Jerusalem. The Scofield Reference Bible was eventually published by Oxford University Press, which at one point was distributing it for free.
We also need to mention John Nelson Darby, modern dispensationalism, and dual-covenant theology. These are false, unbiblical, and blasphemous ideas. The history here is fascinating—almost unbelievable. Truth really is stranger than fiction.
In Genesis 12:3, God says to Abram (later renamed Abraham):
“I will bless those who bless you, and I will curse him who curses you; and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.”
Here’s what Scofield wrote in his commentary:
“Wonderfully fulfilled in the history of the dispersion. It has invariably fared ill with the people who have persecuted the Jew, well with those who have protected him.”
So, for Scofield, this verse is essentially a divine command to bless and protect Jews. According to him, God’s instruction is eternal and applies universally.
After Scofield, unconditional allegiance to the Jewish people became widespread among Protestant Christians. The core belief is that Jews are still the “chosen people” of God, irrespective of their belief in Jesus Christ. That’s the crux of the matter. This idea is the scam—the con of the century. Millions of Christians were duped.
This unquestioning allegiance extends to the modern state of Israel. It’s essentially a master-slave dynamic. To put it plainly, Christian Zionists believe that their religion obliges them to support a secular political state created in 1948.
Take John Hagee, for example. He once said that if anyone even raises their voice against Israel, they “invite the wrath of God.” This kind of thinking verges dangerously close to a form of idolatry—what I call eodolatry (from the Greek Ioudaios, meaning “Jew”). I don’t say this to be flippant or disrespectful.
Theologically, all Trinitarian Christians already worship at least one Jew—Jesus. Catholics venerate a pantheon of Jewish figures. Zionist Christians take this reverence to the extreme.
So, my point is: Trinitarian Christianity contains a theological predisposition toward eodolatry, and Zionist Jews are acutely aware of this dynamic.
Let me give you an example. Last year, during the pro-Palestinian campus protests, Rep. Rick Allen from Georgia questioned the president of Columbia University. He asked:
“Are you familiar with Genesis 12:3?”
She replied, “Probably not as well as you are.”
He responded:
“It says, ‘If you bless Israel, I will bless you; if you curse Israel, I will curse you.’ Do you want Columbia University to be cursed by God?”
This is utter nonsense. The “Israel” referred to in Genesis is a reference to Abraham—not a modern secular state established in 1948.
And yet, we constantly see American and European Christian politicians donning kippahs, visiting Jerusalem, placing their hands on the Western Wall—making what can only be described as oaths of loyalty. But rarely—if ever—do we see them visiting the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, the holiest site for Christians.
So, clearly, we know where their true loyalties lie.
Now back to Ted Cruz. In that same interview, he said:
“I came into Congress 13 years ago with the stated intention of being the leading defender of Israel in the United States Senate, and I work every day to do that.”
That’s insane. Imagine replacing the word “Israel” with any other foreign country: “I came into Congress to be the leading defender of France, or Egypt, or Germany.” That would be scandalous.
All of those nations are allies of the U.S.—yet no senator would dare make such a statement. So this raises serious questions: Whom does Ted Cruz actually work for?
I’ll comment more on the clip we just watched shortly, and then I’d like to go through some key passages in the New Testament. I encourage the audience to literally take out your Bibles and follow along. I have my trusted New Revised Standard Version—it’s a “holy” Bible, not just any Bible.
He doesn’t even know the reference, which is extraordinary. It’s very extraordinary. I think a lot of people fall into this camp—they’ve been indoctrinated with certain ideas and never bothered to actually examine what they were told. It’s a sad state of affairs.
He’s like, “Look it up on your phone.” But let’s back up one verse—Genesis 12:2. Here, God is speaking to Abram, the exalted father and great patriarch (that’s what Abram means) before He renames him Abraham, father of nations. God says to him:
“I will make you a great nation; I will bless you and make your name great, and you shall be a blessing.”
The Hebrew phrase for “great nation” is goy gadol. Interestingly, this is echoed in the Qur’an, where it says Abraham was a nation unto himself—devoted to God, a monotheist, not a polytheist. In Surah 37:108–111, Allah says:
“And We left for him [favorable mention] among later generations: ‘Peace be upon Abraham.’ Thus do We reward the doers of good. Indeed, he was of Our believing servants.”
Now verse 3 of Genesis 12 is the so-called “holy grail”:
“I will bless those who bless you, and I will curse him who curses you; and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.”
As you mentioned, the Hebrew word Israel does not appear in this text. It’s simply not there. Jacob—who is renamed Israel—doesn’t even exist yet; he’s Abraham’s grandson. This is God speaking directly to Abraham.
So that’s the first point: the word Israel is absent.
Now, secondly—Ted Cruz is partially right. He’s correct that Abraham’s descendants or “seed” are implied in the blessing. It’s not explicit in Genesis 12:3, but it is implicit—and it’s made explicit elsewhere in Genesis.
From a Jewish or Torah perspective, the understanding is that those blessed are Abraham’s descendants—specifically the people of Israel. But this is Israel as a people, not as a modern political state or government. It refers to the children of Israel, i.e., the descendants of Jacob.
From our Muslim perspective, the Israelites were the Muslim ummah of that time. Today, Muslims across the world—in every one of the five daily prayers—ask God to bless the family of Abraham. This includes righteous individuals from both branches of his lineage: the Israelites and the Ishmaelites.
The Arabic word we use in prayer is “barik”—to bless. This is the exact same verb used in Genesis 12:3: “I will bless those who bless you.”
The great irony here is that over two billion Muslims today fulfill this biblical directive by blessing Abraham.
I’ve never met a Christian who does this—at least not in any formal way as part of their daily prayers. Maybe some do it privately, but it’s certainly not institutionalized as it is in Islam. In Islam, it is ritualized worship.
The Prophet Muhammad ﷺ himself taught us to ask God to bless the family of Abraham—but it’s not an unconditional blessing. It’s not simply by virtue of descent. We bless the righteous and obedient among Abraham’s descendants.
Now, let’s return to Surah 37 and continue from verses 112–113:
“We gave Abraham good news of Isaac, a prophet and a righteous man. We blessed him and Isaac as well. And among their offspring are those who do good and others who clearly wrong themselves.”
This shows that being from the lineage of Abraham doesn’t guarantee righteousness. What ultimately matters is the state of the heart—not race or lineage. Abraham himself approached his Lord with a sound heart.
In our tradition, we do honor the Sadat—the descendants of the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ—as long as they are righteous. Sayyid B. Imadad, a descendant of the Prophet through Imam Hussein, once said in poetry:
“By your life, a person is only the son of his religion,
So don’t forsake piety and lean on your lineage.
Verily, Islam exalted the Persian Salman,
And idolatry debased the highborn Abu Lahab.”
Abu Lahab, of course, was the Prophet’s own uncle—yet condemned in the Qur’an.
Back to Cruz and Genesis 12:3:
His interpretation is a misquotation followed by a partial truth and concludes with a major theological error.
Let’s unpack that.
- Misquotation: The verse says nothing about Israel.
- Partial truth: Yes, descendants of Abraham are implied—but the reference is to a people, not a political state.
- Major error: Cruz demonstrates total ignorance of how Genesis 12:3 is interpreted in the New Testament.
Now let me be clear. Even if we grant—for argument’s sake—that Jewish tradition sees Genesis 12:3 as referring to a perpetual blessing upon the Israelites as a people, that is not how the New Testament interprets it.
And Cruz claims to be a Christian.
As a Christian, he is supposed to believe in the New Testament, which supersedes the Old Testament. That’s why it’s called the New Testament.
Paul of Tarsus—despite our disagreements with him as Muslims—claims to be divinely inspired. If one accepts the 27-book New Testament canon, one is bound to take Paul seriously.
If you’re going to be a Christian, be a Christian. Don’t pick and choose. The Qur’an even criticizes the People of the Book for believing in parts of the scripture and rejecting others.
Some Christian apologists argue that the Qur’an “commands” Christians to follow the Bible because the Bible is totally accurate. That’s a straw man. The Qur’an takes a far more nuanced view.
If Christians had stuck to the New Testament and their traditional theology, they would not be war-hawking for Israel today.
By “tradition,” I don’t mean blind allegiance to ecclesiastical authority. I mean the process of harmonizing Scripture with natural reason—as Aquinas tried to do.
Whether Aquinas succeeded or not is another matter. But the method is noble: faith and reason cannot ultimately contradict each other because both come from God.
Unfortunately, many Protestant evangelicals today, especially Christian Zionists, reject this view. They follow fideism—the belief that reason is unreliable. Martin Luther famously called reason a “whore.”
So for Aquinas, reason is part of the Imago Dei—the image of God in man. Our faith should perfect reason, not replace it.
Back to the Qur’an: it acknowledges that not all Christians will become Muslim. But at the very least, Christians should honor their own tradition. Christian Zionism is not traditional Christianity.
Dispensationalism, dual-covenant theology, and “rightly dividing” the Bible are all innovations (bid‘ah) at best—and kufr (disbelief) at worst, from a traditional Christian lens.
These doctrines are not just theologically unsound—they’re geopolitically dangerous. Dr. Stephen Sizer (a practicing Christian) called Christian Zionism a “Roadmap to Armageddon.”
Take John Hagee, for example—a massive figure in Christian Zionism. He leads “Christians United for Israel” (CUFI), a group with tens of millions of followers. In his book In Defense of Israel, Hagee claims that Jesus never claimed to be the Messiah!
Let that sink in.
According to Hagee, the Jews didn’t reject Jesus as Messiah—because He never claimed to be one.
That’s absolute nonsense. In the New Testament, Jesus is called Christos—the Greek for Messiah—over 500 times.
John 4:25–26 makes it unmistakable:
The woman at the well says, “I know the Messiah is coming.”
Jesus replies, “I who speak to you am He.”
Even in the 13th century, Aquinas had to refute millenarian views like those of Joachim of Fiore, who envisioned an “Age of the Spirit” that would replace the Church. Aquinas shut that down.
So what does Paul actually say about Genesis 12?
Look at Galatians 3:16. Paul writes:
“Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He does not say ‘and to seeds,’ as of many, but as of one—‘and to your seed,’ who is Christ.”
According to Paul, the “seed” of Abraham is Jesus—not the Jewish people collectively, and certainly not a modern secular state.
So only those who believe in Christ are considered the true seed of Abraham. Not the disbelieving Israelites. Not the modern apartheid ethnostate of Israel founded by atheists. A state that isn’t even religious in its own constitution.
I mean, it doesn’t even pretend to be biblical Israel. It doesn’t even pretend. Yeah, exactly—not the modern State of Israel, where Jews routinely spit on and insult Christians as they walk by. Not Tel Aviv, which hosts the largest pride parade in the world—just 100 miles from Sodom and Gomorrah. And they’ve adopted the rainbow as their symbol.
They’ve turned the rainbow into a symbol of degeneracy and rebellion. Of course, the rainbow was originally a sign of the covenant that God made with humanity—Genesis 9. They’re mocking Genesis 9. In 2023, two ultra-Orthodox members of the Knesset—Moshe Gaffne and Yaakov Asher—actually introduced a bill to imprison Christian missionaries in Israel for one year if they tried to convert Jews to Christianity. They wanted to criminalize talking about Jesus.
The bill didn’t pass, but still—this is supposed to be God’s institution on earth for evangelical Christian Zionists? This is the country that John Hagee wants every Christian in the world to bless? You couldn’t make it up. If this were in a fictional novel… I mean, imagine Dan Brown writing a sequel to The Da Vinci Code. He’s a brilliant fiction writer, and even he couldn’t sell this story. It’s too implausible. Yet here we are. As they say, truth is stranger than fiction.
So, Israeli lawmakers want to criminalize talking about Jesus, yet Hagee—a supposed Christian minister—says that if a man so much as raises his voice against Israel, he invites the wrath of God? You can’t make this up.
Let’s look at another verse. This is from 1 Corinthians 16:22. There are two readings of this verse, and interestingly, Bruce Metzger’s Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament doesn’t explain the difference—perhaps for politically correct reasons, who knows?
The King James Version renders it:
“If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema. Maranatha.”
“Maranatha” is Aramaic: “Come, O Lord.” So if anyone does not love Jesus, that person is cursed. That’s Paul speaking.
Here’s 1 John 2:22:
“Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a person is the antichrist.”
If you don’t accept Jesus as Messiah, you are an antichrist. I didn’t say that—Paul of Tarsus and John the Elder did. That’s what the New Testament says.
Recently, I heard an anti-Zionist Christian podcaster say something interesting. I’m paraphrasing:
“When America started blessing Israel on May 14, 1948, what did it get in return?
Abortion. Feminism. Homosexuality becoming mainstream. The AIDS epidemic. Gender ideology. High crime. Trash in the streets. Increased violence. Divorce. Inflation. Homelessness. Atheism. Porn addiction. Disobedient children. Critical Race Theory. Postmodern, post-truth thinking…
Is this what blessing looks like—or are we being cursed?”
It’s a provocative point. And it brings us back to Scripture.
Now back to Galatians. Let’s look at Galatians 3:28–29:
“There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed and heirs according to the promise.”
Paul is referencing Genesis here. This is a conditional statement:
If you belong to Jesus, then you are Abraham’s seed.
According to the New Testament, Christians are the new chosen people. You are only blessed—only chosen—if you believe in Jesus.
Also in Galatians, Paul makes a radical claim: Gentile believers (Greeks, Romans, etc.) are now children of Sarah, the free woman. Meanwhile, Jews—who are physically descended from Sarah but reject Jesus—are called children of Hagar, the bondwoman. The bottom line? If you don’t believe in Jesus, you are unchosen. Not only that—if you reject Christ, Paul argues you’re not really Jewish anymore.
Now look at Galatians 3:6–8:
“Just as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness, therefore know that only those who are of faith are sons of Abraham.
And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel to Abraham beforehand, saying, ‘In you all nations shall be blessed.’”
That’s Genesis 12:3. Paul is explicitly reinterpreting Genesis 12:3 to point to Christ. So, God’s plan since Abraham’s time was to bring salvation to non-Jews through Jesus. The real blessing is Jesus, not any ethnicity or state.
As a Muslim, I can read this plainly in the text. Why can’t millions of Christians?
Let’s continue with Galatians 6:14–16:
“But God forbid that I should boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ…
For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, but a new creation.
And as many as walk according to this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel of God.”
Who is the Israel of God here? Not a political entity. Not a specific ethnicity. Paul defines Israel of God as those who believe in and glory in the cross of Christ—the Church. The spiritual Israel. A new creation.
Jesus is depicted as the new Israel in the New Testament. The new Jacob. Jacob had 12 sons; Jesus had 12 disciples. Jesus is also the new Moses. Where Moses freed Israel from Egypt, Jesus frees his people from sin. Old Israel wandered the wilderness for 40 years; Jesus did so for 40 days. Moses received the five books; Jesus delivered five discourses. The parallel is deliberate. But unlike old Israel, which disobeyed God, Jesus remained obedient: “Not as I will, but as Thou wilt.”
This is all in Matthew’s Gospel. Yet Christian Zionists say that blessing the modern Israeli state and its political leaders will bring blessing?
If you bless Jesus, you will be blessed. That’s the New Testament teaching. Zionist Christians have replaced Jesus Christ with Netanyahu, Ben Gvir, Smotrich, and Herzog. It’s the con job of the millennium.
Now, Romans 2:26–29:
“If an uncircumcised man keeps the righteous requirements of the law, will not his uncircumcision be counted as circumcision? …
For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly… but he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, not in the letter…”
The very definition of Jew has been transformed. Paul says a true Jew is inward—one who believes in Christ. Circumcision is no longer physical but spiritual.
Remember Matthew 3:9:
“Do not think to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father.’ For I say to you that God is able to raise up children to Abraham from these stones.”
Lineage is meaningless without obedience. If you disobey God, you are not chosen. You are, as Jesus says in John 8:44, “of your father the devil.”
Let’s turn now to Revelation—the end of the Bible.
Revelation 2:9:
“I know the blasphemy of those who say they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan.”
In the end times, Jesus will oppose those who falsely claim to be Jews.
Most founders of modern Israel were Ashkenazi converts—ethnically non-Semitic, atheistic, non-Torah observant. Even Netanyahu (originally Milikowski) likely doesn’t believe in God. But even if they were direct descendants of Abraham and Torah-observant, the New Testament says: If you reject Jesus, you are not a Jew.
Revelation 3:9:
“I will make those of the synagogue of Satan, who say they are Jews and are not, but lie—indeed I will make them come and worship before your feet, and to know that I have loved you.”
Jesus says He will compel false Jews to bow before true believers—Christians. The New Living Translation is even more direct:
“I will force those who belong to Satan’s synagogue—those liars who say they are Jews but are not—to come and bow down at your feet. They will acknowledge that you are the ones I love.”
Compare that to Isaiah 60:14:
“The sons of those who afflicted you shall come bowing to you… they shall call you the City of the Lord, Zion of the Holy One of Israel.”
So here in Isaiah, in the Tanakh, those who persecuted the Jews will one day be forced to bow down at the feet of the Jews. However, in Revelation 3:9, due to the Jews’ rejection of Jesus, the situation is reversed. Now, the so-called Jews will be forced to bow down at the feet of Christians—the new Israel, the true Jews.
Do you see what’s happening here? Do you see what John of Patmos—what “Jesus,” as quoted in Revelation—is doing? He’s flipping the narrative. He’s taking Isaiah 60:14 and applying it not to ethnic Jews who cling to the Mosaic covenant, but to Christians. The Jews who disbelieve in Jesus—so-called “Israel”—will be made to bow before Christians, the true people of God.
Let’s go back to Romans, specifically Romans 9:1–9.
When I was in seminary, one of my professors said, Galatians is Paul at his most passionate—he’s not mincing words. But Romans is where Paul is calm, reasoned, and magisterial. Although, even at the end of Galatians, he says, “Now I say this last part in big bold letters.” He literally instructs his scribe to emphasize it.
Anyway, here’s what Paul says in Romans 9:1–5:
“I tell the truth in Christ, I am not lying, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Spirit, that I have great sorrow and continual grief in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh, who are Israelites, to whom pertain the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God, and the promises; of whom are the fathers and from whom, according to the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, the eternally blessed God. Amen.”
Now, a side note on translation: that last phrase, “who is over all, the eternally blessed God,” is problematic. It makes it sound like Paul is calling Christ “the eternally blessed God.” A better translation would be: “To them belong the patriarchs, and from them, according to the flesh, came the Christ. God, who is over all, be blessed forever. Amen.” That final phrase—“ho ōn epi pantōn”—is clearly a doxology to God the Father, just as it’s used in Ephesians 4. But I digress.
Back to the main point. In Romans 9:1–5, Paul is essentially acknowledging the great spiritual privileges the Israelites once had—adoption, covenants, the law, and even being the people from whom Christ descended.
But there’s a “but.”
Watch this—Romans 9:6:
“But it is not that the word of God has taken no effect. For they are not all Israel who are of Israel…”
Then he adds—verse 8:
“That is, those who are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God; but the children of the promise are counted as the seed.”
This is Paul still referring back to Genesis 12. According to him, the true Israel—the true children of Abraham—are Gentiles and Jews who believe in Jesus Christ. It could not be more explicit.
The children of the flesh are not the children of God. So to invoke Genesis 12 as though it refers to the modern secular nation-state of Israel—in light of the New Testament—is not just misguided. It is ludicrous beyond imagination. You would have to throw out the entire New Testament to make that claim.
And that’s precisely what Zionist ideologues are hoping for: to get Christians to throw away the New Testament entirely. To pretend Jesus is not the Messiah of the New Testament. Are you kidding me?
There’s an insightful quote by Abdul Hakim Murad, a Muslim scholar in England. He writes short, piercing aphorisms. On this topic, he offers the following:
“Hear O Israel, the Lord thy God is not Israel.”
That’s a profound subversion of the Shema (“Hear O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one,” Deuteronomy 6:4). Jesus reaffirms the Shema in Mark 12, by the way. But what Murad is pointing out is the idolatrous turn many have taken—worshiping the state of Israel itself.
And based on everything Paul writes, I think he’d agree.
This is Romans 11:1–5. Paul writes:
“I say then, has God cast away His people? Certainly not! For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. God has not cast away His people whom He foreknew. Or do you not know what the Scripture says of Elijah—how he pleads with God against Israel, saying, ‘Lord, they have killed Your prophets and torn down Your altars, and I alone am left, and they seek my life’? But what does the divine response say to him? ‘I have reserved for Myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal.’
Even so then, at this present time there is a remnant according to the election of grace.”
What is Paul saying? Is it that all Israelites—all Jews—are still chosen? No.
Paul is saying that, although still a minority, some ethnic Jews—like himself—did believe in Jesus. Yes, there is still a remnant.
Now jump to verse 17:
“And if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive tree, were grafted in among them and with them became a partaker of the root and fatness of the olive tree,
do not boast against the branches. But if you do boast, remember that you do not support the root, but the root supports you.”
This is often referred to as “replacement theology.” But notice—it’s not a total replacement. God has not totally abandoned Israel. Paul is clear on that. Some scholars call it “grafting theology.”
Remember also in Mark, when Jesus curses the fig tree? Mark likely wrote that with Romans in mind. The cursed and withered tree represents old Israel. Why was it cursed? Because of its disbelief in Jesus.
The Qur’an echoes this idea. It says the disbelieving among the Children of Israel were cursed on the tongues of David and Jesus the son of Mary, because of their disobedience and violations.
Paul continues:
“You will say then, ‘Branches were broken off that I might be grafted in.’ Well said.
Because of unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by faith. Do not be haughty, but fear.
For if God did not spare the natural branches, He may not spare you either.”
Here, Paul is warning the Christians—those who believe in Jesus—not to make the same mistake that old Israel made. Arrogance can lead to being cut off.
We find the same principle in the Qur’an at the end of the Prophet Muhammad’s ﷺ mission:
“If you Muslims turn away, God will replace you with another people who will not be like you.”
Paul goes on:
“Notice how God is both kind and severe. He is severe toward those who disobeyed,
but kind to you—if you continue to trust in His kindness. But if you stop trusting,
you also will be cut off.
And if the people of Israel turn from their unbelief, they will be grafted in again.
For God has the power to graft them back into the tree.”
So the door is still open.
Jews who disbelieved in Jesus were cut off—like branches. “Old Israel,” those who rejected Jesus, were removed from the olive tree. But Gentiles who believe in Jesus are grafted in. And if Jews believe in Jesus, they too will be grafted back in.
But they must believe.
Now, many early Christians saw the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in AD 70 as a sign from God—that God was finished with those people. Why? Because the center of Israelite worship wasn’t Rabbinic Judaism or the Talmud or even the Torah—it was the Temple. That’s where the sacrifices were offered, as outlined in Leviticus.
God destroyed the Temple. That was it. Early Christians saw that as judgment.
And Jesus said, “Destroy this temple, and I will raise it up.” (John 2:19) According to New Testament theology, Jesus is the new Temple—the eternal Temple.
The Shekinah—the presence of God—left the physical Temple and descended into the body of Jesus, in the incarnation. The early Church Fathers taught this.
Ironically, the Romans eventually expelled the Jews from Jerusalem in the second century after the Bar Kokhba revolt. It was the Muslims, under Umar ibn al-Khattab, who allowed the Jews to return to Jerusalem in the 7th century. Christians had banned them for centuries.
According to the New Testament, because the Jews did not trust in God and violated their covenant, God made a new covenant.
And what’s another word for covenant? As we touched on earlier—Testament.
That’s why the Christian scriptures are called the New Testament.
Now ask yourself:
If Jews are still saved without Jesus, if their covenant is still valid, then what need is there for a New Testament?
Then Jeremiah’s prophecy becomes meaningless.
Jeremiah 31:31 is the lynchpin verse. It says:
“Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah.”
That’s where we get “New Testament.”
Now the Old Covenant, or Old Testament, was conditional. Where does it say that? In Exodus 19:5–6, just before the Ten Commandments:
“Now if you will obey Me and keep My covenant, you shall be My own special treasure among all peoples.
For all the earth is Mine. And you shall be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.”
The Hebrew word “im” (if) makes it conditional.
So what happened? Did they break it?
Yes. Jeremiah 11:10 says:
“They have turned back to the iniquities of their forefathers, who refused to hear My words.
They have gone after other gods.
The house of Israel and the house of Judah have broken My covenant which I made with their fathers.”
Crystal clear.
Now go back to that language—“kingdom of priests, holy nation.” Compare it with 1 Peter 2:9 in the New Testament:
“But you”—speaking to Christians—“are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s special possession.”
This isn’t referring to ethnic Jews—but believers in Christ.
And yes, many Christians are ethnic Jews. But the key is belief in Jesus Christ—not any other figure.
Revelation 1:6 also uses the same language:
“Jesus Christ made us kings and priests to His God and Father.”
Jesus has a God, according to Revelation.
And in Revelation 5:10:
“You have made them to be a kingdom and priests to serve our God.”
So who are the true kings and priests?
Believers in Jesus.
Not unbelieving ethnic Jews. And certainly not a modern secular ethnostate. That’s an insult to Christian theology.
Now let’s turn to Matthew 21:33–43—the Parable of the Vineyard.
Jesus says:
“There was a landowner who planted a vineyard, put a wall around it, dug a winepress, and built a tower. Then he leased it to tenant farmers and went away.
When harvest time came, he sent his servants to collect the fruit. But the tenants seized his servants; they beat one, killed another, and stoned a third.
He sent more servants, but they did the same.
Finally, he sent his son. ‘They will respect my son,’ he said.
But the tenants said, ‘This is the heir. Come, let us kill him and take his inheritance.’
So they seized him, threw him out of the vineyard, and killed him.”
So:
- The landowner is God.
- The vineyard is the Holy Land.
- The tenants are the Jews.
- The servants are the prophets.
- The son is the Messiah.
Jesus continues:
“When the owner returns, what will he do to those tenants?”
The people reply:
“He will destroy those wicked men and lease the vineyard to others who will give him the fruits in their season.”
Meaning: Gentiles will inherit the Holy Land because of Jewish disobedience. Jesus then quotes:
“The stone the builders rejected has become the cornerstone.”
Then he delivers the final blow:
“Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a nation bearing the proper fruit.”
Crystal clear.
If someone reads this parable and still thinks all Jews remain God’s chosen people, they’ve missed the plot entirely.
Romans 6 and Hebrews 10 state that Jesus’s sacrifice was the final sacrifice. He is the ultimate Temple, the ultimate High Priest, the ultimate sin offering.
Yet many Christian Zionists support building a third physical temple, to reinstitute priests and animal sacrifices.
That is, frankly, blasphemous. It’s throwing Jesus away.
Conclusion: Faith, Not Flesh
The consistent witness of the New Testament—from Paul’s epistles to the Gospels to Revelation—is clear and uncompromising: God’s covenant is no longer tethered to ethnicity, geography, or genealogy. It is rooted in faith in Jesus Christ.
To assert that ethnic descent from Abraham guarantees divine favor—while rejecting the very Messiah whom God sent—is not merely theologically flawed; it is explicitly refuted by Scripture. Paul, himself “a Hebrew of Hebrews,” declares without ambiguity: “They are not all Israel who are of Israel” (Romans 9:6). The true children of Abraham are not those who share his blood, but those who share his faith.
Christian Zionism, in attempting to revive a covenant that has been fulfilled in Christ and rendered void by unbelief, strikes at the very heart of the Gospel. To support the rebuilding of a third temple, the reinstitution of sacrifices, or the sacralization of a secular political state is, in effect, to crucify Christ anew. It is to deny the sufficiency of His atoning work—“we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all” (Hebrews 10:10).
This is not a political argument. It is a theological one. It is about fidelity to the message of Jesus and the apostolic witness. The Church is the new Israel. The faithful are the true heirs of the promise. Any ideology—religious or political—that calls Christians to forsake the Gospel in favor of fleshly lineage is, at its core, a rejection of Christ.
As Paul solemnly warns: “If God did not spare the natural branches, He may not spare you either” (Romans 11:21).
Dr. Ali Ataie’s message to believers: Let us not be arrogant. Let us be faithful.