The Fulfillment of Deuteronomy 30

Deuteronomy 30 is considered the first and most important Prophecy of Israel's return to her Promised Land.  Other Prophecies we turn to from Prophets like Isaiah are arguably just elaborating on that.

Some think this can apply to 1948 and what's been going since.  I long ago sorta agreed with that, but have during the time I've written on this blog been inclined to agree with those who say it obviously can't fit, and my mind as of this post hasn't entirely changed on that, but.......

Nehemiah chapter 1 quotes Deuteronomy 30, as having already being fulfilled by the return from the Babylonian Captivity.

Unless you want to reject the Canonocity of Nehemiah, (which I know of people who would, but I'm not addressing this post to them,) you have to accept this as correct.  Now another Captivity happening under Rome is why we know there is another return from Captivity coming.  But Deuteronomy 30 has been fulfilled at least once already.

Doesn't matter how at face value laughable it seems.  Critics of Christianity mock plenty of the New Testament's claims of Old Testament fulfillment.  But good Christians should accept and defend those no matter what.  From Peter applying the end of Joel 2 to Pentecost, to the claim that Jesus was a Nazarite because he was from a town called Nazareth.  I've gone out of my way on this blog to defend the New Testament's quotations of Isaiah 7 and 8.  But the Acts 2 reference is more comparable here, yet equally criticized by some, as it's about a stage in God's Covenant relationship with His People.

Christians can believe there is a second fulfillment coming, that may be grander then the first, as I certainly do with Joel and Pentecost in my view of Revelation 6-7.  But we can't question the accuracy of the cited fulfillment.  We use Scripture to Interpret Scripture.

That means Nehemiah has destroyed much of the argument that it's absurd to apply these Prophecies to 1948.  It's no longer true that it has to be something obviously Supernatural, and that no Gentile human governments can be the means by which God does it.

I would argue the Anglican British Government (and the Rothschilds if you insist on overstating their involvement) come closer to being worshipers of The God of The Torah then the devout Mithra worshiping Cyrus, or the Zoroastrians who made the later decrees.

But the main reason I can argue 1948 fits better is that it more naturally fits the idea that they're returning from all over the world, from it's very edges, from many nations.  While in Nehemiah's day at face value it seems like a return from just one nation.  Perhaps we could infer these decrees also became a rallying cry to Israelites who wound up in other regions for whatever reason, but if so that was only a small part of it.  The prophecies specify people returning by Ships, they specify Israelites returning from Ethiopia, and somehow even people returning by air (but not all of them, that will be important later).  Those details fit 1948 and since, but are harder to apply to Nehemiah's time.

Rob Skiba, one of the main people I'm responding to here, is totally against viewing that return as including the Northern Kingdom's exiles.  Though Chris White and Chuck Missler argue it did, that Babylon inherited Assyria's captives.  However Assyria never kept them in Assyria in the first place, and Ezra and Nehemiah's long lists of returning clans includes no references to Joseph, Ephraim, Manasseh, Reuben, Gad or Naphtali.  Asher wasn't part of the Assyrian deportation in the first place which is why Anna was in Judea.  Yet again the people saying clearly 1948 can't fulfill these are basing it partly on asserting modern Jews are only from the Southern Kingdom.

The only thing one could argue that Return had that today's doesn't is returning in obedience.

Christians typically assume they can't be returning in obedience unless they've accepted Yeshua/Jesus as their Messiah.  But to a Jew that's a non issue, and they would be offended if you told them otherwise.  Fortunately I've become a Universalist.  I do believe the culmination of all this involves Jesus being recognized as The Messiah, but at the start of the process I know there are other ways to be obedient.  So I won't offend Jews by telling them God's Promises to them doesn't apply till they accept Jesus.

Now there is a strictly Hebrew Bible basis for questioning the obedience of modern Israel that some have made, and that's how they aren't even really trying to govern themselves by the Torah.  Some online today limit Canon to only The Torah, they reject Nehemiah so I can't really respond to them here.  Ironically in this case it's being a Paulian Evangelical Universalist Christian that makes it easier to defend Israel here.  To me Paul's declaration that we aren't under The Law anymore doesn't apply just to Christians, Jesus saved and liberated everyone.  And as a civil Government the Torah is utterly unworkable in the modern world.

But if I were a citizen of modern Israel, there are plenty of policies of the modern government I would object to.

So the question becomes, was Israel in perfect obedience in Nehemiah's day?  By some priorities they were more so then modern Israel.  But no, they certainly still had issues that the Prophets from that time period like Zechariah, Haggai and Malachi were addressing.

But they no longer had the main problem that lead to the Captivity, their tendency to fall into Idolatry was cured.  Whether or not modern Israel still has the same issues as first Century Judaism would be a complicated debate, but since most Modern Jews aren't Sadducees, I think a good case can be made that they don't, from a Christian, Rabbinic or Karaite perspective.

So it is my view that 1948 was the beginning of the restoration of Israel, but it's not complete yet.  Ezekiel 37 clearly isn't fulfilled until the Resurrection.  The time between the Decrees of Cyrus and Nehemiah was longer then between 1948 and now, and Nehemiah's decree was only the beginning of another phrase. 

The issue of Israel's return is also part of the Rapture debate.  You see to many Post-Tribbers the Rapture is the same as Israel's return, hence the emphasis on saying it must be a supernatural return.  Ignoring the clear references to many returning by "Ships of Tarshish".

The Church is New Jerusalem/Yahuah-Shammah.  But we're not all there is to Israel, there is still the land allotted to the Tribes, the Levites, the Priests and the Prince, which are all separate from Yahuah-Shammah.  It's after the Rapture that Israel is protected in the Wilderness.

Post-Tribbers deny that we are actually taken to Heaven at the Rapture.  Jesus clearly said in Mark 13:27 "And then shall he send his angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven.".  But more importantly then that, Revelation 13 says the Best will Blaspheme "Them that dwell in Heaven", chapter 14 has the Resurrected 144 Thousand on the Heavenly Zion.  New Jerusalem doesn't descend until after the Millennium and Gog and Magog and the White Throne Judgment.