Who is Israel? (Part 3) An Amillennial view of Israel
An inaugurated Kingdom
Amillennialism & Fulfillment Theology: One Story, One People, One Kingdom
Not every reading of the end times points to a literal thousand-year reign on earth. In fact, some say the “millennium” isn’t a future age at all, it’s right now. Welcome to amillennialism: the idea that the kingdom Jesus inaugurated is already here (spiritually), expanding across the earth through the gospel, and will one day reach its fullness not in a rebuilt Israel, but in a renewed creation.
For those who hold this view, Israel’s story didn’t stop it was fulfilled. Not erased, but expanded. Not tossed aside, but transposed into a higher key. They don’t see the Church as a replacement of Israel, but as its continuation, its true heir, the family God always had in mind, now composed of every tribe and tongue who are in Christ.
This is often called “supersessionism,” though many prefer the term Fulfillment Theology. And here’s the heart of it: Jesus and the church are the true Israel. And those who belong to Him, Jew or Gentile, are heirs to the promises. Full stop.
As Sam Storms puts it:
“Amillennialism best accounts for the many texts in which OT prophetic hope is portrayed as being fulfilled…in the person and work of Jesus Christ and the believing remnant, his body, the Church, the true Israel of God.”
Even the language of Israel gets reimagined. In 1 Peter 2, the same titles once reserved for Israel, “chosen race,” “holy nation,” “royal priesthood”, are now applied to Gentile believers. Hebrews tells us that the new covenant promised to “the house of Israel” (Jeremiah 31) is already here, and it’s been inaugurated not with another temple, but with the blood of Jesus.
So what happens to the promises? They’re not revoked. They’re fulfilled. The land promise? Romans 4 says Abraham wasn’t promised just Canaan, but “the whole world.” The kingdom? It’s not limited to Jerusalem, it’s wherever the King is. The seed of Abraham? Paul says it’s Christ (Galatians 3:16), and all who are in Him.
N. T. Wright puts it simply: Jesus and the multi-ethnic Church are the true Israel.
And that’s the defining shape of this theology. There is no second plan, no political kingdom reboot, no future temple tour. Just the one olive tree, pruned and replanted. Some Jewish branches were broken off. Gentiles were grafted in. But it’s still one tree, nourished by the same covenant promises made to the patriarchs.
Now, that doesn’t mean amillennialists don’t care about ethnic Israel. In fact, many from the Puritans to modern-day theologians, still hold out hope that a large number of Jews will come to Christ before the end. But they see this not as a return to Old Covenant categories, but as the final ingathering of Jews into the same family the Gentiles have been joining for two thousand years.
Even “all Israel will be saved” (Romans 11:26) is read differently here. Some interpret it as the whole remnant of elect Jews over time. Others like Wright believe “all Israel” refers to the entire people of God: Jew and Gentile together, saved by grace. Either way, no one gets saved by ethnicity. No one enters the kingdom by ancestral privilege. Only by the cross.
As John Piper (a Historic Pre-millennialist) puts it: “The promises made to Abraham… will be inherited as an everlasting gift only by true, spiritual Israel… Being born Jewish does not make one an heir of the promise.” In other words: the door is wide open. But Christ is still the only way in.
This view can feel like a deep exhale, because it sees everything converging in Jesus. He’s the temple. He’s the land. He’s the fulfillment. And we’re not waiting for a future political reset… we’re living in the kingdom already, even as we long for its completion in the New Heavens and New Earth
Evaluating Amillennialism & Fulfillment Theology: One Story, Fully Told
Amillennialism brings remarkable coherence to Scripture’s grand narrative. It refuses to fracture the story into competing peoples or plans. Instead, it reads every covenant, typology, and promise as finding its fulfillment in Jesus. From circumcision to baptism, from Passover to the Lord’s Supper, from tabernacle to the indwelling Spirit, the storyline runs uninterrupted from Genesis to Revelation. This is not a theological switch; it’s the very framework the New Testament authors use when they declare that in Christ, “every promise of God is ‘Yes’” (2 Cor 1:20). The result is a unified, compelling narrative arc focused on one Messiah, one people, and one inheritance.
The New Testament repeatedly affirms this unity. Paul, Peter, and the writer of Hebrews apply quintessentially Israelite language to the Church: heirs “according to promise” (Gal 3:29), “a royal priesthood, a holy nation” (1 Pet 2:9), and members of the “heavenly Jerusalem” (Heb 12:22). Romans 9 makes the pivotal argument that physical lineage doesn’t define Abraham’s offspring, obedient faith in Christ does. Romans 11 concludes this olive-tree allegory: believing Jews and believing Gentiles belong to a single family, rooted in the covenant promises. That theological symmetry resonates deeply.
This Christ-centric view also handles prophecy with restraint and balance, embodying the “already–not yet” tension. Instead of speculating over future territorial promises or rebuilding earthly thrones, amillennialism reads Revelation 20 as symbolic, describing Christ’s current reign through His risen life and Spirit-engaged Church, with Satan’s binding already occurring now (Rev 12:7–11). Critics label this symbolic reading as spiritualizing prophecy, yet defenders like Sam Storms offer a compelling analogy: “It’s not that God gave Israel a horse and buggy and replaced it; He delivered a Ferrari.” It’s not a bait-and-switch, it’s an unfolding upgrade of God’s redemptive design.
In summary, amillennialism’s strengths are clear:
Covenantal Continuity: It weaves a single thread from Abraham to the Church, not sidelining Israel but integrating its trajectory in Christ.
Christ-Centered Fulfillment: Jesus is the true Israel; all who belong to Him are rightful heirs of every covenant promise (Gal 3:29).
One People of God: No two-track theology, there is one olive tree composed of believing Jews and Gentiles (Rom 11).
Prophetic Restraint: It reads apocalyptic texts responsibly, avoiding speculative geopolitics and emphasizing Christ’s present spiritual reign.
Already–Not Yet Tension: It maintains narrative depth and eschatological hope without forcing premature conclusions or oversimplifying God’s redemptive plan.
This framework brings theological elegance, biblical fidelity, and Christ-focused unity to our understanding of the kingdom, making it a profoundly compelling lens for interpreting the full sweep of God’s Word.
Where Amillennialism struggles
Let’s be honest: amillennialism brings clarity, but not without friction.
One of the most repeated critiques against amillennialism is that it “spiritualizes” Old Testament prophecy, particularly promises regarding the land, temple, kingdom, and Israel’s restoration. Critics argue that amillennialism often reinterprets concrete, historical promises through a symbolic or allegorical lens, thereby obscuring their original context. For example, when passages like Ezekiel 40–48 describe a future temple, or when Zechariah speaks of nations gathering to Jerusalem, amillennialists tend to see these as typological previews of spiritual realities fulfilled in Christ or the Church. But for critics, especially premillennialists, this feels like a hermeneutical inconsistency.
The theological concern is fidelity: does God mean what He says in prophecy? Or do promises made in physical terms ultimately dissolve into metaphor?
Another issue is the interpretation of Revelation 20 speaking explicitly of a thousand-year reign of Christ, following Satan’s binding and preceding the final judgment. Amillennialism interprets this passage symbolically, arguing that the “millennium” is not a future, physical reign of Christ on earth, but a present spiritual reality, coinciding with the Church age. Critics respond that this undermines the clear structure of Revelation 20: a sequence of two literal resurrections (v. 4–5), a defined temporal period (“a thousand years”), and a visible reign of saints with Christ. They argue this passage echoes Old Testament kingdom expectations ( Isaiah 2, Daniel 7, Zechariah 14) and should be read in continuity with those texts.
Another theological critique of amillennialism centers on its interpretation of Revelation 20’s statement that “Satan is bound.” Amillennialists typically understand this binding as symbolic, a limitation placed on Satan so he cannot prevent the gospel’s spread or deceive the nations en masse during the Church ageAnother central critique concerns the fate of ethnic Israel. Many amillennialists affirm that believing Jews become part of the Church, but they do not expect a distinct, national role for Israel in the eschatological future. For critics, this sounds like theological maneuvering. If Revelation says Satan is imprisoned in the abyss so he “should not deceive the nations,” why is deception still rampant today? Critics contend that if binding refers to preventing deception, and the gospel hasn’t yet reached all nations without hindrance, then Satan isn’t truly “bound” as described.
Yet another point of contention are passages like Romans 11 suggest a yet-to-come turning of Israel to Christ. Paul envisions the grafting back in of natural branches and speaks of “all Israel” being saved (Rom. 11:25–26). The theological issue here is covenant fidelity: if God made eternal promises to the patriarchs regarding Israel’s people and land (Genesis 15, 17; Jeremiah 31), then any theology that redefines or dissolves those promises risks making God appear forgetful or unfaithful.
Lastly, critics point to what they perceive as inconsistency in the amillennial method of interpretation. In some cases, amillennialists read New Testament texts, like the resurrection, final judgment, or return of Christ literally and sequentially. But when it comes to Old Testament kingdom promises, land inheritance, or temple visions, those are often read symbolically or as typological of Christ and the Church.
Critics argue that this back-and-forth between literal and symbolic interpretation lacks a consistent rule and opens the door to subjectivity. If some prophecies are fulfilled literally and others spiritually, who decides which is which, and based on what principle?
Amillennialism lives in the tension between God’s promise and fulfillment.
In practical terms, this means living in the already, not yet. Christ already reigns, his death and resurrection inaugurated a kingdom that grows through his Spirit and people, yet the full consummation awaits his return. This framework gives believers the patience to live faithfully now, even amid suffering and uncertainty, without resorting to escapism or pouring energy into geopolitical speculation.
Ultimately, amillennialism points us back to Jesus, the One in whom every biblical mystery finds its meaning, even those mysteries we’re still unpacking centuries later.
How Coherent Is It, Really?
If we’re asking Ai how well this view holds together across the sweep of Scripture, it lands at around 80% coherence.
It does an incredible job tracing the New Testament’s own trajectory, one people, one Messiah, one inheritance. It offers a beautifully unified, Christ-exalting view of redemptive history. But it leaves some questions hanging. What do we do with those prophecies that still sound like physical, national promises? What if God actually meant both something fulfilled in Christ, and still waiting to unfold for the Jewish people?
In the end, fulfillment theology gives us a stunningly cohesive narrative, one that reads all of Scripture through the light of the cross and the resurrection.
Additional Reading on the subject
Riddlebarger, Kim A Case for Amillennialism: Understanding the End Times (Baker Books, 2003/2013). A clear, accessible defense of the historic Protestant position that Christ’s millennial reign is present now, grounded in key biblical texts (Daniel 9; Romans 11; Revelation 20) .
Johnson, Jeffrey The Five Points of Amillennialism (Reformation Heritage Books). A concise biblical-theological overview that lays out five central pillars of the view, ideal for students and pastors .
Ammon, Jonathan The Power of His Reign: An Easy Introduction to Amillennialism (self-pub, 2022). A user-friendly primer that emphasizes the kingdom’s spiritual reality “now” and its ongoing spread until Christ’s return .
Beale, G. K. The Temple and the Church’s Mission: A Biblical Theology of the Dwelling Place of God (IVP Academic, 2004). Explores how OT temple themes find fulfillment in Christ and the Church, a vital component of fulfillment theology .
Bibliography
Storms, Sam. “Why I Am an Amillennialist.” Enjoying God Blog, 29 Aug. 2022.
Quote: “What unites us is our common confession that Jesus is coming back!”
Storms, Sam. “30 Reasons Why I am an Amillennialist (Part Two).” Enjoying God Blog, 22 June 2022.
Offers typological interpretation of OT prophecy in verses like Hebrews 11 and Acts 15
Wright, N. T. “N. T. Wright on ‘Israel in Pauline Theology.’” Dunelm Road, 31 Mar. 2014.
Quote: “For Wright, Jesus Christ and the multi‑ethnic church are the true Israel.”
Bird, Michael F. “Is the Church the New/True Israel?” MichaelBird’s Substack, Apr. 2024.
Discusses Wright’s view of the church as the true Israel