No, Ephesians doesn’t teach that the body of Christ is the Israel of God

I’ve previously written about some of my other corrections of AK Richardson’s takes on certain topics related to the discussion about Hyperdispensationalism that we had recently on his YouTube channel, but there’s another passage he’s brought up a few times now (Ephesians 2:11-22) that I should quickly touch on, because he believes this passage proves that Gentiles in the body of Christ have been made a part of Israel, and that the body of Christ is also what he refers to as “spiritual Israel” (along those lines, he also believes the label “the Israel of God” is actually a reference to the body of Christ).

Now, it’s easy to see how someone who approaches this passage with the presupposition that Amillennialism is correct (which it clearly is not) will read it this way, because an Amillennialist (which AK happens to be) is basically forced to read their preconceived belief that there is no difference between Israel and the body of Christ into this passage, leading them to mistakenly conclude that it’s a good proof text for the idea that Gentiles in the body of Christ have joined the Israel of God.

The fact of the matter, however, is that while this passage can seem like it means we become a part of Israel when we get saved (especially if one already holds to the mistaken assumption that there is no difference between the body of Christ and the Israel of God when they read this passage), we have to take the rest of Scripture into consideration when we read it, and as I’ve explained elsewhere, it’s pretty clear that there are some pretty significant differences between the body of Christ and the Israel of God, and that the two groups have two different sets of expectations and are saved by following two distinct Gospels, so it goes without saying that this passage can’t mean what AK is claiming it does. (Of course, as long as one holds on to the eschatological misconception known as Amillennialism, they’ll be incapable of understanding much of what any passage in Scripture actually means, much less just this one, since this presupposition causes one to have to misinterpret the majority of Scripture.) So, while I could dive deeply into the details of this passage (and perhaps I will some day in the future), it just isn’t necessary to do so, because based on everything else I’ve written on this website, it’s evident that AK (and other Amillennialists) are simply reading their presuppositions into the passage and that it obviously doesn’t mean what they assume it does. If I find the time, I might get deeper into what Paul actually is saying in this passage one of these days. For now, though, the things I’ve written elsewhere on this website will be enough for those among the elect to understand that this passage simply isn’t saying what AK is forced to assume it does, and at the end of the day, it’s the elect I’m writing for.