–continuing from part 4.
I thought that the fifth post would be the last, but Will Dudding brought up some objections in the comments of the last post. This has caused me to dig a little deeper, and in the end has only increased my confidence in this understanding of the land promise. So before drawing out the implications of this view of the land promise (and then concluding our series), I need to pause and answer some objections. Answering these objections will also serve to recap this series and help us gain an even better appreciation for how the land promise applies to us.
Answering Objections
Will’s comments focused on several questions relating to the specific promises made to Abraham. He focused on two places in Genesis where the land promise is specified, but I’d like to quote all the places the land promise to Abraham is mentioned:
Now the Lord said to Abram, “Go from your country… to the land that I will show you. And I will make of you a great nation….” “To your offspring I will give this land”. (Gen. 12:1-2a; 7)
“Lift up your eyes and look from the place where you are, northward and southward and eastward and westward, for all the land that you see I will give to you and to your offspring forever. I will make your offspring as the dust of the earth…. Arise, walk through the length and breadth of the land, for I will give it to you.” (Gen. 13:14b-17)
On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, “To your offspring I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the river Euphrates, the land of the Kenites, the Kenizzites, the Kadmonites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Rephaim, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Girgashites and the Jebusites”. (Gen. 15:18-21)
“I have made you the father of a multitude of nations…. And I will establish my covenant between me and you and your offspring after you throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant to be God to you and to your offspring after you. And I will give to you and to your offspring after you the land of your sojournings, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession, and I will be their God. (Gen. 17:5b-8]
“I will surely bless you, and I will surely multiply your offspring as the stars of heaven and as the sand that is on the seashore. And your offspring shall possess the gate of his enemies, and in your offspring shall all the nations of the earth be blessed…” (Gen. 22:17-18]
From reading these promises, it is easy to see why Will sees problems with my view. He sees unconditional promises made to Abraham, concerning a specific plot of land to be given to Abraham’s offspring to possess forever. He fears I am saying God has cast off Israel and replaced her with the Church, and that I am ignoring these “forever” promises, and turning them into a spiritual pseudo promise so I can say they are fulfilled. It’s as simple as this: Abraham’s descendants haven’t possessed this land, so the fulfillment must still be expected in the future.
To respond to these objections is a large task, because so many fundamental assumptions are wrapped up in them. Nevertheless, I will give this a try.
The Possession of the Promised Land
I am claiming that Joshua 21:43-45 declares that God fulfilled his promise to give the land to Israel. Nehemiah and Solomon also declare God did not drop the ball on any of his promises. In studying this further, I realize I neglected an important passage in 1 Kings.
Judah and Israel were as many as the sand by the sea. They ate and drank and were happy. Solomon ruled over all the kingdoms from the Euphrates to the land of the Philistines and to the border of Egypt. They brought tribute and served Solomon all the days of his life. (1 Kings 4:20-21)
The inspired author of 1 Kings certainly means to grab our attention here. He is proclaiming the promises concerning Abraham’s seed being as numerous as the sand of the sea, have been fulfilled. He is also pointing us to the exact dimensions of the land promised in Gen. 15, as being now inhabited and ruled over by Solomon. Of course, later in 1 Kings 8:56, Solomon will actually declare that all the promises have been fulfilled. So in one sense clearly, God declares through inspired authors of Scripture, that the Israelites did indeed possess the land. Hold with me here, as we go on to address some other objections.
The Inheritors of the Promised Land
Now the promises above stipulate that Abraham’s descendants will inherit the land. But we observed previously (in part 1) that the New Testament states that the very promise that Abraham would inherit the world, was given to all the spiritual descendants of Abraham (see Rom. 4:11-16). To expand on this, let’s note a few important passages below:
For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” 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. 9:6b-8]
Know then that it is those of faith who are the sons of Abraham. (Gal. 3:7)
Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, “And to offsprings,” referring to many, but referring to one, “And to your offspring,” who is Christ. (Gal. 3:16)
…you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise. (Gal. 3:28b-29)
…the Gentiles are fellow heirs… (Eph. 3:6a)
Now you, brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise. (Gal. 4:28]
That is why it depends on faith, in order that the promise [re: the land, see v. 13] may rest on grace and be guaranteed to all his offspring””not only to the adherent of the law but also to the one who shares the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all, (Rom. 4:16)
See how all the above verses go hand in hand with Rom. 4:16 (the last verse cited above). This is clear New Testament teaching here. Unequivocal. “Offspring of Abraham” = “those who believe in Jesus, who is the specific Offspring of Abraham”. We know that Abraham saw Christ’s day, and his faith was in a future deliverer (John 8:58, Rom. 4, Gen. 3:15). And so we know this New Testament assertion must mean something. If we believers are co-heirs with Abraham and descendants of him, than this seems to change how we are to view the promises made in Gen. Again, suspend disbelief until our next point.
The Nature and Concept of Land
When we talk of land, we must think in ancient terms. Land was always sacred, and vastly more important in ancient times than today. A King and his realm was totally tied up in his land. Like a King, so a god. It was assumed that deities were tied up to the land, and the god of the Canaanites wouldn’t hold sway in Nineveh. Remember Namaan? He gets healed of leprosy by Elisha the prophet and what does he request? A barrel full of dirt! He felt he needed part of the land to take back to Syria so that he could be a worshiper of Jehovah.
Of course, Jehovah declares that he is the One True and Living God. He alone is God. And He owns the whole Earth. Nevertheless, land is integral in how God relates with his people. Adam and Eve needed an Eden. A place where they fellowshipped with God. If you note Abraham’s wanderings, the only places he builds altars are in the land God was giving him. Fellowship with God stemmed from being on His land.
Throughout Deuteronomy, a constantly reoccurring idea is that these laws are to be obeyed, “in the land that the LORD, the God of your fathers, has given you to possess — as long as you live in the land” (Deut. 12:1 NIV). Obedience is intricately connected to the land. And the land was a good land. “A land flowing with milk and honey”. This points out that the land is a new paradise — a place of communion with God and blessing. And throughout Deuteronomy it is clear that God is graciously giving this to the Israelites, even though they are exhorted to take it.
The land is intimately tied up with God’s redemptive work toward Israel. At the conclusion of laws regulating life in the land (Deut. 12-25), there is a powerful ceremony highlighting the importance of Israel viewing themselves as stewards of God’s land (Deut. 26:1-11). We will explore the nature of the land further as we look at conditionality and a few other topics in the next post.
Bob,
I am heartened by your continued research into this subject and the fact that rebuttals don’t dampen that zeal to be Berean.
I would like to add one thing, if I may. While everyone is familiar with the facts of the destruction of Jerusalem, the dispersion of the nations of Israel and Judah, how many people know that all the genealogical records of the Jews were also destroyed at or before that time? What plainer sign could anyone wish for to prove that Israel, as a nation chosen and separated for God, was cut off, as Paul says in Romans. Paul also says they will be grafted back in IF they believe. Since the Gentiles were “grafted” into Christ, doesn’t it seem plain that the only way national Jews can be grafted back in is by the same means? Jesus is the Way, and He is the true promise of rest that Canaan was simply a shadow of.
Bob,
Thanks for the study.
It has been refreshing and enlightening.
Jason
Thanks guys, for the encouragement.
Wow. Too many smilies snuck in there. I don’t like how WP renders “8)”!
Bob,
Add a space between the eight and the parentheses.
Jason
Hey Bob,
Thanks for the continued work. I have been studying this subject on my own as well. Maybe I don’t really get what you are getting at. Let me list what I understand as your position and let me know if I’m misunderstanding anything.
The true spiritual children of Abraham are believers. (I agree)
The offspring or seed of Abraham is ultimately Christ ( I agree)
God has abandoned National Israel for any special future kingdom (disagree)
The Church (including saved Jews) has replaced national Israel and have inherited spiritual promises (disagree)
The land promises were fulfilled in Solomon’s kingdom (but they are supposed to inherit the land forever Gen 3:15-16)
The covenant with Israel and Moses were conditional and therefore made the Abrahamic covenant conditional as well. (disagree)
There will be no future kingdom of National Israel i.e. No millenium, rapture, etc. only an eternal state (disagree)
Am I getting your beliefs right or am I misunderstanding you?
Will,
I’m going to get at the points where we disagree more pointedly next time. For now, let me point out a few things.
1) The promise concerning continued possession of the Land was for the offspring of Abraham.
Now who is that according to the New Testament?
2) The promises as delineated in Genesis seem to be unconditional and seem to be saying Israel will forever occupy that land.
However, the Old Testament itself declares that the promises concerning the land were fulfilled. Who is in a better position to understand the nature of those promises, us or the inspired authors of Scripture?
Furthermore, Israel, according to your view, has never fully occupied the land yet. So how is that promise true? How have they been forever occupying it?
And even more so, how is it a “forever” occupation, when the millennium will come to an end?
3) One’s view on whether there will be a millennium need not really come into play here. I’m not sure that historic premillennialists would disagree with the position I’m advocating all that much. Perhaps, but I’m not sure. Certainly the New Testament understanding of the Kingdom should not be divorced from eschatology. The Kingdom is here and now and will be realized in a truer, fuller sense ultimately in the Eternal Kingdom of the New Earth.
4) To say my position is that the Church replaces Israel, isn’t quite right. Paul points out that there was a spiritual sense of Israel and a national sense. Not all Israel was Israel. Given that understanding, the church is grafted in to spiritual Israel and exists now as God’s people on earth. Furthermore, without repentance and faith in Christ, there is no hope for anyone, Jew or Gentile. What’s in dispute is whether all national Israel will come to repentance. And even then, they will be grafted back in to their own tree: the spiritual Israel tree which the Church is part of now. So I don’t see any future distinction between spiritual Israel and the Church. They have been made of two, one new man (see Eph. 2). And they together are growing into a habitation for the Lord (the building’s foundation is the apostles [church] and prophets [spiritual/remnant Israel]. No one is replaced, but national Israel is cast aside.
Again I’ll delve more into this later, hopefully. As a foretaste, how is it that David’s kingdom is “forever”? How is it that some of Abraham’s promises apply spiritually to the church, but some don’t?
Blessings in Christ,
Bob
What about the land promise in Ez.36?
22″Therefore say to the house of Israel, Thus says the Lord GOD: It is not for your sake, O house of Israel, that I am about to act, but for the sake of my holy name, which you have profaned among the nations to which you came. 23 And I will vindicate the holiness of my great name, which has been profaned among the nations, and which you have profaned among them. And the nations will know that I am the LORD, declares the Lord GOD, when through you I vindicate my holiness before their eyes. 24 I will take you from the nations and gather you from all the countries and bring you into your own land. 25 I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses, and from all your idols I will cleanse you. 26And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. 27 And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules. 28 You shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers, and you shall be my people, and I will be your God. 29And I will deliver you from all your uncleannesses. And I will summon the grain and make it abundant and lay no famine upon you. 30 I will make the fruit of the tree and the increase of the field abundant, that you may never again suffer the disgrace of famine among the nations. 31Then you will remember your evil ways, and your deeds that were not good, and you will loathe yourselves for your iniquities and your abominations. 32 It is not for your sake that I will act, declares the Lord GOD; let that be known to you. Be ashamed and confounded for your ways, O house of Israel.
33″Thus says the Lord GOD: On the day that I cleanse you from all your iniquities, I will cause the cities to be inhabited, and the waste places shall be rebuilt. 34And the land that was desolate shall be tilled, instead of being the desolation that it was in the sight of all who passed by. 35And they will say, ‘This land that was desolate has become like the garden of Eden, and the waste and desolate and ruined cities are now fortified and inhabited.’ 36Then the nations that are left all around you shall know that I am the LORD; I have rebuilt the ruined places and replanted that which was desolate. I am the LORD; I have spoken, and I will do it.
“1) The promise concerning continued possession of the Land was for the offspring of Abraham.”
The land promise is for the physical offspring of Abrham.
“Now who is that according to the New Testament?”
You’re forcing me to erase the distinction. Spiritual Israel is made up of all believers in Christ. So, I’m in! Praise the Lord.
“2) The promises as delineated in Genesis seem to be unconditional and seem to be saying Israel will forever occupy that land.”
Seem? No, they are unconditional. You are interpreting backwards…from NT back into OT. Revelation is progressive, we start at the beginning and move our way forward. If I interpret backwards, I will agree with you on all this.
“However, the Old Testament itself declares that the promises concerning the land were fulfilled. Who is in a better position to understand the nature of those promises, us or the inspired authors of Scripture?”
Like I said in the last post, Solomon might be referring to the Mosaic Covenant. They fulfilled their obligation to God up to that point, and God fulfilled His. The last guy who posted that promise in Ezekiel made an important point. That prophecy was written after the so called fulfillment of the Abrahamic Covenant in I Kings.
“Furthermore, Israel, according to your view, has never fully occupied the land yet. So how is that promise true? How have they been forever occupying it?And even more so, how is it a “forever†occupation, when the millennium will come to an end?”
They havn’t been occupying it because they broke the covenant with God, but because He is faithful, He will still keep His promise to Abraham and when Israel believes in the correct Messiah at the end of the Tribulation, the land promise will finally be fulifilled. After the Millennium, there is still a New Jerusalem…all things are made new…that’s the forever part I guess.
“No one is replaced, but national Israel is cast aside.”
That’s replacement! There are divine appointments that God has made with Israel and all His people that are on the Jewish calendar that are still to be fulfilled. Jesus fulfilled the feast of Passover by dying as the passover lamb, he fulfilled the firstfruits offering three days later by raising from the dead on the day of firstfruits as the firstfruits of the resurrection, he fulfilled the feast of Pentecost by coming in the person of the Holy Spirit on day of Pentacost but the feasts of trumpets, Yom Kippur, and Tabernacles are his future appointments that are still unfulfilled: rapture, second coming, millennial reign. This is all from a Jewish standpoint which could not have been known by the original Covenant Theolgians who made this stuff up.
As one with a knowledge about surveying, land plats and county records searches, as well as review of title policies, I am really enjoying this search for who owns the “land” and under what conditions. Thanks Bob
Bob,
I got to give it to you one this one: “how is it a “forever†occupation, when the millennium will come to an end?”
Since I don’t even include the millenium in my train of thought, this is a “big” point on your side of the argument!
I won’t repeat my own objections to the idea that “forever” always means “forever and ever” in God’s Word. All promises to Israel were conditional. Where do people think the term “lost tribes of Israel” came from? Israel was cut off long before Judah when God gave her a divorce. God was willing to take Israel back, but they remained divorced from God through the end of the Old Covenant period, did they not?
I am not an expert on Israel, but I can see no purpose in God nullifying the work of Jesus Christ for a future return to animal sacrifices. That is my biggest objection to this whole idea of a restored Israel and temple worship.
Thanks for the continued exposition of this topic!
James,
Stick around and I’ll get to that. Probably part 6 will deal with that. I would like to point out, however, that the promise is a new covenant promise. And Hebrews makes clear, along with Jesus himself at the institution of the Lord’s Supper, that the new covenant is in effect now.
How does that jive, by the way, with Eph. 6:1-3, where the Gentile believing children are promised long life in the land?
Blessings in Christ,
Bob
William,
I appreciate the back and forth here. Like you, this is helping me as I study out the topic.
1) The land promise is for the physical offspring of Abraham
How are you justified in saying that? Where does it specify “physical”? The promise is for Abraham’s offspring, which according to Gal. 3:29, Heb. 2:15, and other places, Gentile Christians are.
Furthermore, once again please note the logic in what Rom. 4 is expressly saying….
2) They haven’t been occupying it because they broke the covenant with God, but because He is faithful, He will still keep His promise to Abraham and when Israel believes in the correct Messiah at the end of the Tribulation, the land promise will finally be fulfilled….
Is the promise “forever” occupation or not? Is it unconditional or not? We’ll explore more about this in a future post.
3) “No one is replaced, but national Israel is cast aside.” That’s replacement!
No it isn’t! 😉
The new covenant has been ushered in through Christ, we won’t return to an old covenant. The new covenant focuses on spiritual Israel, which the Gentile Church has been joined to. Again, there is no blessing for national Israel apart from uniting with Christ by faith. Any future millennium or future blessings will only be for spiritual Israel, which the Gentile church has been grafted into. The promised return of “all Israel” (whatever that phrase means) specifically states that national Israel, were they to repent, could be grafted back in to the one tree that the Gentiles are now a part of. This is clear, any future hope for national Israel requires repentance and unity by faith with Christ. That means there is no future for national Israel as national Israel, but only by becoming part of the spiritual Israel, of which the Gentiles now form a part (see Rom. 11 and Eph. 2).
The rest of your comment sees you building a point on some unstated assumed analogy between the Old and New testaments. The same kind of thing, I am trying to do. Just because there are six Jewish feasts means that each one must directly tie in to some element such as Christ’s death, resurrection, Pentecost, return, millennium, etc. That is using the same methodology against me. There are no controls here. Why wasn’t Jesus’ ascension one of the points a feast referred to? By the way, I’m pretty sure firstfruits = Pentecost. Pentecost was the firstfruits feast. The Passover happened just prior to the feast of unleavened bread, and 7 weeks later we had firstfruits.
Again, stay tuned for more (I just posted today, and hope to post once or twice more this week.)
Blessings brother,
Bob
Prodigal Knot,
I see that as very problematic too. But not all dispensationalists hold to a return to animal sacrifice. I think that follows naturally from their positions and beliefs, however.
Nancy,
Glad you are enjoying the series. One day, we won’t need surveyors and land/title policies anymore!
Blessings in Christ to all,
Bob Hayton
Yes Bob, I would be looking for your answer since the promise was about the land that was given to their fathers. This is quite specific.
28 “You shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers, and you shall be my people, and I will be your God.”