Monday, December 14, 2015

Israel Should Return to 1967 Borders!



Israel Should Return to 1967 Borders!

4122014
NearEast-1967-WarToday is a quick history of modern Israel. Most people are ignorant of the actual maps. President Obama demands that Israel “return to the ’67 borders.” However, he is speaking of the lines BEFORE the Six Day War, when Jordan occupied Judea and Samaria (the so-called West Bank). Those lines were not actually borders but armistice lines from Israel’s 1948 War of Independence. The above map shows the lines AFTER the Six Day War (including both blue and pink shaded areas). I am totally in favor of Israel returning to those lines.
The 1917 Balfour Declaration was legally enacted by the 1920 legal decision of the League of Nations after the San Remo Conference, as seen in the second map. This was given to the Jews as their national home. It is amazing how much land the Jews have given up since then! This map is much closer to God’s promise for Israel. Here is a portion of that agreement:
Confirmed by the Council of the League of Nations on July 24, 1922
Came into operation in September 1923.

“The Council of the League of Nations:
Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have agreed, for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them; and
Whereas the Principal Allied powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people,” (San Remo Conference, April 24, 1920).
Pal-under-BritishMandate192

So, while the world whittles away at Israel’s borders, God is favoring and restoring her to His promised land. The Biblical promise is yet to be fulfilled in total. I believe it will happen at the conclusion of the Psalm 83 War (which I have written and talked much about). Here is the only word that counts for Israel’s future borders:
On the same day Yehovah made a covenant with Abram, saying: “To your descendants I have given this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the River Euphrates.Genesis 15:18
Les Lawrence, Voice of Christian Zionists      (READ MORE)


Israel Election for New Government on March 17, 2015

2122014
img550204Flash News Update!
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu fired part of his ruling coalition today. This will lead to new elections on March 17. At this early moment it appears that the conservatives will benefit most as the leftist parties look to lose Knesset seats. Netanyahu has had strong resistance to his platform from the left leaning members of his own coalition. Livni and Lapid were fired for undermining the Prime Minister from within.
Here are a few links to this fast breaking story, followed by my observations.
Netanyahu Fails to Save Coalition, Early Elections Expected Opposition parties have already submitted a motion for the dissolution of the Knesset, and party officials say Netanyahu’s Likud faction will support them, thereby accelerating the process of early elections, which would presumably be held by mid-March (17th) of next year.
Current polls suggest that Netanyahu and his Likud will handily win the election, and that the right-wing overall will benefit, while leading centrist and left-wing parties will almost all lose mandates.
While the prospects for Bibi Netanyahu continuing as Prime Minister look good, it is not without possible pitfalls. Put simply, Bibi represents Biblical Zionism and the leftists represent the humanist compromise for peace at any cost. They will keep trading land for peace until Israel would be destroyed “piece by peace.” In the end it will be the promise of Yehovah God that will determine the future for Israel.
“For as the rain comes down, and the snow from heaven, and do not return there, but water the earth, and make it bring forth and bud… so shall My word be that goes forth from My mouth. It shall not return to Me void, but it shall accomplish what I please, and it shall prosper in the thing for which I sent it.” Isaiah 55: 10-11
“Yehovah has a day of vengeance, a year of retribution, to uphold Zion’s cause.” Isaiah 34:8
Pray for the peace of Jerusalem, and begin now praying for the new elections.
Les Lawrence, Voice of Christian Zionists        (READ MORE)
(I have taken the liberty to change the word “LORD” to Yehovah. Every single time you see LORD or GOD in all capital letters in the Old Testament, the actual Hebrew word is Yehovah. This name occurs 6,828 times in the Hebrew text, yet remains untranslated in most Bibles. His name, obscured for 2,500 years, is now being revealed. It is TIME to restore the name of Yehovah!   (for deeper study click here.)

The Biblical Borders Showing What is the True Land of Israel


The Biblical Borders Showing What is the True Land of Israel

In recent times, the borders of the State of Israel seem to change every decade or so, but what were the precise Biblical borders of the Land of Israel? As we see in this week's Torah reading, the answer to this question is not so simple - for the story of Bnei Gad and Reuven in Parshat Matot (32:1-42) implies that Israel's borders are rather 'expandable,' while Parshat Masei (33:1-15) details what appears to be a rather fixed geographical border.

So what are the exact borders of the Land of Israel? This week's shiur examines the biblical roots of this complex issue.

Introduction

Two clichés, both based on psukim in Tanach, are commonly used to describe the expanse of the borders of the Land of Israel:

A) 'From the Nile to the Euphrates'; 

B) 'From Dan to Be'er Sheva.'

The geographic discrepancy between these two boundary-lines is immense! According to (A), Eretz Yisrael encompasses almost the entire Middle East,






 while according to (B), Israel is a tiny country not much bigger than the state of Rhode Island 





So which cliché is correct?

The Borders in Parshat Masei

In Parshat Masei, the Torah presents the most precise delineation of the borders of the Land of Israel in Tanach:

"And God spoke to Moshe saying: Command Bnei Yisrael and tell them, when you enter Eretz Canaan, this is the land that shall become your inheritance - Eretz Canaan according ot its borders. Your southern border, from Midbar Tzin..." (see 34:1-13)

Over the centuries, many attempts have been made to identify each location mentioned in the parsha. With regard to the eastern and western borders, i.e. the Mediterranean Sea (34:6) and the Jordan River (34:11-12), there can be no question whatsoever as to their identity. With regard to the northern and southern borders, however, a variety of opinions exist.

The 'minimalist' approach identifies the northern border in the area of today's Southern Lebanon, i.e. along the Litani river until the Metulla area. The southern border, according to this view, runs along the Be'er Sheva - Gaza line in the northern Negev. On the other hand, the 'maximalist' opinion identifies the northern border somewhere up in Turkey and Northern Syria, while the southern border is said to be situated somewhere deep in the Sinai desert.

The Eastern Frontier

Although the eastern border in Parshat Masei is clearly the Jordan river, the story of "bnei Gad u'bnei Reuven" in Parshat Matot (31:1-54) indicates the possibility of expanding this border into present-day Jordan. Recall that Moshe Rabbeinu allows the tribes of Gad, Reuven, and Menashe to establish their permanent settlement of Eretz Yisrael on the 'eastern bank' of the Jordan River, provided that they fulfill their vow to help everyone else conquer the land located on the westerb bank. [See also Yehoshua chapters 13-14, and chapter 22.]

So why are the borders of Eretz Yisrael so ambiguous? Are they vast or small? Are they rigid and unchanging or expandable? Are certain parts of the 'Holy Land' holier than others?

To answer these questions, and to understand why this topic is so complicated, we must return to Sefer Breishit and God's promise to the Avot regarding the Land of Israel.

The Land Promised to Avraham Avinu

In Parshat Lech Lecha, when God first chooses Avraham Avinu, He promises him a special land. [See Breishit 12:7, 13:14-17, 15:18, 17:7-8. See also 22:17-18, 26:2-5, 28:3-4, 28:13-14, 35:11-12, 46:1-4, 48:4 and 21. (That should keep you busy.)]

In His first three promises to Avraham, God describes the land in very general terms:

1) In Ur Kasdim:
"Go forth from your native land and from your father's house to the land what I will show you." (12:1)

2) At Shchem:
"I will assign this land to your offspring." (12:7)

3) At Bet-El:
"Raise your eyes and look out from where you are... for I give all the land that you see..." (13:15)
Later in Parshat Lech Lecha, Avraham Avinu enters into two covenants with God concerning his future. Both covenants precisely define the Promised Land, but each covenant consists of an entirely different piece of land!

1) At Brit Bein HaB'tarim: "Ha'Aretz"
"On that day God made a covenant with Avraham, saying: to your offspring I assign this land, from the river of Egypt [the Nile] to the river, the river Euphrates, the Kenites, Knizites... (the ten nations)" (Breishit 15:18-21)

The land defined by these borders is enormous! To the northeast, the border extends to the Euphrates River, which flows from northern Syria to the Persian Gulf, and to the southwest, it runs from the sources of the Nile River in Ethiopia down to the port city of Alexandria! [Undoubtedly, this covenant is the source of the popular phrase "from the Nile to the Euphrates."]

2) At Brit Milah: "Eretz Canaan"

"I assign the land in which you sojourn to you and your offspring to come, all the land of Canaan..." (17:8)

In this covenant, the 'Promised Land' is much smaller. Even though the term "Eretz Canaan" appears here for the first time [see also Shmot 6:4, and compare with Breishit 17:7-8], the geographic definition of this area has already been mentioned in Parshat Noach. Let's take a careful look at that definition:
"And the border of the Canaani was from Sidon (the Litani valley in Lebanon) down the coastal plain to Grar and Gaza, [and from Sidon (down the Syrian-African Rift)] to Sdom, Amora... (the Dead Sea area)." (Breishit 10:19)

[Note that this is the only border detailed in the genealogical record of Breishit chapter 10. Most likely, this delineation is recorded as critical background information for Parshat Lech Lecha!]

This biblical definition of Eretz Canaan more or less coincides with the general region that the Avot inhabited - "eretz m'gurecha" (see 17:7-8). The Avot lived and sojourned in the area between Be'er Sheva and Grar to the south (see 28:10, 46:1), and the area of Shchem and Dotan (37:12-17) to the north. And during his battle against the Four Kings, Avraham chased his foes as far north as Dan (14:14)!

[Undoubtedly, these borders inspired the popular phrase: "from Dan to Be'er Sheva." This phrase is used several times later in Tanach to define the populace of the Land of Israel. For example:

"And all of Israel, from Dan to Be'er Sheva, knew that Shmuel was a trustworthy prophet..." (Shmuel I 3:20)
See also I Melachim 5:5.]

In summary, the source of the conflicting borders of Eretz Yisrael appears to be its different presentations in Brit Bein HaB'tarim and Brit Milah. Now, we must explain the relationship between each "brit" and its respective definition of the land.

Two Borders - Two Types of Kedusha

To understand the significance of these conflicting borders, we must determine the exact nature of each covenant.

In our shiurim on Sefer Breishit, we analyzed the significance of both covenants with the avot and the unique contribution of each (i.e., Bein HaB'tarim - b'shem Havaya and Brit Milah - b'shem Elokim). For our purposes here, we will briefly review our conclusions.

Brit Bein HaB'tarim

After Avraham's defeat of the Four Kings, God promises him that his offspring will one day conquer ("yerusha") the land, just as Avraham himself had just done. However, this conquest will take place only after several generations of bondage in a foreign land, after which they will gain their independence and their oppressor will be punished. The land in which they will establish their sovereignty is described as expanding from the Nile to the Euphrates [the land then occupied by the ten nations, see chapter 15, especially 18-21].

This covenant with Avaraham Avinu reflects the historical/national aspect of Am Yisrael's relationship with God, as it focuses on the long-term, historical process required for Avraham's offspring to achieve their sovereignty (better known as the process of Yetziat Mitzrayim). Notice that in this covenant, the Promised Land is consistently referred to as "ha'Aretz," and its conquest as "yerusha." (The significance of these terms will become clear a bit later in the shiur.)

Brit Milah

In preparation for this covenant, God first changes Avram's name to Avraham, in anticipation of the birth of a child from Sarah [formerly Sarai]. God then promises Avraham that He will establish and maintain a special relationship between Himself and Avraham's descendants - "lihyot lachem l'Elokim" - He will be a close, intimate God for them. [See Breishit 17:3-9.]

This covenant reflects the religious/personal aspect of Am Yisrael's relationship with God, as it emphasizes a unique, intimate relationship with the Divine. In this covenant, the Promised Land is referred to as "Eretz Canaan." [Note that its inheritance (from father to son) is referred to as "achuza," as opposed to the use of the word "yerusha" in Brit Bein HaB'tarim, as noted earlier.]

Hence, there are two aspects latent in the "kedusha" (sanctity) of Eretz Yisrael:

A) The National Aspect - the "kedushat ha'Aretz" of Brit Bein HaB'tarim relates to the conquest of the land ("yerushat ha'Aretz") and the establishment of a national entity - a sovereign state. This "kedusha" is achieved once Bnei Yisrael gain sovereignty, upon Yehoshua's conquest of the land. For example, the obligation of tithing the land's produce (i.e. "trumot u'ma'asrot"), a requirement contingent upon this 'national sanctity' of the Land, begins only once the land is conquered. [See Rambam, Hilchot Trumot, chapter 1.]

B) The Personal Aspect - the "kedushat Eretz Canaan" of Brit Milah already existed in the time of the Avot and remains eternal. This kedusha reflects God's special Providence over this land (see Vayikra chapter 18), even while inhabited by other nations. This intrinsic "kedusha" is forever present regardless of who seizes control over the Land, be it Persians, Romans, Crusaders, Turks etc. [If you are a "n'turei karta'nik" you can add Zionists to the list.]

Board #3 summarizes our analysis thus far.

Yerusha and Achuza

Understanding these two key words, which describe our acquisition of Eretz Yisrael in each covenant (respectively), helps clarify this distinction:

A) In Brit Bein HaB'tarim - "yerusha" (Breishit 15:3,4,7,8); 

B) In Brit Milah - "achuzah" (Breishit 17:8).

In Chumash, the word "ye-ru-sha" denotes conquest that leads to sovereignty, i.e. military control over a given territory. [This definition must not be confused with its popular usage, "ye-ru-she," usually referring to an inheritance received from a parent.]

Thereafter, the sovereign power can then either apportion or sell that land to its inhabitants. As the conqueror and ruler, the governing body may distribute the land in any manner he chooses. Usually, should the owner die, his land is automatically inherited by the closest heir. In Chumash, this type of ownership is known as "achuza."

[For example, when Sarah dies, Avraham must now acquire an "achuzat kever" - a family burial plot (see Breishit 23:4). He must first purchase the plot from the Hittites, the sovereign at that point in time.]

Accordingly, then:

A) Brit Bein HaB'tarim, the national aspect, uses the word "yerusha," since it relates to Am Yisrael's conquest of the Land. 

B) Brit Milah employs the word "achuza," as it emphasizes one's personal connection to the land.
At the Crossroads of the Middle East

Based on our understanding of these two covenants, their conflicting presentations of the land's borders can now be reconciled.

Avraham Avinu was chosen to father a nation that will "become a blessing" for all other nations (see Breishit 12:1-3). The special land set aside for that nation by that promise is called "ha'Aretz." In Brit Bein HaB'tarim, "ha'Aretz" is defined as the land between the Nile and Euphrates. These rivers are not borders; never in the history of mankind have these rivers marked the borders of a single country. Rather, these rivers mark the two centers of ancient civilization - Mesopotamia ("N'har Prat") and Egypt ("N'har Mitzrayim") [see 15:18-21].

Therefore, whereas Brit Bein HaB'tarim reflects the national aspect of our relationship with God, its borders of "ha'Aretz" reflect our destiny to become a blessing to all mankind. We are to become a nation 'declaring God's Name' at the crossroads of the two great centers of civilization.

The 'Kernel'

The more precise geographic borders of this special land are defined in Brit Milah, as Eretz Canaan - the land in which our forefathers sojourned. Given its destiny to become the homeland for God's special nation, this land possesses intrinsic kedusha. This inherent sanctity sensitizes the land to the moral behavior of its inhabitants (see Vayikra 18:1-2,24-28).

The basic borders of Eretz Yisrael are those of "Eretz Canaan," i.e. 'from Dan to Be'er Sheva,' as promised in Brit Milah. These borders form a natural geographic area: Eretz Canaan is bordered by the Mediterranean Sea on the West, the Negev desert on the South, the Syrian-African Rift (Jordan River) to the East, and the Lebanon Mountain Range to the North.

Once this 'kernel' area is conquered, its borders can potentially (but do not have to) be extended. The potential limits of this expansion are established by Brit Bein HaB'tarim - from "N'har Mitzryaim" to "N'har Prat." This demarcation may be understood as a limit rather than a border, as each river represents a center of ancient civilization. After conquering Eretz Canaan, Am Yisrael can, when such is warranted, expand its borders through continuous settlement outward, until (but not including) the two ancient centers of civilization, Egypt and Mesopotamia.

Expanding Kedusha

This interpretation explains why Transjordan does not acquire "kedushat ha'aretz" until after "Eretz Canaan" is conquered. Bnei Gad and Reuven must first help conquer mainland "Eretz Canaan" before the kedusha can extend into Transjordan. [Note the use of "lifnei Hashem" in Bamidbar chapter 32, especially in 32:29-30.] When Bnei Gad and Reuven comply with these conditions, they not only help Bnei Yisrael conquer Eretz Canaan, but they also facilitate the inclusion of Transjordan as an integral part of Eretz Yisrael ("ha'Aretz").

'Land for Progress'

We have shown that our relationship to the Land of Israel, like our relationship with God, exists at both the national and individual levels. God chose this special land in order that we fulfill our destiny.

While "kedushat Eretz Yisrael" at the individual level may be considered a Divine gift, its kedusha at the national level is most definitely a Divine challenge. To achieve its fullest borders, we must rise to that challenge.

For Further Iyun

A. Mitzvat Kibush Eretz Canaan

This interpretation enhances our understanding of the Torah's presentation of the mitzva to conquer Eretz Yisrael in Parshat Masei (Bamidbar 33:50-56).

First, Bnei Yisrael are commanded to conquer the land = "yerusha":

"V'horashtem et kol yoshvei ha'aretz mipneichem... 
V'horashtem et ha'aretz v'yshavtem bah, ki lachem na'tati et ha'aretz la'reshet otah."

Only once the land is conquered can it then be apportioned to each family according to the tribal households:
"V'hitnachaltem et ha'aretz b'goral l'mishp'choteichem... l'matot Avoteichem titnechalu..."
The conquest is referred to as "yerusha," while the subsequent distribution of the land is referred to as "nachala."

"Yerusha" is achieved by the joint military effort of all twelve tribes [Yehoshua chapters 1-12]. Afterwards, "nachalah" is accomplished when each tribe settles and establishes communities in its portion [Yehoshua chapters 13-19].

[Note that the word "nachala" is not necessarily synonymous with "achuza." "Achuza" is usually used in the context of real-estate dealings, such as Avraham's purchase of a burial plot and field from Efron (see Breishit 23:9,16-20). "Nachala" usually refers to family inheritance.]

B. The Rambam presents his halachik definition of Eretz Yisrael in the first chapter of Hilchot Trumot (in Yad Hachazaka).


http://www.tanach.org/bamidbar/matot/matots1.htm



MAY 1, 2012


The Coming Kingdom (Part 2)


Andy Woods
Dr. Andy Woods 
Sugar Land Bible Church
Because the contemporary evangelical world is engulfed in the idea that the church is presently experiencing the messianic kingdom, last month we began a series of studies chronicling what the Bible teaches concerning this important issue of the kingdom. After distinguishing the universal kingdom from the theocratic kingdom, we observed that the notion of a coming messianic kingdom begins as early as Genesis One. We also saw that because of the negative impact that the Tower of Babel incident had on all nations (Gen. 11:1-9), God brought into existence a special nation that He would perpetuate through the patriarch Abraham (then called Abram). Through this special nation, later called Israel, God would bring His messianic and redemptive blessings to the world (Gen. 3:1512:3).

BIBLICAL COVENANTS AND THE KINGDOM

Thus, the next place in God's word that speaks to the reality of a future messianic kingdom are those sections that reveal God's covenants with His special nation Israel. A covenant in ancient times is similar to a legal contract today, which binds the parties to the agreement to perform in a specific way. In the biblical covenants, the God of the universe legally obligated Himself to fulfill specific promises directly for Israel and indirectly for the world. Let us briefly explain the content of these covenants and then note their contribution to a promised future earthly kingdom.
Israel's foundational covenant, known as the Abrahamic Covenant(Gen. 12:1-315:18), unconditionally promises three elements to Israel: land extending from modern day Egypt to Iraq (Gen. 15:18-21), seed or innumerable descendants (Gen. 15:4-522:17), and blessing (Gen. 15:1). These three promises are amplified in subsequent covenants (or sub-covenants) that God made with the nation. The land provision is amplified in the land covenant (Deut. 29-30). The blessing component is amplified in the New Covenant (Jer. 31:31-34). Here, God promised to write His laws on the hearts of the Jews.
Regarding the seed promises, from Abraham's many seed would ultimately come a singular seed (Gen. 3:15Gal. 3:16) or descendant who would procure all of the promises found in the Abrahamic Covenant for Israel consequently ushering in blessing for the nation and world. This seed aspect of the Abrahamic Covenant’s promises is later amplified in what is known as the Davidic Covenant. After God rejected Saul, who was the nation’s first king, God selected David from among Jesse’s sons (1 Sam. 16:1) leading to David’s anointing as the nation’s second king (1 Sam. 16:13). In time, God entered into a covenant with David, which promised that through David’s lineage would come an eternal house, throne, and kingdom (2 Sam. 7:13-16). In other words, God through David’s lineage would usher in an eternal dynasty and throne. The Old Testament continually reaffirms that there would eventually arise a Davidicdescendant who would usher in all that was unconditionally promised to both Abraham and David (Ps. 89Amos 9:11Hosea 3:5;Isa. 7:13-149:6-7Ezek. 34:2337:24).

LITERAL

These covenantal obligations make an enormous impact upon the reality of a future earthly kingdom when it is understood that these promises are literalunconditional, and unfulfilled. Several reasons make it apparent that these promises should be construed literally. The promises are terrestrial or earthly in nature. In fact, Abraham was told by God to walk around the very land that he and his people would one day possess (Gen. 13:17). The promises are made exclusively with national Israel rather than the church, which was not yet in existence (Matt. 16:18). Regarding the seed, they concern David’s physical line. There is nothing in the context of 2 Samuel 7which would lead the reader to the conclusion that these promises are to be understood as anything other than literal and earthly. Since these promises to David are an amplification of the seed component of the Abrahamic Covenant, they share the Abrahamic Covenant’s literalness and terrestrial nature.

UNCONDITIONAL

In addition to being literal, these covenantal obligations areunconditional. An unconditional promise is the opposite of a conditional promise, which requires some sort of performance on the part of one of the contracting parties before the other party is obligated to perform. If these promises were conditional, Israel would be obligated to do something before God was obligated to fulfill His covenantal obligations. However, these promises are, in actuality, unconditional. In other words, the ultimate performance in fulfillment of these promises rests solely in what God has obligated Himself to do regardless of the performance of Israel.
The late prophecy scholar Dr. John F. Walvoord identifies four reasons as to why these covenantal promises are unconditional. [1] First, Walvoord notes the typical ancient Near Eastern, covenant-ratification ceremony, which God used to establish the Abrahamic Covenant (Gen 15). In this ceremony, severed animal carcasses were placed into two rows and the parties to the covenant passed through these rows. Such a solemn occasion testified to the fact that if the parties did not fulfill their obligations under the covenant, then they, too, were to be severed just as the animals had been (Jer. 34:8-1018-19). What is unique about the Abrahamic Covenant is that Abraham never passed through the severed animal pieces. After God put Abraham to sleep, He alone, as represented by the oven and the torch, passed through the animal pieces (Gen. 15:12,17). This signifies that God alone will bring to pass all the promises in the Abrahamic Covenant unilaterally.
Second, there are no stated conditions for Israel’s obedience inGenesis 15. If Israel had to do something before God could perform His obligations, such a condition would have been mentioned. Because there are no stated conditions for Israel to perform before God can perform, the covenant must solely rest upon God for performance. Third, the Abrahamic Covenant is called eternal (Gen. 17:71319) and unchangeable (Heb. 6:13-18). Thus, the ultimate fulfillment of the covenant cannot rest upon the performance of fickle and sinful men. Because only God is eternal and unchangeable, He alone will bring the covenant promises into fulfillment. Fourth, the covenant is trans-generationally reaffirmed despite Israel's perpetual national disobedience. No matter how wicked each generation became, God kept on perpetually reaffirming the covenant to Israel (Jer. 31:35-37). If the covenant were conditioned upon Israel's performance, it would have been revoked long ago due to Israel's disobedience rather than continually reaffirmed.

UNFULFILLED

In addition to being literal and unconditional, the covenant, even up to the present hour, remains unfulfilled. While some might make the argument that some parts of the covenant have achieved a past fulfillment, when construed literally, the bulk of the covenant remains unfulfilled thus awaiting a future realization. Some challenge the covenant’s unfulfilled aspects by contending that it was fulfilled either in the days of Joshua (Josh. 11:2321:43-45) or during the prosperous portion of Solomon’s reign (1 Kgs. 4:20-21;8:56). [2] However, several reasons make this interpretation suspect. [3] For example, the extended context indicates that the land promises were not completely satisfied in the days of Joshua (13:1-7; Judges 1:1921272930-36). In addition, the land that Israel attained in the conquest was only a fraction of what was found in the Abrahamic Covenant. [4] Also, the land promises could not have been fulfilled in Joshua’s day since Israel had not yet conquered Jerusalem (Josh. 15:63). The conquest of Jerusalem would have to wait another four hundred years until the Davidic reign (2 Sam. 5).
The Promised Land
Although Solomon gained a large percentage of the land, his empire only extended to the border of Egypt (1 Kgs. 4:21) rather than to the promised river of Egypt (Gen. 15:18) according to what God initially promised Abraham. [5] Regarding the notion that the land promises were fulfilled under Solomon’s reign, Constable observes:
This does not mean that the Abrahamic Covenant was fulfilled in Solomon’s day (Gen. 15:18-20), for not all of this territory was incorporated into the geographic boundaries of Israel; many of the subjected kingdoms retained their identity and territory but paid taxes (tribute) to Solomon. Israel’s own geographic limits were “from Dan to Beersheba” (1 Kings 4:25). [6]
Moreover, the Abrahamic Covenant promises that Israel would possess the land forever (Gen. 17:7-81319). This eternal promise has obviously never been fulfilled due to Israel’s subsequent eviction from the land a few centuries after Solomon’s reign (2 Kgs. 1725). Furthermore, if the land promises were satisfied in Joshua’s or Solomon’s day, then why do subsequent prophets treat these promises as if they are yet to be fulfilled (Amos 9:11-15)? Certainly the New Covenant's promise of God writing His laws upon the hearts of Israel has never been fulfilled. Israel's national disobedience is well chronicled in the pages of Scripture. In fact, Israel largely remains a Christ-rejecting nation to the present day.
The bottom line is that if the Abrahamic Covenant and its related sub-covenants are literal (interpreted in ordinary, earthly terms),unconditional (resting upon God alone for performance rather than Israel), and unfulfilled (never fulfilled historically thereby necessitating a future fulfillment), there must be a future time in history in which God will make good on what He has covenantally obligated Himself to do. God must do what He said He would do since it is contrary to His nature to lie, fabricate, or equivocate in any sense (Num. 23:19). Thus, such a future fulfillment of the Abrahamic Covenant and related sub-covenants heightens the biblical expectation of a future, earthly kingdom.
(To Be Continued...)
Endnotes

[1] John F. Walvoord, The Millennial Kingdom (Findlay, OH: Dunham, 1959), 149-52.
[2] Hank Hanegraaff, The Apocalypse Code (Nashville, TN: Nelson, 2007), 52-53, 178-79.
[3] Arnold G. Fruchtenbaum, Israelology: The Missing Link in Systematic Theology, rev. ed. (Tustin, CA: Ariel, 1994), 521-22, 631-32; John F. Walvoord, Major Bible Prophecies (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1991), 82.
[4] See the helpful map showing what was promised in the Abrahamic Covenant in comparison to what was attained in the conquest in Thomas L. Constable, “Notes on Numbers,” online: www.soniclight.com, accessed 13 January 2012, 98.
[5] Charles C. Ryrie, The Ryrie Study Bible: New American Standard Bible(Chicago: Moody, 1995), 533.
[6] Thomas L. Constable, “1 Kings,” in The Bible Knowledge Commentary, ed. John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck (Colorado Springs, CO: Chariot Victor, 1985), 497.



Hinei lo yanum va'lo yishan / Shomer Yisra'el [He that keepeth Israel neither slumbers nor sleeps. (Psalm 121:4)] 

No comments:

Post a Comment