Do the Jews have a divine right to the Land?
A Christian interpretation of the restoration
Bible scholars say that the land promise to Abraham Isaac and Jacob, who was renamed Israel, and to the descendants of Jacob, is a primary theme of the Old Testament.
Under the leadership of Moses, the children of Israel were brought out of Egypt, and dwelt in the wilderness for 40 years. When Moses died, under Joshua, Israel crossed over the Jordan, and obtained possession of the land, overcoming the seven nations who dwelt there. The 12 tribes were assigned their territories.
Later, Israel became a kingdom, under David. He was succeeded by Solomon, who built the temple that David had aspired to build. After Solomon's reign, the kingdom was divided into two kingdoms.
The northern kingdom of Israel lapsed into apostasy. The 10 tribes were taken away captive by the Assyrians, and later, the Jews, and the line of David, were taken away to Babylon.
Throughout all this, a remnant of Israel remained faithful. This included the prophets. They foretold a wonderful restoration, when all Israel would inherit the land, and possess it forever.
Dispensationalists and Christain Zionists believe that the restoration foretold by the prophets is happening in modern times. They claim that it is fulfilled by the Jewish state in Palestine, which was established with the partial help of Christians Zionists in the US and the UK.
Some people, like Hal Lindsey, have made predictions and set dates for the so-called "rapture" and return of Christ, based on the date of the establishment of the Jewish state of Israel in 1948. Those predictions failed.
Other Christians are apalled by reports of cruel actions by Jews against their Palestinian neighbours, and their policy of confiscation of Palistinian lands. Scholars among this group have pointed out that the New Testament has almost nothing to say about the land promise, and so offers no support for the claims of Christian Zionists. Instead, they argue that the New Testament teaches that the land promises are fulfilled in Christ.
Several Christian writers, while arguing against Christian Zionism, have said the land promise to Israel was set aside in the New Testament. Dr. Stephen R. Sizer wrote, [1]
Teaching about the Land is conspicuous by its absence in the Gospels and in the priorities of Jesus. There are four references to the Land in the Gospels and these are all indirect. The strongest is found in the Beatitudes. In Matthew 5:5 Jesus quotes from Psalm 37:11. The inheritance of the land promised to the meek has been universalized to include the earth. The Greek term for 'earth' here is the same word used in the Septuagint for land yet the context of Jesus Beatitudes requires that the perspective be stretched beyond mere possession of Palestine. Either that or all Christians bearing the fruit of the Spirit may claim the land as their rightful possession.
Sizer says, "Either that or all Christians bearing the fruit of the Spirit may claim the land as their rightful possession," intending to support the idea that the word Jesus used should be understood as "earth" rather than "land" by implying that for "all Christians" claiming the land as their "rightful possession" would be absurd. But, Abraham was promised the land as a possession. "For all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, ..." [Genesis 13:15]
And, Isaac was promised the land as a possession. "Sojourn in this land, and I will be with thee, and will bless thee; for unto thee, and unto thy seed, I will give all these countries..." [Genesis 26:3]
And, Jacob was promised the land as a possession; "the land whereon thou liest, to thee will I give it..." [Genesis 28:13]
Sizer found little support in the New Testament for the goals of Zionism. He wrote:
There is no evidence that the Apostles believed that the Jewish people still had a divine right to the Land, or that the Jewish possession of the Land would be an important, let alone central, aspect of God's future plan for the world. In the Christological logic of Paul, the Land, like the Law, both particular and provisional, had now become totally irrelevant.
This claim requires some careful examination. Sizer stated:
The fundamental question Christian Zionists must therefore answer is this: What difference did the coming of Jesus Christ make to the traditional Jewish hopes and expectations about the land? Christians may not interpret the Old Covenant as if the coming of Jesus made little or no difference to the nationalistic and territorial aspirations of first century Judaism. Christian Zionists seem to read the Old Testament with the spectacles that the first disciples wore before their resurrection encounters with the risen Christ and before Pentecost. They seem to believe the coming of the kingdom of Jesus meant a postponement of Jewish hopes for restoration rather than the fulfillment of those hopes in the Messiah and new, inclusive, Messianic community.
In the process of redemptive history a dramatic movement has been made from type to reality, from shadow to substance. The Land that once was the specific locale of God's redemptive working served well under the Old Covenant forms as a picture of paradise lost and promised, lost then promised, but under the New Covenant fulfillment this Land has been expanded to encompass the cosmos. The exalted Christ rules from the heavenly Jerusalem demonstrating His sovereignty over the entire world.. A regression to the limited forms of the Old Covenant shadow is apostasy. ... The reality cannot give way again to shadow, for in the will and purposes of God the shadows no longer exist. The light has come in Jesus Christ.
By calling this covenant "new," he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear. Hebrews 8:13
Sizer pointed out that "the destruction of the temple and sacrificial system in 70 AD fulfilled that prediction." The Mosaic system disappeared. But what became of the land promises? Did they lose their validity? What about the promise of a glorious restoration?
Sizer partly answers this, when he refers to and quotes the following observation by Chris Wright: [2]
Hebrews affirmation of what "we have" are surprisingly comprehensive. We have the land, described as the rest into which we have entered through Christ, in a way which even Joshua did not achieve for Israel (3:12-4:11); we have a High Priest (4:14, 8:1, 10:21) and an Altar (13:10); we have a hope which in this context refers to the reality of the covenant made with Abraham (6:13-20). We enter into the Holy Place, so we have the reality of the tabernacle and the temple (10:9). We have come to Mount Zion (12:22) and we are receiving a kingdom, in line with Haggai 2:6 (12:28). Indeed according to Hebrews (13:14), the only thing we do not have is an earthly, territorial city. 'For here we do not have an enduring city, but we are looking for the city that is to come.' (Hebrews 13:14)
We will return to these examples of spiritual promises, that have been fulfilled to the church.
Colin Chapman, who also thinks the land promise has ben set aside, wrote: [3]
Jesus had little or nothing to say about the land. The reason for this silence is not that Jesus took traditional Jewish hopes for granted and affirmed them, but that all these hopes are now to be understood in the context of the coming of the kingdom of God in and through Jesus.
Mark 1:15 'The time has come ... the kingdom of God
is near ...'
Matthew 5:5 'the meek shall inherit the land' (cf Psalm 37:11)
Luke 4:17-21; 7:21-23 the Exile is over ... (cf Isaiah 35; 61:1-2))
Luke 21:20-28 'Jerusalem will be trampled on ... you will see the Son
of Man ...'
Matthew 5:5 seems to be the only clear reference to the land in the teaching of Jesus. But it is not an accident that Jesus has so little to say about the land, because the land is now being understood in the context of the kingdom of God. Tom Wright has shown that when Jesus quotes verses from Isaiah which were originally about the return from Exile, he is saying in effect, 'A new return from Exile is taking place; and all the blessings associated with return are now being offered in a new way.'
The same idea is further developed in a recent book by Gary M. Burge, Jesus and the Land: The New Testament Challenge to "Holy Land" Theology. In a review, Kenneth L. Gentry wrote: [4]
[Burge] points out that despite the longing and perspective of many (not all!) first-century Jews, Jesus downplays the Land -- as well as two other "holy places" for Israel: Jerusalem and the Temple. In a later chapter Burge captures this point well: "the lens of the incarnation had now refocused things completely. Christian theology had no room for 'holy places' outside of the Holy One who is Christ." ...
Burge shows that "early Christian preaching is utterly uninterested in a Jewish eschatology devoted to the restoration of the land." ... Acts shows that "the Land of Promise was the source of Christianity's legacy but no longer its goal." ... Thus, "the striking thing is that Paul here can refer to the promise of Abraham and not refer to the Land of Promise. ... Paul is consistent with all the speeches in the book of Acts. Paul as well as Peter can consistently ignore the central elements in Abraham's life according to Jewish teaching: land and progeny."
Are the writers quoted above forgetting the words of the prophets, who exulted in the land promises, and predicted many wonderful things about the future of the land?
For example, Ezekiel wrote about a river, flowing out of the temple, with an abundance of fish. The river heals the country it flows through. Isaiah wrote of trees growing in the desert, the wilderness becoming fruitful, beasts becoming docile, lions eating straw, venomous snakes becoming harmless, trees clapping their hands, and mountains and the hills breaking forth into singing. Joel and Amos wrote about mountains dropping wine. Joel said all the hills will flow with milk.
The apostle Peter encouraged Christians to take heed to prophecy, which by no means supports the idea that the land promises no longer have any meaning, but on the contrary, suggests that they do have relevance to the church, although the land should not to be taken literally. In fact, in many prophecies, the land is associated with food or drink, such as milk, honey, or wine. The question is, what does the land promise, or the land, and the landforms in these prophecies represent? What are the mountains, that drop wine, and the hills, and what is the wilderness that is to flourish and blossom? The land becomes fruitful when it is watered; the water is identified with the Spirit.
2 Peter 1:19
We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that
ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day
dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:
Can the prophecies about Israel's restoration to the promised land be reconciled with the views of Sizer, Chapman, and Burge? How should the land promises be understood, in the light of the gospel? The prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel all predicted a restoration of Israel to their land, one that would be forever, that will be accompanied by a return to God, and repentance, and weeping. [Jeremiah 31:9; 50:4] What is to become of promises like that?
In the NT, many of the things promised to Israel, are shown to have been fulfilled. Some were already mentioned by Sizer, in the quotation from Christ Wright, about Hebrews. [2]
In 1Corinthians 10:1-11, Paul showed that Israel's experience in the wilderness happened "for our examples;" that is, it was to provide an example for the church. The woman in Revelation 12:6 flees to the wilderness, and again in Revelation 12:14-15. The church's sojourn in the wilderness is spiritual, but what does the wilderness represent? Like the wilderness where Israel dwelt after the exodus, it must represent a period of trial. In both of those verses in Revelation, where the wilderness is mentioned, the woman is fed, or nourished. Is she nourished by the land? The church's sojourn in the wilderness implies that there is a future "rest" that the saints seek to enter into, corresponding to Israel's promised land or rest. This is confirmed in Hebrews 4.
Hebrews 4:8-12
8 For if Jesus [or Joshua] had given them rest, then would he not
afterward have spoken of another day.
9 There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God.
10 For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his
own works, as God did from his.
11 Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall
after the same example of unbelief.
12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any
twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and
spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the
thoughts and intents of the heart.
The name "Israel of God," is applied to the church by Paul, in Galatians 6:16, while in Galatians 4:24-25, Paul identifies the earthly Jerusalem (and unbelieving Jews) with Hagar and her seed. In Ephesians 2:11-13, he says that Gentiles have been "made nigh" to the commonwealth of Israel, and to the covenants of promise, by the blood of Christ.
In Revelation 7:4-8, the saints, who are sealed by God, are represented by 12 tribes of Israel. The order in which the tribes are mentioned, and the meanings attached to the names of the sons of Jacob chosen by their mothers, and recorded in Genesis, suggests a psalm, that clearly applies to the church.
I will praise the LORD, (Judah)
Surely the LORD hath looked upon my affliction, (Reuben)
He has granted me good fortune, (Gad)
Happy am I, (Asher)
With great wrestlings have I wrestled, (Naphtali)
But God will make me forget all my toil, (Manasseh)
The LORD hath heard me, (Simeon)
He has joined Himself to me, (Levi)
He has purchased me, (Issachar)
He will dwell with me always, (Zebulun)
The LORD shall add more children to me, (Joseph)
By the son of His right hand. (Benjamin)
The tribes of Ephraim and Dan are not included in the list in Revelation 7:4-8. The names of the tribes are listed in an order that was not the order of birth, but the order of the names seems intented to reveal a message or a psalm such as that presented above. It is also a prophecy. Dan means "judgment," and the omission of his name suggests that those included in the 144,000 will escape the judgment, which supports their identification with the church.
Mount Zion was where the temple was located, so the name was associated with the temple. The church is the new temple, so is called Zion.
While the Jewish capital was the earthly city of Jerusalem, the church has a heavenly city.
Hebrews 12:22-23
But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God,
the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,
To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written
in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men
made perfect.
As Chris Wright pointed out, [2] the prophecies about a restored kingdom have been fulfilled in the church. Jesus received the throne of his ancestor David, which was in the earthly city of Jerusalem, but now, Jerusalem has been raised up, and has become the heavenly Jerusalem. Peter showed this in Acts 2:30-36, where he says Jesus sits at God's right hand, and several New Testament scriptures show that believers are citizens in Christ's heavenly kingdom. In Revelation 3:7 Jesus says he has the "key of David." What else is this, but his authority over the heavenly city?
Ephesians 2:5-7
5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with
Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)
6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly
places in Christ Jesus:
7 That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his
grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.
Colossians 1:13
Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated
us into the kingdom of his dear Son:
Hebrews 12:28
Wherefore we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have
grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly
fear:
The covenant made with Abraham involved circumcision of the flesh; in the New Covenant God has sealed us with a circumcision "made without hands."
Colossians 2:11
In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without
hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the
circumcision of Christ:
Philippians 3:3
For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and
rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.
Just as the temple included a holy place where the priests could stand before God, for Christians, access to God is by faith through Christ. This is now available to every Christian.
Hebrews 10:19-22
Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the
blood of Jesus,
By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the
veil, that is to say, his flesh;
And having an high priest over the house of God;
Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having
our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed
with pure water.
Similarly, an altar is available to believers. Humble prayers are the offerings that God desires.
Hebrews 13:10
We have an altar, whereof they have no right to eat which serve the
tabernacle.
The book of Hebrews shows that the new covenant foretold by the prophets is made with the church. It is another indication that the label Israel applies to the church, as the new covenant applies to the house of Israel, and to the house of Judah. In this covenant God promises to "remember our sins no more."
Hebrews 10:15-17
15 Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us: for after that he
had said before,
16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days,
saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their
minds will I write them;
17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.
The book of Hebrews says Jesus is our great high priest.
Hebrews 4:14
Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the
heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession.
Hebrews 8:1
Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an
high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty
in the heavens;
Hebrews 10:21
And having an high priest over the house of God;
The aposle Peter showed that out inheritance is incorruptible. Thus, it is a far greater and better inheritance than possession of a particular territory on the earth.
1 Peter 1:3-4
Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according
to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the
resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,
To an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not
away, reserved in heaven for you.
It seems likely that Christian scholars have not fully explored, or understood, the implications of the spiritual interpretation of the land promise, even while they acknowledge the New Testament supports such an interpretation.
When Jesus said the meek will inherit the earth, or land, what, specifically, does the land referred to represent? Was the promised land intended as a metaphor, that represents the "fullness of blessing" available to Christians, as Sarah Frances Smiley believed, as well as their eternal inheritance, of which the Spirit of God given to the church is the "earnest" or token, as Patrick Fairbairn taught?
Surely this promised inheritance would include understanding the mysteries of God's revelations, including prophecy, that have eluded wise men for many generations.
Paul wrote:
1 Corinthians 1:19
For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring
to nothing the understanding of the prudent.
Gary Burge pointed out that the first century Jewish philosopher Philo reinterpreted the land promise, as did Josephus. For Philo, a Stoic, the promise to Abraham became a promise about possessing the wisdom of God. Philo omits the land promises from his account of scriptural events. Burge wrote: [5]
Philo is inspired by his desire to adapt Judaism to Hellenistic thought and he does this by allegorizing his Bible. For him, the truth of the concrete objects of Jewish life now take on a new meaning. The land is reinterpreted as the knowledge and wisdom of God. Thus he neglects the land promises found in Abraham and the patriarchs whenever the covenant is mentioned. No land promise appears even in discussions of Isaac or Jacob. In Genesis 28.10-22 when Jacob dreams at Bethel, the Hebrew text's explicit reaffirmation of the land promise (28.13) is replaced by Philo with a promise of wisdom and virtue. The promise that Joseph would be buried in the Promised Land in Philo becomes a hope that his soul will inhabit "cities of virtue." Canaan becomes not a place of religious promise but a metaphor, a stage of development for the soul. Moses' leadership, therefore, will not take Israel to the Promised Land, but to a higher level of maturity and wisdom. Even in his eschatology, Philo does not see a literal ingathering of exiled Israel to a literal Promised Land. This instead will be an arrival into a state of deeper wisdom.
The land may indeed be a metaphor, but one that must be understood in the light of the gospel, rather than Stoic philosophy. The story of the drought in the days of Elijah has a typical application for the church, as suggested by Malachi 4:5. The Spirit of God is represented by rain.
Jesus said the drought in Israel lasted for three years and six months, and other scriptures allude to it. [Luke 4:25; James 5:17; Revelation 11:6] The rain of the Spirit of God waters the literal words of scripture with a true interpretation. Thus the barren land may represent the words of scripture, that when watered by the Spirit from above, brings forth fruit, and bread, and nourishment to God's people.
Isaiah 55:10-11
For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and
returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it
bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and
bread to the eater:
So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall
not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I
please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.
James seems to have used land to represent the scriptures, and referred to Christ as the husbandman, when he wrote:
James 5:7-8
Be patient therefore, brethren, unto the coming of the Lord.
Behold, the husbandman waiteth for the precious fruit of the
earth, and hath long patience for it, until he receive the early
and latter rain.
Be ye also patient; stablish your hearts: for the coming of the
Lord draweth nigh.
The idea that the land is indeed a great metaphor is considered further in Jesus and the Land promise, and Changes in the promised land.
1. An Alternative Theology of the Holy Land: A Critique of Christian Zionism by Stephen R. Sizer. (The Churchman, June 1999)
2. A Christian approach to Old Testament prophecy concerning Israel, by Chris Wright, in P.W.L. Walker (ed.), Jerusalem Past and Present in the Purposes of God (revd. ed., Carlisle/Grand Rapids: Paternoster/Baker, 1994. pp. 18-19.)
3. Israel and Palestine: Where is God in the conflict?, by Colin Chapman. (Encounters Mission Ezine Issue 5: April 2005)
4. The Land and Jesus, by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr. A review of Jesus and the Land: The New Testament Challenge to "Holy Land" Theology by Gary M. Burge. (Baker Academic, 2010)
5. Jesus and the Land: The New Testament Challenge to "Holy Land" Theology by Gary M. Burge. (Baker Academic, 2010) p. 22
Copyright © 2010 by Douglas E. Cox
All Rights Reserved.