The Land Promises and the Unity of the People of God

One of the main distinctions between dispensationalism and covenantalism is over the relationship between Israel and the Church. The covenantalist sees them as different administrations of the same thing (see, for example, Acts 7:38 KJV). In contrast, the dispensationalist sees them as radically discontiguous, there having been no church in the Old Testament, and Israel's having a future separate from the church.

One aspect of this is the frequent references dispensationalists make to the promises God made to Israel. While the covenantalist takes the remaining promises to be given to the church, the Israel of God (Galatians 6:16), the dispensationalist sees them as necessarily remaining to be fulfilled to Israel, i. e., the Jews, in their distinct character.

I want to consider the land promises, in particular, here. Are there remaining land promises for the Jews? I don't think that Bible allows that conclusion, even apart from the identity of Israel and the church.

In Joshua 21:43-45, given after the conquest of the Promised Land, we read this comment: "Thus the Lord gave to Israel all the land that He swore to give to their fathers. And they took possession of it, and they settled there. And the Lord gave them rest on every side just as He had sworn to their fathers. Not one of all their enemies had withstood them, for the Lord had given all their enemies into their hands. Not one word of all the good promises that the Lord had made to the house of Israel had failed; all came to pass." Thus, the land promise had been fulfilled, not waiting for the modern state of Israel.

Furthermore, in I Kings 4:21, we read this: "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." This describes Solomon's enjoyment of that Land, not waiting for it. This is repeated in the parallel passage in II Chronicles 9:26.

In other words, the land promises to Israel aren't waiting for fulfillment! They were fulfilled three thousand years ago!

Moreover, something that dispensationalists fail to recognize is that the fulfillment of God's promises is always far more than the literal promise. In this case, by denying the bitestamental unity of the people of God, the dispensationalist is blind to Psalm 2:8: "Ask of Me, and I will make the nations Your heritage, and the ends of the earth Your possession." This promise is part of the intra-Trinitarian covenant, made before the world was created, and is a gift from the Father to the Son. And then in the New Testament, that same Son promises it to His church: "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age" (Matthew 28:18-20). The rigid literalism and minimalism of dispensationalists causes them not to enjoy the real promises of God, and also to deny them to those same Jews that they have cast out of the church.

Neutrality: There's No Need to Be a Fanatic!

Sin is an unpopular concept in today's culture. However, one sin is still acknowledged: to claim that anything is true, while something else is untrue. That is, the law of logic known as the Law of Non-Contradiction is now Public Enemy Number One. Of course, that popular opinion is self-refuting, because it says that it is an absolute truth that there is no absolute truth.

And this isn't just a secular problem. Even among professing Christians it is the "in thing" to say, "I believe X; you believe Y; but there is no way to know who is right, so we'll just agree to disagree." Well, I for one do not so agree! Why? Because to agree to that neutrality is a betrayal of God, the Bible, and truth.

In the words of Scripture (Joshua 24:15), "If it is evil in your eyes to serve the Lord, choose this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your fathers served in the region beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you dwell. But as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord." The context was a renewal of the covenant between Israel and Jehovah. Some of the Israelites had held on to the pagan deities that they had known in Egypt (verse 14). That is, they were hedging their bets, serving Jehovah one hour, and then the pagan deities the next. After all, why be fanatical about it? But Joshua rejected their neutrality, as did Jehovah. This is the same God who had warned the Israelites (Deuteronomy 4:24), "The LORD your God is a consuming fire, a jealous God."

Unlike the suave and open-minded Christian of modern America, the God of the Bible very much believes in absolute truth. And He is it!

Jesus made the same point (Matthew 6:24): "No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other." Therefore (Matthew 12:30), "Whoever is not with Me is against Me, and whoever does not gather with Me scatters."

So, while it may be very sophisticated to choose both of every choice, Jesus is not sympathetic. The God of the Bible, whether in the Old Testament or in the New, rejects your neutrality. As we used to say, "It's my way or the highway."

"The Middle Way" or God's Way?

 It is rare to find a professing atheist in modern America. Rather, it is fashionable not to express assurednes in either direction. To be outspokenly Christian is disdained as fanaticism, while explicit atheism is considered arrogant. Instead, let us all be somewhere in the middle, Christian by heritage, but not too concerned about truth, or agnostic because we don't want to be dogmatic.

Stuff and nonsense, is my reaction! It is that of Jesus, too: "I know your works: you are neither cold nor hot. Would that you were either cold or hot!" (Revelation 3:15).

God does not offer Himself as one option among many. He isn't an item on a smorgasbord, or an orphan preening in the hope that you will pick Him. That is a shabby view of God! 

The God of the Bible does not plead; He commands: "The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now He commands all people everywhere to repent" (Acts 17:30). "This is his commandment, that we believe in the name of His Son Jesus Christ" (I John 3:23). There is no equivocation here, no middle among three choices. God tells us that it His way, with no other option.

We see here that God gives no consideration to modern moderation, Aristotle's middle way in every decision. This is a shocking concept to the modern American! Who does He think He is? God!?!? And the answer is, yes, that is exactly what He thinks.

There is no "golden mean" here. The options are obedience and disobedience, and the consequences of which option a man chooses."Now therefore fear the Lord and serve Him in sincerity and in faithfulness. Put away the gods ... and serve the Lord. And if it is evil in your eyes to serve the Lord, choose this day whom you will serve... But as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord" (Joshua 24:14-15).

Reprobation in the Old Testament

Reprobation is the flip side of the doctrine of election. Just as God, out of His free and sovereign grace, has ordained some to mercy, out of His sovereign holiness and justice, He has ordained the rest to perdition for their sins. While many Evangelicals balk at this doctrine, it certainly isn't because of any lack of biblical support for it, especially in the Old Testament!

Consider Deuteronomy 2:30, "Sihon the king of Heshbon would not let us pass by him, for the LORD your God hardened his spirit and made his heart obstinate, that He might give him into your hand, as he is this day." God had purposed the destruction of Sihon and his people, so He hardened the king's heart.

And Joshua 11:19-20, "There was not a city that made peace with the people of Israel except the Hivites, the inhabitants of Gibeon. They took them all in battle. For it was the Lord’s doing to harden their hearts that they should come against Israel in battle, in order that they should be devoted to destruction and should receive no mercy but be destroyed, just as the Lord commanded Moses." Here we see the same act of hardening, but over a larger area.

Or the case of the son's of Eli, I Samuel 2:25, "'If someone sins against a man, God will mediate for him, but if someone sins against the LORD, who can intercede for him?' But they would not listen to the voice of their father, for it was the will of the LORD to put them to death." Eli tried to warn them about their evil ways, but God had already determined on their destruction, so He hardened their hearts against the words of their father.

Arminians resist the significance of these passages. They hold that God only hardened the hearts after the respective people had already hardened their own hearts, i.e., what is known as "judicial hardening." However, that appears nowhere in these passages, except in the case of the sons of Eli. Rather, the Arminian commits the very error that Paul refutes in Romans 9:21: "Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use?" As Creator and Lord, God has a sovereign right to use His creatures as He sees fit. Our only option is to bow our heads and bless the Lord for His justice.

I Samuel 17, David, Goliath, and the Sovereignty of God

Vv. 19-26, "Now Saul and they and all the men of Israel were in the Valley of Elah, fighting with the Philistines. And David rose early in the morning and left the sheep with a keeper and took the provisions and went, as Jesse had commanded him. And he came to the encampment as the host was going out to the battle line, shouting the war cry. And Israel and the Philistines drew up for battle, army against army. And David left the things in charge of the keeper of the baggage and ran to the ranks and went and greeted his brothers. As he talked with them, behold, the champion, the Philistine of Gath, Goliath by name, came up out of the ranks of the Philistines and spoke the same words as before. And David heard him. All the men of Israel, when they saw the man, fled from him and were much afraid. And the men of Israel said, 'Have you seen this man who has come up? Surely he has come up to defy Israel. And the king will enrich the man who kills him with great riches and will give him his daughter and make his father’s house free in Israel.' And David said to the men who stood by him, 'What shall be done for the man who kills this Philistine and takes away the reproach from Israel? For who is this uncircumcised Philistine, that he should defy the armies of the living God?'"


Vv. 41-47, "And the Philistine moved forward and came near to David, with his shield-bearer in front of him. And when the Philistine looked and saw David, he disdained him, for he was but a youth, ruddy and handsome in appearance. And the Philistine said to David, “Am I a dog, that you come to me with sticks?” And the Philistine cursed David by his gods. The Philistine said to David, 'Come to me, and I will give your flesh to the birds of the air and to the beasts of the field.' Then David said to the Philistine, 'You come to me with a sword and with a spear and with a javelin, but I come to you in the name of the Lord of hosts, the God of the armies of Israel, whom you have defied. This day the Lord will deliver you into my hand, and I will strike you down and cut off your head. And I will give the dead bodies of the host of the Philistines this day to the birds of the air and to the wild beasts of the earth, that all the earth may know that there is a God in Israel, and that all this assembly may know that the Lord saves not with sword and spear. For the battle is the Lord’s, and He will give you into our hand.'"

This story has entered our common lexicon. Even the most biblically-illiterate person has heard of David and Goliath, and uses their names any time an apparent underdog defeats a better-provided opponent. However, that popular version of the story actually misses its significance.

First, consider Goliath. A last survivor of the race of giants, Joshua 11:22 (eleven and a half feet, or about four meters, tall, v. 4), heavily armored and weaponed. All of the greatest fighting men of Israel, even comparably accoutered, were too afraid even to face him.

Second, consider David, the youngest of eight sons (v. 12). In fact, he was even the youngest of the five sons who were too young to join the army (as implied by the fact that only the three eldest were at the battle, v. 13). He refused Saul's armor and sword (vv. 38-39). Instead, he approached the giant with just his shepherding staff and a sling with five stones ( v. 40). Both in his person and in his provisions, David was no match for this foe of all Israel.

What does David say? Verse 45, "You come to me with a sword and with a spear and with a javelin, but I come to you in the name of the Lord of hosts, the God of the armies of Israel, Whom you have defied." He counters the humanistic bullying of Goliath, not with human strength, reasoning, or arms, but with the name of Jehovah his God. Notice especially how this contrasts with Goliath's earlier curses in the names of his own pagan deities, verse 43. David takes these curses, not as a personal insult, but rather an aspersion against the God of Israel (vv. 26 and 45).

And now we see the real nature of this battle. David's words continue, verse 46-47, "This day the Lord will deliver you into my hand, and I will strike you down and cut off your head. And I will give the dead bodies of the host of the Philistines this day to the birds of the air and to the wild beasts of the earth, that all the earth may know that there is a God in Israel, and that all this assembly may know that the Lord saves not with sword and spear. For the battle is the Lord’s, and He will give you into our hand." He understands that Jehovah is jealous for His own deity. And indeed, He could have struck down Goliath directly, with a mere thought. However, in His grace, God condescends to bless us His people, by allowing us to be the means that He uses for His purposes. David is just a boy, with only the weapons of his shepherding, facing a battle-hardened, heavily-armed literal giant. He is perfectly aware that he has no native ability to defeat this foe. Yet his faith assures him that his God is not limited by our powers and talents, but rather acts by His own power and intent.

The significance of this story isn't that Jehovah, the true and living God, has a guiding concern about borders and political competition. Rather, His concern is for His own glory. As He Himself says (Isaiah 42:8), "I am the LORD; that is My name; My glory I give to no other, nor My praise to carved idols." This is the exact principle that Goliath explicitly challenged! And subordinately, He is concerned for the safety and conversion of His elect people. As David says in verse 47, he intends that "all this assembly may know that the Lord saves..."

In the words of Paul (I Corinthians 1:27), the true moral of this story is that "God chooses what is weak in the world to shame the strong." Is this not something we need to know in our own daily spiritual confrontations?

Deuteronomy 20:1-9, Rousas Rushdoony on Biblical Warfare

“When you go out to war against your enemies, and see horses and chariots and an army larger than your own, you shall not be afraid of them, for the Lord your God is with you, Who brought you up out of the land of Egypt. And when you draw near to the battle, the priest shall come forward and speak to the people and shall say to them, ‘Hear, O Israel, today you are drawing near for battle against your enemies: let not your heart faint. Do not fear or panic or be in dread of them, for the Lord your God is He who goes with you to fight for you against your enemies, to give you the victory.’ Then the officers shall speak to the people, saying, ‘Is there any man who has built a new house and has not dedicated it? Let him go back to his house, lest he die in the battle and another man dedicate it. And is there any man who has planted a vineyard and has not enjoyed its fruit? Let him go back to his house, lest he die in the battle and another man enjoy its fruit. And is there any man who has betrothed a wife and has not taken her? Let him go back to his house, lest he die in the battle and another man take her.’ And the officers shall speak further to the people, and say, ‘Is there any man who is fearful and fainthearted? Let him go back to his house, lest he make the heart of his fellows melt like his own.’ And when the officers have finished speaking to the people, then commanders shall be appointed at the head of the people."
[Note that this is from The ESV, while Rushdoony originally used the KJV. The passage below is from Rushdoony's commentary on Deuteronomy. I reproduce it here because of my fear of the current support among conservative American Christians for imperialistic wars around the world.]

J. A. Thompson has cited the biblical texts governing godly warfare. First, no such war could be conducted apart from God's word or orders (I Sam. 28:5-6; 30:7-8; II Sam. 5:19, 22-23). Second, there had to be a consecration to the task by the men of Israel (I Sam. 21:5; II Sam. 11:11; Isa. 13:3). All that would offend God must be separated from them (Deut. 23:9-14), because God dwells in the camp with His people (Deut. 23:14; Judg. 4:14). Third, the Lord can deliver His people by many or by few (Judg. 7:2ff; I Sam. 13:15ff; 14:6, 17). Fourth, God can and does send panic into the ranks of the enemy, and thereby bring about their defeat (Josh. 10:10; Judg. 4:15; I Sam. 5:11; 7:10; etc.). Fifth, the spoils of the war belong to God, not to man. [J. A. Thompson, Deuteronomy, IV Press, 1978, pp. 2187-219]

One of the Dead Sea Scrolls is entitled, The War of the Sons of Light against the Sons of Darkness. Its concern was with the great war with God's enemies at the end-time. These laws had their influence. Throughout the Christian era, much has occurred in the way of efforts, both successful and unsuccessful, to limit injustices in wartime. Although the history of Western warfare is not good, it still is different from the ferocity of most pagan conflicts, until recently.

In v. 1, God stresses through Moses that He is with them: therefore, "be not afraid of them." This is a command: to believe in God means to trust in His word.

As a result, two kinds of exemption from military service are granted. First, all those whose minds are distracted and preoccupied by their affairs at home, i.e., a new house as yet not dedicated nor used, a bride betrothed but not taken, or a new vineyard finally producing but as yet unharvested. All such men, however willing to fight, are to be sent home, both as a merciful act and also to eliminate distracted minds (vv. 5-7). Second, all who are fearful and fainthearted are to be sent home. Their presence in the army is a threat to their fellow soldiers.

These exemptions are to be declared by a priest. They are religious exemptions and are therefore to be set forth by a priest. According to numerous texts, a campaign was to be preceded by burnt offerings (Judg. 6:20-21, 26; 20:26; I Sam. 4:3; 7:9; 13:10ff; 14:18; 23:4, 6, 9; 30:7ff). These verses also tell us that attempts to replace obedience with the presence of the ark led to disastrous results.

The exemptions applied to all ranks of soldiers. If, therefore, clan leaders dropped out because of some kind of exemption, then captains of armies were to be made out of the remaining men. The officers were thus named by the men of courage.

The army must then trust in God, not in the size of the army. Wars are not outside of God's providential government, and the most necessary equipment for battle is a trust in God.

It is clear from all of this that military service was voluntary, not compulsory. The covenant people were to place their hope in God, to use godly soldiers, and to eliminate from the ranks of the volunteers all men who might be for any cause double-minded.

[Joseph] Morecroft noted, "When wars are fought in the defense of justice, in the suppression of evil, or in defense of the homeland, they are godly, and are part of the work of restoration. Such wars are 'wars of the Lord," Num. 21:14.'" [A Christian Manual of Law]

Again citing Morecroft, v. 2 indicates that the priest accompanied the army; this was the origin of chaplains. Moreover, the exemptions make it clear that the family has priority, together with exercising dominion over the earth under God.

Deuteronomy deals with warfare in chapters 20:1-20: 21:10-14: 23:9-14; 24:5, and 25:17-19. Even a modernist like Anthony Phillips has called the laws "humanitarian." [Deuteronomy, 1973]

In v. 9, the officers speak "unto the people." Instead of a drafted army, the soldiers are the people, come together to defend their cause or their homes. This is basic in Deuteronomy. Instead of a state decreeing war as a matter of policy, we have a people ready to fight for their cause. Instead of men drafted, made soldiers by compulsion, we have a gathering of the clansmen to defend their cause. The first step before battle is to send home some of these men.

The captains or commanders were, according to A. D. H. Mayes [Deuteronomy, 1981], apparently chosen on the same basis as were elders in cities and in the temple life of the people, captains over tens, twenties, hundreds, and thousands. The original commandment for this in cited in Deuteronomy 1:9-15.

P. C. Craigie's [The Book of Deuteronomy, 1976] comments on this text are very telling. He states, "Israelite strength lay not in numbers, not in the superiority of their weapons, but in their God. The strength of their God was not simply a matter of faith, but a matter of experience." The legitimate wars were godly wars because their purpose was to remain secure in their possession of the land and their exercise of godly dominion therein. Again quoting the admirable Craigie, "The basis of these exemptions becomes clearer against the background of the function of war in ancient Israel. The purpose of war in the early stages of Israel's history was to take possession of the land promised to the people of God; in the later period of history, war was fought for defensive purposes, to defend the land from external aggressors. The possession of the promised land, in other words, was at the heart of Israel's wars, and the importance of the land, in the plan of God, was that Israel was to live and work and prosper in it. The building of homes and orchards, the marrying of a wife, and other such things were of the essence of life in the promised land, and if these things ceased, then the wars would become pointless. Thus, in these exemptions from military service, it is clear that the important aspects of normal life in the land take precedence over the requirements of the army, But this somewhat idealistic approach (in modern terms) was possible only because of the profound conviction that military strength and victory lay, in the first resort, not in the army, but in God."

Israel's military muster included all men between ages twenty and fifty, but not all were used. In Judges 7, we see how Gideon reduced his army in terms of this law. Our Lord applied this in selecting His army, the apostles and other disciples, and He sent home all who were not totally dedicated (Luke 9:57-62). In Luke 14:18-20, our Lord makes it clear that the law of exemptions from military service did not apply where men are summoned into the Kingdom.

Verse 4 states that "God is He that goeth with you." This has also been rendered as "God who marches with you."

We see here as elsewhere that there is nothing outside of God's government. Work, worship, war, eating, sanitation, and all things are subject to His laws. He is totally the Governor of all things. The marginal note to this text in the Geneva Bible tells us, "God permitteth not this people to fight when it seemeth good to them." We are in all things totally under His government.

God's laws of warfare view legitimate warfare as the defense of the family and the land. Modern warfare is waged for political, not covenantal, reasons. Moreover, nonbiblical wars are waged more and more against civilians, as were pagan wars. Thus, there is a great gap between political wars and those permitted by God's law.

Whom Shall We Fear? God Alone!

"But you, O Israel, my servant,
     Jacob, whom I have chosen,
the offspring of Abraham, My friend;
     you whom I took from the ends of the earth,
and called from the farthest corners,
     saying to you, 'You are My servant,
I have chosen you and not cast you off';
     fear not, for I am with you;
be not dismayed, for I am your God;
     I will strengthen you, I will help you,
I will uphold you with My righteous right hand.

"Behold, all who are incensed against you
     shall be put to shame and confounded;
those who strive against you
     shall be as nothing and shall perish.
You shall seek those who contend with you,
     but you will not find them;
those who war against you shall be as nothing at all.
     For I, the Lord your God, hold your right hand;
it is I who say to you, 'Fear not,
     I am the one who helps you.'

"Fear not, you worm Jacob, you men of Israel!
     I am the one who helps you, declares the Lord;
your Redeemer is the Holy One of Israel."
- Isaiah 41:8-14

The Bible speaks much of the fear of the Lord: a reverence for Him that leads us to fear offending Him.

Deuteronomy 6:13: "It is the Lord your God you shall fear. Him shall you serve and by His name you shall swear."

Psalm 111:10: "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom; all those who practice it have a good understanding. His praise endures forever!" But the "beginning of wisdom" spoken of here isn't in the sense of "first", as one is the first of the numbers but otherwise the same. Rather it means "core, foundation, that which gives everything else meaning."

Proverbs 19:23: "The fear of the Lord leads to life, and whoever has it rests satisfied; he will not be visited by harm."

In our own time, where are we urged to give our fear? If a police officer says he has some questions for us, do we not all sweat? Or what about the IRS? Does the thought of an audit give us cuddly feelings? Of course not!

It has been estimated that the average American commits three felonies a day, without even realizing it. While we all understand that criminals properly have a fear of the civil law, our current political system is rather designed to cause the peaceable citizen to fear, even more than the criminal!

The Larger Catechism, Question 96, asks, "What particular use is there of the moral law to unregenerate men?" And answers, in part, "The moral law is of use to unregenerate men, to awaken their consciences to flee from the wrath to come, and to drive them to Christ." Ah, here in this concise summary of biblical teaching, we see the contrast. God's Law serves to strike the fear of Him in the heart of the unbeliever, such that he flees for mercy to Jesus Christ. To whom shall the citizen apply for mercy under secular law? That person, whether officer, judge, or bureaucrat, holds the power over the citizen, and revels in the awareness of that power.

Our time doesn't have temples devoted to emperor worship, the official religion of the ancient Romans. The Roman emperor didn't care whether the Christians loved and worshiped Jesus, as long as the emperor had the preeminence. It was the refusal to grant that preeminence that sent the Christians to the Coliseum! In the same way, the FBI won't object to our having Jesus in our hearts, in our homes, even in our churches, just as long as we don't let that devotion interfere with our devotion to the State Our Savior. This is the apostasy of our time.

And Jesus Himself warned us that such a choice would be forced upon us. In Matthew 10:28, He says, "Do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell." Our God is a jealous God, and will not allow us to give allegiance to the state now, no matter its abuse of us, and to continue to expect His favor in eternity. It is a stark choice: will I have the wrath of government in this life, or the wrath of God forever after?

While God may command our allegiance simply because He is God, yet He is also a gracious Father, and gives us blessed promises and encouragements to the right choice.

Deuteronomy 1:29-30: "Then I said to you, 'Do not be in dread or afraid of them. The Lord your God who goes before you will Himself fight for you, just as He did for you in Egypt before your eyes.'" Just as He overthrew the power of Pharaoh at the Red Sea, God goes before us in the defeat of our own self-deified state.

Joshua 1:9: "Have I not commanded you? Be strong and courageous. Do not be frightened, and do not be dismayed, for the Lord your God is with you wherever you go."

Psalm 27:1: "The Lord is my light and my salvation; whom shall I fear? The Lord is the stronghold of my life; of whom shall I be afraid?"

Isaiah 41:10: "Fear not, for I am with you; be not dismayed, for I am your God; I will strengthen you, I will help you, I will uphold you with My righteous right hand."

And Jesus speaking in John 16:33: "In the world you will have tribulation. But take heart; I have overcome the world."

So, what can we conclude? I want you to remember three things. First, that there are two conflicting claims on our spiritual fear. Shall it be God? Or shall it be the humanistic state, which pretends to deity? Second, this is a choice with eternal consequences: Shall we grant our fear to the state for our brief lives in exchange for the eternal wrath of God. And third, the true and living God has given us such comforting encouragements to strengthen us against the self-appointed god of this life.

May the Holy Spirit always recall these encouragements to our minds when we face these choices. Amen!