Add/remove tags to this thread

Topic: 1) Confirmation

Page 1 of 1  sorted by
Status: Offline
Posts: 939

1) Confirmation


David Hill (26 Sep 2003) "The Theocratic Covenant (3)"

Being a critique of George Peters' Book The Theocratic Kingdom

C O N F I R M A T I O N :

"Language could not possibly make it any plainer or stronger. The Sun may refuse to shine, the Moon and Stars may depart, the sea may no longer war with its waves, day and night may not alternate in their season, the ordinances of heaven and earth may be repealed (comp. e.g. Jer 33:17-26, Is 54:9, Jer 31:35-36, Ps 89:36-37, etc.), but the promises of God shall not fail in restoring the overthrown Davidic Kingdom; God will perform the promises made to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David and the prophets, respecting the Jewish nation. Men may foolishly ridicule and sneer at these things because still unrealized, calling them "Jewish notions, fables, and prejudices," but God's Word stands pledged, as solemnly and sacredly as word can be substantiated, for their fulfillment." (Vol 2, pg 283)

The Theocratic Kingdom of our Lord is rooted in the covenants in the Old Testament, as Peters says, confirmed by the oath of God himself (compare this with Num 30:2 and his quote above becomes conclusive, "If a man vow a vow unto Y'hova, or swear an oath to bind his soul with a bond; he shall not break his word, he shall do according to all that proceeds out of his mouth."), and will see their literal fulfillment (Vol 1, pg 342) in our day and age. No understanding of the Kingdom, and the Scriptures, and prophecies relating to it, can be properly understood, as intended by the Holy Spirit, outside of these covenants, (Vol 1 pg 293). And he himself has done an excellent job in expounding these covenants, far and above any other writer since the days of the Apostles.

However, in one particular he is in error, and (if you look at the quote you may notice) that is in the teaching of the Mosaic Covenant (Ex 34, Lev 26 etc) as it stands in its proper relation to the Abrahamic Covenant (Gen 12:1-7, 13:14-17, 15:4-21, 17:4-16, 22:15-18) and the Davidic Covenant (2 Sam 7:10-16, 1 Chr 17:11-14, Ps 89), as well as how all three of these relate to the New Covenant (Jer 30-33). This error, in turn, affects his view of Eschatology to some extent. All these points will be addressed in this critique. We will first look at "the Old Covenant" which, I believe, is referring to the first three Covenants, then we will properly relate them to the New, and correct any major errors to the prophecies that have resulted.

To any Jewish readers who (like one of my friends in Israel) take offense to the phrase "Old" Covenant; you can look at it in the same basic sense that we refer to the "Old" World.

Basically, the view that is incorrect is that the Mosaic Covenant is "inferior" to the Ab. and Dav., that it was never intended to be permanent and that, since 70 AD, it has been dis-annulled, never to be heard from again. The truth, however, is that this covenant, as the others, is the Revelation of God to His chosen nation and in no way is it inferior to the other two, for it is as much the Word of God as they are.

"It has been remarked by various writers, that the Covenant name of Jehovah or Jahveh, by which the unchangeableness of God is expressed, indicates the absolute certainty of ultimate fulfillment." (Vol 1, pg 287)

It is noteworthy that Peters; though emphasizing the fact that the Ab. and Dav. Covenants were both confirmed by an oath from God; fails to point out that the Mosaic Covenant itself was not only confirmed by oath, but that the very covenant keeping name, Y'hova, as stated above, was given to the Nation of Israel under the Mosaic Covenant (per Moses' specific request - Ex 3:13) and not under the Ab. or Dav. Covenants. That covenant keeping name and personage is further revealed to Moses (Ex 34:5-10), again at his request (33:13), specifically so that Moses may know that "this nation is thy people." It is incredible to me that this Eternal God would make the Ab. and Dav. covenants perpetual, but make the Mos. temporary, even when sealing it with His own covenant keeping name and personality under sworn oath. The quote above, in this light, is conclusive.

"The Jews had the strongest possible assurance given to them that the Kingdom based on these covenants would be realized. Attention has already been directed to the fact that the prophecies pertaining to this Kingdom shall not, in their ultimate fulfillment, fail, i.e., they are unconditional. The reason for this is that they are evolved from covenants confirmed by oath; and hence, in view of their absolute certainty (no matter how postponed), God has given expression to language which affirms beyond all doubt that this Kingdom, sustaining a covenant relationship, would at some time in the future be established; and this, too, as covenanted in connection with the national salvation of the Jewish nation." (Vol 1, pg 287)

The fact that this covenant was also confirmed by oath is specifically stated by Moses himself (Dt 28:90 - referring to either Ex 34 and/or Lev 26), and the reasons for the covenant are specified, again, as "Y'hova shall establish thee for an Holy People unto Himself as He has sworn to thee." The Mos. Covenant was basically designed to take the descendants of Abraham and forge them into a Holy Nation. Without the Mosaic Covenant the Abrahamic Covenant could never be realized and the Davidic Covenant becomes a moot point (as history proves). This covenant is a necessary link in the chain that ends in the New Covenant itself, and to make the Mos. inferior in any way, to these others, weakens the whole.

The condition ("if you obey") does not affect the Covenant itself, only the timing of its realization. This statement is proven by Moses saying (Dt 7:6-12) that the nation already was "an Holy People unto the LORD thy God" (see also Dt 14:2 and 21, 26:17-19 emphatically, Dt 27:9, 29:13) in fulfillment of the sworn oath, and that if they did break the covenant (symbolized by Moses breaking the first set of stone commandments carved out by God Himself, denoting the Deity of Christ, and engraved by the finger of God - the Holy Spirit - in perfect type of the breaking of God's own Son to ratify the New Covenant), that he would still remember it (Lev 26:44-46, Dt 4:30-40, 8:18) and fulfill the promises contained in it despite of the sin of the nation (symbolized by Moses carving out the second set of stone commandments denoting another individual like Y'shua but not divine, and engraved by the finger of God - the indwelling Holy Spirit - as a result of the New Covenant).

All of this is confirmed in "the song of Moses" (Dt 32) shortly before his death; that the nation of Israel is God's inheritance and that, by oath, He will execute vengeance on those nations that persecute his people, which we know occurs during the trib and (from context) after they had rejected Messiah. The Church dispensation (The New Covenant) has not abolished this oath-bound Mosaic Covenant (any more than it has the Abrahamic or Davidic) as some suppose, for, likewise, in the above mentioned passage (Lev 26), in the latter days, when they are in tribulation, the Lord will still remember his covenant with "them" (vs 44 - the nation and not the patriarchs), when they heard "the voice of God" and which is reiterated in Malachi (4:4) when he calls them to "remember the law of my servant Moses" (and not the covenant with Abraham) before the coming of the dreadful day of the Lord, when Elijah returns and "restores all things" including, assuredly, this covenant.

So, we see that the fact that the Mosaic Covenant was confirmed by an oath from the covenant keeping God Himself, re-elevates it back to its original standing as the next link in the covenant chain.

"This already gives us the clue to the literal fulfillment of the covenant promises, confirmed as they are by the oath of God, and therefore unconditional. Thus e.g. the promise of making Abraham's seed a mighty nation...will be realized when this elect nation will all be gathered and stand associated with the restored Theocratic Kingdom." (Vol 1, pg 416)


Page 1 of 1  sorted by
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Members Login

Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard