2 of 5

Let me outline just two scriptural teachings that suggest we don't have to always side with Israel against the Palestinians, or vice versa, in order to be biblical.

1. The Abrahamic covenant is both conditional and unconditional. The basis of God's plan for the nation of Israel is his covenant with Abraham. Theologians have hotly debated whether this covenant is conditional (and thereby invalidated by Israel's unfaithfulness) or unconditional (and therefore a permanent promise).

Arab Christians, often influenced by Islam and the plo, normally focus exclusively on the conditional elements. On the other hand, pro-Israeli Western Christians tend to focus solely on the unconditional elements.

It is best to recognize that there are both conditional and unconditional elements in the covenant. The unconditional elements demonstrate God's unmerited grace in electing the participants and his unwavering faithfulness in fulfilling the covenant.

At the same time, certain conditions had to be fulfilled for the covenant to become a reality: Abraham had to leave Ur and most of his family and go to Canaan. Once he had done that, the Lord entered into an unconditional covenant with Abraham and his descendants through Isaac and Jacob (with whom God confirmed and expanded the covenant).

But later restatements of the Abrahamic covenant (such as Gen. 22:16ff.) suggest conditionality. Rather than trying to deny this duality, we can harmonize it as follows: The promise of land, seed, and blessing to Abraham's descendants is an irrevocable covenant from God. The experience of these blessings, however, was conditioned by the faith-obedience of each generation of Israel. The purpose of the Mosaic covenant (plainly conditional) was to make clear to Israel the faith-obedience necessary to participate in the blessings of the promises given to Abraham.

Adherence to the Mosaic covenant would enable any generation of Israel to experience the blessings promised by the Abrahamic covenant, while unfaithfulness would result in curses, though the promise of restoration to the land (after repentance) remains in perpetuity.

2. Israel must fulfill the covenant stipulations of righteousness. If Jews today want to make a Scripture-based claim to the land, then all parties can fairly demand that they adhere to the stipulations of their own Scriptures.

1. The purpose of God's granting the covenant to Abraham's seed was that they might bring blessing to "all the families of the earth." Possession of the land must bring blessing to non-Israelites and ultimately to the world.
   
   
2. We must also remember that ownership of the land is ultimately God's. The Israelites are only residing "aliens and tenants" (Lev. 25:23). The Lord warned the Israelites that if they failed to adhere to the covenant, then the land would "vomit them" from it (Lev. 18:24-30; 20:22-26; Deut. 4:25-27, 40; Deut. 8 and 9).
   
   
3. The Law of Moses forbids murder, theft, and coveting. Obtaining any land by means that violate any of these commands would invalidate alleged claims to such land on biblical bases. The case of Ahab murdering Naboth in order to obtain his land clearly reveals God's intolerance for such conduct (1 Kings 21).
   
   
4. The conquest of Canaan does not provide a precedent for genocide or confiscation of land. Joshua's mandate applied to a period when Canaanite religion and culture had plummeted to the depths of pagan depravity: it included sorcery, spiritism, and child sacrifice (Deut. 18:9-15). God gave Israel a special assignment to act as an instrument of his judgment on the Canaanites.
   
   "Joshua had a clear and direct commandment from God both to conquer and to kill the inhabitants of the seven Canaanite nations," says David Stern, a messianic Jew who believes in the irrevocable promise of the land to the nation of Israel. "It was a very specific ad hoc commandment, and it did not extend to all living in the Land, only to certain nations that had had 400 years in which to repent of their evil ways (Genesis 15). It cannot be stated rationally that the Palestinian Arabs today are in the category of the Canaanites. … Such an ethnic comparison expresses an unbiblical attitude of racism, nationalism, and hate which cannot be disguised by calling it 'faithfulness to God's promises.' Moreover, the prophetic vision of resettlement of the Land after the exile is not based on violent takeover but on divine intervention (Isa. 60-61, Ezek. 36-37)." We must also remember that the Lord promised to expel the Israelites from the land if they practiced any of these evils (Lev. 18:24-28).
   
   

next page... |  2 of 5

share this page

April 2003, Vol. 47, No. 4