Conditional or Unconditional

[TubaFour]

It's been a while, but here goes:

Genesis 17:8

And I will give to you and to your offspring after you the land of your sojournings, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession, and I will be their God.

That's an unconditional promise.

Leviticus 18:

24 "Do not make yourselves unclean by any of these things, for by all these the nations I am driving out before you have become unclean, 25and the land became unclean, so that I punished its iniquity, and the land vomited out its inhabitants. 26But you shall keep my statutes and my rules and do none of these abominations, either the native or the stranger who sojourns among you 27(for the people of the land, who were before you, did all of these abominations, so that the land became unclean), 28lest the land vomit you out when you make it unclean, as it vomited out the nation that was before you. 29For everyone who does any of these abominations, the persons who do them shall be cut off from among their people.

and

Lev. 20:22:

You shall therefore keep all my statutes and all my rules and do them, that the land where I am bringing you to live may not vomit you out.

Conditional Promise!!! If you obey, you'll stay in the land!!

Which is it? How do you reconcile these seemingly contradictory promises?


Also, how do you interpret Gal 3:16:

Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, "And to offsprings," referring to many, but referring to one, "And to your offspring," who is Christ.

TIA,

aL

 

[Biblewriter]

The suggested contradiction here is purely imaginary. The covenant of the law was indeed conditional. And as the conditions were not met, it did not apply. But promise is not the same as covenant. The promise to Abraham was unconditional, as we read in Galatians 3:18.

But the promise to Abraham was not the only unconditional promise made in the Old Testament.

We read in Psalm 89, concerning God's promise to David:

30 If his children forsake my law, and walk not in my judgments;​

31 If they break my statutes, and keep not my commandments;​

32 Then will I visit their transgression with the rod, and their iniquity with stripes.​

33 Nevertheless my lovingkindness will I not utterly take from him, nor suffer my faithfulness to fail.​

34 My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips.

Like the original promise to Abraham, this promise referred (at least mainly) to great David's greater Son, our Lord Jesus.

But there were many other unconditional promises made. These included many promises about a future restoration of Israel. Although some of these could be spiritually interpreted to mean the church, many of them are stated in explicit terms that could in no way be spiritualized to mean the church.

The problem is how to reconcile the fact that Israel was rejected due to their disobedience with the fact that they were promised a future restoration. This problem is resolved in another set of unconditional promises made to Israel. That is an often repeated promise that God would eventually bring them into repentance, and thus qualify them to receive the blessing He promised their fathers so long ago.

I have listed a dozen places this promise was made in a thread titled "The Unfulfilled Promise of Israel's Repentance." None of the naysayers in this forum responded to this thread. I can only assume that this was because none of them could answer its compelling result. That the nation of Israel would again be restored to their land, and Messiah would from there rule the world.

I will only cite one occasion of this promise here. In Hosea 1 we read:

8Now when she had weaned Loruhamah, she conceived, and bare a son. 9Then said God, Call his name Loammi: for ye are not my people, and I will not be your God. ​

10Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God. 11Then shall the children of Judah and the children of Israel be gathered together, and appoint themselves one head, and they shall come up out of the land: for great shall be the day of Jezreel.​

​

 

[TubaFour]

I am not sure I understand why you think the contradiction is imaginary. You distinguished a conditional covenant from an unconditional covenant. But, that's all you did. In effect you affirmed my point. The promise to Abraham is unconditional, but the covenant made in Sinai is conditional.

That's the point of the opening post.

You also state that he promise to Abraham is the only unconditional promise in the OT. What about the promise to Noah? Or Genesis 3:15? Those are two that immediately come to mind.

I personally believe there's no contradiction either between the promise given to Abraham and the Mosaic covenant, but not because the latter covenant didn't apply. If it didn't apply why did God bother giving it to Israel? How did it not apply?

aL

 

[Biblewriter]

I am not sure I understand why you think the contradiction is imaginary. You distinguished a conditional covenant from an unconditional covenant. But, that's all you did. In effect you affirmed my point. The promise to Abraham is unconditional, but the covenant made in Sinai is conditional.

That's the point of the opening post.

You also state that he promise to Abraham is the only unconditional promise in the OT. What about the promise to Noah? Or Genesis 3:15? Those are two that immediately come to mind.

I personally believe there's no contradiction either between the promise given to Abraham and the Mosaic covenant, but not because the latter covenant didn't apply. If it didn't apply why did God bother giving it to Israel? How did it not apply?

aL

My use of the words "did not apply" was unfortunate. The promised blessings ceased to apply at that time because the conditions were not met at that time. Instead, the the threatened curses applied.

But Israel was also promised at later times that they would finally be brought to repentance. When they have finally repented, the promises will again apply.

Note: I did not say that the promise to Abraham was the only unconditional promise in the OT. I don't know how you got that out of my post. I expressly said there were others.

 

[TubaFour]

My use of the words "did not apply" was unfortunate. The promised blessings ceased to apply at that time because the conditions were not met at that time. Instead, the the threatened curses applied.

So, the Mosaic covenant applied when given with all the curses (and blessings).

But Israel was also promised at later times that they would finally be brought to repentance. When they have finally repented, the promises will again apply.

I am not sure how you use the term promises in this sentence, but, I imagine you mean blessings. So, are you saying that the blessings of the Mosaic covenant will apply again? Or are you saying the Abrahamic covenant will apply again?

If you mean the former, i.e. that the Mosaic covenant's blessings will apply again, that seems to contradict the testimony of the whole bible especially Hebrews, where the writer tells us that the Old (Mosaic) Covenant is obsolete.

If you mean that the Abrahamic covenant will be instituted again, I am not sure how you mean that, since it was never abrogated. It still applies, it is the announcement of Christ and his benefits. If you mean Israel will participate in the Abrahamic Covenant, I'd say they did in the OT, and in any event, the Abrahamic covenant is NOT a national covenant. It was made with Abraham before he was circumcised, as Paul points out in Romans.

In my opinion, this is the distinction between the conditional covenant made at Sinai (it was a national, temporary covenant) whereas the Abrahamic covenant was not made with Israel (it didn't exist yet). It was made with Christ and with his elect (with Abraham as an earthly father of Christ -- i.e., one from whom Christ would come). (Ref. Gal 3:16)

Note: I did not say that the promise to Abraham was the only unconditional promise in the OT. I don't know how you got that out of my post. I expressly said there were others.

I misread your second sentence/paragraph. I skipped over the word "not". My bad.

aL

 

[Biblewriter]

So, the Mosaic covenant applied when given with all the curses (and blessings).

yes

I am not sure how you use the term promises in this sentence, but, I imagine you mean blessings. So, are you saying that the blessings of the Mosaic covenant will apply again? Or are you saying the Abrahamic covenant will apply again?

Yes, I meant blessings. I agree with you that the Abrahamic covenant was never abrogated.

If you mean the former, i.e. that the Mosaic covenant's blessings will apply again, that seems to contradict the testimony of the whole bible especially Hebrews, where the writer tells us that the Old (Mosaic) Covenant is obsolete.

If you mean that the Abrahamic covenant will be instituted again, I am not sure how you mean that, since it was never abrogated. It still applies, it is the announcement of Christ and his benefits. If you mean Israel will participate in the Abrahamic Covenant, I'd say they did in the OT, and in any event, the Abrahamic covenant is NOT a national covenant. It was made with Abraham before he was circumcised, as Paul points out in Romans.

In my opinion, this is the distinction between the conditional covenant made at Sinai (it was a national, temporary covenant) whereas the Abrahamic covenant was not made with Israel (it didn't exist yet). It was made with Christ and with his elect (with Abraham as an earthly father of Christ -- i.e., one from whom Christ would come). (Ref. Gal 3:16)

I misread your second sentence/paragraph. I skipped over the word "not". My bad.

aL

You seem to be neglecting the many expressly stated promised made after the Mosaic covenant. Although they were made during the time of the Mosaic covenant, they were not part of it.

These promises specifically include a return of all Israel to her land, with specifics about what part of the land will go to each of the twelve tribes. They specifically include a promise of Israel's repentance when they are brought back. They also include the annihilation of some of Israel's worst enemies, and the subjection of the rest. They include the entire world coming up to Jerusalem to worship the Lord, the building of a temple and a system of sacrifices distinctly different from those instituted through (notice I did not say by) Moses.

As none of these has ever happened, we are left with only two choices. We can either believe that they will still happen at some time in the future. Or we can believe that they will never happen. But if we conclude that they will never happen, we are forced to conclude that these promises were conditional. The problem with this conclusion is that most of these promises included no language even suggesting a condition, and none of the ones I have referred to included anything that could unquestionably be called a condition.

 

[holdon]

It's been a while, but here goes:

Genesis 17:8

And I will give to you and to your offspring after you the land of your sojournings, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession, and I will be their God.

That's an unconditional promise.

Leviticus 18:

24 "Do not make yourselves unclean by any of these things, for by all these the nations I am driving out before you have become unclean, 25and the land became unclean, so that I punished its iniquity, and the land vomited out its inhabitants. 26But you shall keep my statutes and my rules and do none of these abominations, either the native or the stranger who sojourns among you 27(for the people of the land, who were before you, did all of these abominations, so that the land became unclean), 28lest the land vomit you out when you make it unclean, as it vomited out the nation that was before you. 29For everyone who does any of these abominations, the persons who do them shall be cut off from among their people.

and

Lev. 20:22:

You shall therefore keep all my statutes and all my rules and do them, that the land where I am bringing you to live may not vomit you out.

Conditional Promise!!! If you obey, you'll stay in the land!!

Which is it? How do you reconcile these seemingly contradictory promises?


Also, how do you interpret Gal 3:16:

Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, "And to offsprings," referring to many, but referring to one, "And to your offspring," who is Christ.

TIA,

aL

I think it is important to see the different things that were said to Abram/Abraham.

In Gen 12 we have the first:
1. And I will make of thee a great nation, and bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing. And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee; and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.

The second:
2. Unto thy seed will I give this land.
Note: In the first there is no mention of a land or seed.

The third in Gen 15:
3. Look now toward the heavens, and number the stars, if thou be able to number them. And he said to him, So shall thy seed be!
Here clearly seed is "numerous" as the stars of heaven.

Then the covenant:
4. On the same day Jehovah made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the river Euphrates;
Here the land is promised to his seed. The first time this was promised in Gen 12 (2.) this time it is framed in a covenant.

Then in Gen 17 confirmation that it is an everlasting covenant:
5. a. behold, my covenant is with thee, and thou shalt be a father of a multitude of nations. "I will establish my covenant between me and thee, and thy seed after thee in their generations, for an everlasting covenant, to be a God to thee, and to thy seed after thee."
b. Confirming the land promise: "I give to thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land of thy sojourning, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession"
c. And the condition of that covenant:
This is my covenant which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee -- that every male among you be circumcised.
d. And that the covenant would be through the line of Isaac and his generations after him:
and thou shalt call his name Isaac; and I will establish my covenant with him, for an everlasting covenant for his seed after him. (this is further confirmed to Isaac in Gen 26 and to Jacob in Gen 28)

Then in Gen 22 confirmation of the source of blessing:
6. Confirmation of the promise in Gen 12 (=1.)
I will richly bless thee, and greatly multiply thy seed, as the stars of heaven, and as the sand that is on the sea-shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies;
And an enhancement: the promise initially made to Abram as a person is now to a single seed:
and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth bless themselves.
This is the single seed Paul speaks of: it is Christ. This is Gal. 3:16.

Further we have God making a people and nation:
7. The basis of God's dealings with Israel as a nation is His covenant with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Ex. 2:24.
God then deals with Israel as a nation: I established also my covenant with them, to give them the land of Canaan, And I will take you to me for a people, and will be your God. Ex 6.

Then the covenant of Sinai:
8. And now, if ye will hearken to my voice indeed and keep my covenant, then shall ye be my own possession out of all the peoples. (This involves blessings and curses). And all the people answered together, and said, All that Jehovah has spoken will we do! Ex 19.
This is the old covenant that will be replaced by the new covenant. Replaced means: with the same parties involved: Israel and God.
This is clearly seen in Jeremiah: "I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers, in the day of my taking them by the hand, to lead them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they broke, (Jer. 31:31,32)

 

[Terral]

Hi TubaFour:

Tuba >> Conditional or Unconditional: It's been a while, but here goes:

Tuba Quotes >> Genesis 17:8 And I will give to you and to your offspring after you the land of your sojournings, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession, and I will be their God.

Tuba Commentary >> That's an unconditional promise.

Tuba Quotes >> Leviticus 18: 24 "Do not make yourselves unclean by any of these things, for by all these the nations I am driving out before you have become unclean, 25and the land became unclean, so that I punished its iniquity, and the land vomited out its inhabitants. 26But you shall keep my statutes and my rules and do none of these abominations, either the native or the stranger who sojourns among you 27(for the people of the land, who were before you, did all of these abominations, so that the land became unclean), 28lest the land vomit you out when you make it unclean, as it vomited out the nation that was before you. 29For everyone who does any of these abominations, the persons who do them shall be cut off from among their people.

and

Tuba Quotes >> Lev. 20:22: You shall therefore keep all my statutes and all my rules and do them, that the land where I am bringing you to live may not vomit you out.

Tuba Commentary >> Conditional Promise!!! If you obey, you'll stay in the land!! Which is it? How do you reconcile these seemingly contradictory promises?

There is no such thing as a contradiction in God’s Living Word, but every syllable must be read in its true ‘context.’ We already know that ‘all Israel will be saved’ (Romans 11:26) and that the “whole house of Israel” (Eze. 37:11-12) will be resurrected and led into the land of Jacob. Right? Of course. And why? “. . . for the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable.” Romans 11:29. The first thing to realize about the ‘true context’ of the OT quotes above is that the “Lord God” is our Lord Jesus Christ who formed Adam as His “son of God” (Luke 3:38) using His own two hands back in Genesis 2:7. All of His ‘promises/covenants’ to the fathers (Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, etc.) are irrevocable, as every covenant is ‘one-sided’ from the perspective of the Lord God and “Israel” as His “Chosen Race” (1Peter 2:9). From a New Testament perspective, the Lord God (Christ) was sent to Israel ONLY (Matt. 15:24), as He sent the Twelve also to Israel ONLY (Matt. 10:5-7), because of the OT ‘promises’ He had already made through the covenants with ‘the fathers,’ which placed responsibility upon the Lord God to make good on those promises. However (this is the seeming contradiction part), the Lord God’s promises to the fathers and Israel (as a nation) have nothing to do with the disobedient individuals and sects within Israel being ‘cut off’ (like Judas, Ananias and his wife Sapphira = Acts 5:1-10) for one reason or another along the way.

Israel (as a nation) was led into captivity in 8 and 6 B.C., but the Lord God (Christ) still appeared to them with the good news that the kingdom of heaven was ‘at hand’ (Mark 1:14-15 = Matt. 4:17-23) with every intention of betrothing (Hosea 2:19-20) His Chosen Race to Himself anyway. The Lord God (Christ) knows there will be a resurrection (Eze. 37:11-12 = Rev. 20:11-15) at the “END of the Age” (Daniel 12:11-13) AND that David himself (Eze. 34:22-25) will be installed as ‘prince,’ during the upcoming 1000 Years Day of the Lord AND again as ‘king’ FOREVER (Eze. 37:24-28) in the new earth of Rev. 21:1+. The fact that specific generations of Israel will certainly be “stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears always resisting the Holy Spirit” (Acts 7:51), was known from the moment Eve was taken from Adam’s side (Gen. 2:20-22), because the Lord God’s chosen race would be ‘deceived’ to ‘fall into transgression’ (1Tim. 2:14), just like the ‘water witness helper’ she represents. Therefore, the land (of the garden = Promised Land of Gen. 15:18 = kingdom of Eze. 47-48) ‘can’ vomit out members of specific disobedient generations (like Adam and Eve were tossed out of the garden), but the ‘calling’ of the Lord for the whole House of Israel to be raised up and led into the land of Jacob (Eze. 37:11-12) is irrevocable just the same.

Tuba >> Also, how do you interpret Gal 3:16: “Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, "And to offsprings," referring to many, but referring to one, "And to your offspring," who is Christ.”

Paul’s statements to these Galatian members of the “body of Christ” (Eph. 4:12 = like in 1Cor. 12:27, Col. 1:24) have a totally different ‘context’ to anything you are reading in the Old Testament for Israel of the flesh. Nobody in the Old Testament OR in the Four Gospels envisioned a Gentile dominant “BODY of Christ,” which represents our ‘mystery is great’ (Eph. 5:32) "church" called out assembly gathered through Paul’s “Word of the Cross” (1Cor. 1:18) gospel message. Remember again that Christ was sent to Israel ONLY (Matt. 15:24) in the Four Gospels AND that Kingdom Church (Matt. 16:16-19, 18:17-18) represents the Prophetic Kingdom “Bride” (John 3:29 = Church #2 here) betrothed to the Lord by obedience to the “Gospel of the Kingdom” (Matt. 4:23, 9:35, etc.); which is a totally different ‘dispensation’ from the OT saints and the “BODY of Christ” from the Pauline Epistles (see differences here). The primary reasons people misinterpret Paul’s teachings to these Galatians is over their refusal to acknowledge the many different ‘dispensations’ (Israel of the flesh under Moses, Kingdom Bride under Peter and Grace BODY under Paul) in order to gather a ‘true context’ of what has been written. To begin unraveling ‘the truth’ of this ‘Conditional or Unconditional’ Covenant seeming contradiction, we must go back to the OT and examine the original promise made to Abraham; which is ‘two-fold’ for ISRAEL ‘and’ contains Paul’s promises to the BODY of Christ (that’s us) enfolded ‘within’ those promises.

“Then the angel of the Lord called to Abraham a second time from heaven, and said, "By Myself I have sworn, declares the Lord, because you have done this thing and have not withheld your son, your only son, indeed I will greatly bless you, and “I will greatly multiply your seed as the stars of the heavens” AND as the “sand which is on the seashore;” and your seed shall possess the gate of their enemies. "In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because you have obeyed My voice." Genesis 22:15-18.

These prophecies and promises are ‘twofold’ in nature having a ‘heavenly’ (as the stars in heaven) and ‘earthly’ (as the sand on the seashore) fulfillment that applies to ISRAEL ONLY without ANYTHING to do with Paul’s “BODY of Christ” at all. Remember always that our gospel for today (Gospel #2) is “according to the revelation of THE MYSTERY” (Rom. 16:25) and that everything concerning the “wisdom given him” remained “Hidden IN GOD”, until ‘revealed’ to Paul via these ‘visions and revelations of the Lord’ (2Cor. 12:1). Therefore, nobody here could make the “Body of Christ” connection to these Genesis 22 ‘promises,’ until Paul did that for us ‘after’ God had already raised Christ from the dead. Paul has become our ‘prophet,’ by pointing out ‘these things’ that were previously hidden in God that DO have application to our “BODY of Christ” under construction since Paul was converted on the road to Damascus in Acts 9:15. The Lord God’s promises above pertain to the kingdom “BRIDE” (John 3:29) like Peter, John, James, the Samarians and Eunuch of Acts 8, Cornelius and his family in Acts 10 and the disciples of Acts 19:1-6 all saved by obeying the “Gospel of the Kingdom” inheriting heavenly positions where they (the Bride) will judge Israel of the flesh (Luke 22:30). Paul writes about these Kingdom Bride members, saved through obeying the Gospel of the Kingdom, saying,

“What then? What Israel is seeking, it has not obtained, but those who were chosen obtained it, and the rest were hardened . . .”. Romans 11:7.

The Lord God (Christ) divided Israel obtaining positions in “His Heavenly Kingdom” (2Tim. 4:18) from those to inherit positions in the earthly counterpart (Eze. 37:11-12) using the Gospel of the Kingdom, which fulfills the Lord’s promises to Abraham fully and completely, BEFORE we even begin addressing Paul’s teaching for us (BODY of Christ) here in Galatians 3. If you go back to the original promise (Gen. 15:5-6 = Romans 4:1-6), then you will see ONLY the mention of the ‘stars’ in heaven, because the BODY of Christ (that’s us) has no earthly counterpart at all. :0) God’s promises to the BODY of Christ have no conditions at all, because we are already seated with Jesus Christ IN the heavenly places that are “IN Christ Jesus” (Eph. 2:6) with lives hidden with Christ IN God (Col. 3:1-3). Peter, John, James and everyone saved via the Gospel of the Kingdom MUST join us “IN” Christ at the marriage supper of the Lamb (Rev. 19:5-10) through the ‘covenant’ of marriage AND according to the Lord God’s promises made to ISRAEL and ‘those’ stars of the heavens. Israel of the flesh is ‘born again’ (John 3:3+7), but the members of Christ’s body (that’s us) are created (Eph. 2:10) IN Christ Jesus, as totally new creatures (2Cor. 5:16-17) part of a totally “new creation” (Gal. 6:15), “because we are the members of His body” (Eph. 5:30),

In Christ Jesus,

Terral

 

[Terral]

Hi TubaFour:

Tuba >> Conditional or Unconditional: It's been a while, but here goes:

Tuba Quotes >> Genesis 17:8 And I will give to you and to your offspring after you the land of your sojournings, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession, and I will be their God.

Tuba Commentary >> That's an unconditional promise.

Tuba Quotes >> Leviticus 18: 24 "Do not make yourselves unclean by any of these things, for by all these the nations I am driving out before you have become unclean, 25and the land became unclean, so that I punished its iniquity, and the land vomited out its inhabitants. 26But you shall keep my statutes and my rules and do none of these abominations, either the native or the stranger who sojourns among you 27(for the people of the land, who were before you, did all of these abominations, so that the land became unclean), 28lest the land vomit you out when you make it unclean, as it vomited out the nation that was before you. 29For everyone who does any of these abominations, the persons who do them shall be cut off from among their people.

and

Tuba Quotes >> Lev. 20:22: You shall therefore keep all my statutes and all my rules and do them, that the land where I am bringing you to live may not vomit you out.

Tuba Commentary >> Conditional Promise!!! If you obey, you'll stay in the land!! Which is it? How do you reconcile these seemingly contradictory promises?

There is no such thing as a contradiction in God’s Living Word, but every syllable must be read in its true ‘context.’ We already know that ‘all Israel will be saved’ (Romans 11:26) and that the “whole house of Israel” (Eze. 37:11-12) will be resurrected and led into the land of Jacob. Right? Of course. And why? “. . . for the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable.” Romans 11:29. The first thing to realize about the ‘true context’ of the OT quotes above is that the “Lord God” is our Lord Jesus Christ who formed Adam as His “son of God” (Luke 3:38) using His own two hands back in Genesis 2:7. All of His ‘promises/covenants’ to the fathers (Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, etc.) are irrevocable, as every covenant is ‘one-sided’ from the perspective of the Lord God and “Israel” as His “Chosen Race” (1Peter 2:9). From a New Testament perspective, the Lord God (Christ) was sent to Israel ONLY (Matt. 15:24), as He sent the Twelve also to Israel ONLY (Matt. 10:5-7), because of the OT ‘promises’ He had already made through the covenants with ‘the fathers,’ which placed responsibility upon the Lord God to make good on those promises. However (this is the seeming contradiction part), the Lord God’s promises to the fathers and Israel (as a nation) have nothing to do with the disobedient individuals and sects within Israel being ‘cut off’ (like Judas, Ananias and his wife Sapphira = Acts 5:1-10) for one reason or another along the way.

Israel (as a nation) was led into captivity in 8 and 6 B.C., but the Lord God (Christ) still appeared to them with the good news that the kingdom of heaven was ‘at hand’ (Mark 1:14-15 = Matt. 4:17-23) with every intention of betrothing (Hosea 2:19-20) His Chosen Race to Himself anyway. The Lord God (Christ) knows there will be a resurrection (Eze. 37:11-12 = Rev. 20:11-15) at the “END of the Age” (Daniel 12:11-13) AND that David himself (Eze. 34:22-25) will be installed as ‘prince,’ during the upcoming 1000 Years Day of the Lord AND again as ‘king’ FOREVER (Eze. 37:24-28) in the new earth of Rev. 21:1+. The fact that specific generations of Israel will certainly be “stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears always resisting the Holy Spirit” (Acts 7:51), was known from the moment Eve was taken from Adam’s side (Gen. 2:20-22), because the Lord God’s chosen race would be ‘deceived’ to ‘fall into transgression’ (1Tim. 2:14), just like the ‘water witness helper’ she represents. Therefore, the land (of the garden = Promised Land of Gen. 15:18 = kingdom of Eze. 47-48) ‘can’ vomit out members of specific disobedient generations (like Adam and Eve were tossed out of the garden), but the ‘calling’ of the Lord for the whole House of Israel to be raised up and led into the land of Jacob (Eze. 37:11-12) is irrevocable just the same.

Tuba >> Also, how do you interpret Gal 3:16: “Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, "And to offsprings," referring to many, but referring to one, "And to your offspring," who is Christ.”

Paul’s statements to these Galatian members of the “body of Christ” (Eph. 4:12 = like in 1Cor. 12:27, Col. 1:24) have a totally different ‘context’ to anything you are reading in the Old Testament for Israel of the flesh. Nobody in the Old Testament OR in the Four Gospels envisioned a Gentile dominant “BODY of Christ,” which represents our ‘mystery is great’ (Eph. 5:32) called out assembly gathered through Paul’s “Word of the Cross” (1Cor. 1:18) gospel message. Remember again that Christ was sent to Israel ONLY (Matt. 15:24) in the Four Gospels AND that Kingdom Church (Matt. 16:16-19, 18:17-18) represents the Prophetic Kingdom “Bride” (John 3:29 = Church #1 here) betrothed to the Lord by obedience to the “Gospel of the Kingdom” (Matt. 4:23, 9:35, etc.); which is a totally different ‘dispensation’ from the OT saints and the “BODY of Christ” from the Pauline Epistles (see differences here). The primary reasons people misinterpret Paul’s teachings to these Galatians is over their refusal to acknowledge the many different ‘dispensations’ (Israel of the flesh under Moses, Kingdom Bride under Peter and Grace BODY under Paul) in order to gather a ‘true context’ of what has been written. To begin unraveling ‘the truth’ of this ‘Conditional or Unconditional’ Covenant seeming contradiction, we must go back to the OT and examine the original promise made to Abraham; which is ‘two-fold’ for ISRAEL ‘and’ contains Paul’s promises to the BODY of Christ (that’s us) enfolded ‘within’ those promises.

“Then the angel of the Lord called to Abraham a second time from heaven, and said, "By Myself I have sworn, declares the Lord, because you have done this thing and have not withheld your son, your only son, indeed I will greatly bless you, and “I will greatly multiply your seed as the stars of the heavens” AND as the “sand which is on the seashore;” and your seed shall possess the gate of their enemies. "In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because you have obeyed My voice." Genesis 22:15-18.

These prophecies and promises are ‘twofold’ in nature having a ‘heavenly’ (as the stars in heaven) and ‘earthly’ (as the sand on the seashore) fulfillment that applies to ISRAEL ONLY without ANYTHING to do with Paul’s “BODY of Christ” at all. Remember always that our gospel for today (Gospel #2) is “according to the revelation of THE MYSTERY” (Rom. 16:25) and that everything concerning the “wisdom given him” remained “Hidden IN GOD”, until ‘revealed’ to Paul via these ‘visions and revelations of the Lord’ (2Cor. 12:1). Therefore, nobody here could make the “Body of Christ” connection to these Genesis 22 ‘promises,’ until Paul did that for us ‘after’ God had already raised Christ from the dead. Paul has become our ‘prophet,’ by pointing out ‘these things’ that were previously hidden in God that DO have application to our “BODY of Christ” under construction since Paul was converted on the road to Damascus in Acts 9:15. The Lord God’s promises above pertain to the kingdom “BRIDE” (John 3:29) like Peter, John, James, the Samarians and Eunuch of Acts 8, Cornelius and his family in Acts 10 and the disciples of Acts 19:1-6 all saved by obeying the “Gospel of the Kingdom” inheriting heavenly positions where they (the Bride) will judge Israel of the flesh (Luke 22:30). Paul writes about these Kingdom Bride members, saved through obeying the Gospel of the Kingdom, saying,

“What then? What Israel is seeking, it has not obtained, but those who were chosen obtained it, and the rest were hardened . . .”. Romans 11:7.

The Lord God (Christ) divided Israel obtaining positions in “His Heavenly Kingdom” (2Tim. 4:18) from those to inherit positions in the earthly counterpart (Eze. 37:11-12) using the Gospel of the Kingdom, which fulfills the Lord’s promises to Abraham fully and completely, BEFORE we even begin addressing Paul’s teaching for us (BODY of Christ) here in Galatians 3. If you go back to the original promise (Gen. 15:5-6 = Romans 4:1-6), then you will see ONLY the mention of the ‘stars’ in heaven, because the BODY of Christ (that’s us) has no earthly counterpart at all. :0) God’s promises to the BODY of Christ have no conditions at all, because we are already seated with Jesus Christ IN the heavenly places that are “IN Christ Jesus” (Eph. 2:6) with lives hidden with Christ IN God (Col. 3:1-3). Peter, John, James and everyone saved via the Gospel of the Kingdom MUST join us “IN” Christ at the marriage supper of the Lamb (Rev. 19:5-10) through the ‘covenant’ of marriage AND according to the Lord God’s promises made to ISRAEL and ‘those’ stars of the heavens. Israel of the flesh is ‘born again’ (John 3:3+7), but the members of Christ’s body (that’s us) are created (Eph. 2:10) IN Christ Jesus, as totally new creatures (2Cor. 5:16-17) part of a totally “new creation” (Gal. 6:15), “because we are the members of His body” (Eph. 5:30),

In Christ Jesus,

Terral

 

[TubaFour]

Thanks for the replies. For the time being, let's set aside what Paul said in Galatians in order not to muddy the picture.

Still the question lingers. Since we can all agree that there are no contradictions in God's word: Is the land promise to Israel conditional (Moses) or unconditional (Abraham)?

Can somebody take a position on this?

Thanks.

aL

 

[ddub85]

@ Tuba

Unconditional to the Jews, yet conditional to THOSE PARTICULAR JEWS who were under the law, without the grace promised to Abraham.

God Bless!

 

[Terral]

Hi TubaFour:

TubaFour >> Still the question lingers. Since we can all agree that there are no contradictions in God's word: Is the land promise to Israel conditional (Moses) or unconditional (Abraham)? Can somebody take a position on this?

“Then He said to me, "Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Israel; behold, they say, 'Our bones are dried up and our hope has perished. We are completely cut off.' "Therefore prophesy and say to them, 'Thus says the Lord God, "Behold, I will open your graves and cause you to come up out of your graves, My people; and I will bring you into the land of Israel.” Ezekiel 37:11-12.

It is not that the ‘land promised to Israel’ is conditional or unconditional, but the Lord God’s promise to raise the whole house of Israel up and bring them into the land of Israel is very much unconditional; because of His promises to the fathers.

In Christ Jesus,

Terral

 

[TubaFour]

@ Tuba

Unconditional to the Jews, yet conditional to THOSE PARTICULAR JEWS who were under the law, without the grace promised to Abraham.

God Bless!

Long time no see ddub...

I am unclear what you mean that the land promise is unconditional to the Jews yet conditional to certain Jews.... So, let's take the Jews living under Joshua, did they get a conditional or an unconditional land promise?

Are you saying that there were jews that lived under Moses but didn't have the grace promised to Abraham? Where do you get that? Doesn't that make the promises made to Abraham conditional or worse, selective? We know that the promises made to Abraham were not conditional nor were they selective...

Also, what about the Babylonian exile? What about the Jews' exile the last 2000 years? What about the land's occupation or conquest by the Assyrians, Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, Babylonians, Arabs, Turks, British (I am sure I left a few out). What do you make of all of that? Was it not the "curse" of the conditional Mosaic covenant that Israel could not keep? The land would vomit them out!!!! Was not all of that the result of their disobedience, their failure to believe in their Messiah?

aL

 

[TubaFour]

Hi TubaFour:

It is not that the ‘land promised to Israel’ is conditional or unconditional, but the Lord God’s promise to raise the whole house of Israel up and bring them into the land of Israel is very much unconditional; because of His promises to the fathers.

In Christ Jesus,

Terral

Terral,

Am I focusing on the wrong thing? My post is concerned with the land promise. I have heard many dispensationalists say that the land grant was made to Israel and that it is a forever land promise. OK. So, we get to Moses, and the land grant is conditioned upon the Israelites' obedience. Either God changed his mind (which He didn't) or I don't understand what's written in the Word of God.

That's the basis for my question.

aL

 

[Terral]

Hi TubaFour:

TubaFour >> Am I focusing on the wrong thing? My post is concerned with the land promise.

Yes. 2x4 is focusing on the wrong thing. The Land of Israel (Eze. 37:11-12) is the same Land of Promise from Genesis 15:18 and the kingdom of Ezekiel 47-48. That land belongs to ISRAEL and is the 'water witness' (helper = like Eve to Adam and the Holy Spirit to the Father) footprint of the Garden of Eden that is currently in a state of disrepair.

2x4 >> I have heard many dispensationalists say that the land grant was made to Israel and that it is a forever land promise. OK. So, we get to Moses, and the land grant is conditioned upon the Israelites' obedience.

No sir. The land belongs to Israel just the same. What dispy’s say is irrelevant to what Scripture says and what the Lord God has given to Israel.

2x4 >> Either God changed his mind (which He didn't) or I don't understand what's written in the Word of God. That's the basis for my question.

And that is the basis of my replies above. You are a believer in our Gospel, according to your personal information. That means your citizenship is in heaven (Phil. 3:20) and that 2x4 is to keep his eyes fixed on the things above where Christ is at the right hand of God (Col. 3:1-3). There is no inheritance for 2x4 in this world and the Promised Land in the Middle East still belongs to Israel. Why 2x4 wants to focus upon someone else’s inheritance is beyond me. We will judge the world and the angels (1Cor. 6:2-3) from “His Heavenly Kingdom” (2Tim. 4:18), then you can look down from heaven and focus on Israel’s inheritance all you want. :0)

New Jerusalem above is our mother . . .

In Christ Jesus even now,

Terral

 

[TubaFour]

Terral said: "Why 2x4 wants to focus upon someone else’s inheritance is beyond me."

It's not so much that I am interested in someone else's inheritance, I am not sure it is someone else's. But, again, that's a topic for another day, and as you can also tell from my information, I am Reformed. I don't buy dispensational hermeneutics.

I was just curious about the land promise because it seems to contradict dispensational dogma which is taken as "gospel" in many circles that the land is an unconditional grant to the people of Israel and which would last forever. Moses seems to say otherwise. That's all.

Since dispies highly value the literal reading of the scriptures then when you read the Abrahamic covenant, the grant is not to Israel, but to Abraham and his descendants (plural) which include "many nations" as stated in Genesis 17. So, why is the land grant in Genesis 17 limited to a certain subset of Abraham's physical descendants when the bible does not limit it there?

Notice also that the "forever" word does not appear when God promises the land to Isaac and to Jacob. (I haven't undertaken an exhaustive search on this issue, so I may be wrong on whether "forever" ever appears again in relation to the land promise.)

All of this to say, if you want to read the scriptures literally, let's be faithful and consistent to what the word actually says and not read into it something it doesn't say.

So when God tells the Israelites through Moses that their possession of the land is conditioned on their obedience (which we know they never could fulfill -- they broke the 10 commandments before they were even given), and when we see the Israelites kicked off the land, subjugated by foreign powers and rejecting their Messiah because they thought he was going to throw off the Roman yoke, etc., you have to grapple with a theology that says the land promise is unconditional and will last forever.

I guess the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD and the scattering of the Jews had no theological significance then!

aL

 

[LamorakDesGalis]

Thanks for the replies. For the time being, let's set aside what Paul said in Galatians in order not to muddy the picture.

Still the question lingers. Since we can all agree that there are no contradictions in God's word: Is the land promise to Israel conditional (Moses) or unconditional (Abraham)?

Can somebody take a position on this?

The land promise is unconditional.

The land promise is present not just in the Abrahamic covenant, but also in the unconditional Davidic covenant here:

2 Samuel 7:10-11 10 I will establish a place for my people Israel and settle them there; they will live there and not be disturbed any more. Violent men will not oppress them again, as they did in the beginning 11 and during the time when I appointed judges to lead my people Israel. Instead, I will give you relief from all your enemies. The LORD declares to you that he himself will build a dynastic house for you.

And the land promise is present in the unconditional New Covenant as well:

Jeremiah 31:31-33 31 "Indeed, a time is coming," says the LORD, "when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and Judah. 32 It will not be like the old covenant that I made with their ancestors when I delivered them from Egypt. For they violated that covenant, even though I was like a faithful husband to them," says the LORD. 33 "But I will make a new covenant with the whole nation of Israel after I plant them back in the land," says the LORD. "I will put my law within them and write it on their hearts and minds. I will be their God and they will be my people.

The Jews of Judah were exiled in Jeremiah's day for the sins they committed as a nation - for violating the conditions of the Mosaic covenant. Jeremiah and other prophets foretold a return to the land based on the unconditional promises the LORD had given to Abraham's descendants.


LDG

 

[TubaFour]

Declaring the land promise to be unconditional does not make it so. Citing more verses that seem to indicate that the land promise is unconditional does not change the fact that the land promise in the Mosaic covenant is conditional. If I am misreading it let me know.

BTW, I didn't read anything in any of the verses you mentioned that made the land promises mentioned unconditional to Israel's obedience.

So, again, the question is unanswered: If the land promise to Abraham (and wherever else) is unconditional and the land promise in the Mosaic covenant is conditional, how do you reconcile these two facts?

aL

 

[ddub85]

@ TubaFour

Long time no see ddub...

Good to speak with you again.

I am unclear what you mean that the land promise is unconditional to the Jews yet conditional to certain Jews.... So, let's take the Jews living under Joshua, did they get a conditional or an unconditional land promise?

The promise is to the Jews as a nation. The NATION rejected grace, and therefore the promise to Abraham. That would include those living under Joshua, as he issued the ultimatum, "Choose ye this day" (or something close to that, anyway). The nation chose other than what Joshua chose. If this were the time, he never would have had to ask the question. We must remember that true Israel are those Jews circumcised of the heart.

Rom 2:29 But he [is] a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision [is that] of the heart, in the spirit, [and] not in the letter; whose praise [is] not of men, but of God.

Those Israelites by blood alone aren't the ones that God would count. Only the Jews who are circumcised of the heart would count, as physical circumcision is by the letter.

Are you saying that there were jews that lived under Moses but didn't have the grace promised to Abraham?

No doubt about it. How many of those who left with Moses even made it into the land with Joshua? There's no question that there were those without grace. The rejection of grace is the introduction of the law. God said,

Deu 10:16 Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiffnecked.

Deu 30:6 And the LORD thy God will circumcise thine heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live.

As we know, the Jews were unwilling to comply, and received the law. So the group of Jews to receive this land promise will do so through first the acceptance of Christ. The promise will still be fulfilled.

Where do you get that? Doesn't that make the promises made to Abraham conditional or worse, selective?

No. The selection is salvation. That is the condition. The promise to Israel through Abraham is unconditional. You must be true Israel to receive the promise, meaning born of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and born again of Christ, circumcised of the heart, accepting grace.

We know that the promises made to Abraham were not conditional nor were they selective...

True. But the promises were to true Israel, those of Israel who accepted grace, the circumcision of the heart. That's why Jesus stated to them,

Mat 23:37 ¶ O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, [thou] that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under [her] wings, and ye would not!

Mat 23:38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.

Also, what about the Babylonian exile? What about the Jews' exile the last 2000 years? What about the land's occupation or conquest by the Assyrians, Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, Babylonians, Arabs, Turks, British (I am sure I left a few out). What do you make of all of that? Was it not the "curse" of the conditional Mosaic covenant that Israel could not keep? The land would vomit them out!!!! Was not all of that the result of their disobedience, their failure to believe in their Messiah?

No question, that's exactly what it was. There is a group to come who will believe in the Messiah, who will have the law placed in their hearts and minds, and will know the Lord. Paul puts it,

Rom 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

Rom 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:

Rom 11:27 For this [is] my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.

God Bless!

 

[LamorakDesGalis]

So, again, the question is unanswered: If the land promise to Abraham (and wherever else) is unconditional and the land promise in the Mosaic covenant is conditional, how do you reconcile these two facts?

The Abrahamic covenant and the Mosaic covenant are two separate covenants. Also the Mosaic covenant promises do not "cancel out " the Abrahamic covenant promises.

When the Bible contrasts the New covenant with the Old covenant, which covenant is the Old? Certainly not the Abrahamic covenant. The Old covenant is the Mosaic covenant. Paul even said that the Mosaic covenant did not replace the Abrahamic covenant (Gal 3:17). The Abrahamic covenant has been in effect ever since it was "cut" - and it continues to be in effect even in this present age (today), according to Paul.

Declaring the land promise to be unconditional does not make it so.

True. But how much detail should I provide? To determine if a covenant is conditional or unconditional, one must take into account what the text says about the covenant in question: the form/structure, the participants involved, the specific promises and any conditions. In the Ancient Near East, there were three basic types of covenants: 1) the royal land grant, 2) parity, and 3) suzerain-vassal.

The royal land grant was an unconditional covenant, usually given unconditionally by a king to a loyal servant. The parity covenant was an agreement between equals. The suzerain-vassal was a conditional covenant between king and vassal. The king pledged protection while the vassal pledged loyalty and service.

The Abrahamic covenant as expressed in Gen 15:9-21 is in the form of a royal land grant. The treaty between Ben-Hadad and Ahab was a parity covenant (1 Kings 20:32-34). And the Mosaic covenant - Exodus chapters 19 to 24 - are in the form of the suzerain-vassal covenant. In fact, the structure of the book of Deuteronomy is in the form of the suzerain-vassal covenant.

Did God place any conditions on his promises to Abraham in Gen 15:9-21? No, the LORD gave a customary oath and then "cut" the covenant (15:17) so that the covenant went into effect.

But the Abrahamic covenant wasn't just to Abraham. It was to his descendants. But it wasn't to all of Abraham's descendants. The Bible very carefully records that God confirmed the Abrahamic covenant to Abraham, then Isaac and then Jacob. The mention in Scriptures of these three names - Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob - is nearly always a reference to the Abrahamic covenant.

Progressive revelation must be taken into account. Before the Mosaic covenant was given or cut, what was the basis on which God led the Israelites out of Egypt? It was the Abrahamic covenant:

Exodus 3:16-17 16 "Go and bring together the elders of Israel and tell them, 'The LORD, the God of your fathers, appeared to me– the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob– saying, "I have attended carefully to you and to what has been done to you in Egypt, 17 and I have promised that I will bring you up out of the affliction of Egypt to the land of the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites, to a land flowing with milk and honey."'

Exodus 6:3-5 3 I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob as God Almighty, but by my name 'the LORD' I was not known to them. 4 I also established my covenant with them to give them the land of Canaan, where they were living as resident foreigners. 5 I have also heard the groaning of the Israelites, whom the Egyptians are enslaving, and I have remembered my covenant.

So the "in-between" period is dependent on the Abrahamic covenant, what about the Mosaic covenant itself? Leviticus 26 is a big chapter on rewards for obedience and punishment for disobedience on those in the land. I'm not going to quote it extensively, but here is an illuminating passage concerning the basis for which the Israelites are in the land, and the basis they have for their return:

Leviticus 26:42-45 42 I will remember my covenant with Jacob and also my covenant with Isaac and also my covenant with Abraham, and I will remember the land. 43 The land will be abandoned by them in order that it may make up for its Sabbaths while it is made desolate without them, and they will make up for their iniquity because they have rejected my regulations and have abhorred my statutes. 44 In spite of this, however, when they are in the land of their enemies I will not reject them and abhor them to make a complete end of them, to break my covenant with them, for I am the LORD their God. 45 I will remember for them the covenant with their ancestors whom I brought out from the land of Egypt in the sight of the nations to be their God. I am the LORD.'"

So there is a "prior commitment" concerning the land even in the Mosaic covenant. If possession of the land depended ONLY on the Mosaic covenant, then once the Israelites are out of the land, that's it. There is no basis for any second chance. And here is a passage in Deuteronomy which shows that the Israelites didn't have "their act together" when God led them into the land:

Deuteronomy 9:5-6 5 It is not because of your righteousness, or even your inner uprightness, that you have come here to possess their land. Instead, because of the wickedness of these nations the LORD your God is driving them out ahead of you in order to confirm the promise he made on oath to your ancestors, to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. 6 ¶ Understand, therefore, that it is not because of your righteousness that the LORD your God is about to give you this good land as a possession, for you are a stubborn people!



LDG