Does the Modern Political State of Israel have a 'Divine Right' to the land?
Looking at the claim of 'divine rights' and 'Biblical Israel' vs. the modern political State of Israel
Is the modern State of Israel the same as biblical Israel or “spiritual Israel?” And, does the modern political state have a divine right to the land? Bible passages like Romans 9 seems to indicate that not all descendants of ‘physical’ Israel are ‘true’ Israelites (those that obey and are faithful). And Galatians 6 says that those who are "in Christ" form a "Spiritual Israel" or the "Israel of God" which is broader than an ethnic group. This group is comprised of those who have faith in Jesus Christ, regardless of their ethnicity or religious background. But how does all this relate to modern conflicts in the Holy Land and claims of divine rights to historic physical spaces?
John Piper's sermon titled "Israel, Palestine, and the Middle East" speaks to theological footings of the Israel/Palestine issue from a series on Romans. Click Here to read or listen to the whole thing... I post here because it captures some nuance on a doctrinal issue underpinning support of current war and military actions resulting in the deaths of thousands in the Middle East.
Proponents say absolutely yes, the ethnic people trace their lineage and history directly to biblical Israel and the promises still apply. This view strongly believes the covenant was eternal and God still has a future plan for the ethnic people of Israel with the belief that they now have a divine right to vanquish enemies and rule in the land. On this basis, many evangelicals and politicians have sadly advocated for wiping out Palestinians, linking them with Old Testament enemies. Others point out the fulfillment of promises by Jesus and inclusion of the nations in a new ‘spiritual Israel.’ In this interpretation, the promises made to Israel have been intensified or broadened to include the whole earth and all nations. I have highlighted a couple different positions on these issues previously here from a Lebanese scholar and here from a dispensationalist perspective both arguing that the current conflict is of human origin not some kind of divine fulfillment.
Whether you’re a Piper fan or not (or a fan of dispensationalism or not), his view is illustrative of a more nuanced dispensationalist view on the issues in the Holy Land, in sharp contrast to the prophecy-entrepreneur or hawkish-Zionist approach. He says, pleading for peace, that “we will make better progress if we do not yield to the claim of either side to be ethnically or nationally sanctioned by God in their present conflict.” Here are some main points and a couple excerpts worth pondering:
God chose Israel from all the peoples of the word to be his own possession.
The land was part of the inheritance he promised to Abraham and his descendants forever.
The promises made to Abraham, including the promise of the land, will be inherited as an everlasting gift only by true, spiritual Israel, not disobedient, unbelieving Israel.
Jesus Christ has come into the world as the Jewish Messiah, and his own people rejected him and broke covenant with their God.
Therefore, the secular State of Israel today may not claim a present divine right to the land, but they are we should seek a peaceful settlement not based on present divine rights, but on international principles of justice, mercy, and practical feasibility.
By faith in Jesus Christ, the Jewish messiah, gentiles become heirs of the promise of Abraham, including the promise of the land.
Finally, this inheritance of Christ's people will happen at the second coming of Christ to establish his kingdom, not before; and till then we Christians must not take up arms to claim our inheritance; but rather lay down our lives to share our inheritance with as many as we can.
"Israel has broken covenant with her God and is living today in disobedience and unbelief in his Son and her Messiah. That is why Paul says in Romans 11:28, “As regards the gospel [the good news of the Messiah] they are enemies of God.”
"This follows from all we have said so far, and the implication it has for those of us who believe the Bible and trust Christ as our Savior and as the Lord of history… We should approve or denounce according to Biblical standards of justice and mercy among [all] peoples. We should encourage our representatives to seek a just settlement that takes the historical and social claims of both peoples into account."
"Neither (Palestinians or Israelis) should be allowed to sway the judgments of justice by a present divine claim to the land. If you believe this, it would be helpful for your representatives to know it. We are not whitewashing terrorism and we are not whitewashing Jewish force. Nor is there any attempt on my part to assess measures of blame or moral equivalence. That's not my aim. My aim is to put the debate on a balanced footing in this sense: neither side should preempt the claims of international justice by the claim of present divine rights. Working out what that justice will look like is still a huge and daunting task. I have not solved that problem. But I think we will make better progress if we do not yield to the claim of either side to be ethnically or nationally sanctioned by God in their present conflict." (emphasis mine)
Regardless of your opinion of Piper's theology, or dispensationalism in general, he brings up an oft-neglected point. Christians rarely distinguish the modern day political State of Israel from biblical Israel or "Spiritual Israel" that includes all those that recognize the Messiah and follow his ways. This is a key distinction that should affect the Christian's posture towards the current conflict in light of all Jesus said and did in fulfillment of the Old Testament. Taking up arms, as many Jews, Christians, Palestinians and even foreign immigrants to Israel are want to do, claiming ‘divine rights’ to claim a spiritual inheritance in a physical space at the expense of others’ lives is not the way of Messiah. Rather, his way is to lay down our lives and ‘rights’ (however we perceive them) so that others may live.
Excellent effort toward an assessment of the range of positions. I am so happy that your title was not an excuse for “replacement theology.” I expected to be offended, but instead found this brief essay a standard scholarly approach. I do not see the current conflict as merely a political issue that excludes the hand of God working through even those who reject Him. “He makes even the wrath of man to praise Him.” Since the majority of Israelis are atheist or secular, they have armed Shia Azerbaijan to slaughter “nominal,” that is, orthodox, Armenian Christians, and support absorption and homosexuality, we should not blindly support every thing their government does, but rather pray for their enlightenment, repentance, and salvation. What we see as multiple wars are merely the physical manifestation that a great spiritual war is raging now, and God is bringing millions of Muslims, and even many Jews to faith in Jesus.
God has given us the privilege to share in this campaign through prayer