1 Biblical theology and the land promise
1
Biblical theology and the land promise
Place matters. Just as Genesis begins with creation, where humans live in the presence of their Lord, so Revelation ends with an even more glorious new creation where all of the redeemed dwell with the Lord and his Christ. But the historical development between the beginning and the end is crucial to observe, for the journey from Eden to the new Jerusalem proceeds through the land promised to Abraham. In other words, the Promised Land occupies a special place for God’s people after the fall and exile from Eden, because it is the place where they will once again live under his lordship and experience his blessed presence. The Promised Land, then, connects the beginning and the end.
From a broader perspective, Eden is presented as the inaugural kingdom, and the new Jerusalem is presented as the consummated kingdom, where the kingdom of the world is the kingdom of God (Rev. 11:15; 21:1 – 22:5). It is no surprise, then, that the Old Testament focuses the extension of God’s kingdom on Israel’s land. In other words, God’s programme with and through Abraham is to restore the original conditions of God’s creational kingdom described in Genesis 1 – 2, which will not finally be accomplished until the former things have passed away and all things are made new (Rev. 21:4–5). Thus the intersection of land and kingdom that commences in Eden will be consummated in the new Jerusalem. Between these historical bookends, God will re-establish his kingdom on earth through Abraham and his seed living in the land of promise.
The aim of the present study is to demonstrate that the land promised to Abraham advances the place of the kingdom that was lost in Eden and serves as a type throughout Israel’s history that anticipates the even greater land – prepared for all of God’s people throughout history – that will come as a result of the person and work of Christ. In other words, the land and its blessings find their fulfilment in the new heaven and new earth won by Christ. When each place of God’s people is situated within the redemptive-historical framework of God’s unfolding plan, the land promised to Abraham is seen to be a progressive fulfilment of God’s kingdom on earth. Subsequently, the land promised to and, on more than one occasion, possessed by God’s people throughout the Old Testament pointed to something greater that his people throughout all time, in relation to Christ, will enjoy in the new creation for eternity.
To unpack the land promise in the plan of God, we will examine the theme of land as it progressively unfolds across the story line of Scripture. That is, an examination of this theme will take place as it develops from the Old to the New Testament, from promise to fulfilment. This examination will demonstrate that the land promised to Abraham, which was inhabited and lost throughout Israel’s history, is important because it picks up the place of God’s kingdom that was lost in Eden, thus serving as a subsequent place in God’s unfolding plan. Furthermore, from the perspective of Israel’s exile, this place anticipates and prepares the way for the coming of Jesus Christ, who wins a new creation for his people. And although those united with Christ by faith in the present era of salvation history enjoy every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, they await their final destiny – the new heaven and new earth – to which the land of promise pointed.
The land promise in biblical scholarship
The theme of land in Scripture is an important component in the biblical framework of promise and fulfilment. Remarkably, it has not received a great deal of attention in terms of a whole-Bible biblical theology. The interest in land as a theological theme is relatively recent in the church’s history. This observation is not surprising given the focus on Israel since the mid-twentieth century. Even so, exegetically driven, biblically robust and systematically sensitive theologies of land are relatively few. However, on the interest of land from a sociopolitical perspective, or on the relationship between land/property and ethics, of books there is no end. This section, then, will summarize and briefly evaluate past theological treatments of the land.
The significance of land as a theological theme was described by Gerhard von Rad. Following in his wake, several works have been devoted to the theme of land. Two books published around the same time treated land as a more comprehensive biblical-theological theme – Walter Brueggemann and W. D. Davies – and both cited von Rad’s earlier essay. Although these works present comprehensive treatments on the biblical theme of land, both fall short for various reasons. For example, in terms of a ‘whole-Bible biblical theology’, Brueggemann gives little attention to New Testament texts, which limits his treatment of the development of land across the entire Christian canon. Furthermore, his existential and sociological emphases influence his understanding of the land. For Davies, when it comes to the nature of Scripture, his work is fraught with a dated form-critical view of the Gospels. Also, he concludes that the New Testament spiritualizes the land and relocates it to Christ. As this book will show, this view does not sufficiently present the New Testament fulfilment of what the Old Testament anticipated.
Three additional works examine the concept of land from within the Old Testament. First, Moshe Weinfeld contributes a substantive exegetical piece to the discussion of land. Although helpful in his exegetical work on the relevant Old Testament texts, he fails to synthesize it into a coherent theology. For example, when it comes to the varying views of the borders of the Promised Land, he detects redactional activity and concludes that they are contradictory. This lack of coherence is no doubt attributed to his subscription to critical views of Scripture, specifically the documentary hypothesis. Secondly, Norman Habel identifies six ideologies in the Old Testament regarding land: royal, theocratic, ancestral household, prophetic, agrarian and immigrant. But rather than offering a comprehensive biblical theology, Habel aims to connect the land to economic, social, political and religious ideas. Finally, and closer to the approach of this book, Arie Leder treats the land as a coherent and progressive biblical theology. However, he limits his study to the Pentateuch before making application to the church. Thus a more comprehensive biblical theology of the Promised Land is needed.
There are also chapters and articles that treat the theme of land within their overall argument. First, some Old Testament theologies isolate the discussion of land to, at most, a few chapters, which often are limited to Deuteronomy and/or Joshua. Other Old Testament theologies integrate land into one of their central themes; thus giving it greater prominence. Secondly, chapters and articles are devoted to one or more aspects of a theology of land from various theological traditions. While each of these chapters and articles illumines the theme of land in a unique way, they are not comprehensive. Finally, G. K. Beale has provided a chapter in his New Testament theology on the relationship of Israel’s land promises to the fulfilment of Israel’s restoration and new-creation prophecies in Christ and the church. Although similar to the argument of this study, Beale’s treatment of the development of the land promise in the Old Testament is brief before he shows the fulfilment in the New Testament.
Other, more recent, works come closer to this study. First, an edited volume by Philip Johnston and Peter Walker is similar in some ways to the present examination of the land theme; especially the first two chapters by Paul Williamson and T. Desmond Alexander. The contributors attempt to provide biblical, theological and contemporary perspectives on the land of promise, albeit from different perspectives. The treatment of land, however, is limited due to the contributors’ conflicting views (e.g. Palestinian Christian, Jewish Christian). Secondly, a recent work by Gary Burge holds out even more promise when it comes to the nature and breadth of Scripture. Burge seeks to integrate both Old and New Testament before showing how Jesus and the New Testament reinterpret the land. He argues that Jesus is the ‘great rearranger’ of the land and that all the properties of the holy land are now relocated in him. However, many will dismiss his conclusions because he does not show sufficient Old Testament warrant for his New Testament conclusions. Thirdly, Craig Bartholomew connects the land promised to Abraham to the broader theme of place. Through a biblical, theological, philosophical, historical and practical investigation, he alerts his readers to the importance of place for humanity as it seeks ‘playmaking’ in its cities, gardens, homes and a myriad of different types of places. However, the primary purpose of Bartholomew’s work is not to examine comprehensively the land promise and its place in redemptive history, but rather to reorient his readers by Scripture and the best of the Christian tradition towards a recovery of place today.
Finally, Peter Gentry and Stephen Wellum have contributed a via media between dispensational and covenant theology that examines God’s overarching plan to bring about his kingdom through covenant by unpacking in detail each biblical covenant in its own redemptive-historical context and its relationship to the arrival of the new covenant in the person and work of Jesus Christ. The final chapters summarize and apply the theological implications of kingdom through covenant to various doctrinal loci, such as the land promise. While my study is in substantial agreement with Gentry and Wellum’s Kingdom Through Covenant, it aims to go into greater depth by restricting its focus to the theme of land.
Some conclusions can be drawn from this brief survey. First, though a variety of books and articles deal with the topic of land, at many points their theological focus is intertwined with ethics and/or the sociopolitical Israel–Palestine conflict. Secondly, though various theologies study the theme of land, many are restricted to Old Testament theology. Furthermore, Old Testament theologies that treat the theme of land often limit their study to Genesis, Deuteronomy and/or Joshua. Thirdly, because many argue that the New Testament does not advance the promise of land, New Testament theology has not, by and large, examined how the theme of land arises. Hence a theology of land remains problematic for New Testament theology. Finally, further study is needed on the theme of land from the standpoint of a whole-Bible theology. This work, therefore, aims to clarify and complete what is lacking.
Approach and assumptions
Recent studies in biblical theology have tried to argue that no one centre or theme exhaustively captures the rich and multifaceted message of Scripture. Paul House asserts, ‘We should give up arguing that one theme and one theme only is the central theme of the Bible and highlight major themes that allow other ideas as subpoints.’ This conclusion finds support given the diversity of the Old and New Testaments. According to James Dunn, a centre for New Testament theology is more easily seen due to its unified focus on Christ and faith in him as Lord, but when the Old Testament is added in the scope of a theological centre, the quest for such a single formulation has never been satisfactorily resolved. This conclusion is often reached because no single centre is broad enough to integrate the multitudinous variety of biblical texts. This does not mean, however, that there is not unity in the diversity. The assumption of an evangelical-theological framework, says Richard Lints, ‘ought to be the unity-in-diversity of the Testaments – with unity being prior to the diversity since it is the one God who manifests himself in the diversity of historical epochs’. Hence the continuity between the various parts of Scripture, between Old and New Testament, can and should be anchored in the one triune God who authored it. With these qualifications in mind, a canonical theology can be pursued.
The purpose of this work is not to summarize and engage the debate over a/the centre of biblical theology. If one centre is chosen, it is possible that other central themes that arise from the text will be ignored. At the same time, it is defensible that some themes are better than others at explicating the message of Scripture in so far as they are connected to and incorporate other important themes. J. L. McKenzie states that Old Testament theology should be based on those themes that occur most frequently and that appear to be vital in giving Old Testament belief its distinctive identity. This idea can be broadened to a ‘whole-Bible biblical theology’, for just as a New Testament theme cannot be examined apart from looking at its Old Testament roots, so also an Old Testament theme cannot be examined apart from its New Testament fulfilment. So themes that progress along the story line of Scripture must be followed to their end, and climax in the person and work of Christ.
For example, various Old Testament, New Testament and canonical-biblical theologies have been organized around central themes such as God or kingdom of God, covenant, God’s presence, election, Messiah, human viceregency (Gen. 1:26–28) and new creation. Others have focused on some multithemed variation. Works such as these demonstrate that in Scripture there is a unity in diversity – a wholeness in the light of the parts – that displays the richness of God’s Word. There are, as Al Wolters writes, ‘connections between any given part of the Scriptures and the overall biblical story’. Along with these important interconnected themes, additional themes arise from a careful reading of Scripture that demonstrate the treasures of God’s Word and his redemptive plan in history, a plan that has been inaugurated and will culminate in uniting all things in Christ: things in heaven and things on earth (Eph. 1:10). The aim of the present study is to demonstrate that the theme of ‘land’ is an important one because it shares ‘in the complex connections of biblical covenants’.
It is important to note the multifaceted nature of the interpretative process in formulating any particular theme or doctrine. Therefore attention must be given to theological method. First, scholars have rightly noted the relationship between exegesis, biblical theology and systematic theology. It is too simplistic to reduce the hermeneutical process to a series of logical steps (e.g. exegesis, biblical theology, systematic theology). Rather, each discipline informs and checks the others. Secondly, this process takes into account and is informed by historical theology, for every person approaches the text with certain (confessional) presuppositions. Theological method is neither formulated in a vacuum nor merely theoretical. Nor should methodology impose foreign categories on to the text. Rather, the content of theology ought to shape its methodology by developing its own intrasystematic categories.
This interpretative and theological process is set forth by Richard Lints, in what he calls the three horizons of redemptive interpretation – the textual (immediate context at the grammatical-historical level), epochal (context of the period of revelation) and canonical (context of the entirety of revelation) horizons. That is, equal study must be given to all texts, rightly interpreted within their respective contexts, with careful attention paid to literary genre in the light of their overall place in redemptive history and the canon to reach sound biblical and theological conclusions.
This theological framework presupposes that Scripture constitutes a unified text with a developing story. God’s Word reveals and interprets his redemptive acts, which develop across time, from creation to new creation. ‘Biblical revelation’, says Lints, ‘progresses because it mirrors the progressive nature of redemption.’ Theology must keep the redemptive-revelatory and redemptive-historical nature of Scripture in its focus. But not only is God’s revelation redemptive-historical; it is redemptive-historical/eschatological. That is, it has a divine telos. Horton is correct when he says that when reading Scripture, ‘eschatology should be a lens and not merely a locus’. This eschatological permeation of Scripture is rooted in a sovereign God, who is moving history along to his appointed ends.
Another important methodological component for this study is typology, which involves correspondence(s) between persons, events and institutions, and later persons, events and institutions. That is, God’s past dealings with his people serve as patterns, or types, for his future dealings with his people. Robert Plummer writes, ‘Because God is completely sovereign over history, all Old Testament-era saving events, institutions, persons, offices, holidays and ceremonies served to anticipate the final saving event, the final saving person, the final saving ceremony, etc.’ For example, Old Testament prophets anticipated and looked for a new David, a new exodus, a new covenant and a new city of God: the old had thus become a type of the new and was important in pointing forward to it. Subsequently, the New Testament authors saw in Christ and his work the fulfilment, or antitype, of these prophetic hopes.
There are several important components in typology. First, typology pays careful attention to textual and historical/theological correspondences that develop across the canon. These correspondences provide the hermeneutical controls for linking types with their antitype(s). Secondly, typology is prospective and prophetic. That is, God intentionally planned certain persons, events and institutions in redemptive history in order that they would serve later redemptive – and Christological – realities. Darrell Bock writes:
Typology, or better typological-prophetic usage, expresses a peculiar link of patterns with movement from the lesser OT person or event to the greater NT person or event. . . . God’s pattern of salvation is being reactivated in a present fulfillment. This fulfillment takes place both in accordance with messianic hope and promise and in accordance with the pattern of God’s activity in salvation.
Thirdly, typology stresses escalation as the Old Testament story line moves forward to its New Testament fulfilment. As a result, God’s redemptive purposes in the Old Testament are unfinished and thus cannot be fully understood apart from their fulfilment in the New Testament. Lints notes, ‘The Old Testament record of history is prophetic in the sense that it describes a revelation and divine action that are as yet incomplete. And the New Testament points to a consummation of history that now we understand only in part, as through a glass darkly.’ Promises in the Old Testament point forward to their fulfilment(s), and the type is fulfilled and surpassed by its antitype. Finally, these typological connections find their terminus in the person and inaugurated-yet-not-consummated work of Christ. In making typological connections – types with their antitypes – promises and fulfilments are linked, which are made clear by textual and historical connections developed both within the Old Testament itself and then from the Old Testament to the New.
By allowing the textual, epochal and canonical horizons and progressive typological connections to illuminate the theme of land, this study will demonstrate how the development of the land promise across the canon provides hermeneutical warrant to see its ultimate fulfilment in the new creation won by Christ. This way of reading Scripture will hopefully help to overcome the impasse of conflicting conclusions concerning the land.
But before embarking upon the task of a biblical theology of land, theological assumptions must first be addressed. There is no such thing as a presupposition-less theology. A positive contribution of postmodernism has been the raising of the interpreter’s awareness that there are no neutral approaches to theology. It is, therefore, essential to recognize presuppositions and evaluate them under the authority of Scripture. To be sure, to defend each one is beyond our scope; nevertheless, these presuppositions are justifiable because they are grounded on the triune God, who has created humans in his image, made himself known in his Word and has graciously and savingly acted on humanity’s behalf in history through the person and work of Jesus Christ. These broader assumptions include the commitment to the total truthfulness and reliability of God’s Word, the divine and human authorship of Scripture, the possibility of a ‘whole-Bible biblical theology’, and the unity and continuity of God’s saving plan progressively revealed to his people through the Bible’s textual diversity.
The plan of the book
This book comprises ten chapters. Following chapter 1, chapter 2 provides the biblical-theological framework from which a theology of land can be canonically understood, and, more specifically, the framework for understanding the place of God’s people is the kingdom. Chapters 3–6 focus on God’s promise of land to Abraham and, subsequently, evaluate the progress of God’s fulfilment of his promise in four plot movements across the Old Testament. Chapter 3 considers the importance of Genesis 1 – 11 for the entrance of Abraham into God’s redemptive plan and examines the nature and scope of the Abrahamic covenant and the promise of land. Chapters 4–5 look at the progress and fulfilment(s) of God’s promise of land throughout Israel’s history. Chapter 6 examines the loss of land in exile and the prophetic anticipation of an international and universal restoration brought through a new covenant, which advances God’s cosmological plan from Adam through Abraham, and is cast in terms of an Edenic land, city and temple – all of which are coextensive. These chapters demonstrate, then, that the land is a type of something greater that will come through Abraham’s seed and a Davidic son, who will triumphantly bring God’s new covenant people into a new creation.
Chapters 7–9 examine the most relevant passages in the New Testament from the Gospels (ch. 6), the epistles (ch. 7) and Revelation (ch. 8). These chapters demonstrate that the land promised to Abraham will finally be in the (physical) new heaven and earth won by Christ. Now, however, the fulfilment is primarily focused on Christ, who has inaugurated a new creational kingdom through his physical resurrection and has made new creations out of those united with him. This united people – both Jew and Gentile – live between the inauguration and consummation of the kingdom, and anticipate the final fulfilment in the new heaven and new earth (Rev. 21 – 22).
Chapter 10 concludes the study by making theological connections and applying the interpretative findings of the previous chapters to theological systems. More specifically, the chapter evaluates how the land promise is interpreted and fulfilled in the theological systems of dispensationalism and covenant theology. In the end, the chapter provides a via media in the light of the arguments presented throughout the book.