Psalm 132:11-12 - "Yahweh swore
an oath to David, a sure oath that he will not revoke: 'One of your
own descendants I will place on your throne; if your sons keep my
covenant and the statutes I teach them, then their sons will sit on
your throne for ever."
There are many scriptures in
the Old Covenant, referencing the "covenant" that God made
with David, promising a descendant who will always reign on his
throne. 2 Samuel 7:12-16 is the original promise. Psalm 89:3, 4,
35-37 also references this covenant, quite emphatically, while
leaving out the conditional phrase of obedience. Of course the
reference in Psalm 132 above does contain the caveat "...if your
sons keep my covenant." We know that the final descendant to be
a physically-reigning king was Zedekiah, who was taken captive into
Babylon, when Nebuchadnezzar sacked Jerusalem. There is no further
reference in the sacred writings, alluding to a descendant of David –
except for Jesus. So, how can these "promise" scriptures
be true?
The first answer has to do with
the condition in the promise. The descendants of David were not
faithful in keeping the laws of the Mosaic covenant, either
personally or socially (meaning, nationally – as the leader of the
nation). This in itself would render the promise null and void. But
what about the references that allude to perpetual reigning, yet
leave out the condition necessary for it?
We know from the genealogy in Matthew
that Jesus was descended from David, but not necessarily from
Zedekiah's line. This fact at least stays true to a descendant of
David always reigning on this throne. But wait! Jesus himself said
in John 18:36, "My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my
servants would fight to prevent my arrest from the Jews. But now my
kingdom is from another place." Jesus takes the old promise and
puts a metaphorical twist on it. The old promise becomes a double
entendre – in other words, it has more than one meaning. God does
this throughout the history of the Old Covenant. Take Daniel,
chapter 12 for example. If we would look at some problematic
scriptures through spiritual eyes, most of the head-scratching would
be relieved in some fashion.
Jesus himself talked metaphorically
quite often with his extensive use of parables. He even did so in
the presence of his disciples. Look at John 16:17-31. Jesus states
in verse 25, quite interestingly: "Though I have been speaking
in allegories, a time is coming when I will no longer do so, but will
plainly speak to you of the Father." How many times did Jesus
say after speaking the parables: "For him who has ears to hear,
let him hear"? He was obviously couching spiritual truths in
ordinary language.
We true "latter-day"
believers have the luxury of hindsight, with the explanations of the
fulfillments of the Old Covenant, fleshed out, in the writings of the
apostles. Paul explains one double entendre in Romans, chapters
9-11. He clearly talks about the physical nation of Israel, being a
metaphor for the church, the body of Christ, and how the body of
Christ is actually the true Israel. Take for example Romans 9:6 –
"It is not as though God's word had failed; for not all who are
descended from Israel are Israel." This shift in emphasis in
the New Testament writings to the church of Jesus is basically the
foundation for why I do not adhere to the modern-day teaching of God
fulfilling last-day prophecies through the current physical nation of
Israel.
The previous specific argument obviously needs much
more reasoning and scriptures to back up my position. Space does not
allow for that in this post, nor is that the goal in this writing. I
am only trying to help you think outside the box, while still staying
true to the integrity of God's word.
