EDITOR'S NOTE: Originally I wanted to address the whole of Piper's article but the more I wrote and researched, the longer my response became. For that reason today I will only address one of his arguments and hopefully Michael and I can cover the rest in a future podcast. For now, we will look at Piper and his argument concerning the covenant between God and Abraham/Israel.
Recently
David Brickner of “Jews for Jesus” and John Piper had a written
debate on Christianity Today regarding the “divine
right” of the modern day Jewish people to the Promised Land. Though
I do not agree with everything he says, I am at least thankful for
David Brickner's response to John Piper's theology on this subject.
As for John Piper there is not much I can say. He claims to desire
the salvation of all Jews, nor promotes an anti-Semite agenda but
unfortunately there comes a problem when you examine his arguments.
His careless look at Scripture is slanted towards replacementism;
which believes that God has done away with the nation of Israel
because of her rejection of the Messiah and assigned her promises to
the Church. Although Piper says that he is not against Jewish people,
this sort of theology has racist and anti-Semitic roots. I pray that
Piper re-looks at his views, as such doctrine can lead to greater
errors.
John
Piper’s strongest argument to the Jew's divine right is summed up
in his own words: “A non-covenant-keeping
people (…) does not have a divine right to hold the land of promise
while they are living in rebellion against the God who promised it to
an obedient people.” This statement is confusing in light of the
fact that Piper does not reject the notion that the Lord gave
the land to the Jewish people. He quotes Psalm 105:10-11, Genesis
13:15 and Genesis 17:8 as proof. He even states this in other
articles. In Do
Jews Have a Divine Right in the Promised Land? he
says: “Nor do I deny that
God promised to Israel the presently disputed land from the time of
Abraham onward.” If this is the case, then why does Piper refuse to
acknowledge the right of the modern day Jews to the land of Israel?
In my opinion this is comes very close to doublespeak.
Let's
examine this. Is Israel's right to the land dependent on their
works? This is the crux of Piper's argument; time after time in many
articles he continues to call Israel a “covenant breaking people”.
But what exactly is this covenant? In order to understand what Piper
is talking about we must go to Genesis 15, where we see God making
this covenant with Abraham. Upon reading this text we find the fatal
flaw in Piper's argument. More specifically let's look at verse 18:
“On
the same day the Lord made
a covenant with Abram, saying...” (heavy emphasis mine)
You
see, Abraham NEVER made the covenant with God! Yahweh was the one who
made the covenant and He made Abraham fall asleep before he could
sign it! How is it possible for Abraham to break a covenant that he
did not make? This covenant was based upon God's faithfulness, not
upon Abraham's.
John
Piper takes pride in Abraham's faithfulness. But though Abraham did
walk with the Lord and was obedient even to the point of sacrificing
his own son, he also often doubted and disobeyed God. I would
even argue that Abraham was probably the biggest covenant breaker of
them all! Was not the conception of Ishmael the biggest sign of
rebellion before the Lord, especially in light of His promises to
Abraham? A wicked work of the flesh indeed! But despite all this, God
did not rescind His promise to Abraham. The promise stood, not
because Abraham was the best candidate, but because it is God who is
faithful.
You
see, it is a picture of our salvation. God saves us not because we
are special (in fact, we frequently sin against Him) but because He
is faithful and just to forgive us our sins if we confess them. If we
want to say that God’s promise to Abraham is conditional and based
upon Abraham's and Israel’s works then we would have to say the
same thing about our salvation. If Israel has no right to
the land they are in because of their disobedience, then even moreso
the church is undeserving of the grace that God has bestowed upon
her! Just look around! More and more pastors are leading people into
errant doctrine, ear tickling sermons and heretical dialogue. Many
denominations are ordaining homosexuals (despite God’s warning
against such people in Romans 1, 1 Corinthians 6:9-11), and liberal
scholars are rejecting the inspiration of the Bible.
If
Piper's theology regarding God's promises to Israel is correct then
it must be applied to the church since in a sense we are grafted into
(not replacing) the promises given to Abraham (Romans 11). This
would make our salvation works-based, and I think Piper would
disagree with justification by works. We are justified the same way
Abraham was: by faith in God's faithfulness. As Hebrews 11:6 tells
us “But without faith it is impossible to please Him,
for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is
a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him.”
Mr.Piper,
when the Lord makes a promise He keeps it, despite what anyone else
does. I implore you to relook at Scripture and see how God promised
not just Abraham’s blessing but also our blessing through him. This
blessing ultimately came through the Messiah-ship of Jesus and that
covenant has always been kept because of God’s faithfulness, not
because of ours. If God can't keep His promise of the land belonging
to Israel (despite their wickedness) then how can He keep the promise
He has made to us (despite our wickedness)? While the viewpoint you
have is seemingly indifferent concerning the nation of Israel, it has
its beginnings in and can lead to an anti-Semitic mindset. Please
remember another promise God made to Abraham:
I
will bless those who bless you, And I
will curse him who curses you; And in you all the
families of the earth shall be blessed.”
Genesis
12:3
Let
us take this seriously. I do not wish to find out what kind of
judgments God has in store for those that curse his people. Let your
yes be yes, and your no be no. Don't say you believe one thing, then
claim the opposite. We should make sure that blessings and curses do
not flow from the same mouth.
-Sergio
David
Brickner on Christianity Today: Do Jews
Have a Divine Right to Israel's Land? http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2012/juneweb-only/john-piper-david-brickner-israel.html?paging=off
John
Piper's Response to David Brickner: How
to Treat a Rebellious Israel
Articles
by John Piper on Israel (mentioned in Brickner's Article):
Links
on Supersessionism (Replacement Theology):
Has
the Church Replaced Israel? - Calvin Smith vs Stephen Sizer:
Israel
the Church and the Jews by James Jacob Prasch:
More links to come!
I'm currently reading Michael Vlach's book, 'Has the Church Replaced Israel: A Theological Evaluation'. So far, it has been very helpful in my understanding of Replacement Theology and the biblical arguments against it.
ReplyDeleteI appreciate your perspective on this issue; I understand the Abrahamic Covenant the same way. God is faithful!
Blessings!
~Yvonne