Words

The Davidic Covenant

            This was a covenant made by God with David in which God promised to make a house for David and establish his kingdom forever (2 Samuel 7). Similar to the Abrahamic covenant, all three systems see it as an unconditional promise. Yet a covenant that has points of conditionality as well, although they are not agreed on the nature of that conditionality. The covenant theologian believes that like the Abrahamic covenant “the Davidic covenant is unilateral and unconditional” because only in that way could its blessings flow to the whole earth as the promise to Abraham intends.[1] Since this covenant fits integrally into God’s plan to redeem a people, the ultimate realization of the promises made to David is certain.[2] The dispensational theologian also labels this an unconditional covenant with David.[3] Blaising and Bock, as progressive dispensationalists, point out that it is in the form of a grant covenant (like the Abrahamic) and therefore unconditional.[4]

            Still, all three systems find some form of conditionality for realization of covenant blessings. Robertson writes that “[u]nder David, the sinful king was to be beaten with the rod of men. In each case [speaking of Abrahamic, Mosaic, and Davidic covenants], full participation in the blessings of the covenant had a condition. Only as this condition was fulfilled would blessing be assured.”[5] Yet he goes on to say that the threat of judgment does not cause the certainty of fulfillment to collapse.[6] Likewise, Chafer asserts that God “reserves the right to interrupt the actual reign of David’s sons if chastisement is required.”[7] Further, Elliott Johnson affirms that “[w]hile the warning threatened the survival of any individual king …no wicked king could remove God’s blessing.”[8] Blaising and Bock state the conditionality entered when the promise was repeated to Solomon after David’s death, for “when a specific son was chosen, so that the possibility of inheriting the promise was narrowed to the descendants of that son of David, the promise was conditioned on covenant faithfulness.”[9] Thus all find conditionality within the covenant, although that condition along with the intensity with which it is held varies.

            The main difference, again, is the issue of continuity or development within the overall progress of revelation through the covenants. This is demonstrated in each system’s understanding of how the covenant relates to the other covenants, as well as how the covenant is fulfilled. The covenant theologian expresses continuity with the previous covenant expressions of God’s purpose to redeem a people to himself by connecting them all to the covenant of redemption, and in so doing establishes security for their fulfillment.[10] In this way the covenant theologian can say that the Davidic covenant “grows out of the soil of the covenant of promise.”[11] In Israel, the idea of covenant is shown to come out of the whole history from Abraham through Moses to David. So Solomon’s achieving of rest is connected with the promise made to Abraham.[12] The continuity of the Davidic covenant with the then future redemptive plan is recognized because “David’s line anticipated in shadow-form the eternal character of the reign of Jesus Christ.”[13] Jesus, as Messiah, unites the throne of David with the throne of God.[14]  Robertson argues against the dispensationalist view expressed by John Walvoord that there is no evidence that the present position of Christ at the right hand of the throne of God has anything to do with the throne of David. He insists that the Old Testament provides this evidence.[15] Vos argues that the general tone of 2 Samuel 23:3-7 shows that David himself was aware of the connection between the Judah-prince reigning forever and the Messiah reigning forever.[16] Further Dumbrell states that in spiritual terms 2 Samuel 7:13 must be read in terms of New Testament Christology, even though physically the virtual failure of the Davidic line occurred in 587 B.C.[17] David then is seen as a type of Christ, and through David’s everlasting throne (Christ) salvation would be brought.[18] Thus, Christ is, at least in part fulfilling the Davidic covenant now by sitting at God’s right hand.

            The dispensational theologian, on the other hand, finds that there will come a day when Christ will fulfill the Davidic covenant. Since its promises are to be literally fulfilled, and though Jesus preached the Davidic kingdom, it was rejected, “then there must be a future period, the millennium, in which they can be fulfilled, for the Church is not now fulfilling them in any literal sense.”[19] For whatever form the kingdom of God takes in the present age, it “would not change or abrogate the promises of the Davidic covenant concerning the future, earthly kingdom.”[20]  The provisions of the covenant were maintained until the time of Christ, when he offered its fulfillment to the Jews. The people rejected that fulfillment with the cry to crucify Christ.

“Yet at the same time, the ultimate determination of a generation’s decision had been decreed and revealed by God (Isa. 52:13-53:12)…. Thus, it would never have been a realized Davidic kingdom, let alone an already or inaugurated fulfillment of the Davidic covenant without the Cross first.” [21]

The current ministry of Jesus at the right hand of the throne of God comes from the priestly ministry of Melchizedek. Thus, it is not based on the Davidic covenant, but on a ministry introduced in Psalm 110 to David and his descendents.[22] In this way, the dispensationalist stresses the discontinuity between the Davidic covenant and this present age, for its fulfillment is to be found in the future millennial kingdom.

            The progressive dispensational theologian finds some lines of continuity between the covenants. Blaising and Bock note that the Davidic covenant is part of the blessing of the Abrahamic covenant and also a partial means of its fulfillment.[23] Similarly, the realization of blessings in the Davidic covenant at the time of the Mosaic dispensation is conditioned by the Mosaic covenant.[24] The progressive dispensational theologian, along with the dispensationalist, affirms the future fulfillment of the Davidic covenant in the millennial kingdom, yet attempts to find continuity with the Davidic covenant and the present rule and position of Christ.[25] As opposed to the dispensational position, the progressive dispensational finds that the Melchizedekian priesthood is part of the Davidic covenant.[26] The progressive dispensational theologian also notes that the blessings of the new covenant will be mediated through the Davidic king.[27] Thus, the present reign of Christ is a partial or inaugural fulfillment of the Davidic covenant. In these ways the progressive dispensationalist attempts to find continuity among the Old Testament covenants.

[1] Horton 2006, 56.

[2] Robertson 1980, 246.

[3] Chafer 1976, 145;

[4] Blaising and Bock 1993, 163.

[5] Robertson 1980, 247.

[6] Ibid., 248.

[7] Chafer 1976, 145.

[8] Johnson 1999, 129.

[9] Blaising and Bock 1993, 164-165.

[10] Robertson 1980, 246.

[11] Horton 2006, 44.

[12] Robertson 1980, 268.

[13] Ibid., 249.

[14] Ibid., 249.

[15] Ibid., 251. He references Amos 9:11ff; Hos. 1:11; 3:4ff; Mic. 4:1-3; 5:2; Isa. 7:14; 9:6; 11:1-10; Jer. 23:5, 6; 33:15-26; Ezek. 34; 37:24.

[16] Vos, Geerhardus.. The Eschatology of the Old Testament. Edited by James T. Dennison Jr. Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R Publishing, 2001, 129-130.

[17] Dumbrell 1984, 150.

[18] Horton 2006, 56.

[19] Ryrie 1965, 158, 172.

[20] Ryrie 1986, 460.

[21] Johnson 1999, 142.

[22] Ibid., 131.

[23] Blaising and Bock 1993, 166.

[24] Ibid., 170.

[25] MacArthur 2004, note on 2 Samuel 7 states that the ultimate fulfillment is when Christ sets up his millennial kingdom on earth.

[26] Blaising and Bock 1993, 162.

[27] Ibid., 170.