Conditionality in the Davidic Covenant? (Ps. 132:11-12)

[clawrence9008]

In trying to further my understanding of historic Reformed covenant theology, one thing that has been difficult for me to grasp is conditionality. I do not agree with the view that sees the Mosaic and Davidic covenants as being substantively a republication/reiteration of the Covenant of Works; however, I am not yet advanced enough in my understanding of covenant theology (or the OT as a whole) to understand some aspects of these covenants. I was reading Psalm 132 today, and came across Ps. 132:11-12, which seems to imply that obedience is a direct condition for the continuation of the Davidic kingship (“if your sons keep my covenant and my testimonies that I shall teach them, their sons also forever shall sit on your throne”). Other passages such as David’s final instructions to Solomon before dying (1 Kings 2:3-4) and Solomon’s dedication of the temple (1 Kings 8:25) seem to also speak to an element of conditionality in the covenant as well.

That being said, when I read of the covenant made with David originally (2 Sam. 7:11-16), it seems undeniable that it is an administration of the covenant of grace. Taking a look at what it says:

When your days are fulfilled and you lie down with your fathers, I will raise up your offspring after you, who shall come from your body, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build a house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son. When he commits iniquity, I will disciple him with the rod of men, with the stripes of the son of men, but my steadfast love will not depart from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before you. And your house and your kingdom shall be made sure forever before me. Your throne shall be established forever (2 Sam. 7:12-16).

The language is all of what God will do (ultimately fulfilled in Christ of course) and almost none of what God would do. A corresponding passage in Ps. 89:28-37 seems to support this — “I will not violate my covenant or alter the word that went forth from my lips. Once for all I have sworn by my holiness; I will not lie to David.” In fact, the very reason why Ethan the Ezrahite can lament over the state of the Davidic kingship is because the covenant promise is rooted in what God will do for David unconditionally, not what David (and his sons) must do for God.

I have two potential answers that I’m not 100% sure are right:
1) This condition was given in order to point to Israel’s need for the perfect Son of David in Jesus Christ, as none of the subsequent kings could perfectly keep God’s law (which is clear from reading 1 & 2 Kings; even Hezekiah and Josiah failed in serious ways). Much like how the law is a schoolmaster to teach God’s people their sinfulness and need for the promised Offspring, Gal. 3:19-26.
2) Even if David’s sons failed to uphold this covenant (as they did, for even Solomon went astray), this could not prevent God from fulfilling His promise to him.

“If his children forsake my law and do not walk according to my rules, if they violate my statutes and do not keep my commandments, then I will punish their transgressions with the rod and their iniquity with stripes, but I will not remove from him my steadfast love or be false to my faithfulness” (Ps. 89:30-33).

I don’t know, maybe I’m just overthinking this lol. Any thoughts?

 

[SeanPatrickCornell]

This is the way I understand it: The covenant was unconditional for David, but conditional for all of David's descendants.

In other words, there would always be a descendent of David on the throne (eventually Christ), but none of the specific descendants of David were promised that any of THEIR descendants would necessarily be on the throne, unless they were obedient.

In yet more other words, King So-and-So was not promised that the Messiah and Eternal King of Israel would be one of HIS descendants specifically if King So-and-So was an ungodly rascal, but the Messiah would definitely be a descendent of David.

 

[clawrence9008]

Also I posted this accidentally prior to me finishing what I was writing, so my full train of thought is now posted.

 

[JTB.SDG]

Fantastic questions, Connor. I grappled with this stuff deeply as I studied through the Davidic Covenant myself. If you're interested in reading a few pages, check out the link below and read through pages 36-40 especially. My short answer is that just like all administrations, the davidic covenant was an administration of the covenant of grace. Here's how I came to understand these tough Scriptures you pointed out: Some of them have to do not with individuals but as the people of God corporately: If they believe in the Lord corporately and live lives reflecting that faith, ie, lives of repentance, then they would experience life under God's blessing corporately. If they didn't, then they wouldn't, hence exile. It's the same truth for any single church, is it not? We could think of Israel as one giant mega-church, and this was God's word to them; in short, there would be no blessing apart from lives of faith and repentance, which have to do not with legal works but the gospel being worked out in their lives. Secondly, in other passages to untie the knot you have to remember that the king wasn't some random believer. He was in a position of representation, and this brings us back to Christ as our federal representative who single-handedly earns our favor with God. Thomas Boston opened my eyes to the simple truth of correlating the Adam-Christ dynamic with the first and second king of Israel in this way. The first king failed and fell, and so God raised up the second king. In so many passages David acts as a type of Christ. And also in many of these requirement Scriptures, this is the emphasis: Yes the king must obey to secure the blessing of God, but the way we understand it is the king as the covenant representative; Solomon, the son of David prefiguring the greater Son of David in his obedience that results in God's blessing pouring out on us. Hope that helps. Here is the link: https://www.ruinandredemption.com/_files/ugd/be37d2_61702bfca35c48d28fc9f57be461a9ac.pdf

 

[brandonadams]

Here's my two cents:

In the Davidic Covenant, God promised

1. to set David’s offspring on David’s throne
2. to establish his throne forever
3. that his offspring would build a house for God to dwell in
4. that He would be his offspring’s Father
5. that His mercy would not depart from his offspring, in spite of his sin
6. that even when these king-sons of David sin and lose the kingdom, David's throne will somehow yet be established forever

Letter Fulfillment
1 Chr 22:5-13, 28:2-10 & 1 Kgs 8:20, 24 are clear that promises 1-4 referred to David's immediate offspring Solomon and that the promise to establish his throne forever was conditioned upon Solomon's (& his sons') obedience (28:7-9; 1 Kings 2:1-4; 8:25; 9:4-5).

Israel’s tenure in the land was now conditioned upon the obedience of the king (1 Kgs 9:7 “then I will cut off Israel from the land which I have given them“). The Davidic Covenant was truly an extension of the Mosaic Covenant.

Solomon failed to meet the condition and as a result the kingdom was torn in two, David's line ceased to reign over Israel, and Israel was cast out of the land (1 Kgs 11:1-13; 12:19-20). Judah was eventually cast out as well and the reign of David's line ended (Jer 22:30 36:30).

In fulfillment of the 5th Davidic promise, God did not tear the kingdom from Solomon, but waited until Solomon died of old age to tear it from his son Rehoboam (1 Kgs 11:34).

Spiritual Fulfillment
But, there's a 6th Davidic promise. 2 Sam 7:16 says that if his son commits iniquity and loses the kingdom, yet David's house and kingdom shall be established forever. Ps 89:33 catches this and says despite David's sons' (plural) disobedience, his throne will endure forever.

Prophets then speak of a future restoration of the house of David (the stump/cut down tree of Jesse) and a New Covenant, in fulfillment of God's Covenant with David (Amos 9:11; Is. 9:6-7; 11:1-9; 55:3; Jer. 23:5-8; 33:14-18; Ezk 37:24-28). This was fulfilled in Christ.

I elaborate here if you're interested https://contrast2.wordpress.com/2018/06/13/the-sure-mercies-of-david/

 

[clawrence9008]

Thomas Boston opened my eyes to the simple truth of correlating the Adam-Christ dynamic with the first and second king of Israel in this way. The first king failed and fell, and so God raised up the second king. In so many passages David acts as a type of Christ. And also in many of these requirement Scriptures, this is the emphasis: Yes the king must obey to secure the blessing of God, but the way we understand it is the king as the covenant representative; Solomon, the son of David prefiguring the greater Son of David in his obedience that results in God's blessing pouring out on us. Hope that helps. Here is the link: https://www.ruinandredemption.com/_files/ugd/be37d2_61702bfca35c48d28fc9f57be461a9ac.pdf

Thank you so much for the link, Jon! Is the Ruin and Redemption teaching from Thomas Boston or is it produced by someone else? If it's not from Boston, could you point me to where I could find Boston's writings on this topic?

 

[JTB.SDG]

Thank you so much for the link, Jon! Is the Ruin and Redemption teaching from Thomas Boston or is it produced by someone else? If it's not from Boston, could you point me to where I could find Boston's writings on this topic?

Conor, Boston's work on the Covenants is called: A View of the Covenant of Grace. The link I cited was written by me, but there are also a ton of Boston quotes along the way in the footnotes. This is the quote I was talking about: “What the first Adam failed in, the second Adam was to do. And this I take to be represented unto us, in the case of the first and second king of Israel, [namely], Saul and David. Acts 13:22 [says], 'I have found David the son of Jesse, a man after mine own heart, which shall fulfill all my will (Gr. 'all my wills'). In which there is a plain view to Saul, who was partial in his obedience to the will of God (1 Samuel 15) and upon that score lost the kingdom for him and his.”