11. The Meaning of “Dividing My Land”

In the Land-for-peace debate, many zealously appeal to Joel 3:2 both to support modern Israel’s right of claim on the Land and to invoke judgment on all nations engaged in setting Israel’s bounds to something less than those of Numbers 34. In this end times passage, the Lord declares judgment against the nations for having “divided My land.”

At first glance, and taken alone, this application is persuasive. But once again, insight into Yeshua’s regenerative mind, Joel’s complete word, Israel’s own history and Israel’s part in today’s events forces us to take a more circumspect view. Without doubt, Joel’s words have application to today’s controversy. But we can’t discern the true application through an emotion-biased, politically charged spirit.

Of first importance to right discernment should be the question, “How does this appeal measure up to the heart Yeshua demonstrated relative to Israel’s political issues?”

- Yeshua and Jewish Politics

When the Pharisees brought a woman caught in adultery to Jesus, they wanted Him to agree to her stoning. They had the Law on their side. But Jesus turned the Law on them. He did not side with them or with the Law, but transcended it to speak from the Spirit of grace and truth—a truth that condemned the Pharisees as much as they condemned the woman.

This story presents a microcosm of Yeshua’s attitude toward the larger national issues of Israel’s legal claims against her oppressors and half-breed indigents like the Samaritans. Here also the Pharisees, and especially the zealots, had the Law and the Prophets “on their side.” But they did not have the Spirit of grace and truth.

No one disputes that the Romans treated the Jews brutally. Yet when it came to Israel’s political struggles with Rome, Yeshua took the same transcendent approach that He took regarding the woman. He did not side with the Jews against Rome, but always turned the issue back to the Jewish heart.

To those who might have expected Him to castigate Rome over taxation, his deft evenhanded reply was, “Give Caesar what is his, and God what is His.” To those who might have expected Him to condemn Pilate for killing the Galileans, His reply remained, “Nay, but unless you repent, you shall all likewise perish.” Yeshua always brought political issues concerning Israel’s opponents back to Israel’s own repentance imperative.

Keep in mind, Joel 3:2 was already written and was known both to the zealots and Yeshua. In all probability the zealots used Joel 3 not only to bolster their case against Rome, but to enlist Yeshua’s support for leading them in pronouncing that judgment. Yet he did not. Nowhere does Yeshua ever affirm a restoration prophecy to support a Jewish political position vis-à-vis the surrounding powers. This is because His kingdom is not of this world.

In the same way He turned the political issues then to the eternal implications for Israel’s heart, so Yeshua does today. His Spirit has not changed. Today’s State of Israel is still a kingdom of this world. And Yeshua’s still is not. For this reason alone, unilaterally shooting Joel 3:2 at all politicians involved in today’s Land debate should be viewed as contrary to God’s heart, even if there is a measure of truth in its application. (We will get to the application momentarily.)

“But,” one might ask, “Did not the same Spirit that moved Yeshua also move Joel—and all the prophets—to speak so passionately on Israel’s behalf?”

The answer is yes, but divine passion always has a governing context, and Yeshua lived to demonstrate that government. Jesus proved that God is not controlled by His emotions for His people, but His emotions are governed by His reasoned impartial holy judgment. In coming to Israel, Yeshua showed that His devotion to the Father, not His feeling for Israel or mankind, was His ultimate center of reference for all reality. (More on this in the closing section on Passionism.)

This observation is critical to rightly relating the prophets’ many passion-laden statements regarding Israel to the Father’s complete heart toward Israel and toward all men as revealed through Yeshua.

- The Contexts: Scriptural, Ancient, and Modern

Defiance of Yeshua’s impartial regenerative Spirit is reason enough to dismiss the intemperate application of Joel 3:2 to today’s Land negotiations. But Joel’s complete context, together with that of Israel’s own history also puts bounds on the legitimate use of Joel 3:2. Let’s look at these:

·        Joel’s Immediate Context

In immediate context, Joel 3:2 describes the actions of nations, specifically the Philistines (Palestinians) and Phoenicians (Lebanese / Hezbollah), in dividing up the Lord’s Land and selling off Jewish captives—after Israel has been driven off the Land at the very end of the age. (Joel here offers one more proof of a final crushing in the Land that presumes a pre-restoration.)

By contrast, the 1917 partition of the Ottoman Empire and the further partitioning of 1947 were about establishing Israel’s bounds out from dispersion. They were not about seizing land from which Israel was forcibly ejected into dispersion. Most importantly, the present border-drawing disputes in which Israel is itself engaged are continuations descended from these actions. But Joel 3:2 is not about establishing Israel nor allows Israel any say in the dividing.

Because all this is so, Joel 3:2 does not technically apply to any of the Land divisions that allowed for Israel’s establishment or the present border negotiations descended from them. The dividing to which Joel refers has not yet occurred. It is premature to apply this prophecy today.

This does not mean the grievous spirit of Land division to which Joel refers is not already present. It most certainly is among the Arabs—and has been ever since the Jews returned! The Palestinians are treacherous wolves just waiting to fulfill Joel 3:2. But to indiscriminately attribute this spirit now to all the nations in the negotiations is a mistake. Not only so, but solely focusing on this evil spirit while neglecting Israel’s burden of responsibility violates the greater context of Joel and the prophets—which we look at next.

o       Joel’s Impartial Zeal

Joel is not a biased book that totally extols Israel while condemning the nations. Joel 2 (the prelude to Joel 3) is a dire warning of Israel’s impending destruction by the Lord’s army (not the Arabs) unless Israel repents. Again, see the repentance imperative. In 2:17-18 the Lord shows that it is in connection to Israel’s repentance that He will arise zealously on behalf of His Land.

This is a major observation. The Lord’s zeal for His Land in 3:2 against the nations is directly tied to His zeal for His Land in 2:18 against Israel’s sins. True to Yeshua’s impartial spirit, the spirit of the prophets is equally impartial vis-à-vis the sins of both Israel and the Arabs. They evenly dole out the promise of judgment for disobedience—“to the Jew first and also to the Greek.” This means that those who partisanly divide Joel 3:2 from Joel 2:18 to politically support Israel without equally calling Israel to repent do not truly share the Lord’s heart.

·        Israel’s Ancient Part in the Dividing

Following in the same spirit of impartiality, Jeremiah (12:14-17) cites the end time division or “striking” of the Lord’s Land to which Joel refers, but promises the uprooting of both the surrounding nations (that have seized it) and Judah as well from among them—after which all will be returned to their proper land.

This too puts a more impartial spin on Joel 3:2. Jeremiah’s contention that Israel herself is to be uprooted among those nations who “strike at the land” suggests Israel is not entirely innocent in these matters. This leads us to consider the ancient historic context of the dividing of the Land.

The first recorded historical “give away” of Promised Land area to Gentiles was not by the seizure or pressure of Gentile powers, but by the sovereign authority of Solomon. Solomon first gave up 20 cities and their environs to Hiram of Tyre (1 Kings 9:11-13).

From here, it was the heathen of Israel that first “divided My Land” into two separate kingdoms, beginning with Jeroboam. The Land has been divided ever since, and was so when Joel wrote his prophecy.  Clearly, the Jews divided the Land themselves well in advance of any dividing by the Gentiles.

This means, if we are to apply all that the prophets intimate about the Land division, and if we are to share the Lord’s transcendent impartial view of the issue, it’s entirely inappropriate to singly fault the Gentile powers for dividing the Land without calling Israel to repent for having precipitated those divisions. In truth, both Jews and Gentiles have illegally divided the Land.

There is yet no evidence of repentance for Israel’s ancient part in having divided the Land. From the Messianic perspective then, the real soul-searching question over the Land division should be, “Whose sin should we be watching? What has our own part been in this that requires repentance? Who should be casting the first stone?”

·        The Messianic Dilemma over Modern Israel

If today’s Land division talks indeed fulfill that against which Joel 3:2 warns, then the present political context puts Messianic support for the State of Israel itself into a dilemma. The problems are these:

1. Israel exists at all because the Land promised to Abraham was divided by the Gentiles to make room for them.  

When looking at Israel’s modern founding, Messianic Zionists accurately cite how the Land to have been awarded under Balfour was 4 times greater than what Israel finally received. Under pressure from the Arabs, the British shrunk it by half, then by half again by the time Israel was established.

Messianics see these original divisions as violations of Joel 3:2. Yet these divisions remain the very basis on which Israel accepted the awarding of its existence—over which the Messianics otherwise rejoice.

This is inconsistent. How can a people agreeably look to the United Nations for approval of its boundaries and its charter (one that also agreed to a Palestinian state), and then use Joel 3:2 as a curse against the nations (Gentiles) for having “divided the Land” to make it possible?

If the entire original award was truly based on an “illegal” Land division, Israel should never have accepted existence on the terms of those divisions. But since it did, would it not then (some might argue) have to be viewed as an “illegitimate” state in God’s eyes?

Zionists would respond, “But Israel was forced into all these situations by the Gentiles. It was either take this or nothing.” True enough. Or is it? Israel’s founders state in their own Declaration of Israel’s Independence that they are the “masters of their own fate.” In so stating, they are accepting full responsibility for their own decisions in these matters. This leads to the next point of dilemma.

2. The Israelis themselves continue to play a cooperating part with the Gentiles in today’s negotiations. 

Since this is so, and since as masters of their own fate the Israelis claim full responsibility for their actions, and if Joel 3:2 condemns today’s negotiations as more illegal division of the Land, then all parties to these discussions must be condemned.

The same premise that condemns today’s Land discussions by Gentile powers must also condemn the State of Israel for participating in those discussions. It is unrighteous to support or condemn only one party in an illegal discussion to which there are two parties. (As is sometimes said, “It takes two to tango.”)

&&&&&&&&&&

Messianic Zionists cannot rightly appeal to Joel 3:2 to condemn Gentile Land divisions while supporting a state founded on the basis of those Land divisions and that “sovereignly” participates in division talks. If Joel 3:2 really applies to today’s Land divisions and is applied impartially, Messianics must reject and condemn the modern State of Israel itself.

- Rightly “Dividing” Joel 3:2

Obviously, we are not going to reject Israel’s existence on the belief that Israel’s creation was based on an illegal Land division. But if not, then we are back to the same point in the discussion Jesus was when He turned the Law on the Pharisees ready to stone the woman. Today (for those with ears to hear), His transcendent Spirit disarms the one-sided use of Joel 3:2, turning the issue back to Israel’s own need of heart.

How then do we rightly “divide” Joel 3:2? Taking all the evidence, the Joel 3:2 threat rightly applies as a warning to the Palestinians, Hezbollah, Iran and every other nation intent on destroying Israel and seizing the Lord’s Land to re-divide among themselves. The Lord’s zeal will arise to destroy these nations at the point they gather to seize the Land for themselves after evicting Israel.

But this does not mean Joel 3:2 can be used to support the cause of Zionism or Israel’s claim to the Land. For Zionism itself was birthed in disobedience (including acts of terrorism), the Land is not Israel’s (it is the Lord’s), and Israel has not repented to where the Lord may release His zeal on behalf of the Land. The Land is the Lord’s, reserved for Eternal Israel at His appearing, awaiting the repentance of the Jews.

When the entire foregoing impartial understanding is taken into account, the use of Joel 3:2 to unilaterally condemn the nations and thereby justify Zionism’s right of claim on the Lord’s Land is exposed for its carnal source—leaving Zionist Messianics without a stone to cast.