2 Chronicles 7:14 - If my people...?

Excellent article. I use this verse every time I teach hermeneutics as a lesson in common misuse of scripture.

The article is by a young man who used to be in my ABF. He is a freshman at Crown College - Powell TN

This article makes a solid biblical case for interpreting 2 Chron. 7:14, with primary application to Israel. But as one must accept in studying Scripture, there may be more than one spiritual application, even though there is one primary interpretation. Christians do have a responsibility to society, even while they go about evangelizing the world, and that responsibility is to be “salt” as well as “light.” The ministry of the Holy Spirit in this age of grace is one of restraining evil as much as redeeming sinners. Too often some Christians have made evangelism their only prerogative, but I would remind us that a balanced approach to sinners is “soup, soap, and salvation.” The “soap” part might apply to standing against evil and corruption in society and government because the growth of evil in those spheres do affect the freedoms related to propagating the gospel. Shall we go so far in being correct in our interpretation of 2 Chron. 7:14, that we must believe that we may not claim God’s blessing on our land if we turn to Him in repentance and faith?

But Jim, the promise only has one, direct application to Israel. There is nothing in the passage to indicate it is a transferable promise for anyone else.

I’m confident that if any people follow the the prescription in this text, they will see God’s blessing on their nation. There are plenty of Scriptural and historical examples.

Are you willing to apply this rule to all the promises made in the OT solely to Israel? Seems to me like you’d be eliminating a lot of spiritual help and hope for Gentile believers.

Jim,

This is a basic rule of hermeneutics. We abuse scripture when we try to make it say something it never tried to say.

EZ solution: differentiating between interpretation and application:

• Interpretation: “my people” in the context = Israel. “On the twenty-third day of the seventh month he sent the people away to their tents, joyful and glad of heart for the good that the Lord had done for David, for Solomon, and for His people Israel” (vs 10) & “I will uproot them from My land which I have given them”
• Application: God blesses obedience. I don’t think there would be much debate about this!

Jim,

You can’t arbitrarily apply a specific promise made to Israel to someone else.

[Chip Van Emmerik]

Jim,

You can’t arbitrarily apply a specific promise made to Israel to someone else.

I’m not.

I’m not saying: “if [every Christian in American] will humble themselves, and pray and seek My face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin and heal [America] “

What I could easily say, were I to preach that passage, is that there is a principle that the one who follows the Lord will experience the Lord’s blessing (Psalm 1). (I observe that it may not be a material blessing!)

[Jim]

[Chip Van Emmerik]

Jim,

You can’t arbitrarily apply a specific promise made to Israel to someone else.

I’m not.

I’m not saying: “if [every Christian in American] will humble themselves, and pray and seek My face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin and heal [America] “

What I could easily say, were I to preach that passage, is that there is a principle that the one who follows the Lord will experience the Lord’s blessing (Psalm 1). (I observe that it may not be a material blessing!)

It’s not allegorical to say:

• At the dedication of the Temple
• Solomon did and said …
• Solomon prayed
• God’s glory filled the Temple
• The people worshipped
• At the end of the feast, Solomon privately prayed
• God answered and promised
• 2 Chron 7:14 …

^^^^

| | | |

That’s exegesis

Here’s a takeaway from this text … We must commit our way to the Lord and he will bless us (Psalm 1) for our dedication

^^^^

| | | |

That’s application

A text has only one single meaning; that is hopefully the consensus among conservatives:

A fundamental principle in grammatico-historical exposition is that the words and sentences can have but one significance in one and the same connection. The moment we neglect this principle we drift out upon a sea of uncertainty and conjecture (Robert Thomas, quoting Milton Terry)

As Jim noted above, there is one single meaning but many applications. Can 2 Chr 7:14 be applied to America as a nation? I don’t think so. Americans, as a corporate group, are certainly not people called by His name!

Is it correct to apply this text in a general sense to saved individuals? You know, repent and return to God and be forgiven, etc? I don’t think so; the emphasis is on collective Israel. The point is perfectly sound, but I’d look elsewhere for a text to apply to individual reconciliation.

On a sidenote, I’m pondering this exact same thing with Ezekiel’s vision of the dry bones (Eze 37). The vision is speaking of the future restoration of Israel, but there is also a marvelous picture of individual salvation as God restores the dry bones to life. Can I really make a sermon on individual salvation from this passage, or should I just go to Eph 2 instead? I better decide quick!

Basically, one could argue that most everything spoken or revealed in the OT was part of God’s covenant with Israel. Many promises in the Psalms were specifically for David (e.g. Psalm 51), yet they have significance for all believers. Holding to an extreme literalism, as seemingly postulated by some on this blog, would this mean that nothing would be spiritually applicable to NT believers? I emphasize again that there is a difference between interpretation and application — one primary interpretation and possibly more than one personal application. I think this has always been the view of those who follow a literal method of interpretation. What God says to Solomon in 2 Chronicles 7 may have spiritual application for any people, not just for Americans. There is a promise for acknowledging God, a judgment for abandoning God, a renewal for repentance, and a restoration for returning to follow God’s ways. Of course, there is no longer only one place where His name is honored and only one place where he hears the prayers of His people. Even that covenant with Solomon was conditional. The one place could be destroyed. The dynasty could be terminated. Even so, national humility and repentance toward God are principles that God promises to bless, not just for Israel, but for any people. Nineveh is one example of this principle. Numerous revivals in history, such as the Welsh Revival and two Great Awakenings in America show this principle at work. I pity the minister who excludes 2 Chron. 7 as having no application for our time.

There are some elements of 2 Chron. 7 that can only mean one thing and be interpreted for only one occasion. There are other aspects of that event, however, that may be applied to God’s dealings with any people. One well-known literalist, Charles Ryrie, says this in commenting on the passage: “This well-known verse (7:14) states God’s requirements for blessing: humility, prayer, devotion, and repentance.” The question we are really debating here is whether the observance of these spiritual exercises carry with them a guaranteed promise of physical blessing. I think in all honesty one would have to conclude from history that God has often, but not always kept this promise in every situation. He has allowed His children to suffer persecution, deprivation, and death even when they called on Him out of a sincere heart. So, yes, some aspects of the 2 Chron. 7 passage — the guarantee of material blessings— were only intended for Israel.