In Proposition 111, George Peters states:
“The Kingdom being identified with the elect Jewish nation, it cannot be established without the restoration of that nation.”
This is a simple yet profound proposition. It is simple in that for a Kingdom to be established, especially a covenanted one whose covenant maker is God, understanding with whom the covenant was made is vital. The covenant as is clearly noted throughout Scripture is with a particular people – Israel. The restoration of that nation is thus required for the established of the Kingdom to whom it is identified with to take place. No restoration, no Kingdom. The two are intimately linked.
The most notable observation Peters presents in Proposition 111 is the following:
“In view of the elect position (Prop. 24) and its consequent Theocratic position, the restoration is so essential, such a prerequisite, that two remarkable forms of expression are employed to indicate it. (1) God restores the nation for His own sake, to vindicate His covenant-keeping mercy, and thus magnify His own name. For example, Ezekiel 36:22 declares, in connection with a restoration which has never yet been realized, “Thus saith the Lord God: I do not this for your sakes, O house of Israel, but for mine holy name’s sake, which ye have profaned among the heathen, whither yet went,” and v. 32, “Not for your sakes do I this, saith the Lord God, be it known unto you: be ashamed and confounded for your own ways, O house of Israel.” The condition in which both Judah and Israel are at the time of the restoration, viz., that of unbelief, shows that God evidences mercy because the time has eventually arrived for the re-establishment of the Theocratic Kingdom, and hence to exalt His own truthfulness, “because” the nation has been overthrown and its uplifting is a necessity, “because” the heathen ridicule the Covenant and its promises, God will perform this work, and, by an astonishing process, bring this rebellious nation to heart-felt obedience and most fervent allegiance. (2) He will do it for the Father’s sake, in behalf of that portion who have been believing and God-fearing. Paul appeals to this, Rom. 11:28, “beloved for the fathers’ sakes,” to whom the Covenant was given. Now turn to Lev. 26:42-45, which Paul evidently had in view, and it is asserted, that although the nation be dispersed, God “will remember” His “Covenant” and “the land,” and it is affirmed that in their dispersion He will not “utterly cast them away, or abhor, or destroy” and thus(by an utter destruction) “break is covenant with hem, for I am the Lord, their God. But I will for their sakes remember the Covenant of their ancestors, whom I brought forth out of the land of Egypt in the sight of the heathen, that I might be their God: I am the Lord.” The restoration, therefore, is impregnably fixed, upon God’s honor as a covenant-keeping God, and upon His promises given to the Fathers, which will be realized.”
In this observation, Peters explores passages where God outlines that as the covenant maker with Israel, He will not forget those promises with His people. In fact, the very reason for bringing about this covenant promise is for His glory, to “vindicate His covenant-keeping mercy, and thus magnify His own name.”
Now many affirm the re-establishment of the current nation state of Israel reveals the fulfillment of this promise. After all, do we not have the return of a nation called Israel to a land in which it formerly dwelt with the Jews returning to live in that land? We certainly have a nation state called Israel with the Jews returning to live in that land. But we have to ask ourselves if that current nation state is the Theocratic Kingdom described in the passages Peters notes or other similar passages? In my humble opinion, perhaps, but not completely. Maybe it can be stated the establishment of the nation state of Israel is a beginning part of a process God is bringing about in keeping with His covenant promises. With that said, it seems difficult to avert what is currently in existence is the totality of the keeping of that covenant. If anything, more is to come resulting in the finality at the end of the full restoration of the nation God established His covenant promises with with the end event being the establishment for all eternity of the Theocratic Kingdom. We can certainly state that event is yet future.
Those who seek to offer the Church-Kingdom theory, fail to recognize the nature of the established covenant between God and a particular people. As has been noted, what is termed as the “church” is not the people to whom God made this everlasting covenant. Such a belief replaced the church with those to whom God covenanted with, something that cannot be affirmed without twisting and ignoring the clear nature of the covenant. There will be those who are grafted into the covenant promises, but those grafted in do not replace anything or anyone. They merely become part of the covenant promises made long ago to Israel.