Rebuilding the Tent of David

By Brian Hennessy

In chapter 15 of the Acts of the Apostles we find the dramatic account of what is arguably the most important “Christian” conference ever held, namely the Council of Jerusalem. It was here that the expression “tent of David,” which has been so frequently mentioned, analyzed and interpreted of late, first came into prominence. I say “interpreted” because it is not exactly clear at first what the “tent of David” is. The expression, which was quoted by James at the Council, was from a prophecy found in the Book of Amos. Since James appears to be using it as the “legal” basis for his decision to release the Gentiles from conscription to the yoke of the Law, understanding what both Amos and James meant by the “tent of David” is clearly important.

Therefore, I would like to share an insight the Lord gave me many years ago that I believe throws a great deal of light on understanding the meaning of the “tent of David.” But just as important is the significance that James saw in the Amos passage which caused him to rule in the way he did. It is an understanding that has been missing in any teaching I have heard on the subject.

 Two Tents

To start, I want to say that the word for “tent” in Hebrew that Amos uses is sukkah, which can be translated several ways. According to Strongs (#5521) it can be rendered as “booth, cottage, covert, pavilion, tabernacle, tent.”  In the New Testament, the Greek word used by James is skene (Strongs #4663), which carries essentially the same meanings.   

Here is the passage from Amos in the Old Testament as it appears in my New American Standard translation.  

 “’In that day I will raise up the fallen booth of David, and wall up its breaches; I will also raise up its ruins, and rebuild it as in the days of old; that they may possess the remnant of Edom and all the nations who are called by My name,’ declares the Lord who does this.’” (Amos 9:11,12)

Now there are really only two possible interpretations for “the tent of David.”  

One possibility is Amos meant the literal tabernacle tent David pitched in Jerusalem to temporarily house the Ark of the Covenant (see 1 Chron.15,16).  If you recall the story, the Ark had been captured by the Philistines under the reign of Saul. Later it was returned to Israel and kept at the home of Abinadab for twenty years. But when David ascended the throne over all Israel he desired to bring the Ark into his new capital in Jerusalem. In his first attempt at transporting it he neglected to carry it according to the Law of Moses, and God called a halt to his parade. After realizing his mistake, he tried it again and this time was successful, delivering the holy thing to Jerusalem with much praise and celebration. Once there he set up a special tent pavilion and placed the Ark inside, where it remained until Solomon built the temple.

Many teachers believe this is the tent that Amos was referencing. They see this unique tabernacle tent as a type and shadow for promises of a future restoration of Davidic praise and worship. Or a prophetic picture of a time when God’s people would have greater access to the Presence of God for worship and communion as David did.

It is easy to see how David’s highly unorthodox tabernacle tent could indeed foreshadow such hopes and promises. However, I don’t believe this is the “tent” Amos was referring to. Nor do I believe James thought that either. The “tent” or “tabernacle” Amos spoke about had “fallen,” sustained “breaches,” become a “ruins,” and needed to be rebuilt. How could that apply to David’s temporary shelter for the Ark? Scripture nowhere mentions that it fell, needed repairs, or was ruined. As far as we know, his tent was simply folded up and retired after Solomon built his magnificent temple. Besides, why would the restoration of that physical tent become a sign that the Gentiles needed to be brought into the fold? Gentiles were forbidden to come anywhere near the tabernacle that enclosed the Ark of the Covenant.

For all those reasons and more I’m convinced Amos was not referring to that literal tent of David in verse 9:11. But rather to the throne of David that had been reduced to the status of a small hut – or tent - following the secession of the ten northern tribes. Amos was prophesying that God would rebuild the Davidic kingdom “as in the days of old” when it ruled over the entire united kingdom of Israel. Implied of course, was that God would also raise up a future king from the line of David to sit on that throne. That king, of course, we know to be Jesus. And that kingdom the Messianic kingdom, which has been in the process of being spiritually restored for the last 2000 years, but which won’t become fully manifested until the Day of the Lord.

Further evidence that supports this interpretation is seen in a similar prophecy by Isaiah: “A throne will even be established in lovingkindness, and a judge will sit on it in faithfulness in the tent of David: moreover he will seek justice and be prompt in righteousness” (Isa. 16:5). Clearly this is speaking metaphorically, and not referring to David’s goat-hair tent, either.

With that understanding, let us now take a closer look at the Council of Jerusalem and try to see what the Holy Spirit showed James that led him to make his momentous decision concerning the Law. 

God’s Types and Shadows

As I already mentioned, the Lord gave me a wonderful insight many years ago that impacts this whole study. But before I share it, I need to explain a phenomenon I find in the Bible that I call “divine reenactment.”

It is commonly accepted that history often repeats itself. But this is especially true, I have noticed, in the history of Israel as recorded in the Bible. However, these repetitive events are not just the result of men making the same foolish mistakes of an earlier generation. Although there is plenty of that also. Witness the dumb attempts of both Pharaoh and Herod to abort the coming saviors of Israel by killing all the baby boys around the time of their respective births.

No, these instant replays I’m speaking of are orchestrated by God for the purpose of revealing and confirming a New Covenant truth to a future generation of God’s people in Israel. Paul explains it this way: “These things happened to them [in that generation of Israel] as an example, and they were written for our instruction [in this generation of Israel] upon whom the end of the ages have come” (1 Cor. 10:11).

Basically, because God realizes we are a little slow on the uptake, He had our forefathers act out some scenarios to help us catch-on to what he is doing in our day. So when we see it happening again, we wake up and say, “Oh, this is what happened to our forefathers.”

The story of Joseph is a good example. Rejected by his brothers and then thrown into a hole in the ground, he is taken to Egypt as a slave where he arises to sit at the right hand of Pharaoh. Years later, when his brothers appear before him to get food, they don’t even recognize him because of his new Gentile persona.  Nevertheless, Joseph’s position allows him to rescue his family from famine and become the savior of Israel.

 That story is seen “repeated” in the rejection of Jesus by His brothers, the Jews, which is soon followed by His death and resurrection from the grave and ascension to sit at the right hand of the Father in heaven. And as subsequent history has shown, Jesus, like Joseph, has become unrecognizable to His brethren today because He has been living and reigning for so long among Gentiles in the Egypt of “Christianity.” But a day is coming when God will use the parallel story of Joseph to open the eyes of His Jewish brethren to reveal His true identity so they can embrace and be reconciled. And this time receive the Bread of Life. At the same time, the eyes of His “Gentile” followers will be opened, as portrayed by the servants of Pharaoh, to the fact that the Jews are His beloved brothers. And therefore ours, if we are in Him. And in this way He will become, like Joseph, the Savior of all Israel.

Now I mention these “divine reenactments” to show you another fascinating historical example that I believe throws a bright spotlight on the happenings of the Council of Jerusalem.

A Young King’s Folly

The first historical event in this biblical reenactment takes place in the year 930 BC following the death of King Solomon. As background, Solomon had wandered from the ways of the Lord in his latter years. He took many wives and built temples to their gods. In spite of being warned by God to repent, he persisted in his sin. So finally God told him He would divide and reduce his kingdom after his death as punishment, allowing his descendant to keep just two of the twelve tribes for the sake of his father David. God then allowed discontent to grow within his kingdom because of the forced labor and taxes he had laid upon the people. At the same time, God raised up a man named Jeroboam from the tribe of Ephraim, promising him the kingship over most of Israel.

  When Solomon finally dies, his son Rehoboam assumes the throne and begins to consolidate his kingdom, seemingly unaware of the impending judgment about to fall because of his father’s disobedience. Here is my portrayal of the scene, as told in 1 Kings 12.
 

It was well before dawn when the people began gathering inside the city. Old men and warriors, women with children, Levites and laborers, nobles and farmers. All wanting to hear what their new young king Rehoboam would say to them.

Three days had passed since they’d first met with their regent to present their simple request, a plea for mercy. “Your father made our yoke hard; therefore lighten the harsh service of your father and his heavy yoke which he put upon us and we will serve you,” were the words their leader, Jeroboam, had spoken on their behalf.

 The king listened attentively, but had not responded yea or nay. Instead he had ordered them all to depart and to return in three days when he would give them his answer. The king then spent the next three days conferring with his advisors. The first set of advisors he spoke to were older men who had served his father, King Solomon. Seeing the rebellious mood of the people, and understanding the need to win the allegiance of these northern tribes of Israel, they wisely advised the king to comply with the people’s request. But King Rehoboam had other counselors, young men he had grown up with who now served in his cabinet. They advised him quite differently, urging him to use all the power of his Davidic monarchy to bring the people into submission.

It was now the third day. Stepping out from among his royal coterie, the king surveyed the vast crowd of waiting faces and their representative Jeroboam standing before him. Lifting up his voice so all could hear, he gave them his answer: “My father made your yoke heavy, but I will add to your yoke; my father disciplined you with whips, but I will discipline you with scorpions.”

His words hung in the air like a death sentence. Then suddenly the people erupted. “What portion do we have in David?” one man shouted. “We have no inheritance in the son of Jesse,” cried another. Turning to the angry crowd, their leader Jeroboam bellowed, “To your tents, O Israel!” And then spinning again to face the seething king, he spat out his contempt: “Now you can look after your own house, David!”
 

After returning to Jerusalem King Rehoboam immediately set about raising an army to smash the rebellion and reunite the country. But a prophet sent from God came to him and told him not to fight against his relatives, revealing to him that this whole separation had been brought about by God for His purposes. Showing that he was not completely void of spiritual discernment, Rehoboam heeded the prophet and disbanded his army.

Having withdrawn their allegiance to the throne of David, the ten northern tribes quickly crowned Jeroboam king and established their own nation with Shechem (later Samaria) as their capital. It would be called the Kingdom of Israel. In the south, only the two tribes of Judah and Benjamin remained loyal to King Rehoboam. They became known as the Kingdom of Judah, with their capital in Jerusalem.

The family of Abraham had now been split into two rival nations, which continued for another two hundred years after. Then the northern kingdom, which had become utterly idolatrous, was conquered by Assyria and its ten tribes were scattered among the nations, never to be seen or heard from again. Which means that the nation was never reunited politically under the throne of David again. As the Biblical writer noted, “So Israel has been in rebellion against the house of David to this day” (1 Kings 12:19).

Nevertheless, all the prophets declared that God would one day bring back the descendants of the northern kingdom and reunite them with Judah under a future Davidic king.

The stage is now set for history to repeat itself 900 years later at the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15). Here is how that story unfolded:

Wisdom Finally Prevails

Men kept filing into the room in two and threes until there was no place left to sit or stand. All the Jewish believers in Jerusalem knew of the importance of the meeting and were squeezing in to hear everything they could first hand. In the midst of the crowd, Paul and Barnabas and the disciples who had come with them from Antioch, were describing to the apostles and elders the things God was doing among the Gentiles through their ministry. Seated to the left of the apostles sat a number of men in fine robes who were also paying close attention to the words of Paul. These believers in Yeshua belonged to the Jewish sect known as the Pharisees.

Paul, speaking with much animation, was describing in great detail the numbers of Gentiles coming to Christ. As the sound of murmured approval grew louder among the listeners, suddenly one of the Pharisees stood to his feet and said, “All this is wonderful. But of course it will be necessary to circumcise these Gentiles, and direct them all to observe the Law of Moses.” A nervous silence suddenly descended upon the room.

The apostles and elders immediately asked for the Torah scrolls to be brought forth so they could all look into the matter. An intense debate then followed, until Peter, frustrated by the lack of progress, stood up and reminded everyone how God had recently used him to share the gospel with the Gentile family of Cornelius. And how they had all gotten saved and been filled with the Holy Spirit. Didn’t this clearly show that God was making no distinction between Jews and Gentiles? That He was cleansing the hearts of all who came to Him?

Realizing he had caught the wind of the Spirit, he looked at the Pharisees and drove home his argument: “Now therefore, why would you put God to the test by placing upon the neck of the Gentile disciples a yoke which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear?  But we believe we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they also are.”

The silence that followed Peter’s heartfelt contention gave instant feedback that the tide was turning. Paul and Barnabas immediately arose and confirmed Peter’s witness that God was truly in this by relating more of the signs and wonders He was doing among the Gentiles.

When they had finished, James, the brother of the Lord and acknowledged leader of the ecclesia in Jerusalem, rose slowly to his feet. “Brethren, listen to me.” Immediately, every head swiveled in his direction.

“Peter has related how God first concerned Himself about taking from among the Gentiles a people for His name, and with this the words of the Prophets agree, just as it is written: ‘After these things I will return, and I will rebuild the tent of David which has fallen, and I will rebuild its ruins, and I will restore it, in order that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord, and all the Gentiles who are called by My name, says the Lord, who makes these things known from of old.’”

Continuing as if everyone saw clearly that this quote from Amos was the final word on the subject, James then declared, “Therefore it is my judgment that we do not trouble those who are turning to God from among the Gentiles.”
 

The debate was over. Paul’s defense of the Gentiles had been vindicated. The Mosaic Law would not be imposed upon the Gentile disciples. They would only be asked to be sensitive to a few Mosaic traditions in order to not offend the Jews who lived among them in the Diaspora. It would be a decision that would cause great rejoicing, not only among the Gentile followers of Jesus in Antioch , but all over the world for the next two thousand years.

Now why do I say this meeting is an example of biblical history repeating itself? Specifically, why do I say it points back to the breakup of the Kingdom 900 years before? Because if you compare this critical meeting in Jerusalem to the one in Shechem with King Rehoboam, you will see an amazing parallel.

To begin, we see both meetings involved pleas for a release from a “yoke” of slavery. Jeroboam had interceded on behalf of the northern tribes before the new leadership in Israel for a release from the harsh yoke of servitude to the crown. And Paul and Barnabas appeared before the newly established government of the ecclesia to plead for leniency on behalf of the Gentiles to be released from the harsh “yoke” of the Law.

Also, in both cases we see there is an opposing counsel. We have the younger counselors of Rehoboam pushing for continued servitude, and we have the Pharisees also arguing for keeping the yoke of the fathers firmly in place. Fortunately, this time the wisdom of the elders (the apostles) prevailed and the yoke was removed and the unity and well-being of the “holy nation” (1 Pet 2:9) preserved.

With the ruling by James, it was agreed that the burdensome legalism of the Old Covenant that had placed a wall of partition between Gentile and Jew, namely the law of commandments contained in ordinances, had been torn down in Messiah. In Messiah we could now all live, Jew and Gentile alike, as “one new man” on ground apart from the Law (Eph 2:14,15). The only yoke we had to carry now was the one Jesus put on us. But as He promised, “My yoke is easy, and my load is light” (Matt 11:28-30).

What was the lesson God wanted emphasized through this divine reenactment? That under the New Covenant the Law is every bit as burdensome and divisive to Israel as that yoke of conscripted labor was in Jeroboam’s day. But that is not the only truth God was revealing in this re-enactment. In fact, it is just the tip of the iceberg.

The Epiphany of James

Now I want to ask you a probing question. But before I do please read the prophecy of Amos again as quoted by James.

“After these things I will return, and I will rebuild the tabernacle of David which has fallen, and I will rebuild its ruins, and I will restore it, in order that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord, and all the Gentiles who are called by My name, says the Lord, who makes these things known from of old.’” (Acts 15:16-18).

My question is, do you see any mention of the Law in that quote? Because I sure don’t. And if you’ll go back to the beginning and read the original prophecy by Amos you won’t find any mention of it there either. Yet wasn’t the whole point of the debate to decide whether the Gentiles should be made to keep the Law or not? And didn’t James quote the Amos prophecy seemingly as proof that the Law should not be imposed on the Gentiles? But clearly the only thing the Amos passage says about the Gentiles is that they will be part and parcel of the final restoration of the Davidic kingdom. But that wasn’t the problem being addressed at the conference. Not even the Pharisees were contesting the inclusion of the Gentiles into the ecclesia, the Israel of God. They were only insisting they be circumcised and be made to keep the whole Law of Moses.  

So if there is no mention of the Law in Amos, then what convinced James that the Law should not be imposed on the Gentiles? And what provoked him to quote Amos in the first place?

It started when he heard Peter describe how God was taking out from among the Gentiles a people for His name. That’s when the Holy Spirit must have brought the Amos prophecy to mind that made the inclusion of the Gentiles the sign that God was restoring the Davidic monarchy. That’s when James put two and two together and realized that Paul’s Gentiles were those Gentiles. The understanding about the Law came, I believe, when he then heard Peter challenge the Pharisees about putting “a yoke upon the neck of the Gentiles which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear.”  

James would have been very familiar with the history of Israel and known what had caused the breakup of David’s kingdom in the first place. When Peter spoke those words about a “yoke of the Law,” the Holy Spirit must have brought to mind the “yoke” that Rehoboam refused to lift (in the same way He caused me to notice the “yoke” connection).

I believe James realized in a nanosecond that if they imposed the Law on the Gentiles they would be making the same tragic mistake their forefather, King Rehoboam, had made 900 years earlier. A mistake that would have the same disastrous consequences. It would cause the “holy nation” that was finally being restored to Davidic rule again under Jesus to be split apart into two separate “nations” again. So that’s why he ruled against it. And although the Amos prophecy didn’t specifically address the Law issue, by quoting it he was reminding the Jews in attendance that the presence of the Gentiles proved that the “tent of David” was being restored. So let’s not mess up this opportunity for unity again as our fathers did.

But Wait, There’s More.

There is still more iceberg hidden beneath the surface that needs to be uncovered.

Did you ever ask yourself why James and the Pharisees were so willing to accept the inclusion of the Gentiles into the family of Israel?

Even if James understood that the Gentiles were the fulfillment of the Amos prophecy, why was he so willing to overturn 1400 years of separation? Amos or no Amos, as a no-nonsense practitioner of the Law, James, like Peter, would have never considered rubbing elbows with Gentiles without a divine revelation. Remember, it took a supernatural vision and command from heaven to pry Peter away from his prejudices just to go and talk to the Gentiles (see Acts 10). What heavenly vision caused James to allow these non-Jewish believers to become part of the nation of Israel? Because to be called “a people for My name” meant they were now co-inheritors of the promises that had once been exclusively the property of the physical descendants of Abraham.

Looking back, we can only imagine what was going through James’ head at the time. Not having twenty centuries of church theology to confuse him, he would not be thinking of these converts as “Christians” who would be included into an entity called the “church” that was separate from Israel. No, he couldn’t stick us there. He clearly understood from the Amos prophecy that these Gentiles being brought into the ecclesia were to be counted as the remnant of Israel and included into the chosen family of Abraham. But the question is -  why would God do that?  Was He doing a totally new thing? Was He moving away from His commitment to limit Israel to the natural descendants of Abraham? Was He now expanding the family to include descendants from other families? He is God, so He can do what he likes. And if He wants to let Jesus bring all his rowdy friends from among the Gentiles into the family, well who can object. But was that what He was doing?

And what about His oft-prophesied promises to bring back the descendants of the northern kingdom scattered among the nations, and to reunite them with the descendants of the kingdom of Judah? Was God writing those descendants off as a lost cause? Or would they be added at some future date?

And maybe the biggest question of all was, what do the Gentiles have to do with restoring the “tent of David” in the first place?  Why couldn’t they just benefit from the blessings of the kingdom as loyal subjects? Why do they have to be part of the family?

There can only be one answer.

James knew that the “Gentiles” Amos was talking about were not just ordinary Gentiles - but the lost descendants of the ten tribes scattered among the nations. And if these Gentiles were those Gentiles, then they were already family!

There is absolutely no doubt that the Gentiles Amos was speaking about were the lost descendants. The whole prophecy of Amos was primarily a judgment against the northern Kingdom of Israel, but with a promise in the famous ninth chapter of a future restoration within the “tent of David.” As we have seen, Amos was saying they would not only be reconciled to God at that time, but would also be reconciled to Judah and the House of David.  

For me, it is the only explanation that makes any sense. How else could the inclusion of Gentiles affect the restoration of the “tent of David” unless they themselves were missing family members chosen in Messiah before the world began?

This explains also why the Pharisees had no problem accepting the Gentiles.

They too realized the Gentiles must be their prodigal relatives returning home after being cleansed in the blood of Jesus. They just felt they needed the Law to keep them on the straight and narrow. But the Holy Spirit through Peter and James showed them they were wrong in their assumption. “The Law is not of faith” (Gal 3:11) and can never promote holy living. It was not designed for that purpose. Just the opposite. “The Law came in that the transgression might increase” (Rom 5:20). The Law was supposed to stir up in us the hidden rebellion to show us we were sinners at heart and needed a Savior. And having led us to Messiah, it had done its job and could be retired. To yoke ourselves to it again was to be like, “a dog returning to its vomit”, which Proverbs describes as the sign of a fool (Prov. 26:11). That’s why Paul scolded the Gentile believers in Galatia who were being tricked into keeping the Law, “Are you so foolish, having begun by the Spirit, are you now going to be perfected by the flesh? “ (Gal 3:3)

So now we know why James could so readily accept the Gentiles into the family and be okay with it. Even if he had to swallow a lifetime of prejudice to do so. He understood that God had not abandoned His promise to Abraham that a remnant of his physical descendants would become His people. And that they alone had been chosen to rule and reign with Messiah. Even Amos had assured Israel: “You only have I chosen among all the families of the earth” (Amos 3:2). And Moses also declared: “For the Lord’s portion is His people; Jacob is the allotment of His inheritance” (Deut 32:9).

James also saw that God had not abandoned His promise to go and find the scattered descendants of the northern kingdom, the kingdom of Israel, as Isaiah and all the prophets had spoken:” For He will lift up a standard for the nations, and assemble the banished ones of Israel, and the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth” (Isa. 11:12). Everything was coming to pass just as God had promised.

The evidence for me that James understood who the Gentiles truly were is confirmed in his opening salutation in his one letter that made it into the New Testament. It begins, “James, a bond servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes who are dispersed abroad, greetings” (James 1:1). Some teachers at a loss to explain this salutation have suggested he was putting the equivalent of a note in a bottle and throwing it into the ocean, hoping some lost scattered descendants of the nation might see it and call home.

No, this was a letter of encouragement sent specifically to all the Jewish and non-Jewish believers in Christ who were living in all the different nations. Because he knew he was speaking to the mishpochah (Hebrew for family). He knew the “tent of David” was being restored.

As one final insight, I was excited to see that the Hebrew word Amos used for describing the “tent of David” was sukkah – or “succoth.” (He could have used the word “ohel,” which is the word used for the literal tent David set up). This connected it for me to the Feast of Tabernacles (same word), which is also called the Feast of Succoth and the Feast of Ingathering. Tabernacles is the last of the three pilgrimage feasts to realize a spiritual fulfillment under the New Covenant, to the extent they will be fulfilled in this age. Because clearly there are future fulfillments as well. The other two feasts, Passover and Pentecost, did have their fulfillments. And on the very day the feasts were to be celebrated. Doesn’t that tell us something?

We saw Passover fulfilled with the death and resurrection of Jesus. We saw Pentecost, or Shavuot, also fulfilled on the very day of the feast with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2). Doesn’t it seem highly likely that we’ll see the “succoth of David” fully restored and made manifest some year while the Feast of Tabernacles is being celebrated?

That’s my belief.

www.reunionministries.net