The Issue of Psalms 37:29

The Bible clearly speaks of a future paradise on earth…The

Jews, to whom God gave these promises, were certain that
their land—indeed, the whole earth—would one day
become a paradise for mankind’s everlasting benefit.

Psalm 37 confirms this hope. “The meek ones themselves

will possess the earth.” (Psalm 37:11) This verse is not
talking about just a temporary restoration of the nation of
Israel to the Promised Land. The same psalm specifies:
“The righteous themselves will possess the earth, and they
will reside forever upon it.” (Psalm 37:29)

Source: Jehovah Witnesses Official Web site “As in

Heaven, Also In Earth”

“The righteous shall inherit the land and dwell therein for ever.”

Bible believers should not be disturbed when asked by the Watchtower

(WT) that people will inherit the earth or as above it will become a paradise
for mankind’s benefit. What will be our response to this so-called proof text,
which they say this prove that the people’s destiny will be on earth and not in
heaven?

To understand the text, we need to set the background or study of the

key words in this particular text.

Background # 1 – “The Righteous”

Who are the righteous people anyway? The word “righteous” with the
equivalent Hebrew “tsaddiyq” (tsad-deek) simply means just, which is the root
word for justification. The justification of believers during the Old Testament
period was in all respects exactly the same as the justification of New
Testament believers. Faith is the basis of this justification, thus Abel
(Heb.11:4), Enoch (Genesis 5:2), Noah (Genesis 6:9,22; 7:1) and Abraham
(Genesis 15:6) to name a few are examples of the Old Testament (OT)
characters who were righteous in the sight of God. The Doctrine of Justification
wholly by faith is founded on the Word of God. For our scriptural references
see (Romans 1:16-17; 3:21-22, 25-26; 4:1-6). In such case, to become righteous
is a judicial act of God whereby He justly declares and treats those who will
believe in our Lord Jesus Christ. The Bible speaks of it as from “…faith to
faith…” nothing less, nothing more.
Now, assuming that “the righteous will inherit the land…” do you think the WT
are qualified as they claim to be? Are they righteous enough by God’s
standards? The overwhelming fact is that the WT nevertheless believe in such
justification by faith rather they teach the doctrine of good works or loyalty to
their organization.

The Bible also teaches that we are saved by grace alone

apart from any self-righteous works (Eph.2:8-9). There
is nothing we can do to contribute to our salvation
because apart from Jesus Christ we are "dead in our
sins" (Eph. 2:1,5).

By contrast, the WTB&TS teaches that salvation "will

depend on one's works." A person must first "come to
Jehovah ' s organization for salvation and then comply with
everything they teach. In this way, a relationship with the
Jehovah's Witnesses organization, rather than a personal
relationship with Jesus Christ, is presented as the basis of
salvation.

On this basis alone, the WT are no longer right of what they claim to be.

Assuming further, that “the righteous will inherit the land…” but why did
the O.T. righteous people did not inherit them as they were supposed to be?
Instead, these people of God were looking for the heavenly place not that
which is an earthly place (Hebrews 11:13-16).

So, the very moment they give you this verse, it is very important that
we are able to know that they were not the one of whom David was talking
about. It simply reads the righteous, the meek, and those who wait on the
LORD.

Background # 2 – “Shall”

The following rules of the word “Shall” in its English usage may sheds
light in determining the right interpretation of this text. In consideration, we
will use the 1828 Webster Dictionary.

1. Shall is primarily in the present, and in our mother tongue was followed
by a verb in the infinitive, like other verbs. "Ic sceal fram the beon
gefullod." I have need to be baptized of thee. "Ic nu sceal singan sar-
cwidas." I must now sing mornful songs.

We still use shall and should before another verb in the infinitive, without
the sign to; but significance of shall is considerably deflected from its
 primitive sense. It is now treated as a mere auxiliary to other verbs,
serving to form some of the tenses. In the present tense, shall, before a
verb in the infinitive, forms the future tense; but its force and effect are
different with different persons or personal pronouns. Thus in the first
person, shall simply foretells or declares what will take place; as, I or we
shall ride to town on Monday. This declaration simply informs another of
a fact that is to take place. The sense of shall here is changed from an
expression of need or duty, to that of previous statement or information,
grounded on intention or resolution. When uttered with emphasis, "I shall
go," it expresses firm determination, but not a promise.

2. In the second and third persons, shall implies a promise, command or

determination. "You shall receive your wages," "he shall receive his
wages," imply that you or he ought to receive them; but usage gives these
phrases the force of a promise in the person uttering them.

When shall is uttered with emphasis in such phrases, it expresses

determination in the speaker, and implies an authority to enforce the act.
"Do you refuse to go? Does he refuse to go? But you or he shall go."

3. Shall I go, shall he go, interrogatively, asks, for permission or direction.

But shall you go, asks for information of another's intention.

4. But after another verb, shall, in the third person, simply foretells. He
says that he shall leave town to-morrow. So also in the second person; you
say that you shall ride to-morrow.

5. After if, and some verbs which express condition or supposition, shall,
in all the persons, simply foretells; as,

If I shall say, or we shall say,

Thou shalt say, ye or you shall say,

Thus we see that Rule # 5 becomes apparent and thus, it only foretells and never
be a promise.