COVERED BY THE BLOOD

        GOD’S EVERLASTING COVENANT

REV. FR. ROBERT W. WILLS Th.D.

157 McCrary Road

Molena, GA  30258

(706)647-3288

CONTENTS

CHAPTER                                                                             PAGES

                1              THE LEGAL BASIS FOR GOD’S KINGDOM                              3-14

                2              THE GOD OF THE COVENANT REVEALED                               15-33

                3              THE BLOOD SPEAKS                                                                      34-48

                4              THE COVENANT YEAR:                                                  49-60

                                                THE FEASTS OF THE LORD

                5.             THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT OF

BLESSING                                                                           61-70

                6.             THE MOSAIC COVENANT OF THE LAW                   71-85

                7.             THE DAVIDIC COVENANT OF AUTHORITY                             86-101

                8.             THE PRIESTLY COVENANT OF WORSHIP                               102-114

                9.             BREAKING COVENANT                                                  115-134

                10.          THE NEW COVENANT                                                                     135-145

                11.          THE NEW COVENANT AND LITURGICAL                 146-164

                                                OR SACRAMENTAL WORSHIP

12.          THE NEW COVENANT AND THE DEVELOPMENT    165-181

OF THE ONE HOLY CHURCH

                13.          TEAM MINISTRY UNDER COVENANT AUTHORITY              182-207

                14.          THE PARITY COVENANTS RECOGNIZED BY GOD                208-218                

                15.          THE PRACTICAL APPLICATION OF                                          219-224

                                COVENANT IN INTERPERSONAL                              

                                RELATIONSHIPS: C.A.D.R.                                                           

                **           APPENDIX:  A MARRIAGE COVENANT                     225-229

CHAPTER 1

THE LEGAL BASIS FOR GOD’S KINGDOM

INCARNATIONAL REALITY OF THE KINGDOM OF GOD

                The Kingdom of God refers to the spheres of God’s direct rule. Although God is Sovereign and has authority over the entire universe, He has chosen two realms to make up his particular kingdom. In the earthly sphere and in the heavenly sphere, God has established rules of operation, personal interaction, and specific plans, which he will carry out. God exercises direct authority over both the spheres of his kingdom.

                Authority is the concept of rightful power. It is used in the Bible with a good deal of elasticity. The word translated as authority in the New Testament is usually the Greek word exousia. The assumption is that God alone is the ultimate authority and he alone the ultimate source of authority for others. The recognition of God’s authority is dependent upon an understanding of who God is. Those who reject God’s authority, either do not really know God (as covenant maker and redeemer), or are in rebellion against God.

                God’s sovereign, universal, and eternal rule over the entire universe gives evidence of his authority. His authority over man is compared to that of a potter over his clay (Romans 9:20-23). So ultimate is God's authority that all authority among humans comes from God alone (Romans 13:1). God's authority includes not only the authority of providence and history, but also the demand for submission and accountability from man. Inherent in God’s authority is the awesome power to judge and punish those who reject his rule (Luke 12:5) and the glorious power to forgive sins and declare righteous those in Christ (Romans 3:21-26).

                The authority of God is exercised in the Old Testament not only by various direct means but also through those to whom he gave authority to act in his behalf priests, prophets, judges, and kings. In the New Testament the authority of the Father and especially of Jesus Christ is expressed in a unique way through the apostles, prophets, teachers, elders and bishops who are the direct and personal ambassadors of Jesus Christ.

                The apostles claimed to speak for Christ and under the Spirit’s direction in terms of both content and form of expression (1 Corinthians 2:10-13; 1 Thessalonians 2:13). They left behind the permanent norm for Christian faith (Galatians 1:8) and conduct (1 Corinthians 11:2; 2 Thessalonians 3:4, 6, 14). They established the order or government of the church so that a shared rule by a group of men, often designated as bishops or elders, is universal in the New Testament period. The authority given by God to the apostles, prophets, teachers, bishops, presbyters, and deacons came from God--the supreme King. The  Kingdom of God, through His      COVENANT, is the extension of God’s rule and dominion in  the earth  and the universe. It  is wherever  JESUS of Nazareth is LORD and KING. It is the PURPOSE and  the  WILL (desire, pleasure) of God--the extension of God's rule. The leaders of the early church saw it as a THEOCRACY, a government that  is GOD-RULED; in other words, a DIVINE GOVERNMENT. Above all, the Kingdom of God was to the early church, and is today, a PRESENT REALITY.

                For  Israel, not only was the Kingdom of God seen as a present reality, but there was a consciousness of having been chosen by  God as  his  “son” (Hosea 11:1; Isaiah 1:2; Jeremiah 3:19). Their ideas laid the basis for later New Testament era usage of adoption imagery. The early church saw Christians as adopted “sons of God.” That is why the early Church Fathers wrote so frequently about a heavenly citizenship. The terms of heavenly citizenship were determined by God’s Eternal Covenant.      

                In the New Testament, the term “adoption” (huiothesia) occurs in Romans 8:15, 23; 9:4;  Galatians 4:5; and Ephesians 1:5. While John and Peter prefer the picture of regeneration  to portray  the  Christian sonship, Paul has characteristically  chosen  a  legal image (as in justification), perhaps due to his contact with the legal conscious Roman world. Through “adoption” we become citizens of God’s Kingdom.

                In  Greek and Roman society adoption was, at least among the upper classes,  a relatively common practice. Unlike the oriental cultures in which slaves  were sometimes  adopted, these people normally limited adoption to  free  citizens. But, at least in Roman law, the citizen so adopted became a virtual slave, for he  came  under the paternal authority of his adoptive father.  Adoption  conferred rights, but it came with a list of duties as well. This was a practical concept that most people in the ancient world could understand.

        Paul  combines several of these pictures in his thought. While chapter 4 of Galatians begins with a picture of the law enslaving the heirs until a given date (e.g., majority  or  the death of the father), there is a shift in vs. 4 to  the  adoption image in which one who was truly a slave (not a minor as in verses 1-3)  becomes a son and thus an heir through redemption. The former slave, empowered by  the Spirit, now uses the address of a son, “Abba! Father!” 

                The  reason for adoption is given in Ephesians 1:5: God’s love. It was not  due  to his  nature or merit that the Christian was adopted and  thus  received  the Spirit and the inheritance, Ephesians 1:14-15. This adoption was due to God’s will being enacted through Christ.  Adoption  was seen as a free grant to undeserving people  solely  from  God’s grace.

                As  in Galatians and Ephesians, adoption was connected to the Spirit in  Romans as  well. It was seen that those who are “led by the Spirit” are sons, who  have  received the “spirit of sonship,” not that of slavery (Romans 8:14-15). Again  the Spirit  produced the cry “Abba!” and indicated the reality of the coming inheritance, by calling on God the Father of Christians.          Adoption, then, was deliverance from the past and a way of life in the  present (walking by the Spirit and sanctification), and a hope for the future (salvation and resurrection).  It  described, for early church leaders, the process of becoming a son of God  (John 1:12; 1 John 3:1-2) and of receiving an inheritance from God. It was, in effect the basis of their authority and power in the church and in the world. God’s eternal covenant provides the legal framework for our adoption into the Kingdom of God as joint-heirs with Christ the Everlasting King.

In the Kingdom of God, as in any endeavor, five issues must be permanently addressed.

1.        Who makes the rules?  This addresses the Transcendence of God.

2.        Who enforces the rules? This relates to the concept of Hierarchy.

3.        What are the rules? This is an issue of ETHICS and RESPONSIBILITY.

4.        What are the consequences of obedience and of disobedience? This has to do with SANCTIONS, referred to in the Bible as blessings and curses.

5.        How are these other four aspects of God’s Covenant going to be passed on to the next generation? This addresses the issue of CONTINUITY.

                Because God is a God of order, not confusion, it was necessary that the ordinances and statutes of his covenant be taught to the new Christian community of the fledgling church, just as the Law had to be set up to instruct ancient Israel. Apostolic Ministry Teams carried with them the authority to instruct and admonish believers in God’s distinctive moral and spiritual standards. This same authority was given to the presbyter/elder/priests and bishops of the Early Church to enforce adherence to the standards of  God’s covenant. They did this with love and compassion, but also with diligence and integrity. Their authority was seen as an extension of God’s Covenant.

                In the third chapter of the Gospel of John Jesus told Nicodemus that he must be “born again” of the water and spirit to be a part of the Kingdom of God. This remains true today, and that is why water baptism and the baptism of the Holy Spirit are associated with entrance into covenant with God. The true church has always viewed baptism as the entrance into the Everlasting Covenant, which  provides the mechanism to run God’s Kingdom.

THE CONSTITUTION OF GOD’S KINGDOM

The legal basis for the operation of God’s Kingdom lies in God’s Covenant. A covenant is a compact or agreement between two parties binding them mutually to  undertakings  on  each other's behalf. Theologically  (used  of  relations between God and man) it denotes a gracious undertaking entered into by God for the  benefit and blessing of man, and specifically of those men who  by  faith receive  the  promises  and commit themselves to the  obligations  which  this undertakes involves. 

In the Old Testament the word used to express the covenant concept is the Hebrew  berit. The  original  meaning  of this word was probably “fetter”  or “obligation,” coming  from  a root bara, “to bind.” This root does not occur as  a  verb in Hebrew,  but  it does occur in Akkadian as baru, “to bind,” and appears  as  a noun  in  the Akkadian biritu, which means “bond” or “fetter.”  Thus  a “berit” could originally signify a relationship between two parties wherein each bound himself to perform a certain service or duty for the other.

                The Hebrew word berith, which is translated as “covenant.” is derived from a root which means “to cut.” Hence a covenant is  a “cutting,”  with  reference  to the cutting or dividing of  animals  into  two parts, and the contracting parties passing between them, in making a  covenant (Gen.  15; Jer. 34:18, 19). The corresponding word in the New Testament  Greek is diatheke, which is, however, rendered “testament” generally in the  Authorized  Version.  It ought to be rendered, just as the word berith  of  the  Old Testament, “covenant.”                 The Hebrew word Berith is used in three ways. (1) This word is used of a covenant or compact  between man  and man (Gen. 21: 32), or between tribes or nations (1 Sam.  11:1;  Josh. 9:6,  15). This type of covenant is a covenant of parity, between equals. It binds them to mutual friendship, or at least to mutual respect for each other’s interests. Participants are bound together in peace and for mutual benefit. In  entering into a covenant, Jehovah was solemnly called on to  witness  the transaction (Gen. 31:50), and hence it was called a “covenant of the Lord”  (1 Sam. 20:8). The marriage compact, which is another covenant of parity, is called “the covenant of God” (Prov. 2:17), because  it  was made in God's name.

                This type of covenant was used in alliances between people. for example, covenants of parity were made between Abraham  and  the Amorites (Genesis 14:13), Joshua and the Gibeonites (Joshua 9:6), Israel and the Canaanites (Exodus 23:32), Solomon and Hiram (1 Kings 5:2-6). The good relations between the Omrides and the Phoenicians were built on this treaty. The marriage between Jezebel and Ahab must be understood as a partial fulfillment of the conditions of the treaty. Vestiges of a parity treaty between the Israelites and the Midianites (Exod. 18) are discernible, although many unsolved problems existed, e.g. the relationship between Midianites and Kenites and the later hostility between Midianites and Israelites.

                We also have the record of such a Parity Treaty between Hattusilis III (Hittite) and Rameses II (Egyptian). We know that the parity treaty between Hattusilis III and Rameses II was concluded with a marriage between the daughter of Hattusilis and Rameses. The stipulations are the prohibition of any relationship with a country outside the Hittite sphere; prohibition of hostility to other Hittite vassals; immediate help to the great king in times of war; the vassal must not listen to any slandering of the great king but immediately report it to the king; the vassal must not hide deserting slaves or refugees; the vassal must appear once a year before the king to pay his taxes and to renew the treaty. The stipulations are followed by the compulsion on the vassal to deposit the written treaty in the temple and to read it occasionally. This is followed by a list of gods as witnesses, in which the gods of the great king are prominently placed. Even certain natural phenomena such as heaven and earth, mountains, sea, rivers, etc., are called in as witnesses.

                The Hebrew word berith is also used  (2) with reference to God's revelation of himself in the way of promise or of favor to men. Thus God's promise to Noah after the Flood is called a covenant (Gen.  9; Jer. l 33:20, “my covenant”). This type of Covenant was often presented in the form of a Royal Grant, by which a sovereign granted land or benefits to loyal servants for faithful or exceptional service. The faithful servant had to be in right relationship (the state of righteousness) in the mind of the Sovereign King.  Since Noah had served God as a “preacher of righteousness,” and since he had faithfully obeyed God’s commandment to build the Ark, God  (the Sovereign King), granted certain promises to him. This Royal Grant was also for Noah’s descendants. Part of this covenant included an unconditional promise that God would never destroy all earthly life with a natural catastrophe, such as the Flood.

                A similar Royal Grant Covenant was made with Abraham in Genesis 15, as an unconditional promise to fulfill a grant of land to Abraham’s descendants. It should be noted that Abraham was declared to be righteous, and that God saw him as a faithful servant. As in the cases of these covenants with Noah and Abraham, the Royal Grant was always unconditional and normally perpetual. It was bestowed as an award for faithfulness, and was available to the person’s heirs, so long as they continued their father’s loyalty and service to their Sovereign King-- the Lord God of Heaven and Earth.

                We  also have another account of God's covenant with Abraham (Gen. 17) which, along with the covenant of Sinai (Exod. 34:27, 28; Lev. 26:15), became known as the Old Covenant. The Abrahamic and Sinatic covenants were afterwards  renewed  at different times in the history of  Israel  (Deut.  29; Josh.  24; 2 Chr. 15; 23; 29; 34; Ezra 10; Neh. 9). These covenants (3) were conditional, and required future (as well as past) service to the Sovereign King of the Universe. These were God’s conditional pledges to be the guarantor and Protector of Israel’s destiny. The conditions were that the people would (a) be consecrated to God as a holy people, (b) submit to God’s rule and authority, and (c) serve God’s purposes in history.

                These  covenants are not contracts or mere human agreements. They are more than that. They are declarations by a sovereign God as to the principles by which his kingdom will operate. It is an assurance that God is faithful to sustain his creation, and is an opportunity for his children to have a viable and vibrant relationship with their Father. God’s  covenants  are modeled upon a form that was adapted  from  the ancient Suzerainty Treaties of the Hittites and Mesopotamians.  A Suzerainty Treaty has always been a covenant regulating the relationship between a great king and one of his subject kings. The great king claimed absolute right of sovereignty over all the vassal king possessed. The great king demanded total loyalty and service. The vassal had to “love” his suzerain and pledged whatever service the suzerain demanded. Participants called each other “lord” and “servant,” or “father” and “son.” The great king pledged to protect the vassal’s realm and dynasty, so long as the vassal continued to offer loyal service to the suzerain. Examples of this type of relationship can be seen in Joshua 9:6-8, Ezra 17:13-18, and Hosea 12:1.

                The idea of making a Suzerainty Treaty pervades almost the whole history of the ancient Near East. It is only by chance that we are well informed on the Near Eastern treaties of Esarhaddon with the Hittites, and the Aramaean Treaty of Sefire. A close study of, the Mari Tablets and those of Amarna shows that a treaty background existed between the various nations and groups mentioned. Curses and blessings conclude the vassal treaty. Certain curses will come into effect when the treaty is broken. These curses are of a wide variety and it is clear that certain of them are reserved for the divine sphere and the army of the great king could execute others. When the treaty is kept, certain blessings will accrue to the vassal, e.g. the eternal reign of his descendants. Variations on this theme occur in later vassal treaties, such as the treaties of Esarhaddon heavy emphasis is laid on the curse motif.

                The best example of a Suzerainty Treaty in the Old Testament is the one contracted between the Israelites and Gibeonites (Jos. 9-10). The vassal character of the treaty is evident in the terminology. The Gibeonites came to the Israelites and told them that they wanted to become their slaves. The treaty was contracted and then a covenantal peace between the two parties existed. It is thus abundantly clear that the Israelites were well aware of various forms of treaties as they were applied elsewhere in the ancient Near East.

                Suzerainty Treaties are the highest forms of covenant. They are binding relationships that are perpetuated from one generation to the next for as long as the vassal is faithful to the Sovereign King. This type of Covenant forms the framework for what we call the Old Covenant and the New Covenant, although, in both of these, there is also the element of a Royal Grant. The major covenants recorded in scripture tend to be Suzerainty Treaties with embedded Royal Grants. When the Suzerainty Treaty is combined with the Royal Grant we can see the operation of works of faith working hand in hand with salvation by grace. The Lord’s Table is based upon the form of covenant relationship between God, and us where God is the Sovereign King and we are His vassals.  He gives us a royal grant of unconditional salvation, healing and deliverance (righteousness or right standing with God).

                A  general characteristic of the Old Testament covenant (berit) is its unalterable and  permanently binding character. The parties to a covenant obligated themselves to carry out their  respective commitments under the penalty of divine  retribution  should they  later  attempt  to avoid them. Usually, although  not  necessarily,  the promise of each was supported by some sort of legal consideration or quid  pro quo.  But where the one party to the agreement was greatly  superior  to  the other  in power or authority, the situation was a bit different: the ruler  or man  of  authority  would in the enactment of the berit  simply  announce  his governmental decree or constitution which he thought best to impose upon those under him, and they for their part expressed their acceptance and readiness to conform  to what he had ordained. Doubtless it was true, even in this  type  of covenant, that  the ruler implicitly committed himself to rule  for  the  best interests of his people and to contrive for their protection against enemies.

                In  the  case of the promulgation of a covenant by God  with  his  chosen people, this one-sided aspect of the transaction was even more apparent, since the contracting parties stood upon entirely different levels. In this case the covenant  constituted a divine announcement of God's holy will to  extend  the benefits  of his unmerited grace to men who were willing by faith  to  receive them,  and who by entering into a personal commitment to God bound  themselves to  him by ties of absolute obligation. The characteristic statement  of  this relationship  occurs in the formula "I will be their God and they shall be  my people" (cf. Jer. 11:4; 24:7; 30:22; 32:38; Ezek. 11:20; 14:11; 36:28;  37:23; Zech.  8:8; etc.). This signifies that God unreservedly gives himself  to  his people  and that they in turn give themselves to him and belong to  him.  Thus they are his "peculiar treasure" (segulla, Exod. 19:5; Deut. 7:6; 14:2; 26:18; Ps.  135:4; Mal. 3:17). His motive in adopting them as his own covenant children is stated to be "lovingkindness" or "covenant-love" (hesed), a term  with which  berit  is  often associated (cf. Deut. 7:9; I Kings  8:23;  Dan.  9:4). In 1 Samuel 20:8, Jonathan is said to exercise hesed  when  he enters into a covenant relationship with David. This concept of covenant-love presents a  remarkable contrast to the motivation attributed by the heathen Semites to  their  gods, who  were  uniformly depicted as entering into covenant relations  with  their devotees  for  the purpose of extracting service and  nourishment  from  their altars, more or less like the feudal lords of human society who extract their support from the labor of their vassals.

                    One very important element in God's covenant relations with Israel lay in the dual aspect of conditionality and unconditionality. Were his solemn  promises, which  partook of the nature of a binding oath (Deut. 7:8), to  be  understood  as capable of nonfulfillment, in case of the failure of man to live  up to  his obligations toward God? Or was there a sense in which  God's  covenant undertakings  were absolutely sure of fulfillment, regardless of the  unfaithfulness of man? The answer to this much-debated question seems to be: (1) that the promises made by Jehovah in the covenant of grace represent decrees  which he will surely bring to pass, when conditions are ripe for their  fulfillment; (2) that the personal benefit, and especially the spiritual and eternal  benefit, of the divine promise will accrue only to those individuals of the  covenant  people  of God who manifest a true and living faith (demonstrated  by  a godly  life). Thus the first aspect is brought out by the initial form of  the covenant with Abraham in Genesis 12:1-3; there is no shadow of doubt but what God will  truly make of Abram a great nation, and make his name great,  and  shall bless all the nations of earth through him and his posterity (Gal. 3:8).

                This  is set forth as God's plan from the very beginning; nothing shall  frustrate it. On the other hand, the individual children of Abraham are to receive personal  benefit  only as they manifest the faith and obedience  of  Abraham. Thus  Exodus 19:5 says “Now therefore if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep  my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me....And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation”.

                In other words, God will see to it that his plan of redemption will be carried out  in history, but he will also see to it that none partake of  the  eternal benefits of the covenant in violation of the demands of holiness. No  covenant child who has a faithless and insincere heart is included in its blessings.  The redemptive elements of God’s Everlasting Covenant (elements of  both the Old and New Covenants) are sometimes referred to as a “Covenant of Grace.

                The redemptive qualities of the covenant of grace are especially set forth, by the prophets, in the form of the “New Covenant.” In the classic  passage  on this theme (Jer. 31:31-37) the earliest phase of the  covenant  (that was effected at Sinai) is shown to have been temporary and provisional because of  the flagrant violation of it by the Israelite nation as a whole,  and  because  of their failure to know or acknowledge God as their personal Lord  and Savior.  But there is a time coming, says Jehovah, when he will put  his  holy law into their very hearts, so that their cordial inclination and desire  will be to live according to his holy standard. Moreover he shall beget within them a  sense of sonship toward himself, so that they shall have a personal  knowledge and love of him that will not require artificial human teaching. Furthermore the carrying out of this redeeming purpose is stated to be as sure as the continued existence of sun, and stars, or even of the foundations of heaven.

                In the New Testament, the term for covenant employed is diatheke, the word used constantly in the Septuigint for berit. Since the ordinary Greek word for  “contract” or  “compact” (syntheke) implied equality on the part of the contracting  parties, the Greek-speaking Jews preferred diatheke (coming from diatithemai, “to make a disposition of one's own property”) in the sense of a unilateral enactment or  “unilateral agreement.” Suntheke, on the other hand usually means “bilateral agreement.” This term would suggest a treaty rather  than a unilateral covenant in which God dictated all terms.

                In secular Greek the word diatheke usually meant “will” or “testament,” but even classical  authors  like Aristophanes occasionally used  it  of  a covenant  wherein one of the two parties had an overwhelming superiority  over the other and could dictate his own terms. Hence the New Testament Greek word  diatheke signified  (more specifically than the Hebrew word berit) an arrangement made by  one party  with  plenary  power, which the other party may accept  or  reject  but cannot alter. Johannes Behm (TDNT, II, 137) defines it as “the decree” of God, the powerful disclosure of the sovereign will of God in  history, whereby  he constitutes the relationship, the authoritative  divine  ordinance (institution),  which introduces a corresponding “order of affairs.”

                We enter into a conditional relationship with God where we agree to unconditionally obey His commandments. We agree to live consecrated and holy lives before God, to submit to His authority (direct and delegated), and to serve His purposes in the earth. God becomes our Lord and Father, and we become his servants and sons. The principles of Fatherhood and of Inheritance are inherent in these covenantal relationships.

THE PRINCIPLE OF FATHERHOOD

Abba is an alternate Aramaic term for "father." It is the word that Jesus used  to  address  God in Mark 14:36. Paul pairs the word with the  Greek  word  for  "father" in Rom. 8:15 and Gal. 4:6. The  aleph that terminates the form abba functions as both a  demonstrative and  a  vocative particle in Aramaic. In the time of Jesus the  word  connoted both the emphatic concept, "the father," and the more intimate "my father, our father."

                While  the  word was the common form of address for children,  there  is  much evidence that in the time of Jesus the practice was not limited only to  children.  The childish character of the word ("daddy") thus proceeded, and  abba  acquired  the warm, familiar ring which we may feel in such an  expression  as  "dear father." The name Abba connotes the fatherhood of God. This is affirmed by the accompanying  translation ho pater ("father") which occurs in each usage of the  name  in  Mark 14:36; Rom. 8:15; and Gal. 4:6. The  use  of  this name as Jesus' mode of address to God in Mark  14:36  is  a unique expression of Jesus' relationship to the Father. The believer sustains the same relationship with God. It is only because of  the  believer’s relationship with God, established by the Holy Spirit, that he can address God with this name that depicts a relationship of warmth and love. In a sense  the relationship designated by this name is the fulfillment of the ancient promise given  to  Abraham's offspring that the Lord will be their God, and  they  his people.

                It was the person and teaching of Jesus that played the formative role in the New Testament’s language about God as ’Father.’ For Jesus, ’Father’ was the principal and most frequent designation for God. He used not only the common Jewish ’our [or your] Father’ (Matt. 5:45; 6:9), but also the intimate family word for ’father’ in his native Aramaic language, abba, which was also appropriated in the later liturgical practice of the church (Mark 14:36; Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6). Not only did the concept of God as ’Father’ express the personal relationship to God affirmed by Jesus and the church (Matt. 11:25-27), but in that cultural setting the term included especially the connotations of obedience, agency, and inheritance. Those who address God as ‘Father’ acknowledge God as the one to whom absolute obedience is due (Matt. 7:21; 26:42) and themselves as the agents who represent God and through whom God works (Matt. 11:25-27; John 10:32) and as God’s heirs (Rom. 8:16-17).

                The God of the Fathers’ is an Old Testament title for God, as well as the more particular phrase of the same meaning, ’the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,’ is found in the New Testament only in two Gospels (Mark 12:26; Matt. 22:32) and in the book of Acts. As in the Old Testament, it emphasizes the continuity of Israel and the church’s faith, that the God of present experience is the same as the God revealed to the ancient patriarchs. Luke-Acts, which is especially interested in pointing out this continuity, thus uses the title four times (Acts 3:13; 5:30; 7:32; 22:14). In Paul and the literature dependent upon him, this title is replaced by “the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Rom. 15:6; 2 Cor. 11:31; Eph. 1:3, 17; Col. 1:3).

                In the Suzerainty Treaty, the King (i.e. God) adopts a paternal relationship with his subject princes (we who are kings and priests under the Sovereign God). The King (God) is the Patriarch who assigns both benefits (Royal Grants) and responsibilities (Commandments) to his children, who are expected to rule as his representative authority.

INHERITANCE

                Covenant also involves a heritage or inheritance. A Suzerainty Treaty or Royal Grant was often “inherited” by the next generation. If the next generation refused to abide by the agreements of the previous generation, war and subjugation (judgment) usually resulted. The Hebrew Bible has no exclusive term for "inheritance." The words often translated "inherit" mean more generally "take possession." Only in context can they be taken to mean "inheritance." The Greek word in the New Testament does refer to the disposition of property after death, but its use in the New Testament often reflects the Old Testament background more than normal Greek usage.

                 In ancient Israel possessions were passed on to the living sons of a father, but the eldest son received a double portion (Deut. 21:17). Rueben lost preeminence because of incest with Bilhah (Gen. 35:22; 49:4; 1 Chron. 5:1), and Esau surrendered his birthright to Jacob (Gen. 25:29-34). These examples show that possession of this double portion was not absolute. Sons of concubines did not inherit unless adopted. Jacob's sons by the maidservants Bilhah and Zilpah (Gen. 30:3-13) inherited (Gen. 49) because those offspring were adopted by Rachel and Leah. Sarai promised to adopt the offspring of her maid Hagar when she gave Hagar to Abram (Gen. 16:2) but went back on that promise after Isaac's birth (Gen. 21:10).

                 Because the Hebrew scriptures concerning inheritance do not necessarily presuppose a death, they could be used in reference to God’s Royal Grant of the land to Israel (Josh. 1:15; Num. 36:2-4). Levites had no share of the land, and the Lord Himself was their "inheritance" (Num. 18:20-24; Deut. 10:9; 18:2; Josh. 13:33). Jeremiah used the concept of "inheritance" to refer to the restoration of Israel to the land from "the north" after the time of punishment (Jer. 3:18-19).

                Anything given by God can be called an “inheritance.” In Psalm 16:5 the pleasant conditions of the psalmist's life were his “inheritance” because he had chosen the Lord as his lot. In Psalm 119:111 God’s testimonies are an “inheritance.” In Job 27:13 “heritage” refers to God’s punishment of the wicked; those who refused to acknowledge God’s covenant.

                In the New Testament “inheritance” can refer to property (Luke 12:13), but it most often refers to the rewards of discipleship: eternal life (Matt. 5:5; 19:29; Mark 10:29-30 and parallels; Titus 3:7), the kingdom (Matt. 25:34; Jas. 2:5; negatively 1 Cor. 6:9-10; 15:50), generally (Acts 20:32; Eph. 1:14,18; Rev. 21:7). Christ is the proto-typical Heir (Matt. 21:38), and through Christ Christians can be heirs of God (Rom. 8:17; Eph. 3:6). In Hebrews  9:15-17, the more usual secular significance of  “will”  or “testament”  appears along with the Old Testament covenantal idea. Only Hebrews makes explicit use of the idea of “inheritance” as requiring the death of the testator, Christ. A will, which is a form of covenant, requires a death of the testator to take effect, so the death of Christ brings the new covenant/will into effect (Heb. 9:16-17). This concept was present in the enactment of the Mosaic covenant, where there was slain a sacrificial animal, representing the later atonement of Christ.

God’s covenant both defines our inheritance and is our inheritance. As such, a covenant—even a promised covenant is permanent and cannot be annulled. The Apostle Paul affirms this principle in Galatians 3:17-18.  “And this I say, that the law, which was four hundred and thirty years later, cannot annul the covenant that was confirmed before by God in Christ, that it should make the promise of no effect. For if the inheritance is of the law, it is no longer of promise; but God gave it to Abraham by promise.” This reminds us of the words of Isaiah (Isa 14:27)  “For the LORD of hosts has purposed, And who will annul it? His hand is stretched out, And who will turn it back?” Our inheritance under God’s covenant is sure, because His covenant is irrevocable.

The parts of a covenant

                We are not well informed on the specific covenant rites of Mesopotamian Suzerainty Treaties, because of lack of material. There are, however, a few vestiges of these rites left in available material. The slaughtering of an animal (sheep, donkey, bull, etc.) is described in the Mari texts and other ancient texts. This reminds us of Christ, who was the ultimate sacrifice, and through whose blood (represented by the wine in Communion) we become heirs to God’s Covenant. It was the custom to cut the animal in two or three parts. In order to fulfill this aspect of covenant, Christ broke bread and gave it to his disciples. Part of it was burnt in honor of the god and part of it was eaten at a covenantal meal. The Lord’s Supper in the New Testament is such a covenant meal.

                In Genesis 15 and Exodus 24, such a rite is described. In the same rite is mentioned. In certain ancient Near Eastern Suzerainty Treaties it is stated that the vassal is compelled to visit the great king annually to renew the treaty. The Israelites gathered together three times per year for certain festivals (Passover, Weeks, and Tabernacles) to renew the covenant.

                Although parity covenants were often used between people in the ancient world, the idea of a covenant relationship between a god and a king or a king’s people is well attested through the history of the ancient Near East. It occurs in various forms with a great diversity of material. This is not always expressly stated, but can be deduced from terminology used. The idea of such a covenant was thus not at all foreign to the Israelites. At the same time the treaty relationship was well known to them, as we have seen above. It is thus not surprising that God used this form of relationship to give expression to his relation with his people. This could have started early, because such an idea was well known in the ancient Near East from well back in the 3rd millennium before Christ.

                Suzerainty Treaties  were legal documents  recognized  by all ancient peoples of the Middle  East. These treaties can be amended, much like the United States Constitution, and the amendments become a part of the original covenant. As a rule, these  ancient covenants and Biblical covenants have ten distinct parts. In the Bible all of these parts are present but may not be explicitly stated.

1.  The Preamble tells who is making the covenant.

2.  A Historical Prologue gives a brief historical overview of the relationships involving the covenant makers.

3.  Demands or stipulations are the obligations a ruler imposes upon vassals.

4.  Provisions for deposit of the text and for periodic reading and renewal of the covenant in order to keep it before the people.

5.  Witnesses attest to the validity of the covenant.

6.  Blessings and curses are included as consequences of keeping or breaking the covenant.

7.  A Formal Oath or confession of faith is made giving allegiance to the Sovereign (to God).

8.  A Solemn Ceremony of celebration and validation of the covenant also takes place.

9.  There is an exchange of Tokens by both parties to seal the Covenant.

10. A reality of the presence of God is always manifested in and through the covenant.

                These ten parts of Suzerainty Treaties effectively dealt with the issues that were referred to above: Who makes the rules? Who enforces the rules? What are the rules? What are the consequences of obedience and of disobedience? How are these four things going to be passed on to the next generation?

                As the sovereign Lord of the Suzerainty Treaty, God makes and enforces the rules that operate His Kingdom. He requires submission and obedience to his divine will, and His will is clearly seen and understood primarily through the Eternal Covenant.

                God’s covenant is confirmed with an oath (Deut. 4:31; Ps. 89:3), and to be accompanied by a sign (Gen. 9; 17). Hence the covenant is called God's  “commandment,”  “counsel,”  “oath,”  or “promise” (Ps. 89:3, 4; 105:8-11; Heb. 6:13-20; Luke 1:68-75). God's  covenant consists wholly in the bestowal of blessing (Isa. 59:21; Jer. 31:33, 34).  The term  covenant  is also used to designate the regular succession  of  day  and night (Jer. 33:20), the Sabbath (Exod. 31:16), circumcision (Gen. 17:9, 10), and in general any ordinance of God (Jer. 34:13, 14). A "covenant of salt" is an example of a an everlasting covenant, signified in the sealing or ratifying of which salt, as an emblem of perpetuity, is used (Num. 18:19; Lev. 2:13; 2 Chr. 13:5).

AN EXAMPLE OF A COVENANT: GOD’S COVENANT WITH  JOSHUA

                Joshua was the successor to Moses (Num. 27:18-23; Deut. 31:7-29), whose leadership of Israel in the conquest of Canaan is recounted in the Book of Joshua. In ancient Israel, not only possessions, but covenant blessings were passed on to the living sons of a father. Usually the eldest son received a double portion (Deut. 21:17). The right to administer God’s covenant to the people of Israel was passed on from Moses to Joshua.  This can be seen in Deuteronomy 31:7-8, 14, and 23. “Then Moses called Joshua and said to him in the sight of all Israel, Be strong and of good courage, for you must go with this people to the land which the LORD has sworn to their fathers to give them, and you shall cause them to inherit it. And the LORD, He is the one who goes before you. He will be with you, He will not leave you nor forsake you; do not fear nor be dismayed.” (Deut. 31:14) Then the LORD said to Moses, "Behold, the days approach when you must die; call Joshua, and present yourselves in the tabernacle of meeting, that I may inaugurate him." So Moses and Joshua went and presented themselves in the tabernacle of meeting. (Deut. 31:23)  Then He inaugurated Joshua the son of Nun, and said, "Be strong and of good courage; for you shall bring the children of Israel into the land of which I swore to them, and I will be with you."

 Joshua’s name, sometimes spelled Hoshea (compare Num. 13:8, 16), means "Yahweh is salvation." In many ways, the Old Testament writers present Joshua as a prophet, priest, and king. As prophet, Joshua had a "spirit of wisdom" like Moses (Deut. 34:9; see  Ecclus. 46:1   of  the  Apocrypha,  where  he  is  called  "successor  of   Moses   in prophesying").  As priest, like Moses, he called upon the people to sanctify themselves and commanded the priests in the movements of the Ark of the Covenant  (Josh.  3:5-6).  As a strong leader, like Moses, he led Israel in the definitive covenant ceremony at Shechem (Josh. 24:1-28). From beginning to end, however, Joshua is preeminently a military figure. He first  appears  as the  leader  of Israel's war against Amalek (Exod. 17:8-16).  With  Caleb,  he spied  out  the land of Canaan (Num. 13:16-29) and  correctly  argued,  though failed  to convince, that it should be taken (14:6-10). After  Moses' death at the border of the Promised Land, Joshua led the  attack on  Canaan, beginning with the crossing of the Jordan (Josh. 3:7- 4:24), and the  destruction  of Jericho (Josh. 6). The main thrust of his  conquest,  and that  best  supported by archaeological evidence, must have  been  toward  the southern foothills and the Negev (10:28-43), with one major incursion into the north  against Hazor (11:1-15). Joshua is reported to have died at the age of 110, was buried at Timnath-serah in central Palestine  (Josh. 24:29-30).

                The Book of Joshua needs to be read and understood in the context of the Covenant that God had made with Israel at Sinai. The structure of the book of Joshua may be analyzed as follows: (a) Israel crosses the Jordan River and sacks Jericho, chapters 1 - 6; (b) the capture of Ai, chapters 7 - 8; (c) the alliance with Gibeon, chapter 9;  (d) the conquest of the south, chapter 10; (e) the triumph in the north,  chapter 11; (f) a summary of Joshua's victories, chapter 12; (g) division of the land, chapters 13 - 22; (h) Joshua's farewell address, chapter 23; the  covenant ceremony at Shechem, chapter 24.

                About a decade or so before 1200 BC an aging Joshua called the elders, judges, and officers of the tribes to the city of Shechem. That city, built in a pass between two lofty hills and looking out upon a fertile valley, is nowhere claimed to have been conquered by the Israelites and may have been a Hebrew enclave all through the centuries of the enslavement in Egypt.  The words of Jacob in Genesis 48:21-  "...which I wrested from the Amorites with my sword and bow"... are possibly an echo of a Hebrew conquest in the region of Shechem during the patriarchal period.

                Carefully read Joshua 24:1-27 and try to identify the nine different parts of the Covenant God made with Joshua. You should note that these nine parts of a covenant are not necessarily in any particular order in any scriptural covenants, but all can be clearly identified in this passage. In the last chapter of the Book of Joshua, a grateful leader and his people will now covenant with their God who fulfilled His promise to give them the land of Canaan. The covenant takes the form of a suzerainty treaty, with an embedded Royal Grant. It affirms the Mosaic covenant and amends it, adding certain new elements to it.

SPECIFICS OF GOD’S COVENANT WITH JOSHUA

THE PREAMBLE

"Thus speaks the Lord, the God of Israel."

HISTORICAL PROLOGUE

" In olden times, your forefathers... lived beyond the Euphrates an worshipped other gods. I took your father Abraham from beyond the Euphrates and led him throughout all the land of Canaan... And I sent Moses and Aaron, and I plagued Egypt...  And I brought your fathers out of Egypt... And I gave you a land whereon you had not labored, and cities which you had built...” No mention was made of the patriarchs in the Mosaic covenant, for that covenant was directed solely at those who had undergone the slave experience.

                Here  at Shechem the entire people were being fused together-- those  who  had remained  in  Canaan and possessed strong memories of the  patriarchal  traditions,  and those who ancestors had once been slaves and who now brought  with them  tales of Egypt, memories of Moses and a long wandering,  and  wilderness traditions.

DEMANDS OR STIPULATIONS

"  Now therefore fear the Lord, and serve Him in sincerity and in  truth;  and put  away  the  gods which your fathers served beyond the  Euphrates,  and  in Egypt;  and  serve the Lord..." Only YHWH was God. Other gods had no  role  to play  in  the cosmos; they were, bits of wood and stone. Pagans who did not worship Yaweh Elohim found utterly incomprehensible the Israelite faith in an image-less, transcendent God who participated  in  human events and had chosen a small, helpless,  and  not  particularly worthy people to be His instrument in an unfolding purposeful history directed by  Him and Him alone. It seemed that there could be no common meeting ground  between these two views of the world.

DEPOSIT OF THE TEXT, PUBLIC READING, AND RENEWAL OF THE COVENANT FOR CONTINUITY

We  are told in the twenty-fourth chapter of the Book of Joshua, in which  the final  literary version of the making of this covenant is found,  that  Joshua "wrote these words in the book of the law of God." The contents of this book-- its additional covenant stipulations and laws-- are unknown. Scholars  believe that  it was kept at the sanctuary in Shechem and read periodically as a  part of a religious ceremony.

THE DIVINE WITNESS

" And Joshua said to the people: `You are witnesses against yourself that  you have  chosen  the Lord, to serve Him.' And they said: `We  are  witnesses...'"  This  is  a  curiously innovative move in a monotheistic  situation  where  no divine  witnesses  are possible. Joshua also constructed a stone to  serve  as witness,  "and set it up there under the oak that was by the sanctuary of  the Lord.  And Joshua said to all the people: `Behold, this stone shall be a  witness against us; for it has heard all the words of the Lord...'"

BLESSINGS AND CURSES

"If you forsake the Lord, and serve strange gods, then He will turn and do you evil and consume you..."

THE FORMAL OATH

"And the people said `to His voice will we hearken.'"

THE SOLEMN CEREMONY

None is recorded, but sacrifices were made. Then the people went away,  "every man  to his inheritance." The response to the events of the conquest  was  the Joshua covenant.

GOD'S TOKEN

God destroyed Jericho as a sign.

MAN'S TOKEN

The people were expected to conquer Canaan in obedience to God’s commandments.

GOD’S PRESENCE

God was present and actually spoke to Joshua. His presence was felt by the congregation and acknowledged in the sacrifices and responses that the people made. Sacrifices were made and there was a covenant meal.

CHAPTER 2

THE GOD OF COVENANT REVEALED

GOD’S CHARACTER

                God is an invisible, personal, and living Spirit, distinguished from all other spirits by several kinds of attributes. God is self-existent, eternal, and unchanging. Intellectually God is omniscient, faithful, and wise. Ethically God is just, merciful, and loving. Emotionally God detests evil, is long-suffering, and is compassionate. God is free, authentic, and omnipotent. He is transcendent in being immanent universally in providential activity, and immanent with his people in redemptive activity.

                Biblical revelation teaches the reality not only of physical entities, but also of spiritual beings: angels, demons, Satan, and the triune God. The Bible also reveals information concerning attributes or characteristics of both material and spiritual realities. The attributes of God are essential characteristics of the divine being. Without these qualities God would not be God.

                God Is an Invisible, Personal, Living, and Active Spirit. Jesus explained to the Samaritian woman why she should worship God in spirit and in truth. God is spirit (John 4:24). The noun pneuma occurs first in the sentence for emphasis. Although some theologies consider         "spirit" an attribute, grammatically in Jesus' statement it is a substantive. In the first century world of the biblical authors, spirits were not dismissed with our modern skepticism.

                As spirit, God is invisible. A spirit does not have flesh and bones (Luke 24:39). As spirit, furthermore, God is personal. Although some thinkers use “spirit” to designate impersonal principles or an impersonal absolute, in the biblical context the divine Spirit has personal capacities of intelligence, emotion, and volition. It is important to deny of the personal in God any vestiges of the physical and moral evil associated with fallen human persons.

                In view of the indivisibility of the divine Spirit, how than are the attributes related to the divine being? The divine attributes are not separate from each other within  the divine being so that they could conflict with each other. The attributes all equally qualify the entirety of the divine being and each other . Preserving the divine simplicity or indivisibility, God's love is always holy love, and God's holiness is always loving holiness. Hence it is futile to argue for the superiority of one divine attribute over another. Every attribute is essential; one cannot be more essential than another in a simple, nonextended being.

                God as spirit, furthermore, is living and active. The invisible God is revealed and embodied through his covenant; the legal basis of all relationship between the visible world and the invisible spirit world. In contrast to the passive ultimates of Greek philosophies the God of the Bible actively creates, sustains, covenants with his people, preserves Israel and the Messiah's line of descent, calls prophet after prophet, send his Son into the world, provides the atoning sacrifice to satisfy his own righteousness, raises Christ from the dead, builds the church, and judges all justly. Far from a passive entity like a warm house, the God of the Bible is an active architect, builder, freedom fighter, and advocate of the poor and oppressed, just judge, empathetic counselor suffering servant, and triumphant deliverer.

                The Scriptures do not endorse worship of an unknown God but make God known. The attributes are inseparable from the being of God, and the divine spirit does not relate or act apart from the essential divine characteristics. In knowing the attributes, then, we know God as he has revealed himself to be in himself. We may be far from fully comprehending divine holiness and divine love, but insofar as our assertions about God coherently convey relevant conceptually revealed meanings they are true of God and conform in part to God’s understanding.

                Writers of theology, to help in relating and remembering them have differently classified the divine attributes. Each classification has its strengths and weaknesses. We may distinguish those attributes that are absolute and immanent (Strong), incommunicable or communicable (Berkhof), metaphysical or moral (Gill), absolute, relative, and moral (Wiley), or personal and constitutional (Chafer). Advantages and disadvantages of  these groupings can be seen in those respective theologies. It is perhaps clearer and more meaningful to distinguish God's characteristics in terms of how they are manifested or revealed to us.

                As God the Father is not seen or felt, there are several incommunicable attributes of God that are most demonstrated by the Father. That they are incommunicable means that these attributes cannot be comprehended with the human senses or reason. These attributes must be accepted by faith, and can be conceptualized, but not explained. God is Spiritual, Infinite, Eternal, Immense, Immutable, Perfect, and Sovereign. Even though we cannot see or feel these attributes, they are real attributes of God.

                As the Holy Spirit’s presence can be felt, although He cannot be seen, God has certain relative attributes which we can sense but not see. God clearly exhibits the qualities of Omnipresence, Omniscience, Omnipotence, Wisdom, Forbearance, Grace, and Sinlessness (Goodness).  These attributes of God lie outside the realm of human experience, but within our ability to understand and benefit from them.

                The Son can be both seen in Christ and felt in his present ministry to believers. He frequently and clearly demonstrates the moral attributes of God. These moral attributes include Holiness, Love, Justice, Righteousness, Long-suffering, Mercy (compassion and kindness), and Peace.  All of these attributes can be seen and felt by those with whom God interacts through the work of Christ and the Holy Spirit. God’s Relative and Moral Attributes are communicable in that they can be felt or seen, as well as comprehended through the human senses. These attributes are communicated to us in the Everlasting Covenant, through God’s Word, through Jesus Christ, and through the Holy Spirit.

                First, God and His covenant are self-existent. All other spirits are created and so have a beginning. They owe their existence to another. God does not depend upon the world or anyone in it for his existence. The world depends on God for its existence. Contrary to those theologians who say we cannot know anything about God in himself, Jesus revealed that God has life in himself (John 5:26). The ground of God's being is not in others, for there is nothing more ultimate than him. God is uncaused, the one who always is (Exod. 3:14). To ask who caused God is to as        self-contradictory question in terms of Jesus' view of God. Another term conveying the concept of God's self-existence is "aseity." It comes from the Latin a, meaning from, and se, meaning oneself. God is underived, necessary, nondependent existence. Understanding this allows us to understand how God is unlimited by anything, or infinite, free, self-determined, and not determined by anything other than him contrary to his own sovereign purposes.

                God and His covenant is eternal and omnipresent (ubiquitous). God's life is from within himself, not anything that had a beginning in the space-time world. God has no beginning, period of growth, old age, or end. The Lord is enthroned as King forever (Ps. 29:10). This God is our God forever and forever (Ps. 48:14). Although space or time, or the succession of events in time does not limit God, he created the world with space and time. God sustains the changing realm of succeeding events and is conscious of every movement in history. The observable, changing world is not unimportant or unreal (the idea of maya in Hinduism) to the omnipresent Lord of all. No tribe, nation, city, family, or personal life is valueless, however brief or apparently insignificant. God's eternal nature is not totally other than time or totally removed from everything in time and space. The space-time world is not foreign or unknown to God. History is the product of God's eternally wise planning, creative purpose, providential preservation, and common grace. God fills space and time with his presence, sustains it, and gives it purpose and value. The omnipresent and ubiquitous One is Lord of time and history, not vice versa. God does not negate time but fulfills it. In it his purposes are accomplished.

                Like God, the covenant is unchanging in nature, desire, and purpose. To say that God is immutable is not to contradict the previous truth that God is living and active. It is to say that all the uses of divine power are consistent with his relative and moral attributes such as wisdom, justice, and love. God's acts are never merely arbitrary, although some may be for reasons wholly within himself rather than conditioned upon human response. Underlying each judgment of the wicked and each pardon of the repentant is his changeless purpose concerning sin and conversion. Unlike the Stoic's concept of divine immutability, God is not indifferent to human activity and need. We can always count upon God's concern for the welfare of His children.

                The immutability of God's character means that God never loses his own integrity or lets others down. With God is no variableness or shadow of turning (James 1:17). God's unshakable nature and word provide the strongest ground of faith and bring strong consolation (Heb. 6: 17-18). God is not a man that he should lie (Num. 23:19) or repent (I Sam. 15:29). The counsel of the Lord stands forever (Ps. 33:11). Though heaven and earth pass away, God's words will not fail (Matt. 5:18; 24:35).

                God is omniscient. God knows all things (I John 3:20). Nothing in all creation is  hidden from God's sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the one to whom we must give account (Heb. 4:13), and God’s covenant covers every possible eventuality. Isaiah distinguished the Lord of all from idols by the Lord's ability to predict the future (Isa. 44:7-8, 25-28). Clearly the Lord's knowledge of the future was communicable in human concepts and words. In the context Isaiah made predictions concerning Jerusalem, Judah, Cyrus, and the temple. These concepts were inspired in the original language and are translatable in the languages of the world.

                The human mind has been created in the divine image to think God's thoughts after him, or to receive through both general and special revelation truth from God. Although the fall has affected the human mind, this has not been eradicated. The new birth involves the Holy Spirit's renewal of the person in knowledge after the image of the Creator (Col. 3:10). Contextually, the knowledge possible to the regenerate includes the present position and nature of the exalted Christ (Col. 1:15-20) and knowledge of God's will (Col. 1:9). With this knowledge Christians can avoid being deceived by mere fine-sounding arguments (Col. 2:4). They are to strengthen the faith they were taught in concepts and words (Col. 2:7). And the content of the word of Christ can inform their teaching and worship (Col. 3:16).

                God knows everything that bears upon the truth concerning any person or event. Our judgments are true insofar as they conform to God's by being coherent or faithful to all the relevant evidence. Because God is faithful and true (Rev. 19:11), his judgments (Rev. 19:2) and his words in human language are faithful and true (Rev. 21:5; 22:6). There is no lack of fidelity in God's person, thought, or promise. God is not hypocritical and inconsistent. We may hold to our hope because he who promised is faithful (Heb. 10:23), He is faithful to forgive our sins (1 John 1:9), sanctify believers, strengthen and protect from the evil one (II Thess. 3:3), and not let us be tempted beyond what we can bear (1 Cor. 10:13). Even if we are faithless, he remains faithful, for he cannot disown himself (2 Tim. 2:13).

                God is not only omniscient and consistent in person and word, but also perfectly wise, and that wisdom is reflected in God’s covenants. We may not always be able to see that events in our lives work together for a wise purpose, but we know that God chooses from among all the possible alternatives the best ends and means for achieving them. God not only chooses the right ends but also for the right reasons, the good of his creatures and thus his glory.  Although we may not fully understand divine wisdom, we have good reason to trust it. After writing of God’s gift of the righteousness, Paul exclaims, "To the only wise God be glory forever through Jesus Christ! Amen." (Rom. 16:27).

                The interrelation of the attributes is already evident as the divine omniscience is aware not only of what is but also of what ought to be (morally); divine faithfulness and consistency involve moral integrity and no hypocrisy; and wisdom makes decisions for action toward certain ends and means in terms of the highest values. It is not so strange then when we read that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge (Prov. 1:7).

                Holiness is not solely the product of God's will, but a changeless characteristic of his eternal nature. God always wills in accord with his nature consistently. He wills the good because he is good. And because God is holy, he consistently hates sin and is repulsed by all evil without respect of persons. The Holy Spirit is called holy because he shares the holiness of the divine nature, and because the Spirit's distinctive function is to produce holy love in God's redeemed people. We are to seek to be morally spotless in character and action, upright, and righteous like the God we worship.

                God is just or righteous, and the covenant focuses that righteousness upon the human situation. God's justice or righteousness is revealed in his moral law, which proceeds from the covenant. Moral law expresses God’s moral nature and in his judgment, granting to all, in matters of merit, exactly what they deserve. His judgment is not arbitrary or capricious, but principled and without respect of persons. Old Testament writers frequently protest the injustice experienced by the poor, widows, orphans, strangers, and the godly. God, in contrast, has pity on the poor and needy (Ps. 72:12-14). He answers, delivers, revives, acquits, and grants them the justice that is their due. In righteousness God delivers the needy from injustice and persecution.

                God’s covenants always contain curses for disobedience, as divine wrath is revealed to sinners who suppress his truth (Rom. 1:18-32), In the gospel the righteousness of God is revealed; a righteousness that is by faith from first to last (Rom. 1:17; 3:21).  Believers are justified freely by God's grace that came by Jesus Christ, who provided the sacrifice of atonement (Rom. 3:24). Hence like  Abraham, those who are fully persuaded that God can do what he has promised (Rom. 4:21) find their faith credited to them for righteousness (Rom. 4:3, 24). God in his justice graciously provides for the just status of believers in Christ. Righteousness in God is not unrelated to mercy, grace, and love.

                In mercy God withholds or modifies deserved judgment, and in grace God freely gives undeserved benefits to whom he chooses. All of these moral characteristics flow from God's great love. In contrast to his transcendent self-existence is his gracious self-giving, agape love. He who lives forever as holy, high, and lofty also lives with him who is contrite and lowly in spirit (Isa. 57:15). God desires to give of himself for the well being of those loved, in spite of the fact that they are unlovely and undeserving. This kind of love involves commitment for the well being of others, a faithful commitment, it is not primarily emotional. Love is settled purpose of will involving the whole person in seeking the well being of others.

                God not only loves but also is in himself love (1 John 4:8). His love is like that of a husband toward his wife, a father toward his son, and a mother toward her unweaned baby. In love God chose Israel (Deut. 7:7) and predestined believing members of the church to be adopted as sons through Jesus Christ (Eph. 1:4-5). God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life (John 3:16).

                God desires that we not despair as one after another of our finite friends, family members, and spiritual leaders let us down. His covenant never lets us down. It is something that can always be counted upon. As God exists, his covenant exists. As we worship Him, we find that He is able and willing to meet our needs.

                God is above all else and is the creator of the universe. This creative propensity has to be ranked as one of his greatest attributes. “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” (Gen. 1:1). He did it by fiat, without any preexisting material; his resolve that things should exist (“Let there be . . .”) called them into being and formed them in order with an existence that depended on his will yet was distinct from his own. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were involved together (Gen. 1:2; Pss. 33:6, 9; 148:5; John 1:1-3; Col. 1:15-16; Heb. 1:2; 11:3). The act of creation is mystery to us. We cannot create out of nothing, and we do not know how God could. To say that he created “out of nothing” is to confess the mystery, not explain it. In particular, we cannot conceive how dependent existence can be distinct existence, nor how angels and human beings in their dependent existence can be not robots but creatures capable of free decisions for which they are morally accountable to their Maker. Yet Scripture everywhere teaches us that this is the way it is. We can choose to obey or to disobey God and His covenant.

                 Space and time are dimensions of the created order; God is not “in” either; nor is he bound by either as we are. As the world order is not self-created, so it is not self-sustaining, as God is. The stability of the universe depends on constant divine upholding; this is a specific ministry of the divine Son (Col. 1:17; Heb. 1:3), and without it every creature of every kind, ourselves included, would cease to be. As Paul told the Athenians, “he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else. . . . In him we live and move and have our being” (Acts 17:25, 28).

                 The possibility of creative intrusions (miracles of creative power, reorienting human hearts and redirecting human desires and energies in regeneration) is as old as the cosmos itself. How far God in his upholding activity actually continues to create new things that cannot be explained in terms of anything that went before, it is beyond our power to know; but certainly his world remains open to his creative power at every point. Knowing that God created the world, and created us as part of it, is basic to true religion. God is to be praised as Creator, by reason of the marvelous order, variety, and beauty of his works.

                God has not only the strength to effect all his purposes in the way in which he purposes them, but also the authority in the entire realm of his kingdom to do what he will. God is not a subject of another's dominion, but is King or Lord of all. By virtue of all his other attributes, his wisdom, justice, and love, for example, God is fit for the ruling of all that he created and sustains. God is a wise, holy, and sovereign. He can defeat the nations and demonic hosts that oppose him. He did so at Calvary. No one can exist independent God’s sovereignty. The attempt to live independent of God is sinful insolence on the part of creatures who in him live and move and have their being. Only a fool could say that there is no God. God even gives breath to the atheist who uses it to deny divine dominion over him.

                The various attributes of God always work together in harmony. God is patient and long-suffering, for example. He is concerned for the well being  of the objects of his love, and becomes angry at injustice done to them. God is also long-suffering with evildoers. Without condoning their sin, God graciously provides them with undeserved temporal and spiritual benefits. God promised the land to Abraham, but the iniquity of the Amorites was not yet full (Gen. 15:16). After over four hundred years of long-suffering restraint God in the fullness of  time allowed the armies of Israel to bring just judgment upon the Amorites' wickedness. Later Israel worshipped the golden calf and deserved divine judgment like other idolaters. But God revealed himself at the second giving of the law as "the Lord, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness" (Exod. 34:6). The Psalmist could write, "But Thou, O Lord, art a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness" (Ps. 86:15). However, the day of God's grace has an end. Eventually, without respect of persons, God's just judgment fell upon Israel for its pervasive evils, primarily the breaking of the Covenant. God's long-suffering is a remarkable virtue, but it does not exclude or contradict God's justice. 

THE DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY

                Although not a biblical term, "the Trinity" is convenient designation for the one God self-revealed in Scripture as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. It signifies that within the one essence of the Godhead we have to distinguish three "persons" who are neither three gods on the one side, nor three parts or modes of God on the other, but coequally and coeternally God.

Many apologists have found Trinitarian analogies both in nature generally and in the constitution of man. We are spirit (pneuma), soul (psuche), and body (soma). God is Holy Spirit (Pneuma Hagion), Father (the possessor of a mind, will and emotions-- a psuche), and Jesus Christ (the physical presence-- the soma). God can be compared to steam (Father), water (spirit), and ice (Son). All three forms of water are one in essence with the same chemical composition, and all can be present at the same time under certain conditions. This reminds us of the single essence and three persons of the Godhead or Trinity.

                God uses the symbolism of three things throughout scripture. God is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Man is body, soul, and spirit. There are three parts  of the Tabernacle and Temple; the Outer Court, the Holy Place, and the Most Holy Place (Holy of Holies). There are three Levitical convocations; Passover, Pentecost (Weeks), and Tabernacles. There are three primary Christian observances; Easter, Pentecost, and Advent. And there are three primary stages in the development of God’s Everlasting Covenant; the Adamic (Edenic) Covenant, the Old (Hebrew) Covenant, and the New (Christ’s) Covenant.

                A proper biblical view of the Trinity balances the concepts of unity and distinctiveness. Two errors that appear in the history of the consideration of the doctrine are tritheism and Unitarianism. In tritheism, error is made in emphasizing the distinctiveness of the Godhead to the point that the Trinity is seen as three separate Gods, or a Christian polytheism. On the other hand, Unitarianism excludes the concept of distinctiveness while focusing solely on the aspect of God the Father. In this way, Christ and the Holy Spirit are placed in lower categories and made less than divine. Both errors compromise the effectiveness and contribution of the activity of God in redemptive history.

                Old Testament doctrine emphasizes the unity of God. God is not himself a plurality, nor is he one among many others. He is single and unique: "The Lord our God is one Lord" (Duet.  6:4), and he demands the exclusion of all pretended rivals (Deut. 5:7-11). Hence there can be no question of tritheism. In the Old Testament there are clear intimations of the Trinity. The frequent mention of the Spirit of God (Gen. 1:2) may be noted, as also, perhaps, the angel of the Lord in Exod. 23:23. Again, the plural in Gen. 1:26 and 11:7 is to be noted, as also the plural form of the divine name and the nature of the divine appearance to Abraham in Gen. 18. The importance of the word (Ps. 33:6), and especially the wisdom, of God (Prov. 8:12ff.) is a further pointer, and in a mysterious verse like Isa. 48:16, in a strongly monotheistic context, we have a very close approach to Trinitarian formulation.

                In the New Testament there is no explicit statement of the doctrine (apart from the 1 John 5:7), but the Trinitarian evidence is overwhelming. God is still preached as the one God (Gal. 3:20). Yet Jesus proclaims his own deity (John 8:58) and evokes and accepts the faith and worship of his disciples (Matt. 16:16; John 20:28). As the Son or Word, he can thus be equated with God (John 1:1) and associated with the Father, e.g., in the Pauline salutations (1 Cor. 1:3, etc.). But the Spirit or Comforter is also brought into the same interrelationship (cf. John 14-16). It is not surprising, therefore, that while we have no dogmatic statement, there are clear references to the three persons of the Godhead in the New Testament. All three are mentioned at the baptism of Jesus (Matt. 3:16-17). The disciples are to baptize in the name of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost (Matt. 28:19). The developed Pauline blessing includes the grace of the Son, the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost (2 Cor. 13:14). Reference is made to the election of  the Father, the sanctification of the Spirit, and the sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ (1 Pet. 1:2) in relation to the salvation of believers.

                It is remarkable that New Testament writers present the Trinity in such a manner that it does not violate the Old Testament concept of the oneness of God. In fact, they unanimously affirm the Hebrew monotheistic faith, but they extend it to include the coming of Jesus and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. The early Christian church experienced the God of Abraham in a new and dramatic way without abandoning the oneness of God that permeates the Old Testament. As a fresh expression of God, the concept of the Trinity--rooted in the God of the past and consistent with the God of the past--absorbs the idea of the God of the past, but goes beyond the God of the past in a more personal encounter.

                The New Testament evidence for the Trinity can be grouped into four types of passages. The first is the Trinitarian formula of Matthew 28:19; 2 Corinthians 13:14; 1 Peter 1:2; Revelation 1:4. In each passage a Trinitarian formula, repeated in summation fashion, registers a distinctive contribution of each person of the Godhead. Matthew 28:19, for example, follows the triple formula of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit that distinguishes Christian baptism. The risen Lord commissioned the disciples to baptize converts with a Trinitarian emphasis that carries the distinctiveness of each person of the Godhead while associating their inner relationship. This passage is the clearest scriptural reference to a systematic presentation of this doctrine.

                Paul, in 2 Corinthians 13:14, finalized his thoughts to the Corinthian church with a pastoral appeal that is grounded in "the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit" (NIV). The formulation is designed to have the practical impact of bringing that divided church together through their personal experience of the Trinity in their daily lives. Significantly, in the Trinitarian order Christ is mentioned first. This reflects the actual process of Christian salvation, since Christ is the key to opening insight into the work of the Godhead. Paul was calling attention to the Trinitarian consciousness, not in the initial work of salvation which has already been accomplished at Corinth, but in the sustaining work that enables divisive Christians to achieve unity.

                John addressed the readers of Revelation with an expanded Trinitarian formula that includes references to the persons of the Godhead (Rev. 1:4-6). The focus on the triumph of Christianity crystallizes the Trinitarian greeting into a doxology that acknowledges the accomplished work and the future return of Christ. This elongated presentation serves as an encouragement to churches facing persecution.

                A second type of New Testament passage is the triadic form. Two passages cast in this structure are Ephesians 4:4-6 and 1 Corinthians 12:3-6. Both passages refer to the three Persons, but not in the definitive formula of the previous passage. Each Scripture balances the unity of the church. Emphasis is placed on the administration of gifts by the Godhead.

                A third category of passages mentions the three persons of the Godhead, but without a clear triadic structure. In the accounts of the baptism of Jesus (Matt. 3:3-17; Mark 1:9-11; and Luke 3:21-22), the three synoptic writers recorded the presence of the Trinity when the Son was baptized, the Spirit descended, and the Father spoke with approval. Paul, in Galatians 4:4-6, outlined the work of the Trinity in the aspect of the sending Father. Other representative passages in this category (2 Thess. 2:13-15; Titus 3:4-6; and Jude 20-21) portray each member of the Trinity in relation to a particular redemptive function.

                The fourth category of Trinitarian passages includes those presented in the farewell discourse of Jesus to His disciples (John 14:16; 15:26; 16:13-15). In the context of these passages, Jesus expounded the work and ministry of the third person of the Godhead as the Agent of God in the continuing ministry of the Son. The Spirit is a Teacher who facilitates understanding on the disciples' part and, in being sent from the Father and the Son, is one in nature with the other Persons of the Trinity. He makes known the Son and "at the same time makes known the Father who is revealed in the Son" (16:15). The discourse emphasizes the interrelatedness of the Trinity in equality and operational significance.

                All of these passages are efforts by the early church to express its awareness of the Trinity. The New Testament is Christological in its approach, but it involves the fullness of God being made available to the individual believer through Jesus and by the Spirit. The consistent Trinitarian expression is not a formulation of the doctrine, as such, but reveals an experiencing of God's persistent self-revelation.

God Revealed Through His COVENANT Names

JEHOVAH ELOHIM

                Throughout the course of Biblical history, God revealed Himself and  His nature  through His intervention into the affairs of His people; and  He would often reveal Himself within the revelation of a particular name  that  reflected some special attribute of His nature.

                In the first verse of the first book of the Bible (Genesis), God reveals  Himself as "Elohim"-- which expresses the general idea of greatness and  glory and  of  creative power, of omnipotence and sovereignty. The name  of  God  as  Elohim appears 32 times in the first chapter of Genesis, and 2,570 times in the  Bible.  The  name  is taken from a word that is plural--and  therefore  also  reveals that God is revealing Himself as a God of plural being or  plural existence--a reference to the Trinity of the God-head (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit).

                In the second chapter of Genesis, God reveals Himself as "Jehovah"-- the Being who is absolutely self-existent, the One who in Himself possesses essential life, permanent existence. This name is used 6,823 times.

                God  is a God of justice and mercy, exercising moral governance and  authority over  the world and demanding righteousness from people. The  Shema--"Hear,  O Israel:  The Lord our God is one Lord" (Deut. 6:4)--Judaism's  famous  confession,  likely  dating to Josiah's reform (about 622 BC), conveys  an  understanding of the God’s sovereign authority.

                In  the 17th chapter of Genesis, God reveals Himself as  "El  Shaddai"--the One mighty to nourish, satisfy, supply; the all-sufficient, all bountiful; the  God who blesses with all manner of blessings. It was as El  Shaddai  that God revealed Himself to Abraham and created the promises and provisions to the covenant between God and man.

                The personality of God is also expressed by a variety of names, which  in ancient Near Eastern tradition signified a range of character and  function. Thus he was worshipped by Melchizedek as the Most High God  (Gen. 14:18), while other titles included God Almighty (Exod. 6:3), "a God who sees" (Gen. 16:13), "God is the God of Israel" (Gen. 33:20), and the redemptive name YHWH ("I am who I am" or "I will be what I will  be"). This name, often transliterated Jehovah or Yahweh, establishes God's existence beyond question and identifies him as the only true an living God (Isa. 45:5). It was this act that gave Israel its uniqueness in human society and made it the vehicle of subsequent revelation.

                The  common Semitic designation for "God" or "a god," is El. This term  shares the same ambiguity of other languages, ancient and modern, to refer  indifferently  to  a deity real or alleged or to the recognized Deity of  national  or personal  veneration. Thus, the term El can refer to a false god or  the  true God. It is an interesting fact that the common Hebrew word for "God," Elohim, is  a plural  form, though grammatically it is treated as a singular and  used  with singular  verbs and adjectives.

                In  the Ugaritic literature that testifies to a Canaanite religion of  a  time  prior  to  the formation of the Israelite traditions, El is  the  supreme  and still  active deity in the pantheon, though there are some indications of  its senescence. This picture lends truth probability to the Israelite  patriarchal  accounts in Genesis that envisage pre-Israelite Canaan and in which the  local deities  are invariably designated by the name El, never by that of  Baal.  On the contrary, traditions relating to the Israelite conquest, the period of the Judges,  and the subsequent mutualism of Israelite and Canaanite societies  in Palestine,  universally  refer to the native Canaanite deity as  BAAL  (Lord). This,  too, corresponds with history: Baal, the son (or nephew?) of El,  later supplanted  the  latter as the "active" deity for  Canaanites,  Arameans,  and others of the Near East, even as in Greek mythology Zeus supplanted his father Chronos.  The change in acceptance by the Canaanites from El to Baal  probably  took place during the time that the people of Israel were in Egyptian bondage.  As  a  designation for the primary cultural "god," however, as  distinct  from  that  of a god separate from others, El remained in all the Semitic  languages as a most used element of proper names.

                Speaking just prior to the Babylonian takeover of Jerusalem (587 BC),  Jeremiah emphasizes the impotence of gods (like Baals) that are mere idols. "The instruction of idols  is  but wood!" he says sarcastically (Jer. 10:8). "False  gods"  cannot bring  rain  (14:22). As the product of human craft, these gods "who  did  not make the heavens and the earth shall perish" (10:11). Jerusalem's  destruction cannot be averted by "the gods to whom they burn incense" (11:12). Such  gods, whom the people "have not known" (7:9; 19:4), are unreal (16:20). Their  nothingness is further asserted by Isaiah who refers to them as mere fragments  of wood  and  metal  (Isa. 40:19-20; 46:6-7), these pagan deities  are  no  match whatever  for Yahweh, the Creator and Sovereign of the universe, who  is  "the first" and "the last" (44:6).

                The  plural  form Elohim is commonly used in all parts of the  Bible,  and  is translated "God" in English. The Hebrew word Yahweh or Yehoveh (YHVH or YHWH when transliterated from Hebrew), is the only other word generally employed to denote the Supreme Being. This Hebrew term is uniformly rendered  in the Authorized Version by "LORD," printed in small capitals.

                In  ancient  cultures names were very important. In the Bible,  names  usually denote something about the character of the person. When a person's  character changed,  his  name often changed. Abram’s name was changed, for  example,  to Abraham.  A name change usually indicated a change of nature in  the  person. The change of name from Jacob to Israel illustrates this point.

                Elohim  is the designated covenant title of God. Variations of this  name  are used  whenever God made a covenant with anyone. God's Covenant Names  describe the righteous and sovereign nature of God. They tell us who God is based  upon two things; His Character and His works. Elohim is distinguished from the gods of  the world in that He is of superior character and of superior  power.  All authority is in Him, and this authority is reflected in His names. His authority  is based upon who God is; i.e. His character. Anyone who exercises  great authority  must  first  have impeccable character. Mankind  can  obtain  godly character  only  through a covenant relationship with Elohim--  the  sovereign creator.

                El has the same general range of meaning as Elohim. It is apparently the  root on which the plural form has been constructed. It differs in usage from Elohim only in its use in theophoric names and to serve to contrast the human and the divine.  Sometimes  it is combined with yah to become Elyah. Elohim  is  often used  with  Jehovah (Yawed), and the King James Version of the  Bible  denotes this combination as LORD God.

                ELOHIM literally means the Mighty One with plural natures (Father, Son, Holy Ghost)  which  is used 2570 times in the Bible. The root El is often  used  in combination with other titles to give the reader a more clear understanding of the God of the Covenant. Some of these terms follow.

1. EL ROT-- "God who sees" (Gen. 16:13) is typical of this type of name.

2. EL OLAM-- "God eternal"; Gen. 21:33).

3. EL-OAH-- Almighty God the Everlasting One (Gen. 21:33)

4. EL-ELYON-- Almighty God the Highest, possessor of heaven and earth  (Genesis14:18-22; Psalms 78:35).  The word Elyon, an adjective meaning "high," is derived from the root ("to go up" or "ascend"). It is used to  describe  the height of objects (2 Kings 15:35; 18:17; Ezek.41:7) as well  as the  prominence  of  persons (Ps. 89:27) and  the  prominence  of Israel  as  a  nation (Deut. 26:19; 28:1). When used  of  God  it connotes the concept of "highest." The name El Elyon occurs only in Gen. 14: 18-22 and Ps. 78:35, although God is known by the shorter title Elyon in a significant  number  of  passages. There is a superlative connotation  in  the word  'elyon. In each case in which the adjective occurs  it  denotes that which is highest or uppermost. In Deut. 26:19 and 28:1 the superlative idea is apparent in the fact that Israel is to be exalted above the nations.

5. EL-TSADIKE-- the Almighty Righteous One (Isa. 45:21; Ps.14:8)

6. EL SHADDAI--(Genesis 17:1-2; Exodus 6:2-3)

                a. the True Almighty One who constantly reveals Himself by His works.

                b. The El (god) who reveals Himself through judgment and His covenants.

                c. The El (god) who is able to fulfill His promises.

                d. The God of Abraham's covenant.

                e. the many breasted One who provides the source of life.

                The etymology of Shaddai is obscure. It has been connected with the Akkadian sadu ("mountain") by some. Others have suggested a connection with the word "breast," and still others have seen a connection with the verb sadad ("to devastate"). The theological significance of the name, if it can be understood fully, must be derived from a study of the various contexts in which the name occurs. The name Shaddai frequently appears apart from El as a divine title.

                “God of the Fathers” is a  technical phrase used as a general designation of the God of the patriarchs. Some references to the formula within the biblical narratives speak of the "God of my [your, thy, his, their] father" (Gen. 31:5, 29; 43:23; 49:25; 50:17), without mention of a particular father. Other references include the name of a particular patriarch, as "the God of Abraham" (Gen. 31:53; 26:24; 28:13; 32:9), "the God of Isaac" (Gen. 28:13; 32:9; 46:1), "the God of Nahor" (Gen. 31:53),  or the "Mighty One of Jacob" (Gen. 49:24).

                The "burning bush" story (Ex. 3) identified the "God of the Fathers" with Yahweh Elohim. Faced with the prospect of telling the people that "The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you," Moses was worried that they would ask him, "What is his name?" (3:13). God commanded Him to answer: "Yahweh, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me to you" (3:15). Exodus 6:2-3 reveals that the "God of the fathers" was not known by the name of Yahweh, but as "El Shaddai"

                One  other form of Covenant name is El-Eloe-Yisrael. This  appellation  occurs only  in Gen. 33:20 as the name of the altar that marked the place of  Jacob’s encounter  with  God. It denotes the unique significance of El as the  God  of Jacob.

                In  the Pentateuch, when Elohim is used as a covenant name, it  most  commonly  denotes  the more transcendental aspects of God's character. When God is  presented  in  relation to his creation and to the peoples of the  earth  in  the Pentateuch, the name Elohim is the name most often used. It is for this reason that  Elohim occurs consistently in the creation account of Gen. 1:1-2:42  and in the genealogies of Genesis. Where the context takes on a moral tone, as  in  Gen. 2:4bff., the redemptive name Yahweh is used.

                Throughout Genesis and the early chapters of Exodus Elohim is used most  often  as  a  proper  name. After Exod. 3 the name begins to  occur  with  increasing frequency as "the God of," or "your God." This  function  is  by  far the most frequent mode of reference to God in  the  book  of Deuteronomy.  When  used in this fashion the name denotes God as  the  supreme deity  of a person or people. Thus, in the frequent expression,  "Yahweh  your God," Yahweh functions as a proper name, while "God" functions as the identification of deity.

                The  appellate Elohim connotes all that God is. As God he is sovereign,  and that  sovereignty extends beyond Israel into the arena of the  nations  (Deut. 2:30,  33; 3:22; Isa. 52:10). As God to his people he is loving  and  merciful (Deut.  1:31; 2:7; 23:5; Isa. 41:10, 13, 17; 49:5; Jer. 3:23). He  establishes standards of obedience (Deut. 4:2; Jer. 11:3) and punishes disobedience (Deut. 23:21). There is no one like God (Isa. 44:7; 45:5-21).

                As  El  Elyon, God is described in his exaltation over all things. He  is  the source  of all authority and power in the universe. There are  two  definitive passages  for this name. In Ps. 83:18 Yahweh is described as "Most  High  over the  earth,"  and Isa. 14:14 states, "I will ascend above the heights  of  the clouds,  I will make myself like the Most High."  He fixed the boundaries  of the  nations (Deut. 32:8). He effects changes in the creation (Ps. 18:13).

                El Shaddai occurs most frequently in the Book of Job. As El Shaddai, the God of covenant disciplines (Job 5:17); he is to be  feared (Job  6:14); he is just (Job 8:3); he hears prayer (Job 8:5); and  he  creates (Job 33:4). This name occurs six times in the patriarchal narratives. In  most of  those  instances  it is associated with the promise given by  God  to  the patriarchs.  Yet the name is often paired with Yahweh, sharing the personal warmth of that name. He is known for his  steadfast love (Ps. 21:7) and his protection (Ps. 91:9-10).

Here are several other references to God as the Sovereign Covenant Maker:

1. A Spirit-- John 4:19-24                                     6. Righteous Judge-- Matthew 16:18

2. consuming fire-- Hebrews 12:29                    7. Revealer of Secrets-- Proverbs 25:2

3. Holy One of Israel; Psalms 71                        8. One who chastens -- Hebrews 12:6

4. Light (Life)-- 1 John 1:5                                   9. Our Strength-- Exodus 15:2           

5. Love-- 1 John 4:7-8                                          10  Ancient of Days--  applied to God in Dan. 7

                In summary, the Covenant Names of God reveal that he is the Sovereign Lord who has set his standard and will enforce it through his covenant. God is a living, personal Spirit worthy of adoration and trust (because of his many perfect attributes), and because of the just covenant law that he has established. God is separate from the world, and yet continuously active in the world. Unlimited by space, God nevertheless created and sustains the cosmos, scientific laws, geographical and political boundaries. Beyond time, God nevertheless actively relates to time, to each human life, home, city, nation, and to human history in general. Unlimited by a body, God is nevertheless providentially related to  physical power in nature and society, industrially, agriculturally, socially, and politically. God knows and judges human stewardship in the use of all the earth's energy resources. Although free from unworthy and uncontrolled emotions, God caringly seeks to meet the needs of those with whom he has made a covenant. God’s covenant people may be the unfortunate, the lonely, the sorrowing, the sick, the victims of prejudice, injustice, anxiety, and despair; but because of God’s Everlasting Covenant, they have the right to enter into the presence of God and to receive God’s visitation to meet their needs.

God Revealed Through His REDEMPTIVE Names

                One who has power and exercises it responsibly was called “Lord” in Old Testament era societies. Lordship must include power to exercise control as well as possession of power within the boundaries of a well-defined system such as law. A despot is only a caricature of the legal term "Lord" or "ruler."

                Nations around Israel often called their gods: "lord." We need to distinguish between the Near Eastern and Greek religions. At first the Greeks did not see themselves in a slave/lord relationship with their gods because they did not believe their gods were responsible for their creation. They could, indeed, call the gods "lord," but that was not characteristic. Instead, both they and their gods were subject to the same higher power--that is, fate. Thus the Greeks felt no personal responsibility before the gods.

                In the Old Testament, Lord usually describes the essence of Yahweh: His power over His people (Ex. 34:23; Isa. 1:24), over the entire earth (Josh. 3:13; Mic. 4:13), and over all gods (Deut. 10:17; Ps. 135:5). Thus adon could stand parallel to the personal name of God, Yahweh (Ex. 15:17): Yahweh is Lord; the Lord is Yahweh. Additional terms such as Sabbaoth (that is, Supreme Head and Commander of all the heavenly forces) underscored the absolute lordship of Yahweh (Isa. 3:1; 10:16,33). Many times adon or the special form adonai was used in direct address to God (439 times), attesting to the honor of God or His representative (2 Sam. 7:18-22,28-29; Josh. 5:14; Zech. 4:4). In time a formal designation, Adonai Yahweh ("the Lord Yahweh"), developed. This corresponded to the uniqueness of Yahweh; and, finally, Yahweh was referred to as Adonai alone, especially in Isaiah, Psalms, and Lamentations. Israelites formed personal names with Adonai (Adonijah, Adoniram) just as did their neighbors (Adoni-zedek, Josh. 10:1-3), since these peoples also addressed their gods as "lord."

                The designation of Yahweh as adonai or “Lord” led to varied forms of conflict with Baal and his worshipers during the history of Israel: for example, prior to the conquest (Num. 25); during the time of the Judges (6:25-32); during the monarchy (1 Kings 18; 22:53; 2 Kings 3:2; 10:18-28). Even in Judah, worship of Baal proved a danger (2 Kings 11:18; 21:1-5). King Josiah's reform finally ended the conflict with Baal by destroying the worship places outside Jerusalem (2 Kings 23). The prophets Hosea, Jeremiah, Zephaniah, and Ezekiel spoke out against the hidden "Baalizing" of the religion of Yahweh. They claimed Israel went to worship Yahweh but did it in such a way they were actually worshiping Baal without naming his name. Yahweh was the supreme Lord over the world; but Baal's worshipers saw Baal as lord of at least a part of the world. He appeared and disappeared with the vegetation, being humiliated and defeated by other gods, even becoming weak, sick, and dying.

                Many people from Christian backgrounds today think that Satan sometimes wins, but will ultimately be defeated by God. Satan is sometimes spoken of as the God of this world. This is basically the same attitude that Israel had. They worshipped God but feared and revered Baal to the point that he had to be honored or placated, according to their erroneous understanding. Just as Christians today do not acknowledge that God through Christ is the only victorious one, and just as they often fear Satan, so the Israelites feared Baal and did not acknowledge Yaweh Elohim as the only god. The revelation of God in the Old Testament, however, speaks against any such alternative, for Yahweh alone is Lord. He is Lord in His historical acts. Humans have no power over Him. He is Lord in His directions for life. Humans are to obey Him totally. He is the Lord who reveals Himself in His covenant, His law, and His faithfulness.

                About 300 BC Adonai became more frequently used than Yahweh. Thus the Books of Esther, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Solomon do not use the name: Yahweh. The title "Lord" (Adonai) was no longer an adjective modifying the divine name but was a substitute for the divine name: Yahweh. Origen reported that when Jews read the divine name Yahweh, they would pronounce it Adonai, while non-Jews would pronounce it kurios. 

                In the Greek translation of the Old Testament (Septuagint), written before the time of Christ, "Yahweh" was written in Hebrew characters. In the Dead Sea Scrolls, the scribes out of awe for the divine name wrote it in ancient Hebrew script rather than in their normal script. Later, Christian scribes replaced the Hebrew characters in the Greek Bible with kurios. Scribes transmitting the Hebrew Bible showed that Yahweh should not be pronounced but read as Adonai by substituting the Hebrew vowels of adonai for those of Yahweh when writing the divine name. Later readers who did not know this history did not pronounce Yahweh; but neither did they pronounce Adonai, as the scribes intended. Rather in the Middle Ages readers of the Hebrew Bible began pronouncing precisely what was written, the mixture of consonants from Yahweh and vowels from adonai, producing the pronunciation of Jehovah, a word that never existed for speakers of classic Hebrew.

                 In the majority of the books of the New Testament, also, Yahweh, or God was called Lord. That occurs above all in quotations from the Old Testament and in translating terms such as "angel," "way," "word," "day," "name," or "hand" of the Lord. In important passages kurios (Lord) appears in the sense of the Old Testament Adonai as Creator of the world and Director of history (Matt. 9:38; 11:25; Acts 17:24; 1 Tim. 6:15; Book of Revelation). In this way Christians preserved and continued the Jewish understanding of God. Since the New Testament and early Christians also called Jesus "Lord," we have difficulty many times determining whether Jesus or God is meant by "Lord" (Matt. 24:42; Mark 5:19-20; Luke 1:76; Acts 10:14).

YAHWEY, YAHOVEH, or JEHOVAH

                Basic  to ancient Hebrew religion is the concept of divine  revelation.  While God  is conceived of as revealing his attributes and will in a number of  ways in the Old Testament, one of the most theologically significant modes of the divine self-disclosure is the revelation inherent in the names of God.

                In light of the ambiguous and often erroneous beliefs about God held by the ancient Semitic People, God had to reveal himself uniquely to his chosen people. He used his titles or names, prophetic revelation, and the Levitical Law to do this. Throughout the Old Testament God is sharply contrasted with  human beings and with the things of the world. One of the prophets represents God as saying: "My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my  ways.... For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts" (Isa. 55:8-9). God is the "Holy  One" of  Israel, a numinous reality inspiring awe. (The Hebrew word for "holy"  had the  meaning of "separate.") Old Testament writers can speak too of the  "hiddenness"  of  God.  God had a name, YAHWEH, or more pronounceable YAHOVAH  (JEHOVAH),  which  God had made known to the people. This name was so holy that the Hebrews would not  pronounce  it,  and in fact, used the term Adoni (lord)  when  reading  a portion of scripture containing the word Yahweh or yahovah. (Note: Since there is no "w"  in Hebrew, the "v" sound should be used when saying this title  of  God). Whatever its origin may have been, it sounded like  "I am" in Hebrew.

                The term Yahweh or Yahovah (Jehovah) comes originally from the tetragrammation YHWH.  Efforts to determine the meaning of the Tetragrammaton  (YHWH)  through historical  investigation have been rendered difficult by the paucity  of  in formative  data  relative to the various forms of the name “ya”  in  historical sources outside the Old Testament.

                In the 22nd chapter of Genesis, God reveals Himself as "Jehovah  Jireh", the  God  who will provide. In the 15th chapter of Exodus,  God  is  "Jehovah-Rophe"  the  God  who heals. In the 17th chapter of Exodus,  God  is  seen  as "Jehovah-Nissi",  God,  my banner. In the 20th chapter of  Leviticus,  God  is "Jehovah-M'Kaddesh"-- the God who sanctifies, and separates unto holiness.  In the  6th chapter of Jeremiah, God is "Jehovah-Tsidkenu"--God,  our  Righteousness. In the 23rd Psalm, God reveals Himself as "Jehovah-Rohi" God who is  our shepherd.  In  the 48th chapter of Exekiel, God reveals Himself  as  "Jehovah-Shammah", meaning God is there, and was used prophetically in reference to the completion  and fulfillment of the promise and pledge of God in His  relationship to man.

                This aspect of divine revelation is established in the words of Exod. 6:3,  "I appeared  to Abraham, to Isaac and to Jacob, as God Almighty, but by  my  name the Lord [Yahweh] I did not make myself known to them." God revealed more than a name to Abraham and, later, to Moses. He revealed His character. Moses  asks in  Exod.  3:13, "What is his name?" (mah-semo). The syntax of  this  question does  not  connote an inquiry as to the name of God but an  inquiry  into  the character revealed by the name.

                Exodus  14:4 also supports the view that the name Yahweh embodies  aspects  of God's  character. It says, "and the Egyptians will know that I am Yahweh."  It is  hardly likely that the intent of this assertion is that they  would  learn only  the name of the Hebrew God. In the light of these observations, the  use of  the  concepts of the name of God in the early narratives of  the  book  of Exodus is far broader than simply the name by which the Hebrew God was  known. It has a strong element of divine self-disclosure within it.

                The attributes of God are set forth in order by Moses in Exod. 34:6,7. (see also Deut.  6:4;  10:17;  Num. 16:22; Exod. 15:11; 33:19; Isa. 44:6;  Hab.  3:6;  Ps. 102:26;  Job 34:12.) They are also systematically classified in Rev. 5:12  and 7:12. God's attributes are spoken of by some as absolute, i.e., such as belong  to his essence as Jehovah, Jah, etc.; and relative, i.e., such as are ascribed to him with relation to his creatures. Others distinguish them into communicable,  i.e., those which can be imparted in degree to his creatures:  goodness, holiness,  and wisdom; and incommunicable, which cannot be so imparted:  independence, immutability, immensity, and eternity. They are by some also divided into natural attributes, eternity, and immensity; and moral attributes,  holiness, goodness, etc.

                YAHWEY, YAHOVEH, or JEHOVAH is various assumed pronunciations of the personal name  of the Hebrew God YHWH. This English language form, which made  its  appearance in late medieval times was widely used from then until modern  times. Jehovah is actually a composite of the consonants for one word and the  vowels for  another. When only consonants were written in ancient Hebrew  texts,  the divine  name  was written YHWH (or YHVH, depending  on  the  transliteration). Later,  vowels  were  added to texts by a series of dots  and  dashes  written below,  within, or above the consonants. By this time, the name of  the  deity had  become  so sacrosanct it was no longer pronounced in  reading  the  text. Instead, the word ADONAI was generally read. Thus the scribes wrote the vowels for  Adonai with the consonants YHVH. When the vowels of Adonai  are  combined with  the consonants YHVH, the form "Yehovah" results. Since  many  languages, such as German, seldom use the letter y but use j instead, the form  "Jehovah" resulted.   There is no evidence that the personal name of God was ever   pronounced Jehovah in antiquity.

                The  parallel structure in Exod. 3:14-15 supports the association of the  name Yahweh  with the concept of being or existence. It says, "I AM has sent me  to you" (verse 14; "The LORD has sent me to you" (verse 15). The name "I AM" is based on the clause "I AM WHO I AM" found in 3:14 which, on the basis of the etymology implied here, suggests that Yahweh is a form of the verb 'ehyeh (I am).

                The clause 'ehyeh'aser 'ehyeh has been translated in several ways, "I am  that I  am" (AV), "I am who I am" (RSV, NIV), and "I will be what I will  be"  (RSV). Recently the translation "I am (the) One who is"  has been suggested. The  latter translation has much in its favor grammatically and fits the  con text well. God is whatever He needs to be and does whatever He needs to do. He is, in effect, a deity who redeems mankind through becoming both a judge and a savior.  For  this reason we say that the Jehovah names of  God  are redemptive names. They describe actions resulting from God's desire to  redeem mankind. God, by His grace, does whatever needs to be done to  bring  mankind into a relationship with Him. Once in that relationship, God meets all  of mankind's needs through his redemptive works.

                Continuity exists  in the divine activity from the time of the patriarchs to the events recorded  in Exod. 3. The Lord is referred to as the God of the fathers (Exod. 3:13, 15,  16). The  God who made the gracious promises regarding Abraham's offspring  is  the God  who is and who continues to be. The affirmation of verse 17 is but a  reaffirmation of the promise made to Abraham. The name Yahweh may thus affirm  the CONTINUING ACTIVITY OF GOD on behalf of his people according to his promise.

                Jesus' application of the words "I am" to himself in John 8:58 not only denoted his preexistence but associated him with Yahweh.  Jesus was the fulfillment of the promise given to Abraham, the fulfillment of which Abraham  anticipated (John 8:56). Jesus was the fulfillment of all of God's redemptive activity.

                In the Pentateuch, Yahweh denotes that aspect of God's character that is  personal  rather than transcendent. It occurs in contexts in which  a  covenantal relationship has been established and the redemptive aspects of God are needed to  be predominate. The name YHWH is employed when God is presented to  us  in His  personal  character and in direct relationship to people or  nature;  and Elohim,   when the God is alluded to as a being who exists completely  outside and above the physical universe.

                Whereas Elohim and the Elohistic names of God speak of God's sovereign authority, the Jehovistic names of God speak of His unlimited power to carry out His will.  God has, at His disposal, all of the resources of the universe.  He  is Yahweh Sabaoth-- the Lord of Hosts.

The  name  Yahweh Sabaoth appears for the first time in  Israel's  history  in connection  with the cult center at Shiloh (1 Sam. 1:3). It is there that  the tent  of  meeting was set up when the land of Canaan had been subdued  by  the Israelites  (Josh.  18:1).

                The  association  of this name with the Ark of the Covenant in I Sam.  4:4  is significant in that Yahweh is enthroned above the angelic figures known as the cherubim  (2 Sam. 6:2). Because the name was associated with the Ark of the Covenant,  David addressed the people in that name when the ark was  recovered  from  the  Philistines (2 Sam. 6:18). The name is often associated  with  the military activities of Israel (1 Sam. 15:2-3).

                The  almighty  power  of Yahweh displayed in this name is  manifested  in  the sphere  of history (Ps. 46:6-7; 59:5). His power may be displayed in the  life of the individual (Ps. 69:6) as well as the nation (Ps. 80:7). Sometimes he is simply referred to as "the Almighty." The military connotation of the name was used  by  Isaiah  to depict the hosts of heaven that accompany Yahweh  in  his intervention in history (Isa. 13:4).

                The  title, "Lord of Sabaoth" (KJV) used for God in Romans 9:29 and James  5:4  accurately  reflects  the  Greek transliteration of the Old Testament  epithet  for  God, Yahweh  sebha'oth,  "Lord  of [angelic] hosts." The Prophets favors the title--Malachi  uses it twenty-three times in four chapters. Israel  itself can  be described as "the hosts of the Lord" in Exodus 12:41. The more  normative sense is that preserved in the account of Joshua's confrontation with the angelic  "commander of the army [host] of the Lord" on the eve of God's  great victory over Jericho (Josh. 5:13-15). These hosts were the myriad of heavenly beings who served God in the divine court (Dan. 7:10), and who accompanied God in battle and at the great event in Bethlehem (Luke 2:13).

                THE JEHOVAHISTIC NAMES OF GOD (REDEMPTIVE NAMES)

Each  and all of these compound REDEMPTIVE names show how Jehovah God meets every need of man in redemptive power. The ultimate revelation of the  REDEMPTIVE NAMES is to be found in the NAME of the LORD JESUS CHRIST. And His CHURCH is to be conformed to HIS IMAGE!  (Gen. 1:26-28; Rom. 8:29; 2 Cor. 3:18).

JEHOVAH (YAHWEH, LORD)--I AM that I AM -"to be" (Exod. 3:14-15; Isa. 42:8)

JEHOVAH ELOHIM-- The Lord God, the Redeemer- Creator. (Gen. 2:4)

JAH-- abbreviated form of JEHOVAH. (Exod. 15:2; 17:16; Ps. 68:4)

JEHOVAH-ELOHIM-SABAOTH-- Lord God of Hosts. (Ps. 84:8; Jer. 15:16)

ADONAI-JEHOVAH-SABOATH-- Master Lord of Hosts. (Ps. 69:6)

JAH-ELOHIM- Lord God. (Ps. 86:18)

JAH-JEHOVAH--Lord Jehovah. (Isa. 12:2; 26:4)

JEHOVAH-JIREH (more correctly YEHOVEH YIREH)-- The Lord will provide. (Gen.22:14)

JEHOVAH-RAPHA-- The Lord that heals. (Exod. 15:26)

JEHOVAH-NISSI-- The Lord, our Banner. (Exod. 17:15)

JEHOVAH-KANNA-- The Lord who is jealous. (Exod. 20:5; 34:14; Deut. 5:9)

JEHOVAH-M'KADDESH-- The Lord who sanctifies. (Exod. 31:13; Lev. 20:8)

JEHOVAH-SHALOM-- The Lord our peace. (Judg.6:24)

JEHOVAH-SHAPHAT-- The Lord is Judge. (Judg.11:27)

JEHOVAH-SABAOH-- The Lord of Hosts. (1 Sam. 1:3; Psa.24: 10; 84:1,3)

JEHOVAH-ELYON-- The Lord Most High. (Ps. 7:17)

JEHOVAH-RAAH (ROHI)-- The Lord my Shepherd. (Ps. 23:1)

JEHOVAH-HOSENU-- The Lord our Maker. (Ps. 95:6)

JEHOVAH-GIBBOR--The Lord is Mighty. (Isa. 42:13)

JEHOVAH-TSIDKENU-- The Lord our Righteousness. (Jer. 23:6)

JEHOVAH-SHAMMAH-- The Lord is there. (Ezek. 48:35)

                The gracious work of redemption manifests God's sovereignty. He promises, covenants, and works redemptive history. The Messiah is himself "Mighty God" (Isa. 9:6-7), "the Son of the Most High" whose "kingdom will never end" (Luke 1:33). From the beginning of his public ministry to its end Jesus' message concerns "the kingdom of God" (Mark 1:15; Acts 1:3; more than 100 instances in the Synoptics). After the resurrection Christ claims "all authority in heaven and earth" (Matt. 28:18), and the ascended Christ is exalted "far above all rule and authority, power, and dominion" (Eph. 1:19-21; Phil. 2:9-11;1 Cor. 15:24-28; Rev. 5:9-14). Hence the earliest Christian confession was simply: "Jesus is Lord" (Rom. 10:9).

OTHER USES OF THE TERM YAWEH OR JEHOVAH

1.  ADONAI JEHOVAH--the "I AM" who is Master (Ps. 9:4-5; Ps. 123:2; Ps.  14:8; Gen. 15:2; Ezek. 44:27-29)

2.  YAHWEH  ELOHIM or JEHOVAH ELOHIM-- the Great "I AM",  the  all  sufficient mighty  God of 3 natures (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) who is sufficient to  meet all your needs. This term is translated "LORD GOD" in the King James Bible.

3.  JAH or YAH is a shorter form of Yahweh which occurs twice in Exodus  (15:2 and 17:15). The former passage is echoed in Isa. 12:2 and Ps. 118:14. It  also occurs numerous times in the formula haleluya ("praise yah"). Its use in early and  late  poetic  passages and its formulaic function in  the  Hallel  psalms suggest that this form of Yahweh is a poetic stylistic device.

Scriptures for Study:

OLD TESTAMENT-- Gen. 1:26; Isa. 9:6-7; Zech. 9:10; Ps. 24:7-10; 50:1-5;  Mic. 5:2; 2 Sam. 7:12-17; 1 Chron. 10-14; Gen. 12:3; 49:10; Isa. 11:6-10; 25:6-8; Zeph. 3:9; Hag. 2:7-9; Zech. 2:10-11; Mal. 1:11; Isa. 60:1-5; Jer. 3:17.

NEW TESTAMENT--Matt. 13:31-33; Mark. 3:10; Luke. 1:33; 2:10; John12:31-32; Acts 2:34-36; 1 Cor. 15:24-28; Eph. 1:10; Phil.  2:10-11;  Heb. 8:11; 10: 12-13; 12:25-29; Rev. 5:9-14; 11:15; 12:10; Luke. 6:5; 1 Cor. 8:6; Matt. 7:29; Mark 14:36;  28:18; Romans 8:15; 14:9; 1 Tim. 1:17; John. 1:49; 18:36; Galatians 4:6.

RECONCILIATION UNDER GOD’S COVENANT  IN TITLES USED BY JESUS

                The two Greek words, “Kurios Iesu,” composed the first Christian confession of faith (1 Cor. 12:3; Rom. 10:9). The decisive reason for transferring the divine title Lord to Jesus was His resurrection from the dead. Before His resurrection, Jesus was addressed with the Jewish title of honor Rabbi ("teacher", Mark 9:5; 11:21, for example). Luke always, and Matthew usually, translated this title into Greek as kurios ("Lord). According to Mark only once did a non-Jew address Jesus as Lord (Mark 7:28), but even that was simply a polite and courteous way of speaking (equivalent to our "sir"). Jesus was also addressed with the Aramaic mari ("lord", John 13:13). The resurrection changed the respectful student/teacher relationship of the disciples with Jesus into the believers' servant/Lord relationship. The designation of Jesus as Lord in the Gospels (esp. in Luke) is an indication of this shift in relationship. Paul said that God honored Jesus with the title of Lord as His response to Jesus' obedient suffering (Phil. 2:6-11). Jesus in the form of a Servant is the humbled One with the marks of the cross, before whom the entire world will bow down. Thus the Crucified One will experience an act of homage like that due God Himself (Isa. 45:23-24). His church already gives Him such homage. He has been seated at the right hand of God, which demonstrates the elevation of Jesus to the position of Ruler next to God Himself (Ps. 110:1; Mark 12:35-37).

                Jesus as the Messiah of Israel (Acts 2:36) was installed as Head of His church and Ruler of the cosmos by His resurrection (Col. 1:17; 2:6,10; Eph. 1:20-23). As such, the church prays for His return: "Come, our Lord" (or in Aramaic, maranatha, 1 Cor. 16:22; 11:26; Rev. 22:20). The cosmic lordship of Jesus still remains the lordship of God. Jesus will give the judged and redeemed world back to the Father (1 Cor. 15:28). The center of this lordship is the power of administration over all things human (Rom. 14:9).

                The lordship of Jesus has ethical consequences. He makes the significance of all other powers of only relative importance (1 Cor. 8:5-6; Col. 2:15). The Christian believer is foundationally freed from being servant to any thing or person in the human world (1 Cor. 7:22-23). The believer devotes self to serve others, even the ones in power, as his or her lord in voluntary service (Mark 10:42-45).

          The Apostle John’s Gospel is punctuated with “I am” statements that have special significance because I am (Greek: ego eimi) was used to render God’s name in the Greek translation of Exodus 3:14; whenever John reports Jesus as saying ego eimi, a claim to deity is implicit. Examples of this are John 8:28, 58, and the other declarations of his grace. These statements remind us that he is our redeemer -- the fulfillment of the revelation of God made through God’s Redemptive Names. In other words Christ is God incarnate. These “I AM” statements are a direct fulfillment of the redemptive work promised by God through his Old Testament redemptive names.

           Here is a summary of Christ as the fulfillment of God’s redemptive character, as expressed through Christ’s “I AM statements.

 1. I AM the door-- John 19:7

2. I AM the good shepherd-- John 10:11

3. I AM the resurrection and the life-- John 11:25

4. I AM the vine, nurturing for fruitfulness -- John 15:1-5

5. Before Abraham was, I AM-- John 8:58 (In other words, Jesus was the Messiah before

    Abraham entered into covenant with El Shaddai and had the revelation of Jehovah Jireh)

6. I AM the light of the world-- John 8:12

7. (I AM) He is the blood (life) and flesh (way of life)--John 6:56

8. (I AM) He is the Bread of Life, giving spiritual food -- John 6:35, 48, 51

9.  Jesus is also the Word (logos), the idea of the covenant that  existed  in the mind of YHWH, guiding us to fellowship with the Father.

                Jesus was born of the human race (Isaiah 9:6), of the Messianic covenant line-- (Genesis 22:18; 49:10), of the Royal line of David (2 Samuel 7:14; Isaiah 11:1). Ephesians  1:17-23  tells us that we have the right to  use  Jesus’  name because of  3 factors. That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him: 18 The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints, 19 And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power, 20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, 21 Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come: 22 And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church, 23 Which is his body, the fullness of him that filleth all in all.

                Jesus inherited His titles from Yehovah or Yahweh-- through his own deity. When we are born again, we are made new creatures (2 Cor. 5:17), and have the inheritance and genealogy of Jesus applied to us.  The Name of Jesus was bestowed upon Him by prophecies recorded in the Old Testament. The use of His name is bestowed on us by permission of Jesus Himself in various recorded passages (such as John 16:24-26). Jesus lived up to His name through the life that He lived and the miracles that He did. He sent His disciples forth in His name to do these same works (Luke 9:1-6 and 10:1-9). All  the power, and all the authority that Jesus had is invested in  His name. Jesus’ name is great and significant to us because of three factors. (1) He INHERITED a great name. (2) His name is great because it was prophetically BESTOWED upon Him. (3) His name is also important because it was CONFERRED upon Him as a  conqueror. Because  we  are adopted into His family, we have the right to  use  the  family name-- the Name of Jesus, in order to exercise the rights of our inheritance.

                As a part of that inheritance, in the Name of Jesus Christ, there is complete reconciliation of mankind to God, and a restoration of Covenant relationship with the Covenant Maker. There are four important New Testament passages which treat of the work of Christ under the figure of reconciliation, namely, Romans 5:10; 2 Corinthians 5:18; Ephesians 2:11; Colossians 1:19. The important Greek words are the noun katallageµ and the verbs katallassoµ and apokatallassoµ. Reconciliation properly applies not to good relations in general but to the doing away of an enmity, the bridging over of a quarrel. It implies that the parties being reconciled were formerly hostile to one another. The Bible tells us bluntly that sinners are “enemies” of God (Rom. 5:10; Col. 1:21; Jas. 4:4). We should not minimize the seriousness of these and similar passages. An enemy is not someone who comes a little short of being a friend. He is in another camp, not the encampment of God.

                It is interesting to notice that no New Testament passage speaks of Christ as reconciling God to man. Always the stress is on man’s being reconciled. This in the nature of the case is very important. It is man’s sin which has caused the enmity. It is man’s sin that has had to be dealt with. Man may very well be called on in the words of 2 Corinthians 5:20 to be reconciled to God. Reconciliation is necessary because of the enmity between sinful humanity and a righteous God. The way to overcome enmity is to take away the cause of the quarrel.  In every case the way to reconciliation lies through an effective grappling with the root cause of the enmity. Christ died to put away our sin. In this way he dealt with the enmity between man and God. He put it out of the way. He made the way wide open for men to come back to God. It is this which is described by the term ‘reconciliation’.

                Man, left to himself, is not particularly worried by his sin. Certainly he feels no hostility to God on account of his sin. A barrier arises because God’s covenant law demands holiness in man. Therefore when the process of reconciliation has been effected it is impossible to say it is completely man-ward, and not God-ward in any sense. There must be a change from God’s side if all that is involved in such expressions as “the wrath of God” is no longer exercised towards man. God promised reconciliation through his covenant, through his titles, and through the prophets. Jesus Christ was the fulfillment of that promise. In His Name we are reconciled to the I AM, and that is why the name of Jesus (Jeshua or Joshua) was given to Christ before his actual birth. God had preordained that the triune  I AM (Yahweh or Jehovah) would step into history in the form of the God-Man Jesus Christ, in order to bring about a complete restoration and reconciliation. For this reason the righteousness of God was imputed to us through Christ (2 Corinthians 5:21).

CHAPTER 4

THE BLOOD SPEAKS

LIFE IS IN THE BLOOD

                The blood has always been critical to understanding God's covenants. Carefully study  the following scriptures to find out why the concept of  “the Blood”  is so important.

1.   There is health in the blood. Israel's bloodline was polluted according to Ezekiel 16:4-6.

2.   Life is in the blood-- Lev. 17:11.

3.   Man's origin is in the blood-- Acts 17:26.

4.   Man's blood (seed) is polluted-- Rom. 5:14; Gen. 6:13.

5.   Man was created after the bloodline of God-- Gen. 1:26-27; 2:7.

6.   Jesus gives a renewal of God's bloodline-- Luke 1:28-35; 1 Peter 1:18-19; 2:24;

      1 John 1:1-9; 3:15-21.

7.   We must become partakers of this Godly bloodline-- John 6:53; Col. 1:12-20; 2:9-11.

8.   The bloodline to which we belong manifests itself and the blood also cries out to God

      Gen. 3 (see Cain and Abel).

9.   Our legal rights are in the blood of the covenant-- Heb. 10:16-23.

10.  The power of a covenant is in the blood-- Heb. 8:6; 9:1-27.

                Above  all, the Hebrews, along with the rest of the ancient world, identified the animating principle of life with BLOOD. Life is in the blood according  to Deuteronomy  12:23  and  Leviticus 17:11. Because of this  belief,  blood  was splashed  upon the altar during sacrifices and also sprinkled on the  worshipers. Blood was shed in making (or "cutting") a covenant by sacrificing animals and also in ritual circumcision. The need to drain all blood from meat slaughtered for food (the dietary laws) also derived from this ancient belief.

                In the covenant ceremony of Exodus 24:4-8 the ritual of the blood matches the two focal points of the Passover: the people sheltering beneath the blood both enjoy peace with God and also are committed to pilgrimage. Thus it is that Moses first sprinkles the blood on the altar, a Godward movement reflecting the central Passover  theology of propitiation. But next, as soon as the people have committed themselves to the way of obedience, the rest of the blood is  sprinkled over them; the blood covers the needs of the redeemed  throughout their walk of pilgrim-obedience.

                In the covenant ceremony it is also to be noted that the presence of the Lord in the midst of his people is symbolized by an altar, for it is the blood of sacrifice which alone secures and maintains fellowship between Redeemer and redeemed. The permanence of the people in the divine presence is symbolized by stone pillars, stone for durability, but, while thus in his presence, their activity is to offer burnt offerings and peace offerings. Blood had brought them into peace with God, and blood would maintain his fellowship by means of the appointed offerings.

                The other side of the same reality is seen in Leviticus 9. The Aaronic priesthood has just been introduced into its sacred function (Lev. 8) and now for the first time celebrates the full round of Levitical sacrifices: the sin offering (9:8), the burnt offering (vs. 12), and the peace offering (vs. 18). The climax follows: "The glory of the Lord appeared to all the people" (vs. 23), this being the foretold purpose of the sacrifices (vs. 6). The sacrifices are thus designed for the expression, enjoyment, and maintenance of fellowship with God.

                Because of this, as  food,  blood was prohibited in Gen. 9:4, where the use of animal  food  is allowed. Compare Deut. 12:23; Lev. 3:17; 7:26; and Lev. 17:10-14. The  injunction to abstain from blood is renewed in the decree of the council of  Jerusalem  (Acts 15:29). It has been held by some that this law of  prohibition  was only ceremonial and temporary; while others regard it as still binding on all. 

                The  blood of sacrifices was caught by the priest in a basin, and then  sprinkled  seven  times  on the altar; that of the Passover on  the  doorposts  and lintels of the houses (Exod. 12; Lev. 4:5-7; 16:14-19). At the giving of the law (Exod. 24:8) the blood of the sacrifices was sprinkled on the people as well  as on  the  altar, and thus the people were consecrated to God, or  entered  into covenant  with him, hence the blood of the covenant (Matt. 26:28;  Heb.  9:19,

20;  10:29; 13:20).

                The murderer was to be punished (Gen. 9:5). The blood of the murdered  "crieth for vengeance" (Gen. 4:10). The "avenger of blood" was the nearest relative of the  murdered,  and he was required to avenge his death (Num. 35:24,  27).

                Blood was used  metaphorically to denote race (Acts 17:26), and as  a  symbol  of slaughter  (Isa.  34:3).  To "wash the feet in blood" means to  gain  a  great victory  (Ps. 58:10). Wine, from its red color, is called "the blood  of  the grape"  (Gen. 49:11). Blood and water issued from our Savior’s side when it was pierced by the Roman soldier (John 19:34). This has led  pathologists  to conclude  that the cause of Christ's death was  rupture  of  the heart.

USE OF THE BLOOD IN THE BIBLICAL SACRIFICES

                Leviticus  17:11 is the Old Testament’s central statement about the significance of  blood  in the sacrificial system, and what it asserts remains true throughout the  regulations  for  individual sacrifices. (1) The blood of sacrifice  is  a  divine provision:  "I  have given it to you." This counters any theory  of  sacrifice which sees in it a human gift designed to attract or excite divine favor.  (2) The  use of blood in sacrifice is a price-paying act: to make  atonement.  The meaning  of blood must suit the function it fulfills. The verb (kipper)  takes its  meaning  from  the related noun (koper), "redemption  price"  (cf.  Exod. 21:30;  30:12; Job 33:24; etc.). It means to pay whatever price  matches  (and cancels)  the offense. If the blood pays the price, then its  significance  is not,  as many hold, life released from the flesh and made available to  become somehow  a  gift to God, but life forfeited or laid down in payment  for  sin. "The  life of the flesh is in the blood" in the ordinary sense that flesh  and blood united make a living being or a living creature, while the separation of blood from flesh is the death of the creature. Thus, in biblical secular usage to shed blood is to kill (cf. Gen. 9:6). (3) The shedding of the blood of sacrifice is a substitutionary act: the last clause of Lev. 17:11 should be translated either the blood "makes atonement at the cost of the life"  (i.e., the animal's life), or the cost atonement in the place of the life" (i.e., the sinner's life).

                The Old Testament has no general word for sacrifice, except the rather sparsely used qorbaµn (corbin), that which is brought near, which is practically confined to the levitical literature. The other frequently used words describe particular kinds of sacrifice, and are derived either from the mode of sacrifice, ‘that which is slain, and ‘that which goes up’ (burnt offering); or from its purpose, as (guilt offering) for guilt, and (sin-offering) for sin. These may be distinguished in part by the disposal of the victim, whether wholly burnt, eaten by priests and worshippers together, or eaten by the priests alone. Also included under qorbaµn were the non-blood offerings ‘offering, oblation’, the cereal offering, the firstfruits, the sheaf of 16 Nisan, the dough of the Feast of Weeks, and the tithes.

                It is significant that the first sacrifices mentioned in Genesis were not meals, but the gift-offerings of Cain and Abel, and the burnt offering of Noah (Gen. 8:20). We have here the first reference to an altar described (e.g. Gen. 12:6-8), but unfortunately details as to the type of sacrifice are lacking. Sacrificial meals seal covenants, but not all covenants are of this type. The blood sprinkling purified the covenant and the eating of the meal marked its consummation.

                In addition, many other sacrifices both national and local were offered. Typical of national sacrifices were those in times of disaster or war (Jdg. 20:26; 21:4; 1 Sam. 7:9), when penitence seems to have been the main note, as were individual occasions of celebration (1 Sam. 1:3), intercession (Num. 23:1), and perhaps hospitality (Exod. 18:12).

                The building of the Temple by Solomon provided opportunity for initiatory (1 Kings 8:62) and regular sacrifices (1 Kings 9:25), but as the sources are books of ‘kings’ they speak rather of royal participation than of that of the people. That the everyday sacrifice was in progress, however, is attested by such a verse as 2 Kings 12:16, and by the frequent mention of sacrifice in the prophets and psalms. The many favorable references in the latter show that the condemnations of the former are not to be taken in an absolute sense, as if prophet and priest were opposed.

                While there is no need to make all such references post-exilic, the prophets’ complaint that penitence did not often enough accompany sacrifice in the late kingdom period should also be borne in mind. The disaster of the Exile is usually seen as resulting in a deeper sense of sin, and no doubt this is true (Kings 17:7; Neh. 9). Joy, as well as penitence, continued to characterize sacrifice (Ezr. 6:16-18; Neh. 8:9).

                Laws for sacrifice are scattered through the codes (Exod. 20:24; 34:25; Lev. 17; 19:5; Num. 15; Deut. 12, etc.), but the sacrificial ‘torah’ is Leviticus 1-7. Chapters 1-5 deal in turn with the burnt offering, cereal offering, peace offering, sin offering, and guilt offering. Chapters 6-7 also give for all five—6:8-13 (burnt); 6:14-18 (cereal); 6:24-30 (sin); 7:1-10 (guilt); 7:11 (peace).

                The sacrificial victim had to be taken from the clean animals and birds (Gen. 8:20), and could be bullock, goat, sheep, dove or pigeon. These provisions are not to be traced to the idea of sacrifice as ‘food for the gods’ (viz. that the gods ate what man ate)—as might be suggested by Lev. 3:11; 21:6—for fish (Lev. 11:9) and wild animals (Deut. 12:22) could be eaten but not sacrificed. The principle seems rather to have been that of property, while the domestic animals had become man’s by his labors (Gen. 22:13 is only apparently an exception), and were in a kind of ‘biotic rapport’ with him. This was even more clearly the case with the non-blood offerings, which had been produced by ‘the sweat of his brow’ (cereals, flour, oil, wine, etc.), and were also staple articles of the kitchen. Property unlawfully acquired was not acceptable.

                The principle of ‘the best for God’ was observed throughout with males being preferred to females (Lev. 1:3; Lev. 3:1; Gen. 15:9; 1 Sam. 6:14; 16:2). Maturity was seen as being especially valuable (1 Sam. 1:24). Physical perfection, ‘without blemish’ was constantly emphasized (Lev. 1:3; 3:1; Deut. 15:21; 17:1; 22:17-25), with the exception for free-will offerings.

                Libations of oil (Gen. 28:18), wine (Gen. 35:14) and water (1 Sam. 7:6) seem to have had a place in sacrificial worship, but only the wine-offerings are referred to in the basic laws (Num. 28:7, etc.). The prohibition of leaven and honey (with some exceptions), and possibly also of milk, is probably to be put down to their liability to putrefaction. For the opposite reason salt was probably added to the sacrifices, because of its well-known preservative qualities (mentioned only in Lev. 2:13 and Ezk. 43:24). Incense played a considerable role, both as an independent offering (Exod. 30:7) and to accompany the cereal offering (Lev. 2).

                The regulations cover both national and individual offerings, and daily and festival occasions. The first public sacrifices with good attestation are the seasonal ones, the Feast of Unleavened Bread, Firstfruits or Weeks and Ingathering or Tabernacles (Exod. 23:14-17; 34:18-23; Deut. 16). With the first the Passover was early connected (Jos. 5:10-12), and with the last, in all probability, covenant renewal ceremonies, and possibly new year and atoning rites.

                Sacrifices of a more private nature were the Passover, for which the unit was the family (Exod. 12), or in confirmation of a treaty (Gen. 31:54), veneration of God (Jdg. 13:19), personal dedication (1 Kings 3:4), consecration (1 Sam. 16:3) or expiation (2 Sa. 24:17). Whether the extending of hospitality to a guest was always regarded as a sacrificial occasion is not clear (Gen. 18; Num. 22:40; 1 Sam. 28:24 may not have involved altar rites, but cf.{cf. confer (Lat.), compare} 1 Sam. 9). Additional occasions mentioned in the laws are the cleansing of the leper (Lev. 14), purification after child-birth (Lev. 12), the consecration of a priest (Lev. 8-9) or a Levite (Num. 8), and the release of a Nazirite from his vows (Num. 6). Less frequent sacrifices were those of sanctuary dedication (2 Sa. 6:13; 1 Kings 8:5),  royal coronations (1 Sam. 11:15; 1 Kings 1:9), and days of national penitence (Jdg. 20:26; 1 Sam. 7) or preparation for battle (1 Sam. 13:8).

                Among seasonal offerings brought annually in recognition of God’s share in productivity were firstlings and firstfruits (Exod. 13; 23:19; Deut. 15:19). Their purpose was probably not to consecrate the rest of the crop, but to deconsecrate it. All was God’s until the first portion had been offered and accepted in lieu of the whole. Only then was the restriction on the human use of the remainder removed (Lev. 23:14, 23-25). Even the portion brought was usually presented only in token at the altar, and afterwards taken away for the use of the priests or for a sacrificial meal. This was also the final fate of the weekly shewbread.

                Three main sacrifices were enjoined: the burnt offering, the peace offering, and the sin offering. The burnt offering expressed the double idea of acceptance before God and dedication to God. Its savor is sweet to the Lord (Lev. 1:9), indicating his delight to accept it and the one who offers it (Gen. 8:20-21). The truth of acceptance is underlined when the burnt offering reappears in token form in the peace offering; the fat of the offering (Lev. 3:3ff.) is regarded as a burnt offering in miniature and is called "the bread of the offering" (Lev. 3:11; 21:8). This means that the Lord, accepting the offering and the offerer, is delighted to sit at table with him, condescending to participate in the feast of reconciliation. But the burnt offering also expresses dedication. In Genesis 22 the Lord exercised his right to claim all, and in responding with a burnt offering Abraham was holding nothing back (vs. 12). The story of the offering of Isaac, ruling out  forever the admissibility of human sacrifice, established at the same time the heart-searching standard of devotion, which the burnt offering expressed.

                The major altar sacrifices of Leviticus 1-5 are described in a framework of a ritual comprising six acts, of which three belong to the worshipper and three to the priest. The provisions for the sin offering, several times repeated for various classes (Lev. 4:1-12, 13-21, 22-26, 27-31), follow the same scheme, except in minor details. The burnt offering of a bird (Lev. 1:14-17) and the cereal offering (Lev. 2) of necessity present greater variations, but are not entirely dissimilar. A similar formula for the guilt offering is not given, but it may be understood as coming under the law of the sin offering (Lev. 7:7).

                (1) The worshipper brings near his offering. The place of the sacrifice is the tabernacle forecourt on the northern side of the altar (for burnt-, sin- and guilt-offerings, but not for the more numerous peace-offerings), although in earlier times it may have been the door of the tabernacle (Lev. 17:4), or local sanctuary, or a rough altar (Exod. 20:24), a rock (1 Sam. 6:14), or pillar (Gen. 28:18). Killing on the altar, although implied by Gen. 22:9 and Exod. 20:24 was not normal.

                (2)) He lays his hands, or in the biblical period more probably one hand, upon the victim, and possibly confesses his sin. This latter is mentioned, however, only in connection with the scapegoat, where the blood was not shed (Lev. 16:21) and with some sin-offerings (Lev. 5:5) and guilt-offerings as a transferring of sin. On the other hand, it seems inadequate to regard it simply as an identification by the owner of his property, for such an identification is not made with the non-blood sacrifices, where it would have been equally appropriate. Representation, if not transference, seems to be clearly involved.

                (3) The slaughtering is performed by the worshipper, except for the national offerings (Lev. 16:11; 2 Chron. 29:24).

                (4) The manipulation of the blood was in the hands of the priest, who collects it in a basin and dashes it against the NE and SW corners of the altar in such a way that all four sides are spattered. This takes place with the animal burnt offerings (Lev. 1), peace offerings (Lev. 3) and guilt-offerings (Lev. 7:2), but not with the burnt offering of birds (Lev. 1:15), where the quantity of blood was insufficient, and so was drained out on the side of the altar. The remainder of the blood is then poured out at the base of the altar. The blood rite is referred to in the historical books only in 2 Kings 16:15.

                (5) Some burning took place with all the sacrifices. Not only the blood but also the fat belonged to God, and this was first burnt (Gen. 4:4; 1 Sam. 2:16). This was not the fat in general, but specifically the fat of the kidneys, liver and intestines. From the peace-, sin- and guilt-offerings only this was burnt, from the cereal-offerings a portion called the ÕazkaµraÆ was separated off and burnt, but the burnt-offering was wholly burnt except for the skin, which became the perquisite of the priests (Lev. 7:8). A different kind of burning away from the altar was the fate of the primary rank sin-offerings. In this burning the skin was also included.

                (6) The remaining portions of the sacrifice were eaten in a sacrificial meal, either by the priests and worshippers together (peace offering), or by the priests and their families, or by the priests alone. Priestly food was classified as either holy or most holy. The former included the peace-offerings (Lev. 10:14; 22:10) and firstfruits and tithes (Num. 18:13), and could be eaten by the priest’s family in any clean place, but the latter included the sin-offerings (Lev. 6:26), guilt-offerings (Lev. 7:6), cereal-offerings (Lev. 6:16), and shewbread (Lev. 24:9), and could be eaten only by the priests themselves, and within the Temple precincts. The people’s sacrificial or covenant meal from the peace offering was the popular accompaniment of local worship in early times (1 Sam. 1; 9), but with the centralization of worship in Jerusalem tended to recede before the formal aspects of worship.

                The burnt offering seems to have a claim to be regarded as the typical Hebrew sacrifice. The burnt offering is connected to forgiveness of soul. When the sin offering came to take precedence as the first of the series of sacrifices (Mishnah, Zebahim 10. 2) it tended to take over this function, but this was not originally the case.

                The meal (meat or cereal offering depending upon how translation is made) offering was another sacrifice. It is somewhat confusing that this term is used in three different ways in the Old Testament. Some 34 times it simply means ‘present’ or ‘tribute,’ while 97 times  it is the cereal-offering (e.g. in Lev. 2), and an indeterminate number of the remaining instances also have this meaning (e.g. Is. 43:23; 66:20), but in the others it refers to sacrifice generally (1 Sam. 2:29; 26:19, and probably in Malachi), and to animal sacrifice in particular (1 Sam. 2:12-17). Sometimes the meal (meat or cereal) offering was an independent sacrifice, whereas in the laws it is the accompaniment of burnt offerings and peace offerings (Num. 15:1-16), except in Num. 5:15, 25; Lev. 5:11, 13; 6:19-23. According to Lev. 2, it is to consist of either flour (2:1-3), baked cakes (2:4-10) or raw grain (2:14-16), together with oil and frankincense. The worshippers ate none of these offerings. They went to the priests, but only after a ‘memorial portion’ (Lev. 2:2) had been burnt on the altar. The principle of substitution or propitiation can be seen in this offering.

                The Hebrew term for Peace Offering has a variety of usages. All these uses are usually understood as referring to a form of the sacrificial meal. When used alone, however, the Peace Offering was possibly not a meal at all. It is in no way inconsistent that a joyous meal followed. The joy was the joy of forgiveness, for the covenant meal also usually marked it reconciliation after estrangement (Gen. 31:54). As a tribute, a present, or a gift of greeting, in the presence of the Lord, the peace-offering was an offering of reconciliation and obedience.

                The peace offering looked both Godward and manward. Godward, it expressed thanksgiving and personal love (Lev. 7:12, 16). It was commanded that this joyous response to God's goodness should be marked also by fellowship with others. The priest has his share (Lev. 7:31-34), and we find the command of Leviticus 7:16 fulfilled in the family celebration of Deuteronomy 12:7.

                The vow-offering or thank-offering, together with the freewill-offering, made up three classes within the peace-offering proper, and the regulations governing them (Lev. 7:11). All three were thank-offerings, but the vow offering, which discharged an earlier promise at the time of its accomplishment, was no longer optional, while the others were. Possibly it was for this reason that the vow reverted to the stricter regulation of a victim without blemish (Lev. 22:19), while this requirement was relaxed for the freewill-offering (Lev. 22:23). Also added in Lev. 7 are the rules for the sacrificial meal, which had been missing in Lev. 3. The thank-offering was to be eaten the same day, and the vow and freewill-offering not later than the next. The priests’ portions are defined as the ‘wave’ breast and the ‘heave’ shoulder (thigh) offerings.

                The guilt offering (trespass offering) and sin offering, are the names of the offenses for which they are to atone. These terms refer, not so much to moral offenses, as to those that are ceremonially defiling, although the moral aspect is by no means ruled out. Of the former kind are the sin-offerings of the leper (Lev. 14); Mark 1:44) and the mother after childbirth (Lev. 12; Luke 2:24), and of the latter, those of deception and misappropriation in Lev. 6:1-7, and passion in Lev. 19:20-22. These examples can have been but little more than random specimens to illustrate the laws, and should not be regarded as giving a full account of sacrifice for sin in these laws, much less in the cult as a whole. In the history, for example, these sacrifices scarcely figure at all. Equally obscure is the relation between the two offerings. They are used synonymously in Leviticus 5:6. The sacrificial victim in the guilt offering, usually a ram, also became the priest’s, and after the regular blood and fat ritual could be eaten by the priests as ‘most holy’ (Lev. 7:1-7). The same provision applies (Lev. 6:24-29) to the sin-offerings of the ruler (Lev. 4:22-26) and the common man (Lev. 4:27-31), but in these cases the blood is put on the horns of the altar.

                The sin-offerings of the high priest (Lev. 4:1-12) and the whole community (Lev. 4:13-21) follow a still more solemn ritual, in which the blood is sprinkled before the veil of the sanctuary, and the bodies of the victims are not eaten but burnt outside the camp (Lev. 6:30; Heb. 13:11). In addition to these four classes provisions are made for substitute offerings from the poor (Lev. 5:7-13). Chapters 4 and 5 thus contain a graduated scale of victims: bull (high priest and congregation, but, he-goat (ruler), she-goat or lamb (common man), turtledoves or pigeons (poor), flour (very poor). The following principles may be noted: (1)everyone must bring some sin offering, (2) no one may eat of his own sin-offering, and (4) the more propitiatory the rite the nearer the blood must come to God. On the Day of Atonement the veil itself was penetrated and the blood sprinkled on the ark.

 THE PRINCIPLE OF THE RED HEIFER

                To the other offerings might be added the ritual of the heifer in Deuteronomy 21 and the scapegoat in Leviticus 16, which, although not blood sacrifices, reflect ideas which must have been true of blood sacrifices. It was in this light that Leviticus 16 was understood in the Jewish tradition (e.g. Mishnah, Yoma 6. 4, ‘bear our sins and be gone’). This particularly important sacrifice, is rich in symbolism and  meaning. There was the annual sacrifice of the specially bred Red Heifer. Some hyssop and the cedar were bound together with the scarlet thread to be dipped into the blood of a bird (dove) and sprinkled over the altar. There is some rich symbolism in this blood sacrifice.

1. Red Heifer--color of the earth-- reminds us of eden (or aden)= Red land; Adam = Red man

2. Hyssop-- cleansing and healing agent which was to be dipped in sacrificial blood.

3. Cedar-- tough, pliable wood used to construct dwellings-- a type of the godly life.

4. Scarlet thread (wool)-- the thread of  the blood covenant that God weaves through history.

                This is similar to cleansing the leper outside the camp. Leviticus 14. In that case, one bird killed in earthen vessel-- representing death to sin tendencies. One bird is set free-- removal of sin, to cleanse the leper. There was a Thanksgiving offering on the 8th day. Repentance is a key element associated with these sacrifices. The penitent are to be comforted (Mark 2:17). Repentance means to turn back, to change one’s mind, to be of another mind.  In Psalms 119:11-16, it denotes replacing that which is destroyed (sin) with Life, which is the Word of God.

                Such passages are a warning against confining the atonement to a single act, as if it were the death alone, or the presentation of the blood, or the disposal of the victim, which atoned. The death was important—the live goat is only half of the ritual in Lev. 16 (with 14:4-7; 5:7-11). The blood manipulation was also important in 2 Chronicles 29:24, where it seems to make atonement subsequent to the killing. The final disposal of the victim by fire or eating or to Azazel also had its place—in Lev. 10:16-20 the priestly eating of the sin offering is more than just declaratory. The view that the death of the victim was only to release the life that was in the blood, and that the atonement consisted only of the latter, is as one-sided as that which sees the death as a quantitative penal satisfaction. The death of the victim could be understood as neutralizing the infection of sin, so that the fat and blood could come unimpeded to the altar as an offering to God.

                Whether other views of sacrifice such as ‘homage’ and ‘communion’ are possible, or whether certain types of sacrifice express one of these aspects more than another (e.g. burnt-offering, homage, and peace-offering, communion), is best left an open question. But in the laws at least the burnt offering, the cereal offering and even the peace offering, as well as the sin- and guilt-offerings, are said to atone.

                Of importance to the discussion here is the recognition that God himself gave the ritual to sinful man (Lev. 17:11, ‘the blood. . . I have given it for you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls’). The sacrifices are to be seen as operating within the sphere of the covenant and covenanting grace. They were not man’s expedient for his own redemption, but were the fruit of grace. The question as to whether within this context propitiation has a place is similar to the New Testament one, and will depend on the view taken of sin, and law and the nature of God. It is obvious from the Old Testament that there is much to suggest that its system was not a final one. No sacrifices availed, for example, for breach of covenant.  It is in this light that the prophetic rejection of sacrifice is to be understood.

                It is noteworthy that Jesus Christ has sacrifice offered for him or offers it himself at his presentation in the Temple, at his last Passover, and presumably on those other occasions when he went up to Jerusalem for the feasts. The practice of the apostles in Acts removes all ground from the opinion that after the sacrifice of Christ the worship of the Jewish Temple is to be regarded as an abomination to God. We find them frequenting the Temple. Paul himself goes up to Jerusalem for Pentecost and offers the sacrifices (which included sin offerings) for the interruption of vows (Acts 21; Num. 6:10-12). However, in principle these sacrifices were now unnecessary, so that when the Romans destroyed the Temple even the non-Christian Jews ceased to offer the sacrifices.

                The Epistle to the Hebrews contains the fullest treatment of the Old Testament sacrifices. The teaching of this writer has its positive side (11:4), but his great concern is to point out their inadequacy except as types. The fact that they cannot gain for men entrance into the Holy of Holies proves that they cannot free the conscience from guilt, but are simply carnal ordinances, imposed until a time of reformation (9:6-10). Their inadequacy to atone is shown also by the fact that mere animals are offered (10:4), and by the very fact of their repetition (10:1-2). They are not so much remedies for sin as reminders of it (10:3).

                Spiritual sacrifices (1 Pet. 2:5; John 4:23-24; Rom. 12:1; Phil. 3:3) are the New Testament substitute for carnal ordinances, and appear frequently (Rom. 12:1; 15:16-17; Phil. 2:17; 4:18; 2 Tim. 4:6; Heb. 13:15-16; Rev. 5:8; 6:9; 8:3-4). Even in the Old Testament, however, the psalmists and prophets sometimes use the language of sacrifice metaphorically (Pss. 50:13-14; 51:16-17; Is. 66:20), and the usage is continued in the intertestamental literature (Ecclus. 35:1-3; Testament of Levi 3. 6; Manual of Discipline 8-9; Philo, De Somniis 2. 183). It appears that every act of the Spirit-filled man, which is devoted to God and is acceptable to him, can be reckoned as a spiritual sacrifice. Spiritual sacrifices compliment the sacrifice of Christ, without which spiritual sacrifices would not be acceptable (Heb. 13:15; 1 Pet. 2:5).

                The sacrifice of Christ is one of the chief themes of the New Testament. His saving work is sometimes spoken of in ethical, sometimes in penal, but often also in sacrificial terms. He is spoken of as the slain lamb of God, whose precious blood takes away the sin of the world (John 1:29, 36; 1 Pet. 1:18-19; Rev. 5:6-10; 13:8). The lamb was an animal used in various sacrifices. More specifically, he is spoken of as the true Passover lamb (1 Cor. 5:6-8), as a sin offering, and in Heb. 10:9-10 as the fulfillment of the covenant sacrifices of the red heifer, as well as the Day of Atonement offerings. The New Testament constantly identifies our Lord with the suffering Servant of Is. 52-53, who is a guilt offering (Is. 53-10), and with the Messiah (Christ) of Daniel 9, who is to atone for iniquity.

THE BLOOD OF JESUS THAT WASHES AWAY SIN

                The writer of Hebrews stresses the importance, in Christ’s sacrifice, of his death (2:9, 14; 9:15-17, 22, 25-28; 13:12, 20), and the fact that his sacrifice is over (1:3; 7:27; 9:12, 25-28; 10:10, 12-14, 18). Everything associated with the sacrifices was also associated with the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. For spotlessness, we have Sinlessness (Heb. 9:14; 1 Pet. 1:19). Sprinkling of our bodies with blood is replaced with forgiveness (Heb. 9:13-14, 19-22), and symbolical atonement is replaced with real atonement (Heb. 10:1-10).

                Sacrifice and the Lord’s Supper are indissolubly connected by making the Eucharist an act of oblation. The Eucharist is a feast upon Christ’s sacrifice corresponds with Jewish sacrificial meals; by the allusion to Exod. 24:8 in Matt. 26:28 and Mark 14:24; and by the traditional interpretation of Heb. 13:10. Since the sacrifice of Christ is in so many points to be spiritualized, the language about the feast on his sacrifice is doubtless to be spiritualized also, but it is not to be bereft of its meaning. The meaning of the sacrificial meal was both the appropriation of atonement and fellowship with God. By enjoying this fellowship in a covenant meal with God, we also truly partake of Christ or of his body and blood. It is shown in John 6 that when those who believe on Christ see him or hear his words, they feed on his body and blood.

                From studying the New Testament, it is clear that the Blood of Jesus Christ is what washes away the sins of those to whom God’s Covenant is  now applied. In the Blood of Jesus there is the fulfillment of every Old Testament period sacrifice. The Blood of Jesus provided a permanent solution to the problem of sin and the necessity for all sin to be judged. When we partake of His body and blood through the Eucharist or Lord’s Supper, we apply that sacrificial solution to our lives. Look at what the New Testament says about the efficacy of Jesus’ Blood. Notice also the aspects of covenant present in these scriptures.

Ephesians  2:13:   But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off  are made nigh by the blood of Christ.                  

Hebrews 10:19:  Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus,                         

Hebrews 12:24:  And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.                                     

Hebrews 13:12:  Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate.  

Hebrews 13:20:  Now the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant,         

1 Peter 1:2:   Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience  and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.                    

1 John 1:7:    But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with other, and the blood of  Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.        

1 John 5:6:   This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood.  And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.                                       

Revelation  1:5:   And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of  the kings of the earth.  Unto him that loved us, and  washed us from our sins in his own blood . . .              

                The Blood of Jesus is very important to all of us who are in covenant with God. It gives us life, strength, salvation, and sanctification. It cleanses us from all unrighteousness and can be applied to the situations of life as a source of deliverance. But one very important question remains a mystery to many Christians. How do we come into continual contact with this blood, so that it can be applied to our needs? For the answer, we must once again look to scripture. John 6:53 says: “Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and  drink his blood, ye have no life in you.”

                We must “eat” of Christ’s flesh and “drink” of his blood. Another question now becomes obvious. How do we do that? Both the Gospel writers and Paul give us the answer.

Luke 22:19-20  and he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, this is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me. 20 likewise also the cup after supper, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you. 1 Corinthians 11:25-26  After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. 26 for as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the lord's death till he come.

                Paul says that the partaking of the Lord’s Supper demonstrates and proclaims (shew) the Lord’s death and application of his blood. This is a covenant meal such as was established in the Peace Offering. Jesus told his disciples that the cup is the New Covenant (Testament) in his blood, which is shed for those in covenant with God through Christ. The early church partook of the Lord’s Supper each week as the main focus of their worship, because members of the Apostolic Church were taught that this was the means by which they could receive the benefits of the New Covenant. This practice continued for well over a thousand years, until it was rejected by many of the second or third generation “reformers” (in the seventeenth century and after) as being too “Roman Catholic.”

                This question should concern us today. If there is no means for the continual application of the Blood, then how can the church of this generation hope to experience and walk in the full benefits of God’s Everlasting Covenant? Could this be one reason why our experience with Christ is often a roller coaster ride and a hit and miss proposition? Could this be why it is so hard for church leaders to get their members to be actively and continually committed to Godly living and service? These are some questions that we all need to ponder, as we reflect on the importance of the Blood of Jesus in God’s Covenant with us today.

THE PROMISE OF COVENANT SEALED IN BLOOD

                There are not a primitive people in the entire world that has never practiced some form of Blood Covenant. When Stanley was exploring Africa in the nineteenth century, he cut covenant around fifty times with different tribes. In fact, the majority of tribes in Equatorial Africa practiced some form of the Blood Covenant. Over the years, many missionaries have witnessed “heathen” rites, which they did not understand. They often did not realize that these rites were vestiges of God’s original means of establishing relationships (Covenant of Parity), granting authority and favors (Royal Grant), and establishing standards for the governance of society under the direction of a supreme deity (Suzerainty Treaties).

                In most primitive societies, covenants are made between tribes or individuals to do the following:

(1)     keep the weaker tribe or individual from being destroyed by stronger neighbors,

(2)     to insure that neither of two cooperating parties would take advantage of the other, and

(3)     to bind people together in loving or caring relationships. Normally, a covenant among pagan people or tribes involves the two parties making the covenant and a priest of some sort. This shows us that there is the remembrance of the spiritual aspect of covenant making, even in the most pagan and primitive societies. Gifts are usually exchanged, blood from both participants is mingled, and wine is often drunk. It is common in many cultures for the blood to be mixed with the wine, which is then drunk by the participants. There is usually physical contact between the flesh of the participants, such a touching the wounds together. Sometimes a covenant meal is eaten.

                When Stanley was seeking Livingstone, he came in contact with a primitive equatorial tribe. He entered into a covenant relationship with the chief of the tribe. The chief received Stanley’s white goat, and Stanley was given a seven foot spear, which he later found was a sign of authority. Everyone bowed and submitted to him when he carried the spear. The wrist of a young Englishman in Stanley’s party and the wrist of a young warrior were cut. The blood was mixed with wine in a cup and the flesh of the young men was joined. Stanley and the chief drank the blood, as blessings were spoken over the two men with the admonition that they keep the covenant, and a priest spoke curses over whoever would break the covenant that was being sealed. Trees were then planted as a memorial to the covenant. Stanley never fully understood the sacredness of the act in which he had participated.

                The gifts, the wine, and the presence of a “blood offering” remind us of the basic principles of God’s covenants. Pagan rites are a defective cultural remembrance of the truth that God has revealed to mankind. We are reminded of the time that Abraham brought his tithes, and to Melchizedek. Melchizedek brought out the bread and the wine to participate in a covenant meal. At the Table of the Lord, we see the presence of the gifts (financial offerings), the wine, contact with the flesh (the bread), the blood (the wine becoming called the blood of Christ), and the understanding that the Eucharist represents a meal (Lord’s Supper).

                The importance of blood covenants in even the most primitive and pagan societies remind us that from the very beginning, the concept of covenant governed all human relationships, as well as the relationship between people and the Sovereign God. From the time of Adam (Gen. 3), God’s Everlasting Covenant was revealed to mankind a step at a time over thousands of years. This revelation was a continuous process, and it is incorrect to think of there being a separate Old Covenant and a separate New Covenant. God’s plan of redemption, his kingdom, and his covenant law have always been in existence, and have always operated the same as it does today.  For convenience, and for historical and cultural reasons, we can use the terms Old and New Covenant, as long as we understand that the New Covenant was the final amendment and final form of God’s kingdom law and divine plan. Certain aspects of the “Old Covenant” were made unnecessary by the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. The covenant was, therefore, modified in a number of ways. Those who refused this amending and chose to remain under the Old Covenant were left behind, as God’s plans moved forward. Forms of worship and requirements for being in the family of God were changed, as the covenant was broadened.

                Just as the United States Constitution has been amended, nullifying certain parts of the original document, so God’s Covenant has been modified annulling certain practices and rituals. Those aspects of the covenant that were temporary were fulfilled in Christ, and we are no longer required to observe that which Christ has already fulfilled. Instead, we are required to follow the final and latest form of God’s Covenant. Over time, the eternal covenant has been established through the entire Word of God (Old and New Testament Canon), the traditions of the Apostles and Prophets (passed down through the Great Church Fathers), and the leading of the Holy Spirit (divine and prophetic revelation).

                This divine plan which we term the covenant, had to be revealed in stages because God had to teach mankind about himself. Until and unless we know God, we cannot begin to understand or live in the fullness of God’s Covenant of Grace. Even though it was revealed piece by piece, the covenant is one document; one divine decree. Think of it in terms of the United States Constitution. That document has been amended several times, and it was even based upon earlier documents and common law. Never the less, the Constitution remains one document. God’s Covenant is similarly to be considered as one document that has been amended and fulfilled, but not really altered or changed. God’s Covenant is based upon his divine character and is a manifestation of God’s grace and mercy.

THE ADAMIC COVENANT

                The Adamic Covenant, the Old Covenant, and the New Covenant are  three broad or general stages through which God's Everlasting  Covenant  with mankind was revealed. It is really one covenant with three stages of completion, reminding us that God is one God in three persons. God first revealed the principles of the covenant to Adam. The Adamic Covenant was initiated based upon  a  promise  of future redemption and a covering of sin through animal sacrifice (such as  the sacrifice of Abel). This was only a promised solution to the sin problem.  Sin was  covered, but not removed, as we can see in the Genesis three account  of  God slaying  animals to cover man's nakedness. Sin was contained, but  not  really dealt  with  under the Adamic Covenant. The Adamic Covenant only covered  the basic sin nature, not collective or personal sin. It was designed to keep  sin in check, but each individual had to bare responsibility for personal sins.

                The  Adamic Covenant is often referred to as a promise of God’s Grace and mercy. (1.) The contracting parties were (a) God the moral  Governor,  and (b) Adam, a free moral agent, and representative of all his natural  posterity (Romans 5:12-19).

(2.) The promise was “life” (Matthew 19:16, 17; Galatians 3:12).

(3.) The  condition was perfect obedience to the law, the test in this  case  being abstaining  from  eating the fruit of the “tree of knowledge,” etc.

 (4.)  The penalty was death (Gen. 2:16, 17).

                The Adamic Covenant has also been called a covenant  of nature, as made with man in his natural or not fallen state; a covenant of life, because “life” was the promise attached to obedience; and a  legal  covenant, because  it demanded perfect obedience to the law. Memories of the Adamic Covenant are present in various forms in virtually all of the cultures of the world. Even though pagan rites have replaced the true worship of God in unregenerate societies, the blood covenant has retained a place of importance and honor in most parts of the world. In the Adamic Covenant, the “tree of life” was  the outward  sign  and seal of that life which was promised in the  covenant,  and hence  it is usually called the seal of that covenant.

It is interesting that the practice of planting trees is often associated with the cutting of a covenant, even in the most primitive of societies.

                The Adamic Covenant is  abro­gated under the gospel, inasmuch as Christ has fulfilled all its conditions in behalf  of his people, and now offers salvation on the condition of faith.  It is  still in force, however, as it rests on the immutable justice of God,  and is binding on all who have not fled to Christ and accepted his righteousness. Christ fulfilled the Adamic Covenant as the second Adam, according to the fifteenth chapter of Paul’s first Epistle to the Corinthians.

                The Adamic Covenant was basically a promise of a future Royal Grant from God to his people. This promise can be traced throughout the Bible. God’s promise begins with a declaration by God; it covers God's future plan for not just one race, but all the nations of the earth; and it focuses on the gifts and deeds that God will bestow on a few to benefit the many. We may define God's promise as the divine declaration made at first to Eve, Shem, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and then to the whole nation of Israel that: (1) He would be their God, (2) they would be His people, and (3) He would dwell in their midst. The blessing of land and of growth as a nation as well as the call to bless the nations was part of the promise to Abraham. Added to these words of assurance were a series of divine actions in history, which have constituted the continuously unfolding divine plan by which all the peoples and nations of the earth would benefit from that day to this.

                The Old Testament did not use a specific Hebrew word for promise. It used quite ordinary words to encapsulate the pivotal promise of God: speak, say, and swear. The New Testament, however, does use both the noun promise (51 times) and the verb (11 times).     Promise in these references can denote either the form or the content of those words. They could refer either to the words themselves as promissory notes on which to base one's confidence for the future, or they could refer to the things themselves which were promised. Since God's one promise-plan was made up of many specifications, the plural form of "promises" appears 11 times in the New Testament. Nevertheless, the singular form was greatly predominant. Both Testaments of the Bible trace the fulfillment of the Promise made to Adam, as God covenanted with His people and proved faithful to His covenants.

A TRANSITIONAL COVENANT WITH NOAH

                The Covenant that God made with Noah is a transition from the Adamic to the Hebrew or Old Covenant. The Adamic Covenant was little more than a promise of redemption and a containment of sin. When Noah came on the scene, sin had so permeated society that a covering and conditional removing of that sin was needed. The Hebrew or Old Covenant offered a process for covering and periodic, albeit temporary, removal of sin and its consequences.  Permanent redemption from sin and its consequences could not come until God had established a framework through which the redemptive work of the Messiah (anointed one) could be accomplished.

                The Old Covenant had its foundation established in the Noahic Covenant of salvation and deliverance (the procedure through which sin could temporarily be removed), which could only be established by the eradication of the rampant sin that was controlling the world; i.e. the Flood. From this foundation of salvation and deliverance, the Old Covenant was built in stages, with God instituting the various precepts and provisions of this larger  (and more comprehensive) covenant over a period of many generations. This comprehensive covenant would be spelled out more clearly to Abraham, in the future, but was established in its incipient stages with Noah and his sons who lived in that transitional time between antediluvian longevity and modern humanity; between the Adamic Covenant of Promise and the Abrahamic Covenant. This covenant shows the continuum of God’s plan for his people.

                The New Testament refers to Noah as a hero of faith. Noah was the first man to offer Yahweh sacrifices under a covenant where those sacrifices actually brought the person into right standing with God (although God did not reveal the sacred name and nature until later). The Bible tells us God gave Noah a covenant, with the rainbow as the sign or tokens of God’s promise to providentially preserve the world. Throughout the centuries, the Flood has illustrated the ethical character and just but loving nature of God, which He expressed through the salvation and deliverance of Noah. God’s covenant with Noah is based upon the principles of salvation and deliverance through faith in God and His word. Noah's expression of faith (his token of covenant) was his building of the Ark. Just as God does today, The Lord of the universe gave the people of Noah's day a chance to repent, and when they didn’t they were subjected to His judgment.

                Noah  (whose name means, "rest") is best known in Judaism and Christianity as the faithful one at the time of great wickedness that caused God to send the Flood. God, wishing to preserve the future of humankind and the beasts, told Noah to build an ark and move his wife, his three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth, along with their wives, and a pair of every kind of creature, into it. This Noah did, to the great merriment of his neighbors. The rains came and all the rest of earth's inhabitants drowned.  As the waters subsided, the ark grounded on top of Mount Ararat. Noah set free a raven, which returned, and doves, some of which did not return, showing that the earth was uncovered in spots. Noah's family disembarked, set up an altar. They offered sacrifices of thanksgiving to God, reminiscent of the “Great Thanksgiving”-- the Eucharist. A covenant was established with Noah, and God gave the rainbow as a sign. This marked the covenant that promised God would never destroy the world by water again.

                The foundation of Grace is God’s Plan of Redemption, which was fulfilled in Christ under the New Covenant, can be seen as a continuous stream beginning with the Adamic Covenant. This stream flows through God’s Old Testament covenants into the New Testament age.  The Adamic promise flows into the Hebrew sacrificial system, whereby the grace of God is applied through the blood sacrifice. This culminates with the sacrifice of Christ and the opportunity for us to be established permanently in God’s Covenant. The covenant meal of the Lord’s Supper is the culmination of the covenant meal that may have begun under the Adamic Covenant when God slew animals to cover the nakedness of mankind’s sin.

SIGNS AND SYMBOLS THAT SEAL A COVENANT

                The Ark and the Rainbow are two important symbols associated with God’s covenant with Noah. The Ark was Noah’s seal of covenant, and the Rainbow was God’s seal of covenant. In the ancient world, a seal was commonly a ring engraved with some device (Gen. 38:18, 25). Jezebel "wrote letters in Ahab's name, and sealed them with his seal"  (1 Kings 21:8). Seals are frequently mentioned in Jewish history (Deut. 32:34; Neh. 9:38; 10:1; Esther 3:12; Cant. 8:6; Isa. 8:16; Jer.  22:24;32: 44, etc.). Sealing a document was equivalent to the signature of the owner of the seal. Thus a seal or token that is exchanged makes a covenant (an oral or written treaty) legally binding. The use of a signet ring by the monarch has recently received a remarkable illustration by the discovery of an impression of such a signet on fine clay at Koyunjik, the site of the ancient Nineveh.  This Seal appears to have been impressed from the bezel of a metallic finger-ring.  It is an oval, 2 inches in length by 1 inch wide, and bears the image, name, and titles of the Egyptian king Sabaco. The actual signet rings of two Egyptian kings (Cheops and Horus) have been discovered. The use of seals is mentioned in the New Testament only in connection with the record of our Lord's burial (Matt. 27:66).

                The tomb of Jesus was sealed by the Pharisees and chief priests for the purpose of making sure that the disciples would not come and steal the body way (ver. 63, 64). The mode of doing this was probably by stretching a cord across the stone and sealing it at both ends with sealing-clay. When God is said  to have  sealed  the Redeemer, the meaning is, that he has  attested  his  divine mission  (John  6:27).  Building the Ark, giving a rainbow, giving the Law, Baptism, and circumcision are examples of seals for covenants people make with God. These tokens are attestations of the covenant (Rom. 4:11). Believers are sealed with the Spirit, as God's mark put upon them (Eph. 1:13; 4:30).  Converts are by Paul styled the seal of his apostleship, i.e., they are its attestation  (1 Cor. 9:2). Seals and sealing are frequently mentioned in the book of Revelation (5:1; 6:1; 7:3; 10:4; 22:10).

                In the marriage covenant, the ring is used as the seal or token of the fidelity of the two people being married. Our signatures on contracts are types of tokens or seals for agreements that we make, although God’s covenants are more binding than our contractual agreements.

                Signs and symbols were important to both Israel and to the early church. Signs and symbols are prevalent in scripture passages that discuss God’s covenant. A symbol is something that, because of its natural properties, historical associations, or mere convention, have come to be understood as referring beyond itself to some other reality. Unfortunately, the religious have a tendency to absolutize their symbols and to take them literally. When this happens, the symbols distort rather than illuminate the divine reality, and they become objects of idolatry rather than pointers to God.

                In the early Christian community the fish, the loaves, the shepherd, and the dove were some of the first symbols used. Each of these had significance as to some facet of Christian life. Later, after the fourth century, the cross became the most important symbol of Christianity. The Cross came to represent the spiritual authority, of Christ and the Church, over demonic powers. The lampstand, and later, candles became associated with the Spirit of God, the skinah light of God’s glory, and God’s illumination of the world’s spiritual darkness. Later the two candles on the Communion Altar became associated with the two natures (divine and human) of Christ, and with the Cherubim atop the Hebrew Ark of the Covenant.

                Another common symbol used in worship was incense, which represented the prayers of the saints. The smell of incense told believers that they had entered a house of prayer, and reminded them that god heard their prayers. This practice, picked up by the church from Judaism, is mentioned in Psalm 141:1-2 and Malachi 1:11.

                In the fourth century, when Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire, its imagery began to reflect borrowings from the emperor's court at Constantinople. Christ was no longer depicted as a youthful shepherd. Instead he was depicted as an enthroned emperor and judge with a dignified beard.  The Virgin Mary, appeared crowned and robed like the empress, and saints dressed like courtiers approached the throne of God with veiled hands, as was the custom in the courts of Eastern monarchs. These symbols or icons, as they came to be called, demonstrated to the people that the authority of God had primacy over the authority of the State. The icons were a constant reminder that the Church was representative of the Kingdom of God. God’s people are courtiers in that kingdom.

                The repertoire of symbolic subjects included scenes from the New Testament reflecting the annual cycle of the principal festivals of the Church. Subjects from the Old Testament, which earlier had served as examples of God's power to save--the Hebrews in the fiery furnace, Noah and the flood--now reflected the belief that, as part of God's plan, certain episodes in the Old Testament prefigured events in the New Testament. For example, Jonah, who formerly symbolized the idea of salvation, now became the type--the original model--of Christ. The church believed that  the death and resurrection of Christ was foreshadowed by Jonah's miraculous encounter with the great fish.

                Protestant reformers of the 16th century, who rejected religious imagery as blasphemous, indirectly gave religious subject matter renewed strength in Roman Catholic countries. Images are still important in Roman Catholic Churches, and Eastern Orthodox Churches incorporate images, called icons, in their worship. In fact, a wall of images or icons, called the Iconostasis, still plays an important part in Eastern Orthodox worship. Often an Iconostasis is very elaborate, with rows and levels of painted or carved icons depicting scenes from the Bible and important scriptural individuals.

                There is a modern emphasis on the sacraments as symbols rather than as a means of grace. This view grows out of the Protestant emphasis on personal religious experience. This emphasis divides Evangelicals from both the Catholic and Liturgical churches of the Reformation.

                The Sacraments, especially the Eucharist and Baptism, were among the most important symbols in early Christianity. These were outward and visible signs of an application of inward and spiritual grace. Augustine defined a sacrament as a visible sign of an invisible reality. To the early church leaders, the sacraments were sacred insofar as they provided the opportunity for the people to be set apart and cleansed of sin. In modern terminology this is called sanctification. The attention of the people was focused on Christ and on spiritual growth, through use of the sacraments, the Christian year, and other Christian symbols.

                The Old Testament understanding of signs and symbols also inclines to see them as visible signs of an invisible reality. Signs and symbols were used to instruct the people of the reality of God’s Kingdom. Signs and symbols are associated with all of the aspects of God’s covenant. They help the people to understand the covenant, and are visible tokens or seals to the covenant. The Ark of Noah, circumcision, the Ark of the Covenant, the Tabernacle and its furnishings, the Temple and its furnishings, the vestments of the priests, feast days of the Hebrew liturgical year, and the brazen serpent were among the symbols important to Israel at various times in its history. Understanding the symbols of ancient Israel and the symbols of the early church can help us to understand God’s Kingdom and God’s Covenant.

cHAPTER 4

THE COVENANT year: The FEASTS OF THE LORD

                In both Old Testament Israel and the New Testament Church, society and worship revolved around holy days or feast days. The administration and application of God’s covenant was liturgical, and various aspects of the covenant were commemorated throughout the year on a cyclical basis. The Feasts of the Lord were special occasions where important sacrifices and rites of worship were observed under the Old Covenant or Hebrew Covenant. During these convocations, the blood sacrifice took on a special redemptive meaning to those who were ruled by God’s Covenant. The Levitical Feasts were the solemn ceremonies through which the covenant was enacted and renewed.

                The Hebrew terms for FEAST (Lev. 23:6; Deut. 16:16) are expressive of a day or season of religious joy. While some of these feasts coincide with the seasons, it does not follow that they have their origin in the seasonal ritual of the religions of the ancient Near East. These are associated with the gods of the pantheon who banquet together or feast with men. Biblical feasts differ in origin, purpose and content. To the Israelite the seasons were the work of the Creator for the benefit of man. They manifested the beneficence of God towards his creatures. By these feasts man not only acknowledged God as his Provider but recorded the Lord’s unbounded and free favor to a chosen people whom he delivered, by personal intervention, in this world (Exod. 10:2; 12:8-9, 11, 14; Lev. 23:5; Deut. 16:6, 12). The joy expressed was heartfelt. Religious commitment was not incompatible with pleasure in temporal things conceived as gifts of God (Lev. 23:40; Deut. 16:14). The response of the participant was religiously ethical. Acknowledgment of sin and devotion to the law of God was involved (Exod. 13:9; Zech. 8:9). The sacrifices offered bespoke forgiveness of sin and reconciliation with God (Lev. 17:11; Num. 28:22; 29:7-11; 2 Chr. 30:22; Ezk. 45:17, 20). To be withheld from the feast was considered a loss and a bar from privilege (Num. 9.7). Not only did the Israelite appear at the feast as a beneficiary of the divine favor, but he made return to the Lord as he had been blessed (Deut. 16:10). Only in unauthorized feasts did unbelieving Israelites eat, drink and play (Exod. 32:6; 1 Kings 12:32-33).

                The feasts to which reference is made in the Old Testament are as follows: (1) The Feast of Unleavened Bread (Exod. 23:15), or Passover, was established to commemorate the historical deliverance from Egypt (Exod. 10:2; 12:8, 14). It was one of the three annual festivals, and was observed on the fourteenth day of the first month. For 7 days unleavened bread was eaten and no servile work done. The first and the last day being ‘holy convocations’, sacrifices were offered (Num. 28:16-25; Deut. 16:1-8).

                (2) The Feast of Weeks is also called the ‘feast of harvest’ and ‘the day of first fruits’ (Exod. 23:16; 34:22; Num. 28:26). Later it was known as Pentecost because it was celebrated on the fiftieth day from the Sabbath beginning the Passover. A holy convocation and the offering of sacrifices marked it.

                (3) The Feast of  Tabernacles or ‘the feast of booths’, is also called the ‘feast of ingathering’ (Exod. 23:16; 34:22; Lev. 23:34; Deut. 16:13). It lasted 7 days, the first and last days being holy convocations. Fruit was gathered in and people dwelt in booths made of branches and boughs of trees (Lev. 23:39-43; Num. 29:12-38).

                (4) The Sabbath. This is regarded as a feast in Lev. 23:2-3, and called a ‘Sabbath of rest’. It was marked by a solemn assembly (Is. 1:13) and cessation from all labor. It was also a day of joy (Is. 58:13).

                (5) The Day of Blowing of Trumpets (Num. 29:1). In Leviticus 23:24 it is called ‘a memorial of blowing of trumpets’ and ‘a Sabbath’. Sacrifices were offered and hard labor ceased on the ‘Day of blowing the trumpets’ (Num. 29:1) or ‘memorial of blowing of trumpets’ (Lev. 23:24). The 7th month in the Jewish calendar, tisûri (Sept./Oct.), was the beginning of the civil year. The first day of the month was to be ‘a day of solemn rest’, in which ‘no laborious work’ was to be done.

                6) The Day of Atonement (Lev. 23:26-31). It was observed on the tenth day of the seventh month, and was a day of a ‘holy convocation’ in which souls were afflicted and atonement made for sin. It was observed but once in the year (Exod. 30:10).

                (7) The Feast of Purim, described in Est. 9. Established by Mordecai in the time of Ahasuerus to commemorate the remarkable deliverance from the intrigues of Haman, this was a day of feasting and gladness. This was not a Levitical Feast prescribed by God.

                (8) The extra-biblical feast of Hanukah is the celebration of the recovery and cleansing of the Jerusalem Temple by Judas Maccabaeus in 164 BC, after its desecration by Antiochus Epiphanes. It is also called the ‘festival of lights’.  In John 10:22, where it is called by its Greek name enkainia (‘dedication’).

THE THREE MAJOR CONVOCATIONS OF ISRAEL

                The Passover of Exod. 12 concerns (1) the original historic event of Israel’s deliverance from Egyptian bondage; (2) the later recurrent institutional commemoration of that event. Closely conjoined, though separate, are (3) the prohibition of  leaven, symbolizing the haste of that unforgettable night of exodus, and (4) the later dedication of the firstborn, with statutory offerings, commemorating those first-born divinely spared in the blood-sprinkled houses. This blood of the sacrificial lamb was carried in a basin and applied therefrom with hyssop, the foliage of the marjoram plant, a common emblem of purity. The celebrating companies were generally family units, but other common ties were possible, such as that which bound our Lord to his disciples.

                There were 3 important days associated with this feast. The first day was Passover, the second day was the Day of Unleavened Bread, and the third day was First Fruits. It is significant that Christ arose on the third day.

                According to Leviticus 23:9-14, the first sheaf of the new crop of barley was presented as a wave offering before the Lord. This took place on the day after the Passover Sabbath and was a public acknowledgment that all came from God and belonged to Him (Num. 28:26; compare Exod. 23:16; 34:22).

                In New Testament times, all Israelite males were expected to appear in Jerusalem thrice annually, for the Feasts of Passover, of Weeks or Pentecost and of Tabernacles. Even Dispersion Jews sometimes conformed; the temporary population of the Holy City could swell to almost 3,000,000 according to Josephus. After candlelight search for the forbidden leaven, and other careful preparations, the Paschal supper proper was taken reclining. It included the symbolic elements of roasted lamb, unleavened bread, bitter herbs, some minor condiments and four cups of wine at specified points. The stipulated ritual hand-washings were carefully observed. The table (more probably the floor) was cleared before the second cup of wine, the story of the Egyptian Passover and Exodus recounted in a dialogue between father and son (or some suitable substitutes). The dishes of food were then brought back, part of the Hallel was sung, the second cup of wine followed. Then came the breaking of bread. In the Last Supper, it was probably at this point that Judas received the sop, and departed into the night to betray his Master (John 13:30). On that fateful night, it may be assumed that the institution of the Lord’s Supper or Eucharist was associated with the third cup of wine. The singing of the Hallel was completed with the fourth cup-doubtless the hymn of Matt. 26:30. It is assumed here that the Last Supper did coincide with the statutory Passover.

                The symbolism, ‘Christ our Passover’, ‘Lamb of God’, is familiar from New Testament usage. We have seen that the traditional lamb, if not provable in all instances, has widespread precedent. It is laid down in Exod. 12:46 and Num. 9:12 that no bone of the Passover victim is to be broken. This small detail is typologically fulfilled when it is reverently applied to the crucified One (John 19:36).

                After the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple, any possibility of slaughtering a victim in ritual manner utterly ceased, and the Jewish Passover reverted to the family festival it had been in the earliest days. Whilst church and synagogue eventually went their separate ways, the habit of celebrating Passover would continue for some time among certain Christians, particularly those of Jewish or proselyte background. But the Lord’s Supper came to replace the Jewish ordinance, just as baptism came to replace circumcision.

                The FEAST OF PENTECOST took place on the 50th day after the Passover offering of the barley sheaf. Since the time elapsed was 7 weeks, it was called ‘feast of weeks’ (Exod. 34:22; Deut. 16:10). It marks the completion of the barley harvest, which began when the sickle was first put to the grain (Deut. 16:9), and when the sheaf was waved ‘the morrow after the Sabbath’ (Lev. 23:11). It is also called the ‘feast of harvest’, and the ‘day of the first fruits’ (Exod. 23:16; Num. 28:26). The feast is not limited to the times of the Pentateuch, but its observance is indicated in the days of Solomon (2 Chr. 8:13), as the second of the three annual festivals (Deut. 16:16).

                The feast was proclaimed as a ‘holy convocation’ on which no servile work was to be done, and at which every male Israelite was required to appear at the sanctuary (Lev. 23:21). Two baked loaves of new, fine, leavened flour were brought out of the dwellings and waved by the priest before the Lord, together with the offerings of animal sacrifice for sin- and peace-offerings (Lev. 23:17-20). As a day of joy (Deut. 16:16) it is evident that on it the devout Israelite expressed gratitude for the blessings of the grain harvest and experienced heartfelt fear of the Lord (Jer. 5:24). But it was the thanksgiving and fear of a redeemed people, for the service was not without sin- and peace offerings, and was, moreover, a reminder of their deliverance from Egypt (Deut. 16:12) as God’s covenant people (Lev. 23:22). The ground of acceptance of the offering presupposes the removal of sin and reconciliation with God.

                In the intertestamental period and later, Pentecost was regarded as the anniversary of the law giving at Sinai (Jubilees 1:1 with 6:17). The Sadducees celebrated it on the 50th day (inclusive reckoning) from the first Sunday after Passover (taking the ‘Sabbath’ of Lev. 23:15 to be the weekly Sabbath). Their reckoning regulated the public observance so long as the Temple stood, and the church is therefore justified in commemorating the first Christian Pentecost on a Sunday (Whit Sunday). The Pharisees, however, interpreted the ‘Sabbath’ of Lev. 23:15 as the Festival of Unleavened Bread and their reckoning became normative in Judaism after ad 70, so that in the Jewish calendar Pentecost now falls on various days of the week.

In the New Testament there are three references to Pentecost: (1) In Acts 2:1, on this day, after the resurrection and ascension of Christ, the disciples were gathered in a house in Jerusalem, and were visited with signs from heaven. The Holy Spirit descended upon them, and new life, power and blessing was evident, which Peter explained was in fulfillment of the prophecy of Joel. (2) In Acts 20:16, Paul was determined not to spend time in Asia and made speed to be in Jerusalem by the day of Pentecost. (3)In 1 Cor. 16:8, Paul purposed to stay at Ephesus until Pentecost, because an effectual door was opened to him for his ministry.

                The FEAST OF TABERNACLES was a ‘festival of ingathering’ (Exod. 23:16; 34:22). This was one of the three great pilgrimage-festivals of the Jewish year; it was kept for 7 days from the 15th to the 22nd day of the 7th month. It came at the end of the year when the labors of the field were gathered in, and was one of the three annual festivals at which every male was required to appear (Exod. 23:14-17; 34:23; Deut. 16:16). It was a time of rejoicing (Deut. 16:14). The designation ‘feast of booths (tabernacles)‘ comes from the requirement for everyone born an Israelite to live in booths made of boughs of trees and branches of palm trees for the 7 days of the feast (Lev. 23:42). Sacrifices were offered on the 7 days, beginning with thirteen bullocks and other animals on the 1st day and diminishing by one bullock each day until on the 7th seven bullocks were offered. On the 8th day there was a solemn assembly when one bullock, one ram and seven lambs were offered (Num. 29:36). This is the last day, ‘that great day of the feast’, probably alluded to in John 7:37. As a feast, divinely instituted, it was never forgotten. It was observed in the time of Solomon (2 Chr. 8:13), Hezekiah (2 Chr. 31:3), and after the Exile (Ezr. 3:4; Zech. 14:16, 18-19). The ceremony of water pouring, associated with this festival in post-exilic times and reflected in Jesus’ proclamation in John 7:37 is not prescribed in the Pentateuch.

                This feast had a historical reference to the Exodus from Egypt and reminded the Jews of their wandering and dwelling in booths in the wilderness (Lev. 23:43). However, this is not evidence of the conversion of the agricultural festival to a historical one. Rather it points to the truth that Israel’s life rested upon redemption, which in its ultimate meaning is the forgiveness of sin. This fact separates this feast from the harvest festivals of the neighboring nations whose roots lay in the mythological activity of the gods. In the New Testament, the  significance of this feast was replaced and fulfilled in the Marriage Feast of the Lamb. Advent more or less replaced this feast in the Christian calendar.

                These three convocations remind us of Salvation, the infilling of the Holy Spirit, and participation in the reality of God’s Kingdom in our daily living and worship of God.

THE DAY OF ATONEMENT

                The holiest and most solemn day of the Hebrew Year was the  DAY OF ATONEMENT called Yom Kippur in Hebrew. Atonement, meaning reconciliation, was associated with sacrificial offerings to remove the effects of sin and in the New Testament, refers specifically to the reconciliation between God and humanity effected by the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. The season of Lent has replaced the Hebrew Day of Atonement in the Christian understanding and in the Church Calendar.

                On the tenth day of the seventh month of the Jewish calendar (Sept.--Oct.) the high priest entered the inner sanctuary of the Temple to make reconciling sacrifices for the sins of the entire nation (Lev. 16:16-28). The high priest was prohibited from entering this most holy place at any other time on pain of death (Lev. 16:2). Nor was any other priest permitted to perform duties within the Temple proper during the ritual for the Day of Atonement (Lev. 16:17). The days' ritual required the high priest to bathe and be dressed in pure linen garments as a symbol of purity (Lev. 16:4). The ceremony began with the sacrifice of a young bull as a sin offering for the priest and his family (Lev. 16:3,6). After burning incense before the mercy seat in the inner sanctuary, the high priest sprinkled the blood from the bull on and in front of the mercy seat (16:14). The priest cast lots over two goats. One was offered as a sin offering. The other was presented alive as a scapegoat (16:5,7-10,20-22). The blood of the goat and the blood of the bull were used as the sin offering. These blood offerings were sprinkled like that to make atonement for the sanctuary (16:15). The mixed blood of the bull and goat were applied to the horns of the altar to make atonement for it (16:18). The high priest confessed all of the people's sins over the head of the live goat which was lead away and then released in the wilderness (16:21-22). Following the ceremony, the priest again bathed and put on his usual garments (16:23-24). The priest then offered a burnt offering for the priest and the people (16:24).

                The bodies of the bull and goat used were burnt outside the camp (16:27-28). The Day of Atonement was a solemn day, requiring the only fast designated by the Mosaic law. All work was also prohibited (16:29; 23:27-28).

                In the Old Testament, atonement refers to the process God established whereby humans could make an offering to God to restore fellowship with God. Such offerings, including both live and dead animals, incense, and money, were required to remove the bad effects of human sin.

                The only fast day stipulated in the Mosaic law was the annual day of Atonement (Yom Kippur), observed on the tenth day of Tishri (September-October) at the conclusion of ten days of penitence. The Day of Atonement was the only day of the year that the priest entered the holy of Holies to make sin offerings for himself, his family, and the "assembly of Israel." After making these offerings, the nation's sins were symbolically laid on the scapegoat "Azazel" that was released into the wilderness to die.

                While atonement in the Old Testament most frequently refers to humans offering sacrifices to God for their wrongdoing, several references are made to God making atonement. In Psalm 78:38, the Hebrew for "atoned for" is used where the KJV translates "forgave" as is also true in Deuteronomy 21:8. Because God "atones for" or "covers" human sin, atonement is best understood as expiation, that is removing the barrier that sin creates rather than propitiation or appeasing an angry God, though both views of atonement continue to be taught.

                The New Testament rarely uses a word for atonement. The basic Greek word is katallasso, usually translated "to reconcile," and the corresponding noun, katallage, meaning "reconciliation." The basic meaning is to establish friendship. This is used in human relationships in 1 Corinthians 7:11, referring to the restoration of relationship between an estranged husband and wife. Paul used the term in reference to Christ's work of salvation in Romans 5:10-11; 11:15; 2 Corinthians 5:18-20. The Greek term hilaskomai, "to forgive" or "show mercy" along with the nouns hilasmos, "means of forgiveness," and hilasterion, "means or place of forgiveness" are the important words in the discussion of expiation and propitiation. They occur in Luke 18:13; Romans 3:25; Hebrews 2:17; 9:5; 1 John 2:2; 4:10.

                The focal point of God's atoning work is Christ's death on the cross. Paul wrote that "when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son" (Rom. 5:10). These words not only define the meaning of atonement, they reveal the heart of the gospel as well.

                The primacy of the cross is emphasized throughout the New Testament. At the beginning of His ministry, Jesus was identified as "the Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world" (John 1:29). The purpose of His coming was "to give his life a ransom for many" (Mark 10:45). He explained His death in terms of the "blood of the New Testament, which is shed for many" (Mark 14:24).

                The relation of the cross to forgiveness of sins was implicit in the earliest Christian preaching (Acts 2:21; 3:6,19; 4:13; 5:31; 8:35; 10:43). Paul proclaimed that "Christ died for our sins"(1 Cor. 15:3), that He was a "propitiation" (Rom. 3:25 KJV), that He became "a curse for us" (Gal. 3:13), and that those "who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ" (Eph. 2:13). Furthermore, "Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many" (Heb. 9:28) and has become "a new and living way" (Heb. 10:20) into God's presence. He is the one who "bare our sins in his own body on the tree" (1 Pet. 2:24).

                Though atonement is focused in the cross, the New Testament makes clear that Christ's death is the climax of His perfect obedience. He "became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross" (Phil. 2:8). "Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which He suffered" (Heb. 5:8). Romans 5:12-19 contrasts Christ's obedience with Adam's disobedience. His sinless obedience qualified Him to be the perfect Sacrifice for sin (Heb. 6:8-10). Furthermore, the New Testament interprets the cross in light of the resurrection. "At-one-ment" is the achievement of Christ crucified and risen. So important is this emphasis that Paul affirms, "And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins" (1 Cor. 15:17).

                The necessity for Christ's atoning work is occasioned by the breach in the relationship between the Creator and the creature. This breach is the result of humanity's sinful rebellion. "But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear" (Isa. 59:2). Thus, in their state of not being reconciled, these people are God's "enemies" (Rom. 5:10), have "enmity against God" (Rom. 8:7), and have "no hope" (Eph. 2:12). There is no difference between Jew and Gentile in this respect, "for all have sinned and come short of the glory of God" (Rom. 3:23).

                The atonement for sin provided by Christ's death had its origin in divine love. No other reason can explain why "God reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ" (2 Cor. 5:18). The anthem that continuously peals from the Bible is that "God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son" (John 3:16; see 1 John 4:9-10). This does not mean that God loves us because Christ died for us. Rather, Christ died for us because God loves us. Thus, "God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us" (Rom. 5:8). Because atonement issues from love, it is always seen as a divine gift.

                Yet, divine love is not sentimental or merely emotional. It is a righteous love which blazes out against all that opposes God's will. The New Testament affirms that "God is love" (1 John 4:8); it also affirms that "our God is a consuming fire" (Heb. 12:29). Thus, the cross is simultaneously a manifestation of God's will to save and of His wrath against sin.

                In His atoning work Christ is both representative and substitute. As representative, Christ acted on behalf of His race. An example of representation is Paul's contrast between Adam and Christ (Rom. 5:12-21; 1 Cor. 15:45-49). Adam and Christ represent two heads of two races of people. Adam is the head of the race of fallen persons. Sin and death came into the world through him. Because of our fallen state, all people belong to Adam's race, the old humanity.

                Christ, the last Adam, represents a new race of people. These are the people who have been saved from sin. Where Adam failed, Christ succeeded. Those who belong to Christ through faith belong to the new humanity He created (2 Cor. 5:17; Eph. 2:14-22).

                As substitute, Christ acted in our place. Whereas representation emphasizes Christ's relation to the race, substitution stresses His relation to the individual. He experienced as substitute the suffering and death each person deserved. Substitution is implied in such references as 2 Corinthians 5:21; Galations 3:13; 1 Peter 2:24.

                In thinking of Christ as substitute, however, His oneness with the Father must be emphasized. Christ is not a third party who comes between God and humanity to absorb all the punishment God can inflict. Substitution means that in Christ, God Himself bears the consequences of human sin. God reconciles people at great cost to Himself.

                To describe the meaning of atonement New Testament writers used images drawn from different areas of experience. Each image says something important about the cross. No one image is adequate by itself. Each image needs the others to produce the whole picture.

                (1) Atonement and ransom. Ransom is an image drawn from ancient economic life. The picture is a slave market or prison. People are in bondage and cannot free themselves. Someone comes and pays the price (provides the ransom) to redeem those in captivity. The New Testament emphasizes both the fact of deliverance and the ransom price. Jesus said that He came "to give his life a ransom for many" (Mark 10:45). Paul wrote, "ye are not your own; For ye are bought with a price" (1 Cor. 6:19-20; compare 7:23). Peter declared that "ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold,... But with the precious blood of Christ" (1 Peter 1:18-19a). The main idea in this imagery is rescue from bondage through the costly self-giving of Jesus.

                (2) Atonement and victory. In this imagery, Satan, the head of evil forces and archenemy of God, has humanity in his power. Christ is the Warrior of God who enters the battle, defeats the devil, and rescues humanity. This conflict motif pervades the gospels (Matt. 4:1-11; 12:28; Mark 3:27; John 12:31). The warfare between Jesus and Satan was real. Yet, divine victory was so certain that Jesus could say in anticipation, "I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven" (Luke 10:18).

                Victory imagery is also prominent in the epistles. "For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil" (1 John 3:8). Christ came so "that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage" (Heb. 2:14-15). That Christ triumphed is clear: "And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it" (Col. 2:15).

                (3) Atonement and sacrifice. Not surprisingly, the atoning power of Christ's death is often expressed in terms drawn from Old Testament sacrificial practices. Thus, Christ's death is called a "sacrifice for sins" (Heb. 10:12) and a "sacrifice to God" (Eph. 5:2). Christ is variously identified with the Passover lamb (1 Cor. 5:7), the sacrifice which initiates the new covenant (Luke 22:20), and the sin offering (Heb. 9:14,25-28). Sacrificial imagery is another way of expressing the coastlines of Christ's atoning work. It is a continual reminder that divine love has assumed the shape of the cross (Gal. 2:20). Sacrifice witnesses to the effectiveness of Christ's death, where sin is forgiven (Eph. 1:7), and the conscience is cleansed (Heb. 9:14).

                 (4) Atonement and glory. In much of the New Testament the glorification of Jesus is associated with His resurrection and ascension. John's Gospel shifts perspective. The whole life and work of Jesus is a revelation of divine glory. This glorification climaxes in Jesus' death on the cross (John 12:23-24; 13:31-32). Consistent with this theme is the emphasis on the cross as "lifting up." This verb has the double meaning of "to lift up on a cross" and "to exalt." The meanings are combined in John's Gospel. " And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me. This he said, signifying what death he should die." (John 12:32-33; 3:14; 8:28). The meaning is not that Jesus was glorified as a reward for His death. Rather it means that divine glory was revealed in the death He died for sins.

                The writer of Hebrews developed images from the Day of Atonement to stress the superiority of Christ's priesthood (8:6; 9:7,11-26). Hebrews 13:11-12 uses the picture of the bull and goat burned outside the camp to illustrate Christ's suffering outside the city walls.

THE SABBATH

                For the ancient Hebrews, God’s Covenant associated worship closely with the Sabbath and revolved around a yearly calendar. The word Sabbath comes from the Hebrew word sûabbaµt, from the root meaning to cease or to desist. In the Bible the principle is laid down that one day in 7 is to be observed as a day holy to God. From the reason given for keeping the Sabbath day in the Ten Commandments we learn that God had set himself the example for the Sabbath rest himself in the creation. The Sabbath therefore is a creation ordinance (Ex. 20:8-11).

                In the account of creation the actual word ‘Sabbath’ is not found, but the root from which the word is derived does occur (Gen. 2:2). The work of creation had occupied 6 days; on the 7th God rested (literally ceased) from his labor. Thus there appears the distinction between the 6 days of labor and the one-day of rest. This is true, even if the 6 days of labor be construed as periods of time longer than 24 hours. The language is anthropomorphic, for God is not a weary workman in need of rest. Nevertheless, the pattern is here set for man to follow. Exod. 20:11 states that God ‘rested’ on the 7th day, and Exod. 31:17 says that he ceased from his work and was refreshed. The language is purposely strong so that man may learn the necessity of regarding the Sabbath as a day on which he himself is to rest from his daily labors.

                The fourth commandment enjoins observance of the Sabbath. In Genesis there is no mention of the Sabbath apart from the creation account. There is, however, mention of periods of 7 days  (Gen. 7:4, 10; 8:10, 12; 29:27). We may also note in the narrative in Job that the seven sons celebrated a feast each on his day, and this was followed by the prayers and sacrifices of Job for the benefit of his children (Job. 1:4-5). This was not a single round, but was regularly practiced. It may be that here is an intimation of worship on the 1st day of the cycle. At least the principle that one day in 7 is holy to the Lord appears to be recognized here.

In Exod. 16:21-30 explicit mention is made of the Sabbath in connection with the giving of manna. The Sabbath is here represented as a gift of God (verse 29), to be for the rest and benefit of the people (verse 30). It was not necessary to work on the Sabbath (i.e. to gather manna), for a double portion had been provided on the 6th day.

                Israel therefore knew the Sabbath, and the injunction to remember it was one that would be understood. In the Decalogue it is made clear that the Sabbath belongs to the Lord. It is therefore primarily his day, and the basic reason for observing it is that it is a day, which belongs to him. It is a day that he has blessed and that he has set apart for observance. This is not contradicted by the Decalogue given in Deuteronomy 5:12. In this latter passage the people are commanded to keep the Sabbath in the manner in which the Lord has already commanded them (the reference is to Exod. 20:8-11), and the fact that the Sabbath belongs to the Lord is again stated (verse 14). An additional reason, however, is given for the observance of the command. This reason is merely additional; it does not conflict with those already given. Israel is commanded to observe the Sabbath day, in order ‘that your manservant and your maidservant may rest as well as you’. Here is a humanitarian emphasis; but here also is emphasis upon the fact that the Sabbath was made for man. Israel had been a slave in Egypt and had been delivered; so Israel must show the mercy of the Sabbath towards those in her own midst who were slaves.

                Throughout the remainder of the Pentateuch the Sabbath legislation is found. It is interesting to note that there is a reference to the Sabbath in each of the four last books of the Pentateuch. Genesis presents the divine rest; the remaining books emphasize the sabbatical legislation. This shows the importance of the institution. Sabbath legislation, it may be said, is integral and essential to the basic law of the Old Testament and the Pentateuch (Exod. 31:13-16; 34:21; Lev. 19:3, 30; 23:3, 38).

                In this connection the significance of the sabbatical legislation appears in the severe punishment that is meted out upon a Sabbath-breaker. A man had been gathering sticks upon the Sabbath day. For this act a special revelation from God decreed that he should be put to death. This man had denied the basic principle of the Sabbath, namely, that the day belonged to the Lord, and therefore was to be observed only as the Lord had commanded (Num. 15:32-36).

                Upon the Pentateuchal legislation the prophets build; their utterances are in accordance with what had been revealed in the Pentateuch. The ‘Sabbaths’ are often linked together with the ‘new moons’ (2 Kings 4:23; Amos 8:5; Ho. 2:11; Is. 1:13; Ezk. 46:3). When prophets like Hosea (2:11) pronounced divine judgment on new moons, Sabbaths and other appointed feasts, they were not condemning the Sabbath as such; they were condemning a misuse of the Sabbath and of the other Mosaic institutions.

                On the other hand, the prophets do point out the blessings that will follow from a proper observance of the Sabbath. There were those who polluted the Sabbath and did evil on that day (Is. 56:2-4), and it was necessary to turn from such things. In a classic passage (Is. 58:13) Isaiah sets forth the blessings that will come from a true observance of the day. It is not a day in which man is to do what pleases him, but rather one on which he is to do the will of God. God, not man, must determine how the Sabbath is to be observed. Recognizing that the day is holy to the Lord will bring the true enjoyment of the promises.

                During the Persian period emphasis was again laid upon observance of the Sabbath day. The pre-exilic ban on engaging in commercial transactions on the Sabbath (Amos 8:5) or carrying burdens on that day (Jer. 17:21). was reinforced by Nehemiah (Neh. 10:31; 13:15-22). During the period between the Testaments, however, a change gradually crept in with respect to the understanding of the purpose of the Sabbath. In the synagogues the law was studied on the Sabbath. Gradually oral tradition made its growth among the Jews, and attention was paid to the minutiae of observance. Two tractates of the Mishnah, Shabbath and ÔErubin, are devoted to a consideration of how the Sabbath was to be observed in detail. It was against this burdening of the commands of God with human tradition that our Lord inveighed. His remarks were not directed against the institution of the Sabbath as such and not against the Old Testament teaching. But he did oppose the Pharisees who had made the Word of God of none effect with their tradition. Christ identified himself as the Lord of the Sabbath (Mark 2:28). In so speaking, he was not depreciating the importance and significance of the Sabbath nor in any way contravening the Old Testament legislation. He was simply pointing out the true significance of the Sabbath with respect to man and indicating his right to speak, inasmuch as he himself was the Lord of the Sabbath.

                As Lord of the Sabbath, Jesus went to the synagogue on the Sabbath day, as was his custom (Luke 4:16). His observance of the Sabbath was in accord with the Old Testament prescription to regard the day as holy to the Lord.

                In his disagreement with the Pharisees (Matt. 12:1-14; Mark 2:23-28; Luke 6:1-11) our Lord pointed out to the Jews their complete misunderstanding of the Old Testament commands. They had sought to make the observance of the Sabbath more rigorous than God had commanded. It was not wrong to eat on the Sabbath, even if the food must be obtained by plucking corn from the ears. Nor was it wrong to do good on the Sabbath day. To heal was a work of mercy, and the Lord of the Sabbath is merciful (John 5:1-18; Luke 13:10-17; 14:1-6).

THE LORD’S DAY

                On the first day of the week the Lord rose from the dead, and therefore it early and increasingly became the day above all others—‘The Lord’s Day‘ (Rev. 1:10)—on which Christians met for worship (Acts 20:7; also Didache 14. 1; Justin, First Apology 67. 3). The Greek word for "Lord's" is precisely the same as that used in the term for "Lord's Supper" (1 Cor. 11:20). In fact, the Didache, an early Christian manual for worship and instruction, links the two terms together, indicating that the Lord's Supper was observed each Lord's Day (14:1). Herein may lie the origin of the term. Because the first day of the week was the day on which the early Christians celebrated Lord's Supper, it became known as Lord's Day, the distinctively Christian day of worship.

                The earliest account of a first-day worship experience is found in Acts 20:7-12. Here Paul joined the Christians of Troas on the evening of the first day of the week for the breaking of bread (probably a reference to the Lord's Supper). The actual day is somewhat uncertain. Evening of the first day could refer to Saturday evening (by Jewish reckoning) or to Sunday evening (by Roman reckoning). Since the incident involved Gentiles on Gentile soil, however, the probable reference is to Sunday night.

                The importance of Sunday to first-century Christians is also intimated in 1 Corinthians 16:1-2. Giving instructions about a special relief offering he wanted to take to the Christians in Jerusalem, Paul suggested that the Corinthians should set aside their weekly contributions on the first day of the week. Paul probably mentioned this day because he knew that his readers routinely assembled on that day for worship and that would be the logical time for them to set aside their offering.

                Two other second-century documents also shed light on the significance of Lord's Day for the early church. First, Ignatius in his Epistle to the Magnesians (about AD 110-117) stressed the importance of Lord's Day by contrasting the worship done on that day with that formerly observed on the Sabbath (9:1). Second, Justin Martyr (about AD 150) wrote the first extant Christian description of a worship service. He noted that the early Sunday morning service began with baptism, included Scripture readings, expository preaching, and prayer, and then concluded with the observance of the Lord's Supper (Apology 65-67).

                First and second century Christian documents indicate that Sunday quickly became the standard day for Christian worship, but they do not explain how or why this change from Sabbath to Lord's Day came about. The most obvious reason, of course, was the Resurrection of Jesus, which took place on that first Lord's Day. Since the earliest collective experiences of the disciples with the risen Lord took place on Easter Sunday evening (Luke 24:36-49; John 20:19-23), one might naturally expect the disciples to gather at that same hour on subsequent Sundays to remember Him in the observance of the Supper. This pattern, perhaps, is reflected in the service at Troas in Acts 20.

                The change in the time of worship from evening to morning, though, probably came about because of practical necessity. Writing to the emperor Trajan at the beginning of the second century, Pliny the Younger, governor of Bithynia, reported that in compliance with Trajan's edict against seditious assemblies, he had ordered that no group, including the Christians, could meet at night. Pliny then described an early morning service of the Christians. Forbidden to meet at night, they met for the observance of the Supper at the only other hour available to them on the first day of the week: early in the morning before they went to work. It is likely that the practice then spread throughout the empire.

                Although some Jewish Christians probably also observed the Sabbath, the early Christians saw Sunday as a day of joy and celebration, not a substitute for the Sabbath. The use of the term "Sabbath" to refer to Sunday did not become common until the English Puritans began to do so after AD 1500. Evidence from the early centuries clearly shows that Christians regarded Sunday as the Lord’s Day--a day to rejoice in the new life brought by the resurrection.

CHRISTIAN YEAR: ENACTING THE COVENANT

                As much of the worship under the Old Covenant revolved around the Holy Days of the Hebrew year, so the worship under the New Covenant revolves around Christian Holy Days. Some time after the Council of Nicaea, the concept of a Christian Year took shape. The Christian Year began on the first Sunday of Advent and ended on the Saturday before Advent began. Festivals or feast days were designated holy days with the purpose of focusing people on Christ. Many of these holy days became our modern holidays. Today, these festivals commemorate historical events in the life of Christ or in the experience of the early church. There were fewer “Holy Days” in the early years of the church, than there are today.

                The Christian Year moved around the person and work of Jesus Christ. Advent celebrated the coming of Christ in the Nativity and also pointed to the Second Coming of Christ. However, this was not adopted into the church calendar until after the third century, and only in the West. The Eastern Churches always had some differences in the dates associated with the birth of Christ. The early church did not celebrate the Christmas season, in the same way as we do today. Most of the Christmas traditions were modified from pagan practices associated with the birth of Mithras or the Winter Solstace. Instead, Advent was the Church’s Christ centered remembrance of Christ’s presence in the earth, as well as upon his first and second comings.

In the Roman chronological system of the Augustan age the week, as a division of time was practically unknown, though the twelve calendar months existed as we have them now. In the course of the first and second century after Christ, the hebdomadal or seven-day period became universally familiar, though not immediately through Jewish or Christian influence. The arrangement seems to have been astrological in origin and to have come to Rome from Egypt.

The starting-point of the Christian system of feasts was of course the commemoration of the Resurrection of Christ on Easter day. For a long time Jews must have formed the vast majority of the members of the infant Church. It was impossible for them to forget that each returning Passover celebrated by their countrymen brought with it the anniversary of their Redeemer's Passion and of His resurrection from the dead. Moreover, they had all their lives been accustomed to observe a weekly day of rest and prayer. Probably at first they did not wholly withdraw from the Synagogue, but it was not long before the observance of the first day of the week became distinctive of Christian worship. St. Paul (Col. 2:16) evidently considered that the converts from paganism were not bound to the observance of the Jewish festivals or of the Sabbath proper. On the other hand, the name "the Lord's day" Sunday seems to have been recognized among Christians as the weekly commemoration of Christ's Resurrection. St. Luke writes in the Acts: "And on the first day of the week, when we were assembled to break bread" (Acts 20:7). We may infer from somewhat later ordinances that it was always regarded as joyful in character.

                The anniversary of the descent of the Holy Ghost upon the Apostles was probably next in importance to Easter. Since Easter was determined by the Jewish Passover, there can be little doubt, seeing that the Christian celebration of Whitsunday stood in the same close relation to the Jewish feast of Pentecost. Jewish converts observed both a Christian Passover and a Christian Pentecost from the very beginning.  Ascension Day though determined in position by the fact that it was forty days after Easter (Acts 1:3) and ten before Whitsuntide, was not superimposed on any Jewish feast.

Easter and Pentecost were certainly two of the most important days in the early Christian year, but there was a great controversy as to when and how those days were to be celebrated. This practice varied from church to church until the fourth century.

A second element, which fundamentally influenced the Christian calendar, may be described as the Nativity Cycle. We may take it as certain that the feast of Christ's Nativity was kept in Rome on 25 December before the year 354. It was introduced into Constantinople by St. John Chrysostom, and definitively adopted in 395. On the other hand, the Epiphany feast on 6 January, which also in the beginning seems to have commemorated the birth of Jesus Christ, is referred to by Clement of Alexandria (Strom. I, 21). A recently discovered discourse of Hippolytus for this feast day is entirely devoted to the theme of Christ's baptism, however. This last, in fact, is and has long been the primary aspect of the Feast of Epiphany in the Oriental churches. But the feast of the Nativity (Dec. 25) is of importance in the calendar not only for itself, as one of the greatest celebrations of the year, but also for the other days depending upon it. Thus on this supposition, however questionable, that the exact date of Christ's nativity was 25 December, we have first the Circumcision on 1 January, the eighth day. This festival greatly utilized in the attempt to divert the newly converted peoples from the superstitious and often idolatrous pagan practices associated with the beginning of the year.

          Again, forty days after Christmas, following, as in the case of the Circumcision, the data of the Jewish law, we have the Presentation in the Temple. This was originally treated as a feast of Our Savior. The Annunciation, or, as it was some times anciently called, the Conception of Our Lord, seems to be heard of in the East in the sixth century and to have been transported thence to Western Europe not long afterwards. Its connection with the Nativity is obvious, and it is even possible. The Incarnation of Our Savior was assigned to the 25th of March because this day, as early as Tertullian, was believed to be the date of His Passion. If this were true, the 25th of December would have been determined by the 25th of March and not vice versa. But certainly the Annunciation as a feast is heard of considerably later than the Nativity.

Another substantial, element in the formation of the calendar is the record of the birthdays of the saints. Christians already in the first half of the second century were accustomed to celebrate the feasts of the martyrs. Probably for a long time these celebrations remained almost entirely local. They were confined to the place where the martyr suffered, or where a considerable portion of his remains was preserved. But in the course of time the practice of moving such relics freely from place to place enlarged the circle of those remembering the martyr. All the churches that possessed these relics felt entitled to keep his "birthday" with some degree of solemnity, and thus we soon find martyrs from Africa, for example, obtaining recognition in Rome and eventually being honored by all the Church. This seems to be, in brief, the history of the inclusion of saints' days in the calendar.

                Today, the Christian Year is highly symbolic and is marked by special colors for each season as well as for saints’ days, martyrs’ days, and festivals. The lectionary, or book of appointed scriptural readings, the Psalter, and the Collects (prayers) used in liturgical churches and in many free churches, are guided by the festivals and seasons commemorated by the Christian Year. These “variables” change, in many modern churches, from Sunday to Sunday, as do the musical responses. In the early church, the concept of a Christian Year slowly developed to hold the believers’ attention on Christ, while helping ministers present a balanced account of the faith. The Christian Year developed during the 4^th and 5^th centuries.

CHAPTER 5

THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT OF BLESSING

GOD’S COVENANT OF GRACE WITH ISRAEL

                In Genesis 1-11, the promise of God is represented by the successive "blessings" announced both in the creative order and on the human family--even in spite of their sin. The promise of blessing therefore, was both introductory to the promise and part of the promise itself. For the fathers of Israel (Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob) we may speak of the promise in the singular even though it announced three significant elements. Each of the three elements is incomplete without the support of each other and without being interlocked into one promise-plan. This triple promise included:

(1)     the promise of a seed or offspring (an heir; Gen. 12:7; 15:4; 17:16,19; 21:12; 22:16-18; 26:3-4,24; 28:13-14; 35:11-12),

(2)     the promise of land (an inheritance; Gen. 12:1,7; 13:17; 15:18; 17:8; 24:7; 26:3-5; 28:13,15; 35:12; 48:4; 50:24)

(3)     the promise of blessing on all the nations (a heritage of the gospel; Gen. 12:3; 18:18; 22:17-18; 26:4; 28:14).

To demonstrate the eternality and one-sidedness in the gracious offer of God, only God passed between the pieces in Genesis 15:9-21 thus obligating Himself to fulfill His promises without simultaneously and similarly obligating Abraham and the subsequent beneficiaries of the promise.

                The promise was eternal, Abraham's descendants had to transmit the promise to subsequent generations until the final Seed, even Jesus the Messiah, came. They had to do more. God expected them to participate personally by faith. Where faith was present, already demands and commands were likewise present. Thus, Abraham obeyed God and left Ur (Gen. 12:1-4) and walked before God in a blameless way (Gen. 17:1). The law extended these demands to the entire life of the people all the while presupposing the earlier promises as the very basis, indeed, as the lever by which such demands could be made (Ex. 2:23-25; 6:2-8; 19:3-8; 20:2).

                The monarchy, prematurely founded by the whims of a people who wished to be like the other nations, received a distinctive role through God's promise. A lad taken "from the pasture" (2 Sam. 7:8 NIV) would be given a name equal to "the greatest men of the earth" (2 Sam. 7:9 NIV); indeed, his offspring would be seated at God's "right hand" (Ps. 110:1).

                The new covenant of Jeremiah 31:31-34 both repeats many of the elements and formulas already contained in the previously announced promise-plan of God and add several new features. The new promise still contains the law of God, only now it will be internalized. It still pledges that God will be their God, and they will be His people. It still declares that He will forgive their sins and remember them no more.

                The New Testament promises may be gathered into these groups. The first are the references to God's promises to Abraham about the heir he was to receive, even Jesus Christ (Rom. 4:13-16,20; 9:7-9; 15:8; Gal. 3:16-22; 4:23; Heb. 6:13-17; 7:6; 11:9-17). A second major grouping may be made around David's seed and the sending of Jesus as "a Savior according to promise" (Acts 13:23,32-33; 26:6). Perhaps we should connect with this group the gift of "the promise of life that is in Christ Jesus" (2 Tim. 1:1 NIV), the "promised eternal inheritance" (Heb. 9:15 NIV), and the promise which "he has promised us, eternal life" (1 John 2:25 NRSV). The third major group is the gift of the Holy Spirit. The promises appear after our Lord's resurrection (Luke 24:49; Acts 2:33,38-39) to communicate a blessing to Israel and thereby to bless all the nations of the earth.

THE BUILDING BLOCKS OF THE COVENANT WITH THE HEBREWS 

                Beginning  with Noah and continuing with Abraham and the descendants of  Abra­ham, God established his second stage of covenant development. God made a covenant with his chosen people, and this covenant provided a temporary solution to the sin problem.  As long as annual blood sacrifices and certain prescribed  offerings were  offered to God, the people's sin was individually and collectively  cov­ered  and  forgotten.   God saw the blood, not the sins of  the  people.  This Covenant,  which has become known as the Old Covenant or Hebrew Covenant,  was for  a people who would carry out God's plan. This Hebrew Covenant dealt  with collective  and personal sin, as well as with the sin nature, but  it  offered only a temporary solution and required continual sacrifice and ritual in order to remain in effect. This Old Covenant provided a learning experience for  the chosen  People of God, with God periodically adding to the provisions  of  the covenant. This could be easily done because each generation renewed the Hebrew covenant,  complete  with additions needed to fit changing circum­stances.

                Put  together  over many generations and with many different people,  The  Old Covenant  can be viewed as a set of building blocks  fitting  together until  the  entire structure was complete. This completion  of  God's  eternal covenant  was finally completed in the finished work of the Lord Jesus  Christ in what is called the New Covenant, which can be seen as a linear continuation of the Old Covenant, not as a totally new work of God.

                What we call the Old Covenant was put together in five main areas. All of these areas fit together to make the covenant complete, and all of these areas also pertain to the New Covenant.

Person with whom               Renewal with:       Major Redemptive               Symbolism and

God made the Covenant:                                    Elements:                               Seals given:     .           

1.  Noah                                 Sons of Noah        salvation and deliverance   Ark and rainbow

2.  Abraham                           Isaac, Jacob,         multiplication and                circumcision and

                                                Joseph                   blessing                                 the Promised Land

3.  Moses                               Joshua                   the law and the spirit         Ark of the Covenant,

                                                                                                                                The Tabernacle,

                                                                                                                                the tablets of the law,

                                                                                                                                the rod of authority,

                                                                                                                                and manna from God

4.  David                                Kings of Judah:    righteous judgment and      Kingdom of Israel               

                                                Solomon,               the kingdom authority         messianic lineage

                                                Josiah, Asa,

                                                Hezekiah

5. Zadok                 the Priest              Priests                                    Temple worship and

     and the Sons                    and Prophets:       praise and worship              the priesthood

     of Zadok                           Jehoiada, Ezra,

                                                Jeremiah, Isaiah,

                                                Hosea, Zechariah

                                                Ezekiel, Malachi,

                                                Joshua (the High Priest                                                                                                                       mentioned by Zechariah)                                                                            

                The  Hebrew  Covenant started with the principles of obtaining  salvation  and deliverance that were given to Noah and his sons. The foundational  principles of  blessing and multiplication, and a personal identification with the  cove­nant through the act of circumcision were established with Abraham. The  Abrahamic Covenant was renewed with Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph. God's law and Levitical ritual became a part of the Old Covenant when God initiated His  covenant with  Moses  at Mt. Sinai. The Mosaic covenant was reaffirmed  by  Joshua  and remained  in effect during the period of the Judges. With David and his seed, God established a  Kingly Covenant. The Davidic Covenant was renewed with Solomon, Asa, Josiah, and Hezekiah. A  Priestly Covenant was established with Zadok and the Sons of Zadok, as  God raised up faithful priests and prophets to prepare for the coming of a Messiah from  the  seed of David. These priestly provisions  were  specifically  given through Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Malachi and several other prophets.

                The Old Covenant (Hebrew Covenant) and the New Covenant are sometimes referred to together as the Covenant of Grace. The term Covenant of Grace refers to the  eternal plan of  redemption entered into by the Godhead, and carried out  in  its several  parts. The  completed covenant, which is referred to as the New Covenant or  Covenant of  Redemption,  supplied  a permanent solution to the sin  problem.  The  sin nature,  personal sin, corporate sin, and even Adamic original sin  were  dealt with under the New Covenant. A one-time sacrifice of the Son of God, eliminat­ed the need to periodically renew this covenant. The once and for all shedding of totally innocent blood completely satisfied God’s conditions for the resto­ration  of eternal fellowship between God and mankind. The New  Covenant  ful­filled the Promise made under the Adamic Covenant and incorporated all of  the elements  of  the Hebrew Covenant into one eternal  sovereignty  treaty.  This covenant  has  become  the most legally binding law ever  established  in  the universe,  and it is the basis for our relationship with God and His  interac­tion  with  us today. The New Covenant is based upon the  redemptive  work  of Christ and the love of a Sovereign God.

                Two Hebrew words are significant in studying the Covenant of God in the Old Testament. Hesed (in the RSV,"steadfast love," but best translated by incorporating the  idea of covenant favor, that is, God freely chose Israel to make  them  a special people) can refer to God's favor shown to Israel. Hesed can also refer to  Israel’s response in loyalty and obedience to the covenant relationship (Hos. 6:6). The idea of praising God for free favor runs through the Psalms (5:7; 57:3;  89:1, 2, 33), especially when the writers have been in trouble and have known deliverance.  Hen  is  a more general term. Its use is similar to a superior’s condescending attitude to a subordinate (Gen. 33:8 of Esau’s attitude to the servile Jacob). In that sense hen  describes  God’s  loving decision  to  select Israel as chosen of God (Deut. 7:7-8;  Jer. 31:2).

OBSERVABLE FRUIT OF COVENANT

                Whenever  Noah , Abraham, or David entered into a covenant with  God,  certain things could be observed in their lives as fruits of the covenant. These same things should be observable in our lives, if we are truly living in  covenant with God.

1.  The presence of God overshadows those who are in covenant with God.

2.  God removes sin and its consequences from God's covenant people.

3.  Knowledge of God's Word, laws, and character is written on the hearts of  God's covenant people, and a choice is made to follow God's ways.

4.  Covenant people demonstrate faith in action by living in obedience to God's Word.

5.  Covenant people act upon their imputed righteousness knowing they are God’s children.

6.  Covenant people separate themselves from the philosophies, attitudes and pleasures of the World which often keep people from spiritual maturity.

7.        The Covenant is one of the places where heaven and earth touch. God touches man and man touches God through the covenant relationship that God establishes with his children.

8.        Above all, covenant people desire to worship God. They worship God in spirit of unity and love, as a bride to her husband. We  must each ask ourselves, "Am I living daily in covenant relationship  with God?" It is time for all believers to enter completely into God's Covenant.

THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT

                The  Biblical  account of Abraham's life and adventures begins in  Genesis  12 with  God's call to Abraham. In verses 2 and 3, we see God  promising  certain things to Abraham. In effect, God was offering to make a Sovereignty Treaty or Covenant with Abraham. Abraham acted upon God's commandments and believed God, but like many of us came short of actually entering into a covenant with  God. In  subsequent chapters, Abraham at times would exhibit great faith. At  other times, he would fail God. He was committed to God and to God's plan, but  only from  the perspective of his own self-interest. Like Abraham,  many  believers want the presence of God, but only so that they may have prosperity and  spiritual power.  These believers, like Abraham want a limited covenant  relationship  with God, but not one in which they must submit totally to  a  Sovereign God.  The Abraham of Genesis 12 was too self-centered and ambitious to  submit completely to a full covenant relationship with God. He would still be  faithful  to God, and this faithfulness would secure God's blessings in  his  life. But not until Abraham had learned to submit, could he receive the  fulfillment of all that God had promised him.

                God  spells out his covenant with Abraham in Genesis chapter 17:2-21. The token of this Covenant demanded by God is circumcision. God, in turn gives the token of Isaac, the son who will establish Abraham’s seed forever. It should be noted that earlier, Abraham participated in a Covenant Meal with Melchizedek, to whom he paid tithes and offered the bread and the wine. This covenant meal is symbolic of the Lord’s Supper in the Christian Church. Traditionally the monetary offering, the bread (body of Christ) and the wine (blood of the New Covenant) are placed on the Table of the Lord in Sacramental Churches. This concept dates back to the Abrahamic Covenant.

God’s people are often set apart for God's service, as in the consecration of a minister, deacon, elder/priest, bishop, or missionary. To consecrate means to invoke or call down upon a person,  place, activities, or things, the power of God through  the  Holy Spirit.  It also means to set apart certain believers for special offices or functions.  Buildings and material objects are often consecrated, as in the consecration or blessing of a church.

                The practice of consecration, which is as old as biblical religion, involved circumcision. The Hebrews were set apart by CIRCUMCISION; Christians are set apart by BAPTISM, also a token of covenant with God. The Hebrews circumcised the newborn baby on the eighth day. In the early church, babies were baptized on the eighth day, in accordance with the Hebrew custom. This practice continued to be widely accepted as the entrance of the child into covenant with God until the latter stages of the Reformation. The understanding of this practice is being restored to some churches today. Baptism will be further discussed in a later chapter concerning the New Covenant, but its parallel to Hebrew circumcision needs to be considered in any discussion of the Abrahamic Covenant.              

                Before Abraham became totally committed to doing God's plan God's way; before he was ready to cut a covenant with God Almighty (who he knew as El Shaddai-- the all sufficient one), Abraham had to undertake a series of separations.

THINGS THAT Abraham had to be separated from

1.  COUNTRY (12:1)-- denoting his physical and spiritual location; any boundaries which limit us in how far we go with God.

2.  KINDRED or HIS FATHER’S HOUSE (12:1)-- those people and influences that were holding him back; the traditions and cultural factors that hindered his spiritual growth.

3.  Egypt (13:11)-- a type of the world system with all of its pleasures; Place of bondage (lust of the flesh, lust of the eyes, pride of life).

4.   LOT  (13:11)-- the responsibilities he had that were tied to the world system and that were hindering him; typical of the harlot church, that is filled with traditions and doctrines, but without God's Spirit.

5.  Wealth without responsibility (14:21-24)-- Abraham paid tithes and gave offerings. Although he was wealthy, his wealth did not control him.

6.        Ishmael -- the works of the flesh, the carnal mind and wild nature.

7.        Isaac--  that which was most important to him, the very promise of  God, of whom he had made an icon of his spiritual and material success.

(The author is indebted to Rev. Kelly Varner for this insight into Abraham’s separations.)

                Only  when Abraham had separated himself from all of those ties to  the  world system, could he walk in the fullness of God's Covenant. Likewise, to live  in the  fullness of God's Everlasting Covenant, we must be willing to make  these same separations. We must be willing to go anywhere (physically or  spiritually) that God wants us to go. We must separate (sanctify) ourselves from people who  exert  a  negative influence over us. We must lay aside traditions and cultural influences, which are holding us back. We must take upon us no responsibilities  or ties to the world system. We must separate ourselves  from  the things  of the flesh  and quit trusting in Egypt for our sustenance.  (Abraham went into Egypt in search of provisions against a famine, instead of  trusting in God to see him through the famine). We must even be willing to give up what God has blessed us with, in order that we might walk in even greater blessings under  God's Covenant. The price of enjoying Covenant Blessings is total  submission to God and dependence upon Him for our every need.

                The Abrahamic Covenant gradually came to be identified as the essence and epitome of God’s covenants with his people. In fact, the “Old Covenant” is sometimes referred to as the “Abrahamic Covenant.” We will examine in detail several of the aspects of God’s covenant with Abraham; circumcision, and Abraham’s oath, and the blessings and curses associated with entering into a covenant relationship.

CIRCUMCISION

                The  Abrahamic Covenant required the removal of the foreskin, a ceremony  performed  on eight-day-old males symbolizing their participation as sons of  the COVENANT binding Yahweh and Israel (Gen. 17:9-14). Fathers (21:4) who initially used flint knives ordinarily did circumcision (Josh. 5:2-3).

                The extent to which circumcision was practiced by Israel's neighbors is debated. Although the practice was attested in third-millennium BC Egyptian bas-reliefs, uncircumcised mummies are known. If Jeremiah 9:25-26 mentions circumcised Egyptians, Edomites, Ammonites, Moabites, and Arabians, Ezekiel 32:21-30 anticipates  that the Egyptians will join the Assyrians,  Elamites,  Edomites, Phoenicians,  and Syrians in an underworld region reserved for  the  uncircumcised. The Philistines were contemptuously called "the uncircumcised" (1  Sam. 14:6; 31:4).

                The  Bible  reports that circumcision was first observed  by  the  patriarchs, maintained  during Egyptian captivity, ignored in the wilderness, and  resumed after entry into Canaan (Gen. 34:13-24; Josh. 5:4-9). Circumcision was mandated  of Israelite slaves and any resident aliens observing the Passover  (Exod. 12:43-49).  Prior to the early fifth century BC, circumcision was made an infancy rite (Gen. 17; 12; Lev. 12:3). With circumcision declining  among  Israel's  neighbors, it superbly served as a distinguishing mark  of  covenantal communion  with Yahweh. Israelite males joined Abraham's son, Isaac, in  being circumcised  on the eighth day (Gen. 21:4). Many Jews resisted Antiochus Epiphanes’ second-century BC campaign to prohibit this Greek-scorned practice (1 Macc. 1:60-61).

                Jesus  and  Paul were circumcised (Luke 2:21; Phil. 3:5). Though  some  Jewish Christians  demanded circumcision of Gentile converts, the  Jerusalem  Council (Acts 15) upheld the Gentile view that it was not binding on Christians.  Here Paul  was influential. He believed that real circumcision is a matter of  the heart (Rom. 2:29). Following this decision made by the Jerusalem Council, baptism gradually replaced circumcision as the means by which believers entered God’s covenant.

                In his letter to the Galatians, Paul repelled the Jewish Christian arguments that Christians should be circumcised. He appealed to Genesis 12 and 15, where the promise to Abraham said nothing about circumcision when it offered a worldwide family, but rather made acceptance with God conditional on the sole requirement of faith (Gal. 3:10-14). Yet “faith” for Paul has ethical implications,  chiefly the act of love (5:6) and the call to act out a  person's  new relationship to God in socially responsible ways (5:13 - 6:10).

THE COVENANT OATH

                When Abraham took Isaac up to the Mountain to be sacrificed to God, he made an oath of faith. He told Isaac that God would provide a lamb for sacrifice.  The New Testament tells us that Abraham believed God and it was counted to him  as righteousness.  A  statement of faith-- an oath, has always been a part  of  a true  covenant.  Both parties offer a pledge or declaration to each  other  at some time during or after the covenant making process.

                The Hebrew word for oath is used in regard to both God and Israelite  society. In both cases it refers to a solemn statement of intention or promise that  is held to be binding and irrevocable. The natural association is in the various ceremonies of covenant making, beginning with God's pledge to Abraham  (Gen. 24:8). This is evidently a landmark case, since God's oath to the patriarch is picked  up  in Luke 1:13-20 and Hebrews 6:13-20. The Mosaic  covenant  is also confirmed by a divine oath (Deut. 29:12, 14; compare Deut.7:8). This practice of confirming a treaty by an oath is well attested to in Near Eastern texts that describe covenant making among ancient tribes and nations.

                Paul  draws out the significance of God's oath, ascribing to Jesus Christ  the power to ratify such divine promises (2 Cor. 1:19, 20; Rom. 15:8). The reliability of God in covenant faithfulness is an assurance that God will not break a declared intention to bless the people.                Whereas salvation and deliverance characterize God’s covenant with Noah, multiplication and blessing characterize God’s covenant with Abraham and his seed. Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph are the specific heirs, with whom God renewed the principles of the Abrahamic Covenant. This covenant remained little changed, in the divine covenantal continuum, until God added his Law. The Law specifically outlined stipulations that God placed upon his people, and clarified the role of sacrificial blood in God’s redemptive plan.

BLESSINGS UNDER THE COVENANT

                The Old Testament word for blessing is barak and generally denotes a bestowal of good, usually conceived of as material (Deut. 11:26; Prov. 10:22; 28:20; Is. 19:24, etc.). The word means "to kneel" (2 Chron. 6:13; Ps. 95:6) and thus "to bless" (Gen. 27:33; Exod. 18:10; Deut. 28:4). Old Testament individuals might bless God (Gen. 9:26; Ezk. 18:10; Ruth 4:14; Ps. 68:19). God also blesses men and women (Gen. 12:2-3; Num. 23:20; Ps. 109:28; Isa. 61:9). Persons might also bless one another (Gen. 27:33; Deut. 7:14; 1 Sam. 25:33), or they might bless things (Deut. 28:4; 1 Sam. 25:33; Prov. 5:18). Normally, however, when used as a verb, the word is in the passive voice ("be blessed"), as though to suggest that persons do not have in themselves the power to bless.

                Blessing is often contrasted with the curse (Gen. 27:12; Deut. 11:26-29; 23:5; 28:2; 33:23), and sometimes is used of the formula of words which constitute a ‘blessing’ (Gen. 27:36, 38, 41; Deut. 33:1). The New Testament word eulogia is used also in the latter sense (Jas. 3:10), but in addition denotes both the spiritual good brought by the gospel (Rom. 15:29 mg.; Eph. 1:3) and material blessings generally (Heb. 6:7; 12:17; 2 Cor. 9:5). Blessing and cursing are primary biblical emphases, as reflected in the 516 uses of words such as bless (132), blessed (285), blesses (10), blessing (70), and blessings (19); and the 199 occurrences of such words as curse (97), cursed (74), curses (19), and cursing (9).

                Both blessing and cursing assumed unique power in Israel's life as they were taken into the context of worship. The Lord was the source of all blessing, and people sought to express gratitude for that blessing; indeed, to pray for the continuation of such blessing: "Bless the Lord, O my soul: and all that is within me, bless his holy name. Bless the Lord, O my soul, and forget not all his benefits" (Ps. 103:1-2). Central to the covenant renewal ceremony was the blessing (Deut. 28:3-6). Aaron's benediction both proclaims and petitions the Lord's blessing: "The Lord bless thee, and keep thee: The Lord make his face shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee: The Lord lift up his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace" (Num. 6:24-26).

                The Greek words euloge?oµ and eulogé?a also denote a blessing. The literal sense is “speaking well.” This yields the meaning  “to extol.” We also find a use for “advocacy” in the papyri. The term may be used for the praise of humans by the gods, but more often for praise of the gods. The idea of blessing is extremely rare.

                Blessing is a most important concept in the Old Testament and Judaism. Like cursing, it involves a transfer by acts and words. The Hebrew group brk, translated by euloge?oµ etc. in the Septuagint, denotes blessing, being blessed, and the individual blessings.

1. A father has a power to bless, which he transmits to his heirs (Gen. 27:1; 48:15; 49:25-26).

2. This blessing takes the form of prayer to God (Gen. 49:25). Since God is personal, the blessing is not magical, but relates to his free and gracious giving. Creation depends on divine blessing (Gen. 1:22). Man and woman are blessed from the outset (Gen. 1:28). God sustains his work by sending showers of blessing (Ezek. 34:26). He blesses the Sabbath (Gen. 2:3) as well as crops and cattle (Deut. 28:1 ). Specific blessings are related to salvation history (cf. Gen. 17:7-8; 26:3). The history of the chosen people stands under blessing or cursing (Deut. 11:26; 30:1 ). Blessing becomes cursing if the commandments are not kept. The righteous who trust in God and do his will find blessing, but sinners cursing (Jer. 17:5, 7; Ps. 24:4-5).

3. The reminder of God’s blessings takes on a religious connotation (cf. the blessings given by Melchizedek in Gen. 14:19, by Moses in Deut. 33:1, by Joshua in Josh. 14:13, by Eli in 1 Sam. 2:20, by David in 2 Sam. 6:18, and by Solomon in 1 Kgs. 8:14). It gradually becomes the priest’s prerogative to bless (Lev. 9:22-23; Num. 6:22; Deut. 10:8). The prayer of Ps. 3:8 echoes constantly in the temple liturgy.

4. An important use of the group is also for the blessing of God by believers in the sense of giving him praise and glory.

5. The Hebrew verb can be used for blessing in the general sense of greeting.

6. The term may also be used euphemistically where cursing is intended (Job 1:11; 2:5, 9).

7. The use of the eulogeé?n group for the brk group does not change the sense by ruling out magical ideas, for the Old Testament itself removes blessing from the sphere of primitive manna, and the Greek terms simply set the seal on this development.

                The rabbis worked out specific rules for blessing. (1) The Aaronic blessing is for the priesthood. (2) Only a priest may pronounce it in the synagogue. (3) All forms of prayer that begin with praise of God are blessings. (4) Ascription of praise etc. is common in other contexts (cf. the blessing of the law, temple, etc. on the Day of Atonement). Blessings must also precede all meals in recognition that all things come from God (Ps. 24:1). A concluding thanksgiving makes an eulogé?a of the whole meal. (5) Table blessings play an important part in the Passover, e.g., the blessing of the bread, and the cup of blessing after the eating of the lamb.

                The Old Testament heavily influences the use of blessings in the New Testament. Thus Hebrews 7:1 uses the story of the blessing of Abraham by Melchizedek to show the superiority of Christ’s high priesthood, while Hebrews 11:20-21 and 12:17 reflect the Old Testament concept of parental blessing. The New Testament also recognizes the duty of blessing God (cf. Luke 1:64; 2:28). The Messiah adopts the religious practices of his day, so that we find him blessing the bread in Mark 6:41; 8:7, though with an upward rather than the prescribed downward look, and with something distinctive that made him recognizable in Luke 24:30. At the Last Supper Jesus blesses the bread and hands around the cup of blessing (Mark 14:22; cf. “the cup of blessing which we bless” in 1 Cor. 10:16). Jesus also blesses people, (e.g., the children in Mark 10:16, and the disciples in Luke 24:50 He brings a fullness of blessing (Rom. 15:29). This is a spiritual blessing (Eph. 1:3) which fulfils what was promised to Abraham (Gal. 3:8-9) and means eternal joy for the blessed of the Father (Matt. 25:34).

                Paul uses eulogé?a for the gifts that he seeks as a collection for Jerusalem (2 Cor. 9:5-6). In 1 Cor. 14:16 eulogeé?n denotes ecstatic praise. As distinct from the curse ana?thema Ieµsou?s, confession of Jesus as Lord is true eulogé?a (1 Cor. 12:3). Revelation shows that the eternal worship in heaven includes the magnifying of him that sits on the throne and the Lamb (5:12-13; 7:12). Elsewhere, Pauline literature uses the word: "Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered" (Rom. 4:7); "Blessed be God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies, and the God of all comfort" (2 Cor. 1:3).

In the Old Testament believers may be the blessed of God (Gen. 12:2; Deut. 28:6), but more commonly God is the blessed one (Gen. 14:20, where Abram is also blessed by God, v. 19). In Jewish writings outside the Old Testament, liturgical formulas call God blessed. Only God is the blessed one in the New Testament (Luke 1:68; Rom. 1:25; 2 Cor. 1:3; 11:31; and Eph. 1:3).    Words of blessing also are used as a salutation or greeting, with an invocation of blessing as a stronger greeting than "peace" (shalom, Gen. 48:20). As such it may be used in meeting (Gen. 47:7), departing (Gen. 24:60), by messengers (1 Sam. 25:14), in gratitude (Job 31:20), as a morning salutation (Prov. 27:14), congratulations for prosperity (Gen. 12:3), in homage (2 Sam. 14:22), and in friendliness (2 Sam. 21:3).

                In the New Testament, the word "bless" often translates makarios, meaning "blessed, fortunate, happy." The special characteristic of New Testament uses of "bless" and related words is close relationship to the religious joy people experience from being certain of salvation and thus of membership in the kingdom of God. "Bless" occurs in the New Testament only ten times, in contrast to 122 Old Testament occurrences. The New Testament never uses "blesses" and uses "blessing" only 17 times. It is reasonable to conclude that the primary use of the blessing concept in the New Testament is that of "blessed" as opposed to the verbal emphasis on "bless."

                "Blessed" appears frequently in the New Testament (88). Especially is "blessed" well known for Jesus' references to the word in the Beatitudes of the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5:3-11) and His congratulations to those who respond positively to the kingdom of God (Matt. 23:39; 24:46; Mark 11:9; Luke 10:23; 14:15). In contrast to frequent usage in the first three Gospels (52 occurrences) the Gospel of John uses the word "blessed" in only three places (John 12:13; 13:17).

                The unique concept of the spoken word, especially in the context of worship or other formal settings, is important for understanding the significance of both cursing and blessing. According to Old Testament thought patterns, the formally spoken word had both an independent existence and the power of its own fulfillment. The word once spoken assumed a history of its own, almost a personality of itself. The word also had the power of its own fulfillment. Both of these concepts are fundamental to understanding Isaiah's emphasis on God's Word. Isaiah wrote: "For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater: so shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I send it" (Isa. 55:10-11).

The Word of God exists as a reality and has within itself the power of its own fulfillment. Formal words of blessing or cursing also had the same power of self-fulfillment. When Isaac mistakenly blessed Jacob rather than Esau, he could not recall the blessing, for it existed in history (Gen. 27:18-41); it had acquired an identity of its own. Blessing and cursing released superhuman powers, to bring to pass the content of the curse or the blessing.

                John often used the word “blessed” in Revelation: "Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein for the time is at hand" (Rev. 1:3). He also wrote: "Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord" (Rev. 14:13; 16:15; 19:9; 20:6; 22:7,14). They are blessed because they are in covenant with God.

BESTOWAL OF BLESSINGS:                           BLESSINGS THAT WE SHOUD SPEAK:

Gen. 1:22; 9:1-7------- divine blessings              Mal. 3:10-12---- prosperity

Gen. 24:48; Ps. 103:1-- adoration of God           Matt. 6:26 ----- food and clothing

Gen. 24:60; 27:4, 27--- invoking a blessing       Acts 14:17------ the harvest

                                                                                Exodus 20:12---- a long life

                                                                                Ps. 127:3-5----- children

THE CURSE OF BREAKING THE COVENANT

                Cursing is less frequently used in the Bible (199) than is "blessing" (516). The concept is almost exclusively Old Testament, which speaks of "curse" (89), "cursed" (65), "curses" (18), and "cursing" (8). The New Testament uses "curse" only 8 times, "cursed" in 9 places, "curses" in a single verse, and "cursing" in one reference. Of the 199 biblical uses of the words, 180 are in the Old Testament and only 19 in the New Testament.

                An early word for curse in the Old Testament is 'arar and is used primarily in poetic and legal sections of the Old Testament. The word appears in the call of Abraham, "and curse him that curseth thee" (Gen. 12:3). An extended curse formula appears in Deuteronomy, where blessing and cursing are contrasted (Deut. 27:15-26; cf. 28:16-19). Later the same word refers to cursing the priests: "If ye will not hear, and if ye will not lay it to heart, to give glory unto my name, saith the Lord of hosts, I will even send a curse upon you, and I will curse your blessings: yea, I have cursed them already, because ye do not lay it to heart" (Mal. 2:2).

                Another word used for curse in the Old Testament (qalal) has less severe implications, although it probably came to be used as a synonym for the harsher term ( arar). The basic meaning of the word is light, insignificant, or trifling. It described persons lightly esteemed (2 Sam. 6:22) and also meant, "to make contemptible"; hence, to curse persons (Gen. 12:3; Exod. 21:17).

CHAPTER 6

THE MOSAIC COVENANT OF THE LAW

                God’s covenant with Moses was the third stage in the development of his covenant with the Hebrews that is known as the Old Covenant. This covenant was renewed with Joshua, and it is really a continuation of the revelation of covenant principles that God started with Adam and continued with Noah and Abraham. The emphasis in the Mosaic Covenant is on covenant law.

                The Mosaic Covenant forms the basis the Biblical Books of Exodus, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy. A study of Exodus  reveals  three  large blocks  of  material. The first, located in chapters 1 - 15, focuses  on  four major events--the summons of Moses, numerous plagues inflicted against  Egypt, the  celebration of PASSOVER, and the deliverance from the pursuing  Egyptians at  the  Sea of Reeds (Red Sea). The second block spanning chapters  16-18 highlights harsh moments in Israel's wilderness journey when lack of food  and water  and pressure from hostile tribes severely tested its trust in  Yahweh's providential  care.  The  third block found in chapters 19-40  on  Yahweh's theophany to Israel at SINAI when it formally became Yahweh's covenant  people by  receiving laws, including elaborate instructions ensuring an ongoing  worshipping fellowship with Him. The foundational series of events, which began with the Exodus, climaxed at Mount Sinai.

                A major truth emerges simply in the way in which the Exodus story is told. Egypt was the scene of a twofold act of God: liberation and redemption. The former was achieved by the tenth plague (Exod. 11:1) and actually brought to Israel all they had sought in crying to the Lord (Exod. 2:23). But the Lord himself had something further in mind: he promised also redemption (Exod. 6:6) as a distinct exercise on his part and, to accomplish it, added the Passover. In this  way Israel became the people who took shelter beneath the blood of the lamb (Exod. 12:13, 22-23) and who, by sheltering, were saved from the wrath of God (Exod. 12:12) and were initiated into a life of pilgrimage (Exod. 12:11). Pharaoh would have made them outcasts (Exod. 11:1); the blood and the flesh of the lamb made them the Lord's redeemed pilgrims. It was this people, the people liberated and redeemed by grace, which came to Mount Sinai.

                Sinai was not a random stopping place on the journey but an intended, primary destination (Exod. 3:12). They were led to that place in the desert by the pillar of cloud and fire (Exod. 13:21-22). The people redeemed by blood were brought by their Redeemer to the place of law giving (Exod. 20:2). The law which God gave through Moses had many aspects, e.g., civil, dealing with the legal system of the people of God considered as a state, with courts and penalties; moral,  the law of holy living; and religious, the law of the ceremonies and sacrifices. It is the latter two, which concern us here.

                Inviting  the  people into covenant fellowship at Sinai,  Yahweh  convincingly manifested  a gracious and sovereign nature. By instructing Moses to tell  the people,  "You  have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and how I  bore  you  on eagles'  wings  and  brought you to myself" (Exod. 19:4).  Yahweh  emphasized  their miraculous deliverance as God's gift. By making God's law an intrinsic  component in the covenant proceedings, however, Yahweh conveyed high  expectations. If  the  people were to enter into a permanent association  with  this  Deity, whose  name was "Jealous" (Exod. 34:14), they must know that Yahweh would  lay  upon them  specific  religious and ethical claims. Still, they will be  honored  by God's  continuing  presence--the  glory of Yahweh that had  settled  on  Sinai (Exod. 24:16)  transferred  itself to the tabernacle (Exod. 40:34)  that  would  accompany Israel through the wilderness trek.

                Exodus portrays Yahweh's chosen as those who profoundly understand that transformation is an essential dimension of religious pilgrimage. When the formerly benign Egyptian environment turned against them (Exod. 1:8-16), they had no alternative  but to cry for help. Though they accepted Moses as leader,  they  freely expressed  their  anger  and fear when the situation  worsened  (Exod. 5:21;  14:12; 17:3). In the threatening wilderness their posture was often rebellious.  Even at  Sinai,  after they had learned firsthand Yahweh's saving  deliverance  and covenant  purpose, they flaunted their infidelity by worshipping a golden  calf that brought them and their leader to grief (chap. 32). Nevertheless,  through those formative moments of exodus and covenant making, Israel recognized  that it had been transformed from a "mixed multitude" of slaves (Exod. 12:35) to a people chosen for Yahweh's own purpose, and that God would not abandon Israel.  Moreover, through the historical recollection of the festivals of Passover  and  unleavened bread (Exod. 12:1-28); and through such  tangible objects  as the Ark of the Covenant (ex. 25:10-22) and the tent tabernacle (Exod. 26:1-37), Israel found ample direction to aspire to become the people Yahweh intended them to become. These feasts and sacred objects symbolized Yahweh's real presence. In other words, Yaweh had added another layer to His Everlasting Covenant, and this group of refugees was now God's true covenant people.

THE COMMANDMENTS OF GOD

                The dramatic delivery of the Ten Commandments on Mount Sinai highlights the covenant relationship between the people of Israel and their God. The  lightning,  the  thunder, the sound of the trumpets, and the theophany of  God  all accent the importance of this relationship and the importance of the laws that God was promulgating. Yaweh got the people's attention and focused that attention on His Laws, which became the written stipulations of His Covenant. The Law (Torah in Hebrew) was  principle amendment to God’s covenant that was cut with Moses.

                There  is a conditional "if" is in line embedded within the basic theology of the  Mosaic covenant,  "if  you  do my will, then I will establish  you."  However,  other references pertaining to “turning to God,” even in the same prophetic book, are  less  inclined toward divine action and human response. They are more inclined toward the “call” of the sovereign God: "Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations" (Jer. 1:5).

                Implicit in the covenant that Joshua and the people made with God, was the understanding that the stipulations and demands of this covenant were commandments that had to be obeyed. The blessings of the covenant were contingent upon obedience to the commandments of God. God’s commandments outline the minimal responsibilities or duties to which God’s covenant people are obligated under their Suzerainty Treaty and Royal Grant.  The people of Israel were commanded to possess the land, and the degree to which they failed to do so meant that their blessings and benefits were limited. Because they did not possess ALL of the land, they were not fully insulated from the depredations depicted in the Book of Judges.               Scripture directly commands obedience to the covenant. Keep therefore the words of this covenant, and do them, that ye may prosper in all that ye do (Deut. 29:9). And God said unto Abraham, Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore, thou, and thy seed after thee in their generations. This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man-child among you shall be circumcised (Gen. 17:9-10). To fully understand the operation of a covenant, one must understand the term COMMANDMENT, and how God's commandments are transmitted. There are several Hebrew words that have been translated as "commandment", and each of these terms has significance to the understanding of God's Covenants. As you examine each of the following words, carefully read each of the accompanying scripture references. All of the following words are translated to read "commandment" in the King James Version of the Bible.

1.  PEH-- From the mouth (as in blowing breath) to lead and direct. The word for Spirit, ruah (breath), is a breathed direction from God's Spirit to mankind. (Read Exod. 17:1; Num.  4:37; 10:3; and 1 Sam.15:24). God's Spirit commands His people to action, and covenants which God makes, are usually made in the Spirit realm. One way believers are directed by God is through His covenants, by His Spirit.

2.  TZAVAH-- To give charge as a messenger. A commandment can come through a messenger of God (a Moses or a Joshua), and the commandment is still to be considered to have come from God. God's chosen leaders can, in other words, give commandments to which God will expect the people to respond. A covenant made with God by God's leaders is binding upon the people. (See Exodus 36:6).

(12)  IMRAW-- God's written Word through divine inspiration of scripture.  The Word  of God has been sent forth to each generation, usually in written  form. This  Word  of God is, in essence, His covenant. The  covenants  expressed  in God's Word are for all generations and for all cultures. (Read Ps. 147:15).

(13)  4.  CAW--  A principle, precept, or injunction. A covenant and the  commandments  associated with that covenant, constitute a legal document. This  term is used in Hosea 5:11.

(14)  5.  MITZVAH-- A law to be obeyed. This term requires a response to a written law  or  sovereignty treaty. There are things that must be  done;  obligations that must be fulfilled by those who are in covenant relationship with God. God holds  His people responsible for the keeping of His covenants. (Read  1  Sam. 13:13; 1 Kings 2:42-44; Prov. 6:23; and Mal. 2:1-2:4). There is an implied blessing associated with keeping this type of commandment. As the people obeyed God’s commandments, God blessed them. Sometimes the priest or prophet pronounced this blessing, and the recipients were blessed with the PEACE OF GOD. In early new Testament worship, the PEACE was passed among the worshippers as they greeted one another with a “holy kiss” during the church service. Sacramental churches today retain this “passing of the peace” as a part of the Eucharist Service. Pentecostal and Charismatic services usually have a time of greeting one another with hugs. This practice is the vestige of the practice of  “passing the peace” in the early church, upon the completion of the Liturgy of the Word. God always commands (mitzvah) a response to His Word.

(12)  TEHUME—A judgment, decree or judicial sentence.  A judgment or sentence has been passed, and that sentence is recorded in the covenant. Remember that in the ancient world all governments recognized all sovereignty treaties (covenants) as being legally binding. This principle is illustrated in Ezra 4:12.

                All of the above words for commandment are used in reference to legally binding commandments of God under the covenants that He has made. There are two Hebrew terms that are translated “commandment” which are not directly associated with divine covenants.

(12)  DAWBAUR—Word of advice or request—(1 Sam. 15:13; 1 Chr. 28:21).

(12)  AWMAR—The command or declaration from a secular authority that does not always come from God. (See 1 Chr. 14:12). Secular laws and authorities must be obeyed  (Rom.  13:1-7), but not all proclamations of secular authorities are commands of God.

COVENANT RESPONSIBILITY AND THE COMMANDMENTS OF GOD

                From the beginning God’s law and commandments lay at the center of his covenant; dealings with man. The major stress in Genesis 2, the Creator’s benevolence and bounty toward his chief creature, does not  obscure the fact that man in the garden was man under law and that it  was through obedience that he entered into life. The balance of things is seen in the contrast between “every tree” that is there for man’s  enjoyment and the single tree that is forbidden. Yet in that single  tree was enshrined the principle of law. Thus at the outset the Bible  joins together that enduring partnership, obedience and life. Obedience safeguarded the enjoyment of the life that was life indeed; disobedience not only forfeited that life but also replaced it by a  death bearing opposite. In Genesis 3, with disobedience came the birth of an evil conscience (vs. 8), the replacement of love by resentment (vs. 12), the corruption of marriage (vs. 16), and, most notably from our present point of view, the dislocation of man from his environment  (vss. 17-19), which turns to fight against him and only grudgingly and at great cost furnishes a sufficiency for life.

                Under the Constitution of the Kingdom of God found in God’s divine covenants, the lawbreaker always deserves the punishment, and the law keeper is always entitled to the reward (Royal Grant) because of the grace and mercy of the King. Responsibility and imputability, or culpability, are particularly concerned with the extent to which a decision or act owes its origin to people’s free will guided by reason. Responsibility for a bad act is called guilt. Responsibility is more often associated with acts of wrongdoing than right doing, because it is assumed that all who are in covenant with God will continually do his will.

                A related concept is justice, the measure of merit. Justice stems from the idea of equality between two persons having some agreement, understanding, or contract between them. If one party fails to keep the agreement, then he or she upsets the equality, thereby owing a  compensation to the other party. The person keeping the agreement has something due him or her. Justice is served when the offending party pays the offended party whatever is deserved or merited, that is, whatever is considered to reestablish the state of equality. From the standpoint of the offended party the compensation merited is regarded as a reward. From the standpoint of the offending party the compensation which is owed is seen as a punishment.

                Moving beyond the limits of the simple contract situation into the broader context of moral responsibility in general, we find that punishment has several functions, since more than an individual is  usually offended by an act of wrongdoing. That act may be a crime against the group or the state. It may also be a sin against God. Retributive punishment serves the offended person by getting back at the offender and restoring the balance which justice demands. Corrective or rehabilitative punishment serves the offender by bringing  him or her back to the place of equality with the rest of the group or society. Preventive or deterrent punishment serves the group or society by forestalling future wrongdoing of the type committed. Vindictive punishment serves the law and the lawgiver, both human and divine, by putting down one who has flouted the very ideas of law, equality, and justice. By so doing, that person has offended the holiness and justice of God.

                Another condition necessary for moral responsibility is knowledge of what is expected of one. A person who is ignorant of a rule or law is either not held responsible or is thought to have a reduced degree of responsibility, as long as he or she did not willfully bring about that ignorance. This is why the Covenant of God (Old and New Testaments) was given  in written form.

                Certainly in Scripture, but also in general usage, responsibility extends to the family, to larger groupings up to a nation, to groups of nations, and to even the entire human race. But the primary focus of responsibility is a person who can be held accountable as one who has the power or ability to make decisions and act on them intentionally. One acts intentionally when one does something for a reason, that is, because of one’s beliefs and desires. This is why God is said to judge “the thoughts and intents  of the heart.”

                 Specific biblical teachings relative to responsibility include the following: (1) Every human being is held responsible by God for the sin of the first human being (Rom. 5:12). (2) God’s giving of the law through Moses created a much greater sense of responsibility in Israel  (Rom. 7:7). (3) The rest of the human race is no less responsible, however, for “when they do by nature the things contained in the law…[they] show the work of the law written in their hearts” (Rom. 2:14-15). (4) Unless the sinner acknowledges responsibility for sin and repents, he or she cannot be forgiven by God through Jesus Christ (Acts 3:19).

                Every aspect of human experience is gathered into mankind’s moral responsibilities under God’s Covenant Law. These responsibilities include apply to us as Christians as much as they did to Old Testament saints. It is important to remember that as members of the Body of Christ, we are in a parity covenant with other believers, as well as God’s Sovereignty treaty. Everyone in covenant with God must accept responsibility to observe the commandments of God concerning the following areas:

(12)  Filial duty in covenant relationships to spouse and family.

(2) Religious commitment to regularly and corporately worship God.

(12)  Ritual exactness to fulfill liturgical obligations and the Sacraments.

(12)  Faithfulness to pay tithes to support the priesthood or ministry of the Kingdom of God

(12)  Care of the needy (alms).

(6) Support of the place of worship with financial offerings and Christian service.

(7) Honesty in deed and word, while maintaining godly relationships.

(8) Maintaining personal hygiene, and temperance in all things.

(9) Forgiving those who have caused hurt or conflicts.

(10) Confession of sins against God and against others.

(11) Faithfulness to study the Word of God and to remain under the teachings of the Apostles.

(12) Faithfulness in prayer and intercession and availability to be used by God in ministry.

                All this variety of Covenant responsibility suspends from one central truth: “I am the Lord.” Lord is the divine name, the “I am what I am” (Exod. 3:14), so that the significance of the recurring claim is not “You must do what I tell you” (i.e., “lord” as an authority word) but “You must do this or that because I am what I am”; every precept of the law is a reflection of “what I am.” Man is the living, personal image of God; the law is the written, preceptual image of God. The intention of Leviticus 19 is declared at the outset: “You shall be holy, for I the Lord your God am holy”(vs. 2). The Lord longs for his people to live in his image, and to that end he has given them his law.

                When man in the image, of God and law in the image of God comes together in the fully obedient life, then man is indeed “being himself.” His nature is the image of God, and the law is given both to activate and to direct that nature into a truly human life; any other life is subhuman. Of course, it is true that in a world of sinners the law, regrettably, has to give itself to the task of curbing and rebuking antisocial and degrading practices, but Old Testament law has, to a far greater extent, the function of liberating man to live according to his true nature. For it is only when man finds the law of liberty that he becomes free. For this reason the Old Testament asserts that the law has been  given for our good, to bring us to a hitherto unrealized fullness of  life (Deut. 4:1; 5:33; 8:1).

                The narrative of Genesis 2-3 provides a historical visual aid: obedience gave access to the tree of life; disobedience promised self-enhancement (Gen. 3:5) but brought death. Throughout the Bible this remains the mirror of the true. A life based on the law of the Lord is constantly nourished by secret springs and is consistently fruitful (Ps. 1:2-3); it is under the blessing of God (Ps. 1:1), for by his law the Lord has made his people secure from bondage (Exod. 20:2). The psalmist speaks for every true believer when he testifies that the way of obedience is the way of true liberty (Ps. 119:45).

                The first desire of the redeemer God is that his redeemed should be obedient. To keep the law is not a new bondage but a proof that the old bondage was past (Exod. 20:2). The law giving led up to a pledge of  obedience (Exod. 24:7) that matched the longing of the Lord (Deut. 5:29).

                With the law so central to life, it is understandable that the Bible should develop a rich legal vocabulary. In logical order, the first word descriptive of God’s law is “testimony” (Ps. 119:2). In his law the Lord has “testified” regarding himself and his requirements. This self-revelation was given in “teaching”(Ps. 119:1) such as a loving parent would impart (Prov. 3:1; 6:20). Once given, the teaching is a “word” (Ps. 119:28) to live by, an intelligible body of truth to be pondered and applied. But the Lord’s testimony is also imperative, taking the form of “statute” (Ps. 119:5), “judgment” (Ps. 119:7), “precept” (Ps. 119:4), and “commandment” (Ps. 119:10), applying  the law to the details of life.

                Although the Law of Moses contained an abundance of commandments from God for Israel, it was everywhere understood that the supreme commandment was to love God, with the result that the Shema (Deut. 6:4-9) was recited daily and posted on the doorpost of every home. A second command like it in importance was to love one’s neighbor as oneself (Matt. 22:39), as required in Leviticus 19:18. Jesus considered this second command to be of such importance that he referred to them both as one commandment when he said, “There is no other greater commandment than these” (Mark 12:31). But the same law demanded that one love not  only his neighbor but also the stranger who lived with him (Lev. 19:34), and that he love them both as he loved himself (Lev. 19:18, 34). So when Jesus said he was giving his disciples a new commandment to love one another, he was undoubtedly referring to this requirement of the law but with an even deeper meaning, which was to love as he had loved them (John 13:34). Years later John thus wrote that the commandment was both old and new (1 John 2:7-8; 2 John 5). Love, as understood in the Western world, is an emotion which cannot be commanded, but in the Semitic world of the Bible it was rather a matter of volition and included the keeping of God’s commandments (John 14:15; 1 John 2:3-4). In the final analysis, love is the mark of discipleship (John 13:35). Those who love God will keep His commandments.

EXODUS AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE MOSAIC COVENANT

                The  story of Moses and the establishment of the Mosaic Covenant (or we  could say  the Mosaic addition to the Abrahamic or Hebrew Covenant) is told in  Exodus.  The  Book of Exodus has a name derived from the  Septuagint,  the  Greek translation  of the Old Testament, meaning "a going out." This second book of the  Bible, is known in Hebrew as weelleh shemoth ("and these  are  the  names") after  its two opening words. It narrates the dramatic departure of  the  ancient Hebrews from Egyptian captivity and their journey to Mount Sinai, where  they enter into a covenant relation with God who favors them with divine  presence. God  revealed Himself to Moses and to His Covenant People as Yaweh; the I  Am, who is sufficient to meet every need.

                The  collection of detailed laws that follows the giving of the  Ten  Commandments  as cited in Exodus 20:22 - 23:33 is often called the Book of the  Covenant,  a  term found in Exodus 24:7. Many of these laws are not  unlike  those found elsewhere in the ancient Near East. These laws deal with worship, bodily harm, the owning of property, relationships to God, and support for  travelers and widows. They have much in common with the Babylonian Code of Hammurabi, especially in relationship to servants, marriage, property, personal injury, and the care of animals; but differ from other laws through the inclusion of a Priestly Code.

                The  Priestly  Code appears largely in Exodus, Numbers, and  Leviticus  (which means  "of  Levi," relating to the priestly tribe of Levi).  The  foundational part  of this code is probably the Law of Holiness in Deuteronomy 17- 26.  Up till this time the Temple of Solomon had been a strong and enduring symbol of religious and COVENANT law. Now it lay destroyed. As one prophet put it,  "The law is no more" (Lam. 2:9).

                The hundreds and hundreds of times in which the concept of Law keeps recurring in almost every book of the Old Testament stresses again how firmly the people of Israel were the people of the Law and the people of the book. In the Prophets  (Amos 5:18; Isa. 2:12) the phrase "the day of the Lord" emphasizes  again and again how divine wrath will consume those who do not heed the Law. Jeremiah,  Isaiah,  Ezekiel, and Hosea all speak of a NEW COVENANT of law  God  will make  with the people in the latter days. These prophecies come  largely  from the time of the Exile, but they nonetheless look forward to a time not  merely of  the  rebuilding of the Temple in Jerusalem but even to a  golden  age  far beyond, when the people of God will once again be God's chosen people.

                In Christ's role as the fulfiller of the Law, both Matthew (10:32-40) and Mark (8:38)  make it clear that what now counts is the believer's  relationship  to him  as  the Son of God, not a relationship to an older covenant  with  Yahweh under Old Testament law.

                The writings of Paul, who was trained as a pharisaic lawyer, are loaded with more  than  one hundred references to the Law. He  emphasized  especially  how Christ's  death in obedience to the will of the Father was the fulfillment of  the Law. In a special sense Christ's death was a return to the final jurisdiction and judgment of his Father. The crucifixion of Christ established a new covenant and disestablished a considerable portion of deuteronomic law. This troubled Jewish-Greek Christians more than a little in the early church, as the account of the conflicts in the synagogues in Jerusalem (Acts 2-3) points out, at the time when Stephen was stoned.

THE ROLE OF LEVITICUS AND DEUTERONOMY IN THE MOSAIC COVENANT

                Leviticus  was a name first given to the third book of the Bible in its  Latin (Vulgate)  version. This in turn derives from the title of the Greek  (Septuagint)   version,  Leuitike  Biblos, meaning "the Levitical  book,"  a  writing primarily  concerned with the responsibilities of Levitical priests. Known  in Hebrew  as  wayyiqra'  ("and he called") after its  opening  word,  this  book schooled Israel's priests in the proper techniques of official public  worship and informed Yahweh’s covenant people about their religious and civil duties. This served much the same purposes for the Hebrews, as the Book of Common Prayer serves for modern Episcopal Churches.

                Deuteronomy  was a name derived from the Septuagint, the Greek translation  of the Old Testament, where the Hebrew phrase "a copy of this law" (Deut.  17:18) was mistranslated "second law" (deuteronomion). This fifth book of the  Bible, known in Hebrew  as 'elleh haddebarim ("these are the words") after its  opening phrase, offers the farewell testament of Moses to the Israelites  encamped in  western  Moab prior to his death and their crossing the  Jordan  River  to claim  the Land of Promise. With its sustained exhortation geared to  engender in the Israelite faithful a fervent love for the Deity and strict adherence to covenant  law,  Deuteronomy issues a word of specific  guidance  for  Israel's daily existence in the land that will imminently be its possession. Deuteronomy contains the essence of God’s Covenant. It is really a covenant document, which details all of the important principles of the Abrahamic/mosaic Covenant.

                Whereas Leviticus speaks of the duties of the Priesthood and worshippers under God's Covenant, Deuteronomy is addressed to the people in general. This entire book is a  very clear restatement of God's Covenant in Moses' second address (chaps. 5 -28). In Deut. 4:10-5:22 an account is recorded of the actual giving of the Law. The fear and insincerity of the people is recorded in Deut. 5:22-30. This opens a lengthy  section  with  the TEN COMMANDMENTS (5:6-21) and   continues  with  a meditation on the meaning of the First Commandment as fundamental to the rest.

                In  chapters 12 -26 specific ordinances are expounded in a less than  orderly manner.  Still,  12:1 - 16:17 deals mainly with correct worship  and  16:18-18:22  with  Israelite officials (judges, kings,  priests,  prophets). Issues  dominating the legislation in chapters 19-26 include  criminal  law, the waging of holy war, and general humanitarian concerns.

                Chapter 27 is intrusive with its directives for a covenant ceremony at Shechem on the Twin Peaks of Mount Gerizim and Mount Ebal (implemented in Josh.  8:30-35). An emphatic termination is reached in chapter 28, with its ample  listing of blessings for obedience and curses for disobedience.

                In  Moses' third address (29:2 - 30:20), he summons Israel to renew its  covenant  with Yahweh and admonishes that disobedience will thrust it  into  exile (29:22-29),  though after repentance Yahweh will restore Israel  (30:1-10).  A climax is achieved in 30:15-20, where Israel's acceptance or rejection of  the covenant is presented as a life or death matter. 

                Deuteronomy  concludes with diverse material including Moses' final charge  to the  people and to Joshua (31:1-8). Moses' deliverance of the written  law  to the  Levitical priests (31:9-13), is followed by Joshua's commissioning (31:14-23), and the  Song of Moses (32:1-43) which contrasts Israel's infidelity with Yahweh's fidelity. The blessing of Moses is then pronounced on the Israelite tribes (33:2-29), followed by the narrative about  Moses' death (chap. 34). Moses put a blessing upon Israel  as  he passed on his mantle of leadership to Joshua in the closing chapters of Deuteronomy.

HEARING AND OBEYING

                Deuteronomy reveals a major reason that people do want to commit themselves to  faithfully keep God’s covenant. In the Old Testament, it was assumed that when one heard from God, he would instantly obey. In fact, there is one Hebrew word for hear and obey, and that word assumes an immediate response to the Word of God.  In Psalm 18:44, the Psalmist wrote:  “As soon as they hear of me, they shall obey me: the strangers shall submit themselves unto me.”

                In the New Testament, James the Bishop of the Jerusalem Church emphasizes this important concept in his epistle (James 1:19). We need to be quick to hear the Word of God, and we need to immediately act on that Word. We also need to be slow to speak, because when our confession is contrary to the Word of God, we manifest unbelief.. At Mount Sinai the Hebrew people were slow to hear and quick to speak. When they heard that God wanted an audience with them, they told Moses, “Go thou near, and hear all that the Lord our God shall say: and speak thou unto us all that the Lord our God shall speak unto thee; and we will hear it, and do it. (Deuteronomy 5:27). The people never intended to hear/do what God said, so they put the responsibility on Moses. They had no intention of being doers of the Word. While Moses was on the Mountain, the people were tempted to build an idol (golden calf), and they gave in to that temptation. Had they been quick to hear/do and slow to speak, this sin could have been prevented.

                Unfortunately, many Christians today respond to God in the same way. We often say to our pastors, “You hear from God and tell us what He says.” What we are really saying is, “I don’t want the responsibility of doing what God says, so that I can grow spiritually.” Then, God allows us to be tempted, so that through that temptation we might be perfected or matured (James 1:4). We can either learn to be doers of the Word through obedience as soon as we hear it, or we can learn to be doers of the Word through necessity born in times of trail and temptation. One way or another, God intends for us to hear and do.

                James addresses this issue when he tells his readers  to strip themselves of all vice and filthiness. The words lay apart in the Authorized Version, is a Greek word used for stripping off one's clothes. He bids his hearers  rid themselves of all defilement like a man striping off soiled garments. The word we have translated filthiness is ruparia; and it can be used for the filth, which soils clothes or soils the body. But it  has one very interesting connection. It is a derivative of rupos  and, when used in a medical sense, it means wax in the ear. It is just possible that it still retains that meaning here; and that James is telling his readers to get rid of everything, which would stop their ears to the true word of God. When earwax gathers in the ear, it can make a man deaf; and a man’s sins can make him deaf to God.

                Throughout history men have tried to make ritual a substitute for sacrifice and service. They have made religion splendid within the church at the expense of neglecting it outside the church. Worship is empty unless it sends a person out to love God by loving others, while walking more purely and standing against the tempting ways of the world. As we learn to observe God’s covenant by hearing and instantly doing God’s Word, we will become servants of God. As such, we will provide service to the Body of Christ.

                What are the results of doing or not doing what we hear God saying? An examination of Deuteronomy 28:1 and 28:15 gives an answer to this question. We can live under the blessings of God’s covenant, through hearing and doing God’s Word. Or we can live under the curse of disobedience. The choice is ours to make each day, because we Christians live under the principles of God’s covenant, whether  or not we accept or understand this fact.

SANCTIFICATION UNDER THE MOSAIC COVENANT

                The Mosaic Covenant, with its ritual cleansings and focus on obedience, shows us that everything associated with the worship of  God, including the worshipper must be cleansed (1 Timothy 4:4-5). Holiness represents purity before God, as righteousness represents blameless purity before the law and the world (Philippians 2:14-15; Colossians 1:22). Sanctification includes both holiness and righteousness, and becomes a technical name for the process of spiritual growth. Being Born Again is the entrance into that process, with conformity to Christ (Romans 8:29-30; 2 Corinthians 3:18; 1 John 3:1-3) being the goal.

                In 2 Thessalonians 2:13 Paul is referring to sanctified Christians as separated to or belonging to God. They are holy or sacred, and are set apart for the service of God. Sanctification includes both a separation unto God and a cleansing from sin. Sanctification is based upon variations of the Hebrew word qadosh and the Greek word hagiazo. These words are translated as holy, holiness, consecrate, hallow, sanctify, purify, saint, and dedicate.

                Paul prays that the Thessalonians be sanctified wholly, spirit, soul, and body being kept  sound and blameless, as something still to be accomplished. Sanctification is the will of God for Christians in the area of sexual chastity (1 Thessalonians 4:3-4). Similarly, the Romans are exhorted to “present their bodies ... holy ...” in their worship. Immorality is one of the biggest problems in our society, as it was in the Greco-Roman society of the first century.

                In 1 Corinthians 6:13-14 the body of the Christian must be kept from immorality because all Christians are to be sanctified, since they belong to Christ. We are told in 1 Thessalonians 5:22 to “abstain from all appearance of evil.” Christians must be outwardly and visibly clean in their moral behavior, with their life-styles reflecting the sanctified life. The washing to which Paul refers was a spiritual application of the ritualistic cleansings mentioned in the Old Testament. A person was ritually unclean during menstruation (Leviticus 12:2,5; 15:20, 25-26), and after touching a dead person. Refraining from certain activities because of a vow (Num. 6) also required a period of cleansing. Keeping our physical behavior pure before God and mankind is what these ritualistic cleansings demonstrated. Outward purity is a testimony to others of the work of  the Holy Spirit within us.

                Sanctification of the human soul and spirit is mentioned in 1 Peter 1:2. This reminds us of  Paul’s mention of  the transformed “mind” (Romans 12:2), along with his admonition to set our minds on things above  (Philippians 4:8-9; 1 Corinthians 2:16). The early Christians did not think of holiness only in physical terms. Sanctification must also occur in the soulish or psychological realm (psuche)-- the human personality that includes our intellect, will, and emotions. Peter seems to be referring to more than physical sanctification. Peter saw personal obedience and an application of the blood of Jesus Christ as results of sanctification. Obedience is a function of the human will or volition, and the application of the blood is an intellectual process of conscious self-evaluation. We must also emotionally respond in gratitude to the salvation that God has made available to us.

                Peter says that sanctification is of the Spirit. Ninety-one times in the New Testament the Spirit is called “holy,” and the implied contrast with evil spirits that work corruption and death must never be overlooked. The Holy Spirit applies separation and cleansing though his gifts for service, and by inwardly equipping believers for Christian living.  Therefore, the role of the Spirit in sanctification is central.

                Sanctification of the human spirit is most clearly seen in Hebrews. Christ’s crucifixion makes possible the moving of the sinner from the profane to the holy. The Holy Spirit makes us holy, so that we can become a part of the temple where God dwells and is worshipped (Hebrews 13:11-16; 2:9-11; 10:10, 14, 29). This spiritual temple is our capacity to hear from God (by his Word and Spirit), to respond to God (in worship and obedience), and to know (rather than just knowing about) God. What proceeds from the spirit of a person, affects both the personality (intellect, volition, and emotions) and physical behavior. The Holy Spirit takes the holiness of the new nature, and applies it to the psychological and physical aspects of  life. 

                In the outer Court of the Tabernacle of Moses, there was a Brazen Altar, revealing the blood of salvation, and a Brazen Laver, emphasizing the cleansing of sanctification. The Laver was a great bowl or basin of polished Brass, thus giving the effect of a mirror. The mirror surface represents the Word of God (James 1:22-23), the brass speaks of judgment (John 19:34; Psalm 78:20), and the water represents the Holy Spirit. Cleansing at the Laver preceded worship within the Holy Place, signifying that we must be cleansed before we can experience the presence of God in our worship. God wants a holy people to worship him.

                Under the Mosaic Covenant the Hebrew priests were washed twice. First, they washed completely when they were set apart unto the Lord’s service. This represents initial sanctification at the point of salvation. Secondly, they had to wash their hands and feet before service to the people at the Brazen Alter or service to God in the Holy Place. Clean hands speak of sanctified ministry or service (1 Timothy 2:8), and clean feet speak of a clean walk or life-style (Isaiah 52:7; Ephesians 4:1). The Laver was also used to wash the inward parts of  various sacrifices (Leviticus 1:9, 13). This can indicate the cleansing of that which of our internal thoughts, attitudes, and motives.

                Since the Holy Spirit dwells within believers, it follows that His sanctifying work is an internal operation. He is constantly illuminating the dark areas of the believer’s life and bringing every aspect of the spirit, soul, and body into conformity with Christ. The Holy Spirit works with our involvement. Paul told the Roman Christians that they should mortify or put to death the deeds of the flesh. While the Holy Spirit supplies the power or ability, it is the believer who must perform the task of mortification. Believers must first renounce or disown every attitude, behavior, desire, motive, thought, or habit that is contrary to Christ and the Word of God. Secondly, by the power of the Holy Spirit, the believer must put these things to death and bury them.

                It is a paradoxical fact about Christian existence that though the believer is to understand himself as “dead to sin”--in that sin no longer dominates him-- sins do remain. It is those sins that believers are called to renounce and put to death. For example, when a sin such as jealousy or anger begins to trouble a believer. The believer must willfully renounce and put that sin to death. Some Christians will do this by saying something like: “I renounce you jealousy and anger, in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and by the power of the Holy Spirit I put you to death in my life. You will not have any hold on me again, because I am cleansed from your works by the blood of Jesus and am washed by the Word of God.” The believer is not to tolerate sin of any kind. All sin must be put to death so that it does not operate in the person’s life. New life is then imparted by the Holy Spirit, to replace what has been put away.

                In Galatians 5:16-21 we are admonished not to walk after the Flesh. It is important for us to confess both general and particular sins. But confession cannot replace mortification. Confession must be accompanied by putting the sin to death and changing attitudes, thought patterns, and behaviors to reflect the new direction our lives are taking. Our true lives are no longer earthly, but heavenly. We should adopt God’s attitude toward sin. We must perceive our attitudes and actions from this heavenly perspective. In so doing, we will find sin detestable and will not want to fulfill or manifest the works of the flesh, mentioned here by Paul.

                The putting to death of specific sins cannot be done in our own strength. It is through the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit that we are made conscious of sins. The nearer we draw toward holiness, the more light will be shed to reveal sins that must be put away. The Holy Spirit will never cease to reveal those things that are contrary to godliness.  Therefore, sanctification is a progressive and life-long process that is conducted jointly by the Holy Spirit and the believer. We have been sanctified, are being sanctified, and will be sanctified.

                The sins listed by Paul result from our inward conflicts and passions (affections), and from willful enjoyment of that which is forbidden (lusts). Paul refers to this in verse 24. The flesh has been crucified (justification), and the Holy Spirit is working with us to deal with the remaining affections and lusts which do not belong within those who are new creatures in Christ. Our life-styles must begin to match what God has declared to be true of us.

                Though we strive for perfection and righteousness, and attain a measure of these things, we can never say that our sanctification is complete. This does not mean that we should be weighted down by sin. Sin does not reign in our lives. Through faith in Christ and by the power of the Holy Spirit, we have been liberated from the bondage of sin. Those character flaws that may remain should not burden us. Rather, we should be diligent to put away those things that the Holy Spirit illuminates as sin. We know that we have the victory in Christ and have been declared to be in right standing with the Father (2 Corinthians 5:21), with ours sins covered by the blood of Jesus Christ. This knowledge motivates us to greater sanctification, which we translate into righteous behavior, as we walk in the Spirit each and every day.

                There are three means by which God initially and progressively sanctifies us. Each of these is inter-dependent upon the others for their practical outworking (1 John 5:5-7). (1) The sanctifying Blood of Jesus Christ is absolute, positional, and eternal (John 19:33-34; Hebrews 13:12; 1 John 1:7). (2) Sanctification by the washing of the Word of God is practical as we obey it (Ephesians 5:25-27; John 15:3; 1 Peter 1:23; James 1:23-25). (3) The Holy Spirit came to make us holy. He applies the power of the cleansing blood as we walk in obedience to the Word of God, which he illuminates. The Holy Spirit sanctifies us from within (1 Corinthians 6:11; Romans 1:4; 2 Thessalonians 2:13; 1 Peter 1:1-2).

                Sanctification is not merely the completion of justification; it is justifying faith at work. In the faith counted for righteousness, actual righteousness is born. In justification, God at  the beginning of Christian life declares us acquitted. In sanctification, God accomplishes his will in us as Christian life proceeds. Sanctification never replaces justification. The faith that justifies, sets in motion the sanctifying energies of grace.

                Sanctification encompasses both separation from sin and cleansing for holy living. Since we are putting to death those things of the flesh, we must be diligent to embrace righteousness as a way of life. The Holy Spirit replaces the deeds of the flesh with the Fruit of the Spirit, which characterize the righteous life. In order to make this “fruit” a part of our daily lives, we must respond to the Spirit’s prompting in the areas of scriptural knowledge, appropriating faith, and practical obedience.

                We must receive knowledge and understanding from the scriptures concerning our personal need for the sanctified life. We must know that it is God’s will for us to be sanctified, and that we can experience the sanctified life now (1 Thessalonians 5:23-24). True knowledge of God’s Word creates faith (Romans 10:17), and sanctification comes by faith in Jesus Christ (Acts 26:18). We must agree with what God says about us. The “old man” was crucified with Christ so that sin might be annulled. Sanctification is the Holy Spirit doing in us experientially what Christ has done for us legally through justification. We need to believe that we no longer have to serve sin, and should act accordingly.

                As the elect of God, we are separated unto obedience to the Word of God (1 Peter 1:2). God’s people have always had the understanding that to “hear” God was to do what He said. In the Old Testament, there was one word,  not two words, for “hear” and “obey.” When we hear God’s Word, we are expected to instantly respond. As we walk in obedience to the Word, the Holy Spirit applies the blood and we live holy (John 14:16; Acts 5:32). 

                A word must be said here about the doctrine of “Eradication.” The traditional definition of this is that the  believer, by a definite work of grace, has inbred sin of the Adamic nature eradicated so that he can no longer sin. John Wesley, certain Holiness groups in the 1800’s, and many Pentecostal groups believed this at the beginning of the twentieth century. The argument against this is that there are two natures still in us following conversion. And if  “eradication” was true, there would be no sickness or death, because there is no sin. Experience tells us that no generation of Christians has ever been able to demonstrate this.

                What is the reality of our ability to have victory over sin? It is evident that we are justified and declared to be righteous. The sixth chapter of Romans makes it clear that the “old man” is dead. Yet we must apply that and yield ourselves to that positional reality. Our conflict between the “old nature” and our new (Christ-like) nature takes place in the mind. It is a conflict between righteousness consciousness and sin consciousness. Sin consciousness is the deception of Satan that leads us to believe that Jesus has not won a complete victory. Sin-conscious preaching, and a lack of teaching on positional righteousness, has contributed to our failure to walk in the victory of Christ. The sin of unbelief keeps us from resting in God’s Holy Place (Hebrews 3-4), which is the sanctified life-style. We cannot say that we are perfect and sinless because of a crisis experience, but neither should we consider ourselves to be at the mercy of sin and Satan. Christ has the total victory, and we can begin walking in that victory by the daily application of the Atonement. We can choose not to sin. We can choose to live righteously. We can choose to put to death the things of the flesh and allow the Spirit to cleanse us each day.

                We are told in 1 John 2:1 that it is God’s will that we not sin. If we do sin, however, we have an advocate (attorney) pleading our case with the father. The blood of Jesus Christ is sufficient to remove the stain of sin in our lives. If we confess our sins, we can believe that God forgives those sins and cleanses us from all thoughts and actions of unrighteousness (1 John 1:9). Through the sanctifying  power of the Holy Spirit we can have victory over sin.

                We have a human spirit which our eternal and spiritual nature; a soul (personality) made up of our intellect (mind, will, and emotions); and a physical body. We usually have knowledge of things from our senses (physical bodily existence), and process and respond to that information in the soulish realm. As Christians, however, we are citizens of the Kingdom of God, which includes both the spirit world and the physical world. For our human spirits to be aware of and respond to what is going on in the Kingdom of God, we must understand God’s ways and plans. We must, therefore, receive information from the spirit realm. It is only by the leading of the Holy Spirit that we can know God and have awareness of  what is going on in the spirit world. Spirit Baptism brings to us increased awareness of the spirit world and how it affects us in the physical world.

                When we are “Born Again” our human spirit is regenerated or made spiritually alive. The Holy Spirit (pneuma) and the word of God (logos) can then interact with our human spirit and produce changes in our souls (psuche) This means that the mind, will, and emotions, personalities, physical drives and behaviors are influenced by this somewhat filtered down “spiritual knowledge” and “spiritual wisdom.” When we are baptized with the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of God begins to impute wisdom and knowledge, along with the Word of God, directly into our soulish realm (psuche). As the Spirit fills us, our personalities begin to change more dramatically. Our minds are renewed,  our volition is subordinated to the will of God, and the Character of God being imparted to us tempers our emotional responses. This results in a stronger influence or subjection of our physical drives and behaviors.

                The Holy Spirit’s presence and gifts make us mature and bring us to a deeper understanding of both God’s Grace and God’s Word. To apply and be guided daily by the Word of God, we need spiritual wisdom to be imparted to us by the Holy Spirit. Paul sets up a contrast between the wisdom of the world and the wisdom of God’s Spirit. The world’s wisdom relies on the human senses, but the Spirit imparts wisdom from the mind of God. The world’s wisdom relies on scholarly human teaching, but the Spirit teaches us those things that can only be spiritually discovered or understood. The wisdom of the Spirit brings knowledge and salvation, while the wisdom of the world brings condemnation.

                Two types of people are portrayed here. The “natural” or material person is animated only by the life received from Adam. This person’s knowledge and understanding is limited to the natural world and is unresponsive to the truths taught by the Spirit. The unregenerated person will think that godly living, divine revelation, and the teachings of Christ are foolish.   The Spirit of the Lord dwells and acts in the “spiritual” person (pneuatikos). The Holy Spirit interacts with our human spirit and soul to produce the capacity to learn and to apply the God’s revealed Word. This person thinks and emotionally responds as Christ does, while judging all things rightly from a supernatural point of view. The Christian who is enlightened and led by the Spirit evaluates correctly all human events and knowledge. This enables him to judge everything according to God’s plan for human destiny. The “material” person can never properly judge the “spiritual” person.

                We have the mind of Christ, because we have the Spirit of Christ. The pneuma (Spirit) alone is capable of searching all things, even the depths of God. Since we possess and receive revelation from the pneuma, we can learn how to use the Word to find God’s will for our lives.

                Drawing a simple diagram can help to understand this process. Draw two sets of the following figures. Each drawing should consist of three circles one on top of the other. Label the top circle in each set as “Spirit,” the middle 3 circle in each set as “soul,” and the bottom circle in each set as body. Write “mind, will and emotions” inside of each middle circle. Label the first figure as “Natural Man” and the  second figure as “Spiritual Man.” The first figure represents a spiritually dead person, so  draw an X through the top (spirit) circle of the first figure. Draw two arrows going into the soul of the “soul” of the first figure. Label them “Worldly Knowledge” and “Sensuality.” These two things directly affect the soulish and physical natures of the unbeliever. Next draw two arrows to the top circle of figure two (spirit) and two more to the middle circle (soul) of figure two. Label the arrows going to the top circle (spirit) as “Christ the Word” and “Holy Spirit Regeneration.” Label the arrows going to the “soul” as “Word of God” and “Spirit Baptism.” You now have a picture of the two natures contrasted in 1 Corinthians 2:9-16. The first figure is spiritually dead and led by worldly knowledge and sensual input. The second figure is spiritually alive and led by the Word and Spirit of God. The Holy Spirit and Christ the living Word save us when we are born again, and continue that transformation when we are Baptized in the Holy Spirit. Whatever is the primary influence in our human soul (mind, will, and emotions) will energize our physical drives and determine our behaviors  and actions. Our covenant with God, witnessed to by the Word and the Spirit, should become the driving force that influences our lives.

THE PRESENCE OF GOD IN AND THROUGH THE MOSAIC COVENANT

                The reason that it was so important for the People of Israel to hear and obey God was that God was present in their midst throughout their wilderness wanderings, as well as during their sojourn in the Promised Land. His presence was associated with the Ark of the Covenant. This Ark was rectangular box like structure of acacia wood, about 4' by 2' by 2', with a lining and an external sheathing of pure beaten gold. It was covered by a lid of solid gold to which was affixed a carved golden cherub at each end. These celestial beings looked down upon the lid, and their wings covered the ark (Exod. 25:10-40). The gold lid to which the cherubim were fastened was called the "mercy seat" (Hebrew kapporet, denoting "cover"), and it was from between the cherubim that God communed with his people (Exod. 25:22). When the ark was moved, priests using poles carried it (Num. 4:5), and anyone who touched the ark might die (2 Sam. 6:6-7).

                The mercy seat was a slab of gold, rectangular in shape, measuring approximately 3 1/2 feet by 2 feet. It was placed over the Ark of the Covenant, functioning as a cover or lid, in the innermost room of the tabernacle (and of the temple at a later date). On top of the mercy seat were two cherubim, facing each other, their wings extending over the mercy seat and meeting above it. A full account of the mercy seat  is provided in Exod. 25:17-22; its construction is described in Exod. 37:6-9.

                The  significance of the mercy seat can be seen most dramatically in the events of the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur). The high priest entered the inner sanctuary containing the ark and the mercy seat; incense was burned so that the mercy seat was enveloped in smoke. The blood from a bull was sprinkled on the mercy seat (Lev.  16:11-19). The ritual was part of a larger ceremony in which Israel,  through solemn repentance, sought God's forgiveness and mercy for sins committed during the preceding year. The mercy seat symbolized God's mercy, over spreading the breaking of the laws that were contained on  the tablets in the ark underneath the mercy seat.

                 In the New Testament the mercy seat is referred to by the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Heb. 9:5), who demonstrates that the annual sprinkling of blood on the mercy seat in the inner sanctuary is superseded by the more perfect sacrifice of Christ. The shedding of Christ's blood replaced the ancient offering of the bull’s blood and served as a final satisfaction for our sin.

                Whenever the people contemplated the Ark of the Covenant, they were reminded of God’s covenant with them, along with the reality of God’s divine presence in their midst. The Ark contained representations of the Law (the tablets mentioned in Exod. 25:16 and 2 Kings 11:12), divine authority (Aaron’s rod that budded mentioned in Num. 17:10), and the manna of life (mentioned in Exod. 16:33-34 and representing the future offering of the Body of Christ).

                The Cherubim represent God’s mercy and God’s grace. God dwells between mercy and grace. The Mercy Seat is the seat of God’s throne, which resided in his tabernacle or temple. This is the seat of God’s authority (Psalm 22:3) where God is enthroned. God sits in judgment on his throne. When we partake of  Communion, we accept God’s mercy and grace, as well as his judgment. He judges areas in our lives that need to be changed. He also judges our enemies-- those who come against his covenant people.

                When the early church observed the Lord’s Supper, they did it on the Table of the Lord. A chalice (cup) and paten (small plate) were covered with a folded cloth (representing the tabernacle of God), and placed in the center of the Altar or Table between two candles (representing the cherubim and  the two natures of Christ). This was for the Christians a representation of the New Covenant, just as the Ark was a representation to the Hebrews of the Old Covenant.  As the sacrificial blood was placed on the Mercy Seat on the Day of Atonement, the wine was placed on the Table of the Lord on the Lord’s Day of worship. The Table of the Lord came to be for the Christians a contact point for the real presence of God in their midst, as was the Ark for the Hebrews. As the Ark embodied God’s covenant for the Hebrews, the Table of the Lord embodied God’s covenant for the church until modern times.

                PARTS OF THE MOSAIC COVENANT

1.  Preamble-- Deut. 1:1-15.

2.  Historical Prologue-- Deut. 1:16-4:39; 9:1-10:22.

3.  Demands & Stipulations-- Deut. 4:40-6:19; 7:1-8:20; 11:1-15:23; 16:16.

4.  Provisions for Remembrance-- Deut. 6:20-25; 31:18-32:52.

5.  Witnesses-- Deut. 4:23-40; 29:19-20; 31:24-26 (Note what is said in Deut. 31: 27, 36, 39).

6.  Blessings and Curses-- Deut. 27:11-30:20 (Note specifically chapter 28).

7.  Formal Oath-- Deut. 31 (The Song of Moses was to be sung).

8.  Solemn Ceremony-- Deut. 16:1-7 (The Passover); also chapter 31.

9.  God's Token or Seal-- The tablets of the Commandments in Deut. 5:22-- the Law.

     Mankind's Token or Seal-- The building of the Tabernacle and its articles of furniture,

     specifically the Ark of the Covenant (Think of its name) in the Tabernacle.

10. God’s Presence-- God’s presence was associated the Ark of the Covenant. He was also

      present in the cloud and the pillar of fire.

Key  scriptures  to study about the mosaic covenant:

Exod. 19:5-6; 24:7-8; 31:16; 34:10-11;  Lev.  2:13; Numbers 10:33-35; Joshua 1:7-8; 3:3-7; Heb. 7:5-28; 10:1-28; and Gal. 2:16. (Note that God's Covenant with Joshua was simply a restatement and extension of the Mosaic Covenant. Both covenants are virtually identical in essence.)

CHAPTER 7

THE DAVIDIC COVENANT OF AUTHORITY

                As the Mosaic Covenant built  upon the principles of the Abrahamic Covenant, so the Davidic Covenant built upon the Covenant that God made with Israel at Sinai. The Davidic  Covenant  established the lineage of the Messiah, in the same way that the  Mosaic Covenant  established a heritage for Israel as a covenant people.  In the  Davidic Covenant God dealt with the principle of authority and the power of God to  carry out  that authority. Even today, we can see that delegated authority  produces works  of faith that demonstrate the reality of God's redemptive plan  to  the world.  Through David and his descendants, the world of the Old Testament  was able  to see the power and authority of God in action, as God began to  reveal His redemptive plan to mankind.

                The  Covenant that  God made with David could be called the  Kingly  Covenant, since it introduces into the Hebrew Covenant the principles of Royal Authority  that  would later be fulfilled in the life of Jesus  Christ.  The  Davidic Covenant  was renewed with Solomon, Asa, and Hezekiah. This covenant,  coupled with  the covenant that God made with some of the more faithful  priests,  set the  stage  for the Birth of Jesus the Christ and the establishment of  a  New Covenant.  The promise of this New Covenant is inherent in the  covenant  that God made with the Kings of Judah.

                David,  the  first widely accepted king, was so successful in  fulfilling  the ideal that, even long afterward, he was regarded as the model Hebrew king.  He instituted succession by inheritance, beginning a dynasty that remained virtually  unbroken for four hundred years, to the destruction of the  nation.  The theocratic  character of David's reign was symbolized by his bringing the  Ark and  the Tabernacle into Jerusalem in order to reinstitute sacrificial  worship and by his making plans for the Temple. It is interesting that God is restoring and merging biblical, sacramental, Pentecostal, and evangelical forms of worship to the church.

                The "covenant with David" can be  seen in  2  Samuel 7:11-16, with additional information about it found  in  2  Chronicles 7:12-20.  This covenant is based upon David's adherence to Israel's  ideal  of kingship as theocracy. As a token of this covenant, God gave David the Kingdom of Judah in perpetuity, and the Kings built and maintained the Temple.

Since mankind is often not obedient to authority, violations to God’s covenant continually happen. God must deal with all violations of the covenant. Because of the fact that to whom much is given, God will harshly judge those in delegated authority, like David. Much is required, when leaders such as David step outside of God’s boundaries. Leaders exercising authority are given the grace to act in that position of authority. When the gift of grace is neglected, as it was by David, the leader is held accountable directly by God.

                Those in authority must be like God. David misrepresented his authority when he sinned by arranging for the murder of Uriah the Hittite. In doing so, he also violated the Covenant of Authority that God had made with him.  Misrepresentation of authority, as in David’s case, is always a large offense. It was made even larger by the fact that God had made a Royal Grant to David, granting to him and his descendents the Kingdom of Judah. There are greater consequences to our actions, as our authority increases, because God increases within us. Human reasoning and wrong thinking often leads to the misrepresentation of authority. That is why David could not be restored until he had overthrown human reasoning, corrected his thinking, and confessed his sin. To know authority, reasonings must be overthrown. Not until we begin to see that God is a sovereign God (Rom. 9), will reasonings be destroyed. Once satanic strongholds in the mind are destroyed, nor more reasoning will remain and our thoughts can be taken captive to obey Christ. Only after thoughts are recaptured will we be truly obedient to Christ.

                Even though David sinned, he is said to be a man after God's own heart. He  is pictured,  not as a sinless man, but still as a righteous man. The concept  of righteousness  is inherent in the Davidic Covenant. God showed that those  who would repent (such as David or Hezekiah) were considered to be in right standing  with God, and eligible for all of the benefits of His  covenants.  Righteousness is one of the key principles in the Davidic Covenant.

                Tsedeq  (Hebrew  for  righteous) is used attributively when  applied  to   God himself  as  to his character. The Lord is the  just judge (2 Chr  12:6;  Ps 11:7; Jer 12:1; Lam  1:18) even to the utmost degree as the judge of all   the earth  (Deut 32:4; Ps 119:137; Isa 5:16). Therefore  his standards, his  judgments  set out in his  word are righteous (Ps 119:144, 160, 172). Being  everlasting, they are the confidence of his people  and will not fall . God's hate of sin and love of righteousness (Psa 45:7) express God's righteous character.

                Therefore  righteousness and  judgment are the habitation ("foundation"  NASB, NIV)  of God's throne, i.e. they always characterize  his actions  (Ps  97:2).  Corollary  to the forensic aspect of God', s righteousness is the  concept  of salvation as vindication  (cf. Isa 1:27; 46:13, in which "salvation"  occurs  in  parallelism  with y'ddqj. The salvation  of God  appears  in  this righteousness,  for  God delivers his people (Isa 51:lff.). God is  characterized as right in delivering his people (Ps 85:9-11; 97:2). Cyrus  is summoned  to deliver God's people and is therefore  termed   righteous  (Isa 42:6; 45:13). Because God is always  righteous, his saving action is  properly signified  by his righteous right hand (Isa 41:10). His  saving  righteousness is expressed with judgment, and love (Ps 36:6-7) and with  power (Ps 71:19).

                When Christians do not know and/or do not intend to do the word of God, acting upon the righteousness imputed to them, they often become motivated by self-willed desires (lusts). The self-willed life pits Christians against each other, as their personal desires conflict with the will of God (logos). Disputes arise when church members begin competing for money, power, prestige, and influence. This competition often leads to envy and enmity, and results in shameful actions.

                Rather than becoming frustrated through the attempt to gain things on our own, we are admonished to ask God for what we need. If we are not receiving what we have prayed for, then we should check our motives to make sure that our prayers are not centered on our self-will and personal desires.

                There have always been those who claim to be in covenant with God, while living contrary to the principles of God’s covenant. This double-mindedness is produced by four basic motivations that drive people to ungodly actions. Singularly or in combination, anger, desire for gain, fear of loss, and general anxiety (desire for security) is the root motives of most behaviors. People motivated by anger, gain, fear, or anxiety become competitive and self-serving.   Unchecked, these root motivations will lead to pride, which refuses to be subject to God, and figures as the very root and essence of sin (Isaiah 13:12-14; Luke 10:18).

                During the past two hundred years two erroneous ideas have permeated the church. Christians have been led to believe that Satan controls the world, including the right to attack and destroy Christians. We have also been led to believe that the only way to be free of satanic attack and to be truly happy, is to leave this world as quickly as possible. The Davidic Covenant foretold the fact that believers can demonstrate the reality of the Kingdom of God, where God reigns, even in the midst of a pagan and unrepentant society.

                But does not Satan have rule of the earth? No! Exodus 9:29 and Psalm 21:1 indicate that the earth is the Lord’s. Satan does not, and never has had control of the earth or its governments. Even in the story of the Exodus from Egypt, it was God, not Satan, who hardened Pharaoh’s heart. Satan may use deception and lies to influence human government, but he cannot control what belongs to God. When Satan tempted Jesus (Matthew 4:8-9) by offering to give him the world’s kingdoms, he was trying to work his usual deception. The kingdoms of the world belong to Christ (Revelation 11:15-16), not to Satan. As the Son of God, Christ inherited the world’s kingdoms from the Father. Colossians 1:16 tells us that “For by him (Christ) were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him.” Satan may influence by deception, but he does not rule this world. The earth belongs to God and we have dominion over it in Jesus’ name.

                Satan was defeated at the cross, and while he is yet our adversary, he is not God’s adversary. God is sovereign and victorious, and Satan has no chance to fight successfully against him. Beyond the death of Christ lies the triumph first recorded in Psalm 118:22; a Psalm of David. “The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner.” This original reference to the nation of Israel was applied to Jesus, who rejected by human authority, became the chief corner stone of the edifice of God’s Kingdom. The unfailing relationship of God to his people culminated in the coming of their Messiah, who laid a foundation for God’s visible Kingdom to be established within the church. Through the Church’s response to life’s challenges, the world sees the magnitude of Christ’s victory.

                In this day of individuality and self-sufficiency, we are reminded by the Kingly Davidic Covenant that God’s Kingdom has always operated corporately, first through the nation of Israel and now through the church. The offering of spiritual sacrifices in worship is primarily corporate. The Gifts of the Spirit function through the corporate church body, and believers draw strength and encouragement from each other. As the Hebrew priesthood existed to serve both God and man, so does the Church.

                Those who turn to God in obedience, desiring to hear and do God’s will, can become the people of God, his holy nation and royal priesthood. By submitting to God’s covenant and by applying the word of God to their lives, we can become the living example of the Kingdom of God and his imputed righteousness.

IMPUTED RIGHTEOUSNESS UNDER THE COVENANT

                Most Christians do not understand that God has decreed them to be righteous under the New Covenant. Because Jesus was condemned on our behalf, we, as Christians, are free of condemnation. We must now become convinced of our right standing with God through Christ. 2 Corinthians 5:21 tells us that Christ became sin for us, “that we might be the righteousness of God in him.” The Holy Spirit convicts or convinces us that we are in a right positional relationship with God. He also convicts us to the extent that we are now responsible to live according to the righteousness that has been imputed to us.

                Righteousness is a positional and judicial declaration of God concerning being in right standing or a right relationship with Him. This relationship is based upon the Christ did, not what we have done (2 Corinthians 5:21). This relationship enables us to stand before God without shame or fear, as if sin never existed in our lives. This relationship obligates us to make a practical application of what God has positionally decreed to be true.        

                Because Jesus was condemned on our behalf, we, as Christians, are free of condemnation. We must now become convinced of our right standing with God through Christ. 2 Corinthians 5:21 tells us that Christ became sin for us, “that we might be the righteousness of God in him.” The Holy Spirit convicts or convinces us that we are in a right positional relationship with God. He also convicts us to the extent that we are now responsible to live according to the righteousness that has been imputed to us.

                Romans 8:1-3 tells us that, in God’s Kingdom, there is no condemnation of those declared righteous. The basic fact of biblical religion is that God pardons and accepts  believing sinners. Paul's doctrine of justification by faith is an analytical exposition of this fact in its full theological connections. Faith is belief in Christ’s atoning death and justifying resurrection (Romans 4:23), and trust in him alone for righteousness (Philippians 3:8-9). Christian morality is obeying God out of gratitude to the Savior whose gift of righteousness made law keeping needless for acceptance (Romans  7:1-6; 12:1-2).

                Justification is the process of  becoming positionally righteous. Righteousness is a forensic term, denoting a judicial act of administering the law in this case, by declaring a verdict of acquittal, and so excluding all possibility of condemnation. Justification thus settles the legal status of the person justified. In James 2:21, 24-25 its reference is to the proof of a man’s acceptance with God that is given when his actions show that he has the kind of living, working faith to which God imputes righteousness.

                Righteousness has two aspects. On the one hand, it means the pardon, remission, reconciliation to God, and the end of his enmity and wrath (Acts 13:39; Romans 4:6-7; 2 Corinthians 5:19). On the other hand, it means the bestowal of a righteous man’s status and a title to all the blessings promised to the just: a thought which Paul amplifies by linking justification with the adoption f believers as God's sons and heirs (Romans 8:14). Part of their inheritance they receive through the gift of the Holy Spirit, whereby God “seals” believers into the New Covenant. (Ephesians 1:13). Justification thus means reinstatement to favor and privilege (righteousness), as well as complete forgiveness of all sins to those who repent. The Holy Spirit convicts us of sin so that we might repent and come into this position as righteous children of God. The Holy Spirit wants us to know that we are in right standing with God, without condemnation. We no longer need to feel guilt and shame for ourselves.

Romans 8:4-11 reveals a life-style which is dominated by sinful human  nature; whose focus is self; whose only law is its own desires. It may be passion-controlled, or lust-controlled, or pride-controlled, or ambition-controlled.  Its characteristic is being absorbed in the things that human nature, without Christ, sets its heart upon. In the most literal sense, such a person is getting further and further away from God. To allow the things of  the world completely to dominate life, a person is making himself totally unfit to stand in the presence of God. This life-style gives little heed to things that are spiritual.

                There is also a life-style that is dominated by the Spirit of God. As a man lives in the air, he lives in Christ, never separated from him. As he breathes in the air and the air fills him, so Christ fills him. He has no desires of his own, and the will of Christ is his only law. He is Spirit-controlled and God-focused. The Spirit-controlled life, the Christ-centered life, the God-focused life is daily coming nearer heaven even when it is still on earth. In this type of life there is such a steady progress to God, that the final transition of death is a natural stage on the way.

                The New Testament (New Covenant) makes it clear that the one who by faith is declared righteous. By faith the righteous person seeks to do the deeds of righteousness and grow in righteousness, by God’s grace and through the daily work of the Holy Spirit.

                The covenant or theocratic aspect involves the  nation of Israel, The covenant required  obedience   to God by the nation and is the way of his  people   (Ps 1:1-6; Deut 6:25), a way of righteousness.  God is righteous, under the  covenant, when he  delivers his people from trouble (Ps 31:1), their enemies (Ps 5:8), the wicked (Ps 37:6)  and when he is vindicating Israel before her foes  or executing vengeance on them (Jer 11:20). It is  appropriate  that Israel  be assured of ultimate victory over her foes (Isa 54:14-17).  In  this last   event the Lord is both righteous and the savior  (Isa 45:21).  Yet  God is just to deliver the national sanctuary to the sword of Israel's enemies  on account  of her sins. God's judgment is just and Israel's evil conduct can  in no way be justified i.e.  considered righteous. But the righteous ones  remember   the covenant to do it, and God's promise  to them is  their  restoration (Isa  51:1-8). For Israel  to look to her maker involved repentance  and   reform. On the basis of this new righteousness  came a deliverance.

                Implicit  in this righteousness is the substitutionary sacrifice for sin  sincerely offered as noted in Psalm 51:16-19. These verses are no later addendum  to the  Psalm. They give the Old Testament parallel to Romans 3:26. The Hebrew word for righteousness describes the righteous standing of God's heirs to salvation, with no charge  to  be  laid against them (Isa 54:17),  this  righteousness,  actually possessed by Messiah (Jer 23:6), is bestowed by him, thus pointing toward the New Testament doctrine of Christ our righteousness. The righteousness of God's heirs  of salvation is the righteousness of the Messiah attributed to them  by God through faith in the redemptive work of Messiah in which God declares them righteous only because of the grace provided through that redemptive work.

                A key verse to understanding righteousness is 2 Corinthians 5:21.  For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. Only God is the source of righteousness. We are declared by God to be that righteousness through Christ. Faith in Christ puts us into a relationship of right standing with God, where we are fully justified or judged to be free of sin. This positional righteousness is a result of the grace and mercy of God, not something that we can produce of ourselves. The redemptive work of Christ makes us righteous. This means that we can dwell in the presence of the Father as if sin never existed in our lives, completely forgiven, without guilt, and without shame. Confession of our sins maintains us in that position (1 John 1: 8-9).

                Israel  in exile appeared to be far from  righteousness (Isa 46:12) but God  would  bring her  back according to his own righteousness (Isa 46:13). Rather than  finding here a meaning of deliverance, salvation or triumph for sedaqa as some do,  it is  better  to  find God's solution of the problem of  justification  for  the sinner in the teaching of Isa 53 where the suffering servant justifies sinners by  bearing  their  sin. This same forensic meaning of  justification  of  the ungodly  is a real precursor of Rom 3:26. So Israel's restoration to the  land of promise is righteousness (Isa 46:12-13) and it is in righteousness that the Lord raises up Cyrus to restore Israel to the land (45:13). Such righteousness will  be set out before all the world, for God will help Israel. In this  fulfillment  of the covenant God is declared righteous (Isa 54:14), and  Israel's status is that of being righteous, saddiq.

                The Hebrew root of the word translated as “righteousness” presents a  development or variety of usage:

1.   The abstract meaning of conformity to some standard (Gen 15:6), Abraham measuring up to the requirement of trust.

2    As a descriptive characteristic of God (Deut 32:4), as just and righteous, the standard being his own will and nature as the Supreme Being. The illustration of the potter and the clay, (Isa 45:9-12) points to the appropriateness of the divine decision.

3.  Sedaqa or sedeq when applied to God means righteousness, his characteristics then becoming the ultimate standard of human conduct.

4.   The  visitation  of  punishment on moral infractions is  an  example  of  righteousness,  as were God's judgments on Pharaoh for refusing  to  release  the Israelites (Ex 9:27). To judge sin is, one may say, a  divine necessity for a righteous God.

5.   God  shows  his  righteousness in vindicating the deserving among  his people (Gen 18:25). Although that righteousness may require punishment, it is followed by mercy on repentance.

6.    The work of justification is seen when David pleads for forgiveness  (Ps. 51:14,  calling on God to bestow deliverance without regard to merit  to fulfill his obligation to his own standards.

                In post-exilic times the root developed to mean benevolence, alms-giving  etc. as acts of a godly man (Ps 112:9).  There are different concepts of the  meaning of this root. It implies a covenant relationship. A man is righteous  when he  meets certain claims which another has on him in virtue  of  relationship" (i.e. as in a sovereignty treaty or covenant). The Bible always uses the image of  a legal dispute whereby God defends the people under covenant to him  much as  an  ancient eastern suzerain promised to do in a suzerainty  treaty.  This covenant  concept  is important. This linking of right and salvation  is  most deeply grounded in the covenant concept, and the word sedaqa is the  execution of covenant faithfulness and the covenant promises. God's righteousness as His judicial reign means that in covenant faithfulness to His people He vindicates and saves them. By this emphasis on the covenant, God's righteousness  becomes fidelity to promises and there is no eternal justice of God to be satisfied by a  substitute.  Indeed,  rescue of the covenant people from  trouble  is  both righteousness,  salvation,  and victory. By instituting  and  developing  this concept of righteousness as a part of a normal covenant relationship with Him, God set the stage for the righteous sacrifice of Jesus Christ as heir to the Davidic line and Davidic Covenant.

                It is impossible for human beings to keep every jot and tittle of God’s Everlasting Covenant. However, to break any part of the covenant is tantamount to breaking the entire covenant. This would result in removal from the protection and blessings provided for us by that covenant. But breaking the covenant would not only leave us exposed to our enemies, it would bring down upon us the judgment of God Himself. God knew this so he instituted a mechanism by which mankind could remain under his covenant. This was done in the days of the Old Testament through the offering of the blood sacrifices, accompanied by the confession of sins committed. Under the New Covenant, God instituted the Lord’s Supper or Eucharist (the Great Thanksgiving). As we Christians confess their sins (1 John 1:9) we are forgiven. As we partake of the Lord’s Supper, we are renewed in our covenant with God and maintain that coveted position of right standing (righteousness) in which God has placed us.

CONFESSION AND REPENTANCE UNDER GOD’S COVENANT

                What role does confession of sin play? Because of his sin with Bathsheba, David had to confess  his sin and repent.. “The Protestant penchant for privatizing faith and relegating confession to a singular transaction between that person and God has meant a loss of accountability.... Anyone can breathe a silent prayer that amounts to little more than a ‘Sorry, God’ and presume to get on with life.  How, if things are to be so private and ‘under the table,’ is the sinner and the sinned against to know if there has been genuine sorrow and change of heart?” wrote Gordon MacDonald in “Rebuilding Your Broken World.”

                In the Davidic Covenant we see both righteousness and judgment. To avoid judgment for breaking covenant with God, David repented and was restored to a right relationship with God. This principle is best illustrated in 1 John 1:8-9 in the New Testament.           

                For those in covenant with God, repentance and confession of sin must be an attitude of life. These principles were a part of the Davidic Covenant. Daily we ask God's Spirit to show us our sin.  Then we work on overcoming it. Biblical repentance reestablishes credibility with the world and fellowship with the Lord. The Holy Spirit is helping us to embrace seven aspects of repentance: (1) Earnestness to do right.  (2) Eagerness to clear oneself through apology.  (3) Indignation against sin. (4) Fear of God.  (5) Desire to see right accomplished. (6) Zeal to correct what's wrong.  (7) Readiness to see that wrongdoing is punished. The Prince of this world has been judged. Satan has already been defeated. Since Jesus died and was resurrected, Satan is no longer the thief of John 10:10. He cannot steal from us, kill us, or destroy us; but he can deceive us. If we believe in his deceit, we give him power that he does not rightfully have. The Holy Spirit works to convince us of the absolute defeat of our adversary. The dunamis power of the Holy Spirit is at work in our lives to enforce the judgment that God has already pronounced upon Satan. He convinces us of judgment.

                What should be the results of true repentance?  Repentance means that I own responsibility for my part in what was unsatisfactory behavior. Under the precepts of God’s covenant, I accept responsibility for my part in what is and what will be new behavior.

                Repentance is owning responsibility for what was, accepting responsibility for what is, and acting responsibly now.  It is responsible action.  It is not a matter of punishing us for past mistakes, hating ourselves for past failures, and depressing ourselves with feelings of worthlessness. Repentance is finishing the unfinished business of my past and choosing to live in new ways that will not repeat old unsatisfactory situations. In the full Christian meaning of the Word, repentance is a process.  It is a thawing out of rigid lifestyles into a flowing, moving, growing, repenting process.

                The story is told of a famous rabbi who was walking with some of his disciples when one of them asked, “Rabbi, when should a man repent?”  The rabbi calmly replied, “You should be sure you repent on the last day of your life.” “But,” protested several of his disciples, “we can never be sure which day will be the last day of our life.” The famous rabbi smiled and said, “The answer to that problem is very simple.  Repent now.”

JUDGMENT UNDER THE COVENANT

                The necessity for repentance is shown through the Davidic Covenant’s inclusion of the concept of judgment. The idea of the judgment day reaches back into the Old Testament concepts of divine judgment and the day of the Lord. The wrath of God is poured out in judgment upon Israel (1 Chronicles. 27:24; 2 Chronicles 24:18; 29:8; Amos 3:2; 5:18).

Also significant is the concept of God as Judge rendering judgments. The Hebrew mishpat brings together the ideas of judging and ruling into a single concept focused in the authority of God as Sovereign over the nation of Israel and over creation. Thus He instituted divine law and renders righteous verdicts based upon it as well as enforcing its requirements (Genesis 18:25; Psalms 89:27; 96:10,13; 98:9). Associated with this is the promise of a day when God will exercise His judgments with awesome power in the Day of the Lord (Isaiah 24-26). The New Testament builds on the foundation of the Old Testament and utilizes the language and imagery of the Jewish writings to present the full revelational picture of Judgment Day. As in the Old Testament, divine judgment is both a present and a future reality. Jesus' first coming represents a divine judgment (John 3:19; 9:39; 12:31). Sinful humanity presently stands under divine condemnation (John 3:36) and experiences in part now the wrath of God (Romans 1:18-32). The people of God are chastised for their waywardness (Hebrews 12:4-11), but that final divine verdict of judgment is yet to be carried out in a future day (1 John 4:17; John 5:24-29) by the Son of Man Himself (John 12:48; 5:22). One’s relationship with Christ is that determiner of eternal destiny (John 3:36), but one’s faithfulness to Christ is crucial to a genuine relationship with Christ (James 2:14-26; Matthew 7:21-23; 1 John 2:3-6). Very similar in emphasis is the parable of the sheep and goats (Matthew 25:31-56). Acts of devotion done to those in need is the distinguishing criterion between the sheep and goats settling their eternal destiny (Matt. 25:46).

                Those who have repented and are in right standing with God (righteousness), are the sheep that will abide with Christ forever. Therefore, God's righteousness, which expresses itself in wrath and judgment against unrepentant sinners triumphs through love in the form of salvation from sin for those who repent and claim God’s covenant promise fulfilled in Christ.

KINGDOM AUTHORITY UNDER THE COVENANT

                We may not like it, but God chooses whom he chooses to exercise delegated authority without consulting with his creation. Authority is given to both the obedient and the disobedient, to the submitted and unsubmitted, and to both the godly and ungodly. All authority comes from God. People may execute God’s authority, without even realizing the source of that authority. Regardless of our understanding of the will of God, we are subjected to his sovereign authority, and each of us have a particular calling which includes the measure of delegated authority that has been given to us by God.

                Respect for worldly authority is important because it is an expression of God’s authority. To be a good citizen means to obey the laws and edicts of the government. The motivation is not avoidance of punishment. It is to bring honor to the sovereign God who ordained human government.

                The New Testament is both logical and just. People cannot accept the privileges afforded by government without also accepting the responsibilities and duties, which it demands, so long as human laws do not conflict with God’s law. For Christians, as citizens in the Kingdom of God, there is always a voluntary subordination to others; putting the interest of others above their own. This is true in family, vocational, legal, and ministerial relationships.

                The earth and its governments are not inherently evil. Satan and evil people can influence governments, but so can godly people. By obeying the laws of the land and by doing good, Christians will silence the ignorant talk of foolish men and their criticism of Christianity. A believer’s best defense against slanderous criticism has always been good behavior.

                Even more important than submission to secular authorities, the community of believers was expected to respect the authority of the church leadership. In continuation of the principles of the Davidic Covenant, the disciple of Christ established a kind of theocratic Kingdom Authority in the church.  Paul and Barnabas appointed elders in every church they established (Acts 14:23; 20:17-38). James and Peter also supported the appointment of elders as officers of the church (James 5:14; 1 Peter 5:1-4). Each Jewish community had its council of elders, such as the Jerusalem Sanhedrin. The church adopted this form of administrative authority at an early date. The term elder comes from the Greek word presbyteros and could also be rendered presbyter. The presbyter/elders were the ministers within the local congregation. They did the liturgical ministry within the local church. Later they became recognized as “priests” in the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches.

                The Davidic Covenant shows that God is in control and has ordained that authority should be established in the earth and in the church (the manifestation of the Kingdom of God). With the knowledge that God is in control, and that he has a glorious inheritance for his people, the Christian community was armed to withstand any oppression or persecution. Christians knew that God cared for them, and they had spiritual leaders who were following Christ’s example. Therefore, they could depend upon God to sustain them and cast all of their anxieties and fears upon their Lord. To understand the Davidic Covenant read these scriptures: 2 Sam. 22:7; 26:16; 2 Chron 29:5-11; Ezra 3:10; Neh. 6:10-11; Ps. 5:7; 11:4; 138:2; and Isa. 6:1; 44:28; 66:6. 

EXOUSIA AND DUNAMIS

                Divine authority is embodied in the Greek word exousia, which denotes first the “ability” to perform an action. It then means the “right,” “authority,” “permission” conferred by a higher court: (1) the possibility granted by government; (2) the right in various social relationships, e.g., that of parents, masters, or owners. Since this second use of authority is illusory without real power, the term approximates at times to power (dunamis), but with the distinction that dunamis denotes external power but exousia has a more inward reference. Jewish usage is parallel to the Greek; the senses are “permission,” “authority,” or “right.” Philo has the term for the absolute power of the king or people, or that of God as seen in his creative activity and his judgments. The Septuagint uses the term for right or God gives authority in the legal sense and also as it. By using exousia for God’s power the Septuagint introduces a term that excellently expresses the concept of God’s unrestricted sovereignty, of the God whose very word is power (Dan. 4:14).

                The New Testament concept rests on three foundations. First, the power indicated is the power to decide. Second, this decision takes place in ordered relationships, all of which reflect God’s lordship. Third, as a divinely given authority to act, exousia implies freedom for the community.

1. Primarily exousia denotes