Covenant
VIEW:48 DATA:01-04-2020
COVENANT.The term is of frequent occurrence in the Bible, and is used in the general sense of a compact or agreement between parties, and also in the more technical and legal sense of an arrangement entered into by God, and confirmed or sealed with the due formalities. The Hebrew word (berîth) has a similarly wide signification; whilst the Greek (diathçkç) is used alike in the classics and on the papyri in the further sense of testament or will, though Aristophanes (Av. 439) is a good witness for the meaning of mutual agreement. The rendering testament is retained by the RV [Note: Revised Version.] in two places only (Heb_9:16-17; cf. margin of Gal_3:15), and is perpetuated in the titles given to the two main parts of the Bible (see Testament).
As for the formalities in concluding a covenant, the primitive way seems to have been for the two parties to swallow each a drop of the others blood, thus becoming covenant-brothers. This actual mingling of blood soon became distasteful, and substitutes were found, such as the cutting of sacrificial animals into two parts, between which the contracting parties passed (Gen_15:10; Gen_15:17, Jer_34:18 f.), the meat probably being eaten afterwards in a joint meal. This ritual appears to have been inherited from the nomadic period, and it afterwards generally gave way to a solemn oath or invocation of God, combining a pledge to observe the covenant (Gen_26:31, Heb_6:17) and the imprecation of a curse on non-observance (Deu_27:15 ff.). Sometimes a handshake took the place of the oath (Ezr_10:19, Pro_6:1; Pro_17:18; Pro_22:26, 1Ch_29:24 marg., 1Ma_6:58), or was added to it (Eze_17:18). In very early times an agreement between two men was sometimes confirmed by setting up a pillar or a heap of stones (Gen_31:44-48), the religious sanction being added (Gen_31:49 f., 53). When God was Himself directly one of the parties, and an obligation was thought to be assumed by Him rather than by both, a token was substituted (Gen_9:12); but in these cases the transaction takes the form chiefly of a pledge or assurance, though the idea of some obligation upon the other party is often implicit. Compacts would often be made or confirmed at a shrine; and the god was invoked as a witness (Gen_31:49 ff., Jos_24:27, 2Ki_11:4; 2Ki_23:3), or a sacrificial meal accompanied the act (Gen_26:30; Gen_31:54, 2Sa_3:20). Sprinkling of sacrificial blood (Exo_24:8, Zec_9:11, Heb_9:20) was a specially solemn indication of Gods approving presence and of the obligations undertaken; and its significance survives and is deepened in the death of Christ (Heb_10:29; Heb_13:20) and in the Eucharist (Mat_26:28, Mar_14:24, Luk_22:20, 1Co_11:25).
Of the covenants referred to in Scripture, there are two classes.
1. Covenants between men.These, again, are of several kinds, the most frequent being international alliances (e.g. Gen_21:27, Jos_9:6, Psa_83:5, Amo_1:9), judicial decisions and codes (Sir_38:33, possibly Exo_24:7), agreements between a ruler and the people (2Sa_5:3, Dan_9:27), and civil and domestic compacts of every variety. The word was used for alliances of friendship (1Sa_18:3, Psa_55:20), and of marriage (Pro_2:17, Mal_2:14). By an easy metaphor, a covenant in the sense of an imposed will may be made with the eyes (Job_31:1); or, in the other sense of agreement, with the stones (Job_5:23), but not with Leviathan (Job_41:4), because of his greatness and intractability, nor wisely with death either in scorn of God (Isa_28:15; Isa_28:18) or in yearning (Wis_1:16). In Dan_11:22 the prince of the covenant is sometimes rendered a prince in league with him; but if the other translation stands, covenant will represent the nation as a religious community (cf. Dan_11:28; Dan_11:30, Psa_74:20), and the prince will be the high priest, Onias III., who was deposed by Antiochus about b.c. 174. Similarly in Mal_3:1 the messenger of the covenant may be the attendant of God, His instrument in dealing with the nation (cf. RVm [Note: Revised Version margin.] ).
2. Covenants between God and men.The idea of a covenant with Adam, beyond the simple injunction of Gen_2:16-17, has been found by some writers in Sir_17:12, which is more easily interpreted of the transactions on Horeb (Deu_5:3). In Psa_25:14, as in Psa_55:20, the word has its fundamental meaning of an alliance of friendship, with a specific allusion in the former case to the Deuteronomic covenant of the tenth verse. In other cases the technical meaning of an agreement with signs and pledges is more conspicuous. The Noachian covenant (Gen_6:18; Gen_9:8-17, Isa_54:9 f., Jer_33:20; Jer_33:25) guarantees the stability of natural law. The covenant with Abraham (Gen_15:18; Gen_17:2-21) was confirmed in its promise to Isaac and Jacob (Exo_2:24, Lev_26:42, Psa_105:9 f.), and ensured a blessing through their seed to all nations, circumcision being adopted as the token (cf. Act_7:8, 1Ma_1:15). Of still greater significance was the covenant at Horeb or Sinai (Exo_19:5; Exo_34:10; Exo_34:27 f. et al.), which was renewed in the plains of Moab (Deu_29:1), and is frequently referred to in the OT. It was really a constitution given to Israel by God, with appointed promise and penalty, duly inscribed on the tables of the covenant (Deu_9:9; Deu_9:11; Deu_9:15), which were deposited in the ark (Deu_10:2; Deu_10:5, 1Ki_8:9; 1Ki_8:21, 2Ch_5:10, Heb_9:4). Elsewhere the covenant is described as set forth in words (Exo_34:28, Deu_29:9) and written in a book (Exo_24:7, 2Ki_23:2). Amongst other covenants of minor importance are that with Phinehas establishing an everlasting priesthood in his line (Num_25:12 f.), and that with David establishing an everlasting kingdom (Psa_89:3 f., Jer_33:21; cf. 2Sa_7:1-29). Joshua and the people covenant to serve Jehovah only (Jos_24:25); so Jehoiada and the people (2Ki_11:17). Hezekiah and the people solemnly agree to reform the worship (2Ch_29:10); Josiah (2Ki_23:3) and Ezra (Ezr_10:3) lead the people into a covenant to observe the Law.
Whilst the Sinaitic covenant is rightly regarded as the charter of the Jewish dispensation, the establishment by God of a new constitution was contemplated by a series of prophets (Jer_31:31; Jer_31:33; Jer_32:40; Jer_50:5, Isa_55:3; Isa_59:21; Isa_61:8, Eze_16:60; Eze_16:62; Eze_20:37; Eze_34:25). Some of the pledges were new, and not confined in their range to Israel, whilst the Messianic Servant becomes for a covenant of the people (Isa_42:6 f., Isa_49:8; cf. messenger of the covenant, Mal_3:1). The Sinaitic covenant is thus transformed, and, whilst continuing as a note of racial separation until the period for the Incarnation was come, gave way then to a new dispensation with increased emphasis on personal religion and the provision of means adequate to ensure it (Heb_8:6-13). Yet the ancient covenant, even that with Abraham, was everlasting (Gen_17:7), and still stands in its supreme purpose (Lev_26:44 f., Act_3:25, Rom_11:26 f.) of making men the people of God, the new elements consisting mainly in the adoption of more effective influences and inspiration. The Exile is sometimes thought of as marking the dissolution of the Old Covenant (Jer_31:31 ff.), though the new one was not fully introduced until some centuries later. The act of making the New Covenant is compared with the transactions in the wilderness (Eze_20:36 ff.). On Gods part there is forgiveness with the quickening of the inner life of man (Eze_36:24 ff.). And both the activity and the blessedness are associated with the Messianic expectations (Jer_33:15 f., Eze_37:21-28, Luk_1:20).
In the later OT writings the word covenant, as appears from the previous citations, has lost much of its technical signification, and does not always denote even a formal act of agreement, but becomes almost a synonym, and that without much precision, for the conditions of religion (Psa_103:18). St. Paul recognizes a series of covenants (Rom_9:4, Eph_2:12) on an ascending scale of adequacy (2Co_3:6, Gal_4:24 ff.; cf. Heb_7:22; Heb_8:6 ff.); and Sinai is but a stage (Gal_3:15 ff.) in the course from Abraham to Christ.
Of special phrases, two or three may present some difficulty. A covenant of salt (Num_18:19, 2Ch_13:5) is a perpetual covenant, the eating of salt together being a token of friendship as sealed by sacred hospitality. The salt of the covenant (Lev_2:13) has probably the same primary suggestion, as at natural accompaniment of the sacrificial meal, and with it constituting an inviolable bond. Sometimes the two great divisions of Scripture are called the books of the Old and of the New Covenant respectively. The name Book of the Covenant (see next article) is given to Exo_20:22-23; that of Little Book of the Covenant to Exo_34:11-26. A distinction is often drawn between the Covenant of Works, assumed to have been made by God with Adam (Gen_2:17), and that of Grace or Redemption (2Ti_1:9), whereby Christ becomes to man the medium of all spiritual blessings.
R. W. Moss.
Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible
Edited by James Hastings, D.D. Published in 1909
Hebrew berit, Greek diatheekee. From baarah "to divide" or" cut in two" a victim (Gesenius), between the parts of which the covenanting parties passed (Gen_15:9, etc.; Jer_34:18-19). Probably the covenanting parties eating together (which barah sometimes means) of the feast after the sacrifice entered into the idea; compare Gen_31:46-47, Jacob and Laban.
"A COVENANT OF SALT," taken in connection with the eastern phrase for friendship, "to eat salt together," confirms this view. Salt, the antidote to corruption, was used in every sacrifice, to denote purity and perpetuity (Lev_2:13; Mar_9:49). So a perpetual covenant or appointment (Num_18:19; 2Ch_13:5). The covenant alluded to in Hos_6:7 margin is not with Adam (KJV "men" is better, compare Psa_82:7), for nowhere else is the expression "covenant" applied to Adam's relation to God, though the thing is implied in Rom_5:12-19; 1Co_15:22; but the Sinaitic covenant which Israel transgressed as lightly as "men" break their every day covenants with their fellow men, or else they have transgressed like other "men," though distinguished above all men by extraordinary spiritual privileges.
"Covenant" in the strict sense, as requiring two independent contracting parties, cannot apply to a covenant between God and man. His covenant must be essentially one of gratuitous promise, an act of pure grace on His part (Gal_3:15, etc.). So in Psa_89:28 "covenant" is explained by the parallel word "mercy." So God's covenant not to destroy the earth again by water (Genesis 9; Jer_33:20). But the covenant, on God's part gratuitous, requires man's acceptance of and obedience to it, as the consequence of His grace experienced, and the end which He designs to His glory, not that it is the meritorious condition of it. The Septuagint renders berit by diatheekee (not suntheekee, "a mutual compact"), i.e. a gracious disposal by His own sovereign will. So Luk_22:29, "I appoint (diatithemai, cognate to diatheekee, by testamentary or gratuitous disposition) unto you a kingdom."
The legal covenant of Sinai came in as a parenthesis (pareiselthee; Rom_5:20) between the promise to Abraham and its fulfillment in his promised seed, Christ. "It was added because of the (so Greek) transgressions" (Gal_3:19), i.e. to bring them, and so man's great need, into clearer view (Rom_3:20; Rom_4:15; Rom_5:13; Rom_7:7-9). For this end its language was that, of a more stipulating kind as between two parties mutually covenanting, "the man that doeth these things shall live by them" (Rom_10:5). But the promise to David (2 Samuel 7; Psalm 89; 2; 72; Isaiah 11) took up again that to Abraham, defining the line, the Davidic, as that in which the promised seed should come.
As the promise found its fulfillment in Christ, so also the law, for He fulfilled it for us that He might be "the Lord our righteousness," "the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth" (Jer_23:6; 1Co_1:30; Rom_10:4; Mat_3:15; Mat_5:17; Isa_42:21; Isa_45:24-25). In Heb_9:15-18 the gospel covenant is distinguished from the legal, as the New Testament contrasted with the Old Testament "Testament" is the better translation here, as bringing out the idea of diatheekee, God's gracious disposal or appointment of His blessings to His people, rather than suntheekee, mutual engagement between Him and them as though equals.
A human "testament" in this one respect illustrates the nature of the covenant; by death Christ chose to lose all the glory and blessings which are His, that we, who were under death's bondage, might inherit all. Thus the ideas of "mediator of the covenant," and "testator," meet in Him, who at once fulfills God's "covenant of promise," and graciously disposes to us all that is His. In most other passages "covenant" would on the whole be the better rendering. "Testament" for each of the two divisions of the Bible comes from the Latin Vulgate version. In Mat_26:28, "this is My blood of the new testament" would perhaps better be translated "covenant," for a testament does not require blood shedding. Still, here and in the original (Exo_24:8) quoted by Christ the idea of testamentary disposition enters.
For his blood was the seal of the testament. See below. Moses by "covenant" means one giving the heavenly inheritance (typified by Canaan) after the testator's death, which was represented by the sacrificial blood he sprinkled. Paul by testament means one with conditions, and so far a covenant, the conditions being fulfilled by Christ, not by us. We must indeed believe, but even this God works in His people (Eph_2:8). Heb_9:17, "a testament is in force after men are dead," just as the Old Testament covenant was in force only in connection with slain sacrificial victims which represent the death of Christ. The fact of the death must be "brought forward" (Heb_9:16) to give effect to the will. The word" death," not sacrifice or slaying, shows that "testament" is meant in Heb_9:15-20. These requisites of a "testament" here concur:
1. The Testator.
2. The heirs.
3. Goods.
4. The Testator's death.
5. The fact of His death brought forward. In Mat_26:28 two additional requisites appear.
6. Witnesses, His disciples.
7. The seal, the sacrament of the Lord's supper, the sign of His blood, wherewith the testament is sealed. The heir is ordinarily the successor of him who dies, and who so ceases to have possession. But Christ comes to life again, and is Himself (including all that He had), in the power of tits now endless life, His people's inheritance; in His being heir (Heb_1:2; Psa_2:8) they are heirs.
Fausset's Bible Dictionary
By Andrew Robert Fausset, co-Author of Jamieson, Fausset and Brown's 1888.
Covenant. The Hebrew berith means primarily "a cutting", with reference to the custom of cutting or dividing animals in two and passing between the parts in ratifying a covenant. (Genesis 15; Jer_34:18-19. In the New Testament, the corresponding Greek word is diatheke, which is frequently translated testament, in the Authorized Version. In its biblical meaning two parties, the word is used ?
1. Of a covenant between God and man; for example, God covenanted with Noah, after the flood, that a like judgment should not be repeated. It is not precisely like a covenant between men, but was a promise or agreement by God.
The principal covenants are the covenant of works ? God promising to save and bless men on condition of perfect obedience ? and the covenant of grace, or God's promise to save men on condition of their believing in Christ and receiving him as their Master and Saviour.
The first is called the Old Covenant, from which we name the first part of the bible the Old Testament, the Latin rendering of the word covenant. The second is called the New Covenant, or New Testament.
2. Covenant between man and man, that is, a solemn compact or agreement, either between tribes or nations, Jos_9:6; Jos_9:15; 1Sa_11:1, or between individuals, Gen_31:44. By which each party bound himself to fulfill certain conditions and was assured of receiving certain advantages.
In making such a covenant, God was solemnly invoked as witness, Gen_31:50, and an oath was sworn. Gen_21:31. A sign or witness of the covenant was sometimes framed, such a gift, Gen_21:30, or a pillar or heap of stones erected. Gen_31:52.
Smith's Bible Dictionary
By Dr. William Smith.Published in 1863
The Greek word διαθηκη occurs often in the Septuagint, as the translation of a Hebrew word, which signifies covenant: it occurs also in the Gospels and the Epistles; and it is rendered in our English Bibles sometimes covenant, sometimes testament. The Greek word, according to its etymology, and according to classical use, may denote a testament, a disposition, as well as a covenant; and the Gospel may be called a testament, because it is a signification of the will of our Saviour ratified by his death, and because it conveys blessings to be enjoyed after his death. These reasons for giving the dispensation of the Gospel the name of a testament appeared to our translators so striking, that they have rendered διαθηκη more frequently by the word testament, than by the word covenant. Yet the train of argument, where διαθηκη occurs, generally appears to proceed upon its meaning a covenant; and therefore, although, when we delineate the nature of the Gospel, the beautiful idea of its being a testament, is not to be lost sight of, yet we are to remember that the word testament, which we read in the Gospels and Epistles, is the translation of a word which the sense requires to be rendered covenant. A covenant implies two parties, and mutual stipulations. The new covenant must derive its name from something in the nature of the stipulations between the parties different from that which existed before; so that we cannot understand the propriety of the name,
new, without looking back to what is called the old, or first. On examining the passages in Galatians 3, in 2 Corinthians 3, and in Hebrews 8-10, where the old and the new covenant are contrasted, it will be found that the old covenant means the dispensation given by Moses to the children of Israel; and the new covenant the dispensation of the Gospel published by Jesus Christ; and that the object of the Apostle is to illustrate the superior excellence of the latter dispensation. But, in order to preserve the consistency of the Apostle's writings, it is necessary to remember that there are two different lights in which the former dispensation may be viewed. Christians appear to draw the line between the old and the new covenant, according to the light in which they view that dispensation. It may be considered merely as a method of publishing the moral law to a particular nation; and then with whatever solemnity it was delivered, and with whatever cordiality it was accepted, it is not a covenant that could give life. For, being nothing more than what divines call a covenant of works, a directory of conduct requiring by its nature entire personal obedience, promising life to those who yielded that obedience, but making no provision for transgressors, it left under a curse every one that continued not in all things that were written in the book of the law to do them. This is the essential imperfection of what is called the covenant of works, the name given in theology to that transaction, in which it is conceived that the supreme Lord of the universe promised to his creature, man, that he would reward that obedience to his law, which, without any such promise, was due to him as the Creator.
No sooner had Adam broken the covenant of works, than a promise of a final deliverance from the evils incurred by the breach of it was given. This promise was the foundation of that transaction which Almighty God, in treating with Abraham, condescends to call my covenant with thee, and which, upon this authority, has received in theology the name of the Abrahamic covenant. Upon the one part, Abraham, whose faith was counted to him for righteousness, received this charge from God, Walk before me, and be thou perfect; upon the other part, the God whom he believed, and whose voice he obeyed, beside promising other blessings to him and his seed, uttered these significant words, In thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed. In this transaction, then, there was the essence of a covenant; for there were mutual stipulations between two parties; and there was superadded, as a seal of the covenant, the rite of circumcision, which, being prescribed by God, was a confirmation of his promise to all who complied with it, and being submitted to by Abraham, was, on his part, an acceptance of the covenant.
The Abrahamic covenant appears, from the nature of the stipulations, to be more than a covenant of works; and, as it was not confined to Abraham, but extended to his seed, it could not be disannulled by any subsequent transactions, which fell short of a fulfilment of the blessing promised. The law of Moses, which was given to the seed of Abraham four hundred and thirty years after, did not come up to the terms of that covenant even with regard to them, for, in its form it was a covenant of works, and to other nations it did not directly convey any blessing. But although the Mosaic dispensation did not fulfil the Abrahamic covenant, it was so far from setting that covenant aside, that it cherished the expectation of its being fulfilled: for it continued the rite of circumcision, which was the seal of the covenant; and in those ceremonies which it enjoined, there was a shadow, a type, an obscure representation, of the promised blessing, Luk_1:72-73.
Here, then, is another view of the Mosaic dispensation. It was added, because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made, Gal_3:19. By delivering a moral law, which men felt themselves unable to obey; by denouncing judgments which it did not of itself provide any effectual method of escaping; and by holding forth, in various oblations, the promised and expected Saviour; it was a schoolmaster to bring men unto Christ. The covenant made with Abraham retained its force during the dispensation of the law, and was the end of that dispensation.
The views which have been given furnish the ground upon which we defend that established language which is familiar to our ears, that there are only two covenants essentially different, and opposite to one another, the covenant of works, made with the first man, intimated by the constitution of human nature to every one of his posterity, and having for its terms, Do this and live; and the covenant of grace, which was the substance of the Abrahamic covenant, and which entered into the constitution of the Sinaitic covenant, but which is more clearly revealed, and more extensively published in the Gospel. This last covenant, which the Scriptures call new in respect to the mode of its dispensation under the Gospel, although it is not new in respect of its essence, has received, in the language of theology, the name of the covenant of grace, for the two following obvious reasons: because, after man had broken the covenant of works, it was pure grace or favour in the Almighty to enter into a new covenant with him; and, because by the covenant there is conveyed that grace which enables man to comply with the terms of it. It could not be a covenant unless there were terms, something required, as well as something promised or given,duties to be performed, as well as blessings to be received. Accordingly, the tenor of the new covenant, founded upon the promise originally made to Abraham, is expressed by Jeremiah in words which the Apostle to the Hebrews has quoted as a description of it: I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people, Heb_8:10 :words which intimate on one part not only entire reconciliation with God, but the continued exercise of all the perfections of the Godhead in promoting the happiness of his people, and the full communication of all the blessings which flow from his unchangeable love; on the other part, the surrender of the heart and affections of his people, the dedication of all the powers of their nature to his service, and the willing uniform obedience of their lives. But, although there are mutual stipulations, the covenant retains its character of a covenant of grace, and must be regarded as having its source purely in the grace of God. For the very circumstances which rendered the new covenant necessary, take away the possibility of there being any merit upon our part: the faith by which the covenant is accepted is the gift of God; and all the good works by which Christians continue to keep the covenant, originate in that change of character which is the fruit of the operation of his Spirit.
Covenants were anciently confirmed by eating and drinking together; and chiefly by feasting on a sacrifice. In this manner, Abimelech, the Philistine, confirmed the covenant with Isaac, and Jacob with his father Laban, Gen_26:26-31; Gen_31:44-46; Gen_31:54. Sometimes they divided the parts of the victim, and passed between them, by which act the parties signified their resolution of fulfilling all the terms of the engagement, on pain of being divided or cut asunder as the sacrifice had been, if they should violate the covenant, Gen_15:9-10; Gen_15:17-18; Jer_34:18. Hence the Hebrew word charat, which properly signifies to divide, is applied allusively in Scripture to the making of a covenant. When the law of Moses was established, the people feasted in their peace-offerings on a part of the sacrifice, in token of their reconciliation with God, Deu_12:6-7. See CIRCUMCISION.
Biblical and Theological Dictionary by Richard Watson
PRINTER 1849.
A covenant was an agreement between two parties that laid down conditions and guaranteed benefits, depending upon a persons keeping or breaking the covenant. It was sealed by some form of witness (Gen_21:22-32; Gen_31:44-54; 1Sa_18:3-4; Mal_2:14).
Covenants between God and the people he created, however, differed from purely human covenants. They were not agreements between equals, because God was always the one who gave, and people were always the ones who received. No human being could negotiate an agreement with God or make demands upon him. Gods promises originated in his sovereign grace alone, and those who received those promises could do nothing but accept his directions.
Through one man to the world
From the time of the earliest recorded covenant (Gods covenant with Noah, and with the human race through him), features of grace are prominent. The covenant originated in Gods grace and depended upon Gods grace for its fulfilment. The rainbow was the sign, or witness, that sealed the covenant (Gen_6:18; Gen_9:8-17; see GRACE).
Having promised to preserve the human race (Gen_9:15-16), God then revealed that he had a plan of salvation for it. This plan again was based on a covenant that originated in Gods grace. In his sovereign will God chose one man, Abraham, promising him a multitude of descendants who would become a nation, receive Canaan as their homeland, and be Gods channel of blessing to the world (Gen_12:1-3; Gen_15:18-21; Gen_17:2-8; Act_3:25).
God confirmed his promise to Abraham by a covenant ceremony. The ancient custom was for the two parties to kill an animal, cut it in halves, then pass between the two halves, calling down the fate of the slaughtered animals upon themselves should they break the covenant (Gen_15:9-11; Jer_34:18). But in Abrahams case, only God (symbolized by a smoking fire-pot and a flaming torch) passed between the halves of the animal. He alone made the covenant and guaranteed its fulfilment (Gen_15:17).
Abraham, however, had a responsibility to respond to Gods grace, and his response would determine whether he would enjoy the covenant benefits. A truly spiritual relationship could exist only where people responded to God in faith and obedience. The rite of circumcision, which God gave as the sign and seal of the covenant, gave Abraham and his descendants the opportunity to demonstrate such faith and obedience. Those who responded to Gods grace by being circumcised kept the covenant; those who did not were cut off from it. The covenant depended upon God, but only those who were obedient to God experienced the communion with God that was the covenants central blessing (Gen_17:9-14; see CIRCUMCISION; OBEDIENCE.)
Developed through Israel
Once the promised nation existed and was on the way to its promised homeland, God renewed the covenant made earlier with Abraham, this time applying it to the whole nation. Since Moses was the mediator through whom God worked in dealing with the people, the covenant is sometimes called the Mosaic covenant. It is also called the Sinaitic covenant, after Mt Sinai, where the ceremony took place.
God, in his sovereign grace, had saved the people of Israel from bondage in Egypt and taken them into a close relationship with himself. Grace was again the basis of Gods covenant dealings (Exo_2:24; Exo_3:16; Exo_4:22; Exo_6:6-8; Exo_15:13; Exo_19:4-6; Exo_20:2). As in the covenant with Abraham, so in the covenant with his descendants, the central blessing was communion with God; for he was their God and they were his people (Gen_17:7; Exo_6:7; Lev_26:12). Again, the people would enjoy this blessing only as they were holy in life and obedient to God (Exo_19:5-6). The people understood this and agreed to be obedient to all Gods commands. They were in no position to argue with God; they could do nothing but surrender completely to his will (Exo_24:7-8; see also LAW).
The two parties to the covenant were then bound together in a blood ritual. Half the blood was thrown against the altar (representing God) and half sprinkled on the people (Exo_24:3-8).
But this blood ritual was more than just a dramatic way of swearing loyalty to the covenant. The Passover had shown the people of Israel that blood symbolized life laid down to release those under condemnation of death (Exo_12:13). Blood was linked with release from the penalty of sin; therefore, the blood ritual at Sinai was an indication to Israel that it began its formal existence as Gods covenant people in a condition of ceremonial purity (Heb_9:19-22; see BLOOD).
All this ceremonial procedure emphasized once more that the covenant with Israel, following the covenant with Abraham, was based on divine grace, not human effort (Gal_3:17-18). Nevertheless, the people had to keep their part of the covenant if they were to enjoy its benefits (Exo_19:5; cf. Gen_17:9). God had no obligation to bless his people when they disobeyed his covenant commands, though in his mercy he was patient with them (Lev_26:27-33; Deu_4:25-31; Deu_7:9-10; Neh_9:33; Heb_3:16-19).
Note on the form of the covenant
The covenant between God and Israel was of a kind that people of the time understood. It was similar in form to the common Near Eastern treaty by which a sovereign overlord made a covenant with his subject peoples.
Such a treaty was not a negotiated agreement. It was an authoritative document prepared by the overlord, declaring his sovereignty over his people and laying down the order of life he required of them. The features of these ancient documents are well illustrated in the book of Deuteronomy, which was written in the form of a covenant document. (For details see DEUTERONOMY. Concerning the illustration that likens the covenant between God and Israel to the marriage covenant see LOVE, sub-heading Steadfast love.)
Towards a specific goal through David
After the promised nation had become established in the promised land, God revealed the next stage in directing his covenant purposes towards their ultimate goal. The promised offspring of Abraham through whom God would send his salvation to the world was Jesus the Messiah (Gen_12:3; Gen_12:7; Gal_3:16; Gal_3:29).
God prepared Israel to produce the Messiah by choosing from the nation one person, King David, and promising that his dynasty would be the channel through which the Messiah would come. God gave David this promise by means of a covenant that followed on from his earlier covenants, namely, those with Abraham and with the nation Israel (2Sa_7:12-17; 2Sa_23:5; Psa_89:3-4; Psa_89:28-37).
Jesus therefore was the true fulfilment of all Gods covenant purposes. The Abrahamic covenant led to the Sinaitic covenant, which in turn led to the Davidic covenant, which led finally to Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the world (Luk_1:32-33; Luk_1:72-73; Act_13:17-23).
The new covenant
Former covenants, then, were but a preparation for that saving work of God through Christ which the Bible calls the new covenant. Or, to put it another way, the new covenant fully develops the features consistently displayed in the former covenants.
Like the former covenants, the new covenant originates in the sovereign grace of God (Rom_3:24; Rom_5:15-21; Eph_2:8-9; Tit_3:5). Through it God makes unworthy sinners his people and promises to be their God (Heb_8:8; Heb_8:10; 1Pe_2:9-10). But if people are to enjoy that life-giving relationship with God which is the covenants central blessing, they must respond to Gods grace in faith and obedience (Gal_3:14; Heb_5:9; 1Pe_1:2). Also, since faith involves perseverance, they must continue in the covenant (Col_1:23; cf. Heb_8:9; see PERSEVERANCE).
Yet there are great differences between the old and new covenants. All former covenants were imperfect not in the sense of being wrong, but in the sense of being incomplete. They belonged to the era before Christ and therefore could not in themselves bring salvation. Only the atoning death of Christ can do that (see ATONEMENT). Therefore, until Christ came, there was always the need for a new covenant, one that carried with it better promises (Heb_8:6-9; Heb_8:13; Heb_10:9-10).
The new covenant, in contrast to the old, is not concerned with a particular nation, nor is it concerned with any nation as a whole. Rather it is concerned with individuals, regardless of their nation. It does not demand obedience to a set of laws, but puts Gods laws in peoples hearts. It does not need priests to mediate between God and individuals, for all believers know God personally and have direct fellowship with him. There is no remembrance of sins through repetitive sacrifices, for all sins are at once removed and are gone for ever (Heb_8:10-12). (For further details of the contrast between the old and new covenants see HEBREWS, LETTER TO THE.)
Jesus Christs atoning death is the basis of the new covenant. He is the mediator through whom God makes the covenant, and he is the sacrifice whose blood seals the covenant (1Co_11:25; Heb_9:15; Heb_12:24). Through that same blood, sin is forgiven completely, so that Gods people enter the covenant not with mere ceremonial cleansing, but with actual cleansing (Mat_26:28; cf. Heb_9:19-22). This is an eternal covenant, for there will never be another to follow it. Covenant grace is fully revealed, and the blessings that flow from it are eternal (Heb_10:16-18; Heb_13:20).
Bridgeway Bible Dictionary by Don Fleming
PRINTER 1990.
Covenant
a mutual contract or agreement between two parties, each of which is bound to fulfill certain engagements to the other. In Scripture it is used mostly in an analogical sense, to denote certain relations between God and man. (See Danville Review, March, 1862.)
I. Terms. In the Old Test. בְּרַית, berith' (rendered league, Jos_9:6-7; Jos_9:11; Jos_9:15-16; Jdg_2:2; 2Sa_3:12-13; 2Sa_3:21; 2Sa_5:3; 1Ki_5:12; 1Ki_15:19, twice; 2Ch_16:3, twice; Job_5:23; Eze_30:5; confederacy, Oba_1:7; confederate, Gen_14:13; Psa_83:5), is the word invariably thus translated (Sept. διαθήκη; once, Wisdom of Solomon 1:16, συνθήκη; Vulg. faedus, pactum, often interchangeably, Genesis 9, 17; Numbers 25; in the Apocrypha testamentum, but sacramentum, 2Es_2:7; sponsiones, Wisdom of Solomon 1:16; in N.T. testamentum [absque foedere, Rom_1:31; Gr. ἀσυνθέτους]). The Hebrew word is derived by Gesenius (Thes. Heb. p. 237, 238; so First, Hebr. Handzw. p. 217) from the root בָּרָה, i. q. בָּרָא, he cut, and taken to mean primarily a cutting, with reference to the custom of cutting or dividing animals in two, and passing between the parts in ratifying a covenant (Genesis 15; Jer_34:18-19). Hence the expression to cut a covenant (כָּרִת בְּרַית, Gen_15:18, or simply כָּרִת, with בְּרַיתunderstood, 1Sa_11:2) is of frequent occurrence. (Comp. ὅρκια τέμνειν, τέμνειν σπονδάς, icere, ferire, percuterefoedus. See Sicvogt, De more Ebraeor. dissectione animalium foedera ineundi, Jen. 1759.) Professor Lee suggests (Heb. Lex. s.v. בְּרַית) that the proper signification of the word is an eating together, or banquet, from the meaning to eat, which the root בָּרָהsometimes bears; because among the Orientals to eat together amounts almost to a covenant of friendship. This view is supported by Gen_31:46, where Jacob and Laban eat together on the heap of stones which they have set up in ratifying the covenant between them. It affords also a satisfactory explanation of the expression a covenant of salt (בְּרַית מֶלִח, διαθήκη ἁλός,, Num_18:19; 2Ch_13:5), when the Eastern idea of eating salt together is remembered. If, however, the other derivation of בְּרַית. be adopted, this expression may be explained by supposing salt to have been eaten or offered with accompanying sacrifices on occasion of very solemn covenants, or it may be regarded as figurative, denoting, either, from the use of salt in sacrifice (Lev_2:13; Mar_9:49), the sacredness, or, from the preserving qualities of salt, the perpetuity of the covenant. (See below.)
In the New Test. the word διαθήκη is frequently, though by no means uniformly, translated testament in the English Auth. Vers., whence the two divisions of the Bible have received their common English names. This translation is perhaps due to the Vulgate, which, having adopted testamentum as the equivalent for διαθήκη in the Apocrypha, uses it always as such in the N.T. (see above). There seems however, to be no necessity for the introduction of a new word conveying a new idea. The Sept. having rendered בְּרַית(which never means will or testament, but always covenant or agreement) by διαθήκη consistently throughout the O.T., the N.T. writers, in adopting that word, may naturally be supposed to intend to convey to their readers, most of them familiar with the Greek O.T., the same idea. Moreover, in the majority of cases, the same thing which has been called a covenant (בְּרַית) in the O.T. is referred to in the N.T. (e.g. 2Co_3:14; Hebrews 7, 9; Rev_11:19); while in the same context the same word and thing in the Greek are in the English sometimes represented by covenant, and sometimes by testament (Heb_7:22; Heb_8:8-13; Heb_9:15). In the confessedly difficult passage, Heb_9:16-17, the word διαθήκη has been thought by many commentators absolutely to require the meaning of will or testament. On the other side, however, it may be alleged that, in addition to what has just been said as to the usual meaning of the word in the N.T., the word occurs twice in the context, where its meaning must necessarily be the same as the translation of בְּרַית, and in the unquestionable sense of covenant (comp. διαθήκη καινή, Heb_9:15, with the same expression in 8:8; and διαθήκη, 9:16, 17, with Heb_9:20, and Exo_24:8). If this sense of διαθήκη be retained, we may either render ἐπὶ νεκροῖς, over, or in the case of, dead sacrifices, and ὁ διαθέμενος, the mediating sacrifice (Scholefield's Hintsfor an improved Translat:on of the N.T.), or (with Ebrard and others) restrict the statement of Exo_24:16 to the O.T. idea of a covenant between man and God, in which man, as guilty, must always be represented by a sacrifice with which he was so completely identified that in its person he (ὁ διαθἐμενος, the human covenanter) actually died (comp. Mat_26:28). SEE TESTAMENT.
II. Their Application. In its Biblical meaning of a compact or agreement between two parties, the word covenant is used
1. Properly, of a covenant between man and man; i.e. a solemn compact or agreement, either between tribes or nations (1Sa_11:1; Jos_9:6; Jos_9:15), or between individuals (Gen_31:44), by which each party bound himself to fulfill certain conditions, and was assured of receiving certain advantages. In making such a covenant God was solemnly invoked as witness (Gen_31:50), whence the expression a covenant of Jehovah בְּרַית יְהוָֹה, 1Sa_20:8; comp. Jer_34:18-19; Eze_17:19), and an oath was sworn (Gen_21:31); and accordingly a breach of covenant was regarded as a very heinous sin (Eze_17:12-20). A sign (אוֹת) or witness (עֵד) of the covenant was sometimes framed, such as a gift (Gen_21:30), or a pillar, or heap of stones erected (Gen_31:52). The marriage compact is called the covenant of God, Pro_2:17 (see Mal_2:14). The word covenant came to be applied to a sure ordinance, such as that of the shew- bread (Lev_24:8); and is used figuratively in such expressions as a covenant with death (Isa_28:18), or with the wild beasts (Hos_2:18). The phrases בִּעֲלֵי בְרַית, בְרַית אִנְשֵׁי, lords or men of one's covenant,' are employed to denote confederacy (Gen_14:13, Oba_1:7). SEE CONTRACT.
2. Improperly, of a covenant between God and man. Man not being in any way in the position of an independent covenanting party, the phrase is evidently used by way of accommodation. SEE ANTHROPOMORPHISM. Strictly speaking, such a covenant is quite unconditional, and amounts to a promise (Gal_3:15 sq., where ἐπαγγελία and διαθήκη are used almost as synonyms) or act of mere favor (Psa_89:28, where חֶסֶדstands in parallelism with בְּרַית) on God's part. Thus the assurance given by God after the Flood that a like judgment should not be repeated, and that the recurrence of the seasons, and of day and night, should not cease, is called a covenant (Genesis 9; Jer_33:20). Generally, however, the form: of a covenant is maintained, by the benefits which God engages to bestow being made by him dependent upon the fulfillment of certain conditions which he imposes on man. Thus the covenant with Abraham was conditioned by circumcision (Act_7:8), the omission of which was declared tantamount to a breach of the covenant (Genesis 17); the covenant of the priesthood by zeal for God, his honor and service (Num_25:12-13; Deu_33:9; Neh_13:29 Mal_2:4-5); the covenant of Sinai by the observance of the ten commandments (Exo_34:27-28; Lev_26:15), which are therefore called Jehovah's covenant (Deu_4:13), a name which was extended to all the books of Moses, if not to the whole body of Jewish canonical Scriptures (2Co_3:13-14). This last- mentioned covenant, which was renewed at different periods of Jewish history (Deuteronomy 29; Joshua 24; 2 Chronicles 15, 23, 29, 34; Ezra 10; Nehemiah 9, 10), is one of the two principal covenants between God and man. They are distinguished as old and new (Jer_31:31-34; Heb_8:8-13; Heb_10:16), with reference to the order, not of their institution, but of their actual development (Gal_3:17); and also as being the instruments respectively of bondage and freedom (Gal_4:24). Consistently with this representation of God's dealings with man under the form of a covenant, such covenant is said to be confirmed in conformity with human custom by an oath (Deu_4:31; Psa_89:3), to be sanctioned by curses to fall upon the unfaithful (Deu_29:21), and to be accompanied by a sign (אוֹת), such as the rainbow (Genesis 9), circumcision (Genesis 8), or the Sabbath (Exo_31:16-17). Hence, in Scripture, the covenant of God is called his counsel, his oath, his promise (Psa_89:3-4; Psa_105:8-11; Heb_6:13-20; Luk_1:68-75; Gal_3:15-18, etc.); and it is described as consisting wholly in the gracious bestowal of blessing on men (Isa_59:21; Jer_31:33-34). Hence also the application of the term covenant to designate such fixed arrangements or laws of nature as the regular succession of day and night (Jer_33:20), and such religious institutions as the Sabbath (Exo_31:16); circumcision (Gen_17:9-10); the Levitical institute (Lev_26:15); and, in general, any precept or ordinance of God (Jer_34:13-14), all such appointments forming part of that system or arrangement in connection with which the blessings of God's grace were to be enjoyed.
CYCLOPEDIA OF BIBLICAL, THEOLOGICAL AND ECCLESIASTICAL
press 1895.
As for the formalities in concluding a covenant, the primitive way seems to have been for the two parties to swallow each a drop of the others blood, thus becoming covenant-brothers. This actual mingling of blood soon became distasteful, and substitutes were found, such as the cutting of sacrificial animals into two parts, between which the contracting parties passed (Gen_15:10; Gen_15:17, Jer_34:18 f.), the meat probably being eaten afterwards in a joint meal. This ritual appears to have been inherited from the nomadic period, and it afterwards generally gave way to a solemn oath or invocation of God, combining a pledge to observe the covenant (Gen_26:31, Heb_6:17) and the imprecation of a curse on non-observance (Deu_27:15 ff.). Sometimes a handshake took the place of the oath (Ezr_10:19, Pro_6:1; Pro_17:18; Pro_22:26, 1Ch_29:24 marg., 1Ma_6:58), or was added to it (Eze_17:18). In very early times an agreement between two men was sometimes confirmed by setting up a pillar or a heap of stones (Gen_31:44-48), the religious sanction being added (Gen_31:49 f., 53). When God was Himself directly one of the parties, and an obligation was thought to be assumed by Him rather than by both, a token was substituted (Gen_9:12); but in these cases the transaction takes the form chiefly of a pledge or assurance, though the idea of some obligation upon the other party is often implicit. Compacts would often be made or confirmed at a shrine; and the god was invoked as a witness (Gen_31:49 ff., Jos_24:27, 2Ki_11:4; 2Ki_23:3), or a sacrificial meal accompanied the act (Gen_26:30; Gen_31:54, 2Sa_3:20). Sprinkling of sacrificial blood (Exo_24:8, Zec_9:11, Heb_9:20) was a specially solemn indication of Gods approving presence and of the obligations undertaken; and its significance survives and is deepened in the death of Christ (Heb_10:29; Heb_13:20) and in the Eucharist (Mat_26:28, Mar_14:24, Luk_22:20, 1Co_11:25).
Of the covenants referred to in Scripture, there are two classes.
1. Covenants between men.These, again, are of several kinds, the most frequent being international alliances (e.g. Gen_21:27, Jos_9:6, Psa_83:5, Amo_1:9), judicial decisions and codes (Sir_38:33, possibly Exo_24:7), agreements between a ruler and the people (2Sa_5:3, Dan_9:27), and civil and domestic compacts of every variety. The word was used for alliances of friendship (1Sa_18:3, Psa_55:20), and of marriage (Pro_2:17, Mal_2:14). By an easy metaphor, a covenant in the sense of an imposed will may be made with the eyes (Job_31:1); or, in the other sense of agreement, with the stones (Job_5:23), but not with Leviathan (Job_41:4), because of his greatness and intractability, nor wisely with death either in scorn of God (Isa_28:15; Isa_28:18) or in yearning (Wis_1:16). In Dan_11:22 the prince of the covenant is sometimes rendered a prince in league with him; but if the other translation stands, covenant will represent the nation as a religious community (cf. Dan_11:28; Dan_11:30, Psa_74:20), and the prince will be the high priest, Onias III., who was deposed by Antiochus about b.c. 174. Similarly in Mal_3:1 the messenger of the covenant may be the attendant of God, His instrument in dealing with the nation (cf. RVm [Note: Revised Version margin.] ).
2. Covenants between God and men.The idea of a covenant with Adam, beyond the simple injunction of Gen_2:16-17, has been found by some writers in Sir_17:12, which is more easily interpreted of the transactions on Horeb (Deu_5:3). In Psa_25:14, as in Psa_55:20, the word has its fundamental meaning of an alliance of friendship, with a specific allusion in the former case to the Deuteronomic covenant of the tenth verse. In other cases the technical meaning of an agreement with signs and pledges is more conspicuous. The Noachian covenant (Gen_6:18; Gen_9:8-17, Isa_54:9 f., Jer_33:20; Jer_33:25) guarantees the stability of natural law. The covenant with Abraham (Gen_15:18; Gen_17:2-21) was confirmed in its promise to Isaac and Jacob (Exo_2:24, Lev_26:42, Psa_105:9 f.), and ensured a blessing through their seed to all nations, circumcision being adopted as the token (cf. Act_7:8, 1Ma_1:15). Of still greater significance was the covenant at Horeb or Sinai (Exo_19:5; Exo_34:10; Exo_34:27 f. et al.), which was renewed in the plains of Moab (Deu_29:1), and is frequently referred to in the OT. It was really a constitution given to Israel by God, with appointed promise and penalty, duly inscribed on the tables of the covenant (Deu_9:9; Deu_9:11; Deu_9:15), which were deposited in the ark (Deu_10:2; Deu_10:5, 1Ki_8:9; 1Ki_8:21, 2Ch_5:10, Heb_9:4). Elsewhere the covenant is described as set forth in words (Exo_34:28, Deu_29:9) and written in a book (Exo_24:7, 2Ki_23:2). Amongst other covenants of minor importance are that with Phinehas establishing an everlasting priesthood in his line (Num_25:12 f.), and that with David establishing an everlasting kingdom (Psa_89:3 f., Jer_33:21; cf. 2Sa_7:1-29). Joshua and the people covenant to serve Jehovah only (Jos_24:25); so Jehoiada and the people (2Ki_11:17). Hezekiah and the people solemnly agree to reform the worship (2Ch_29:10); Josiah (2Ki_23:3) and Ezra (Ezr_10:3) lead the people into a covenant to observe the Law.
Whilst the Sinaitic covenant is rightly regarded as the charter of the Jewish dispensation, the establishment by God of a new constitution was contemplated by a series of prophets (Jer_31:31; Jer_31:33; Jer_32:40; Jer_50:5, Isa_55:3; Isa_59:21; Isa_61:8, Eze_16:60; Eze_16:62; Eze_20:37; Eze_34:25). Some of the pledges were new, and not confined in their range to Israel, whilst the Messianic Servant becomes for a covenant of the people (Isa_42:6 f., Isa_49:8; cf. messenger of the covenant, Mal_3:1). The Sinaitic covenant is thus transformed, and, whilst continuing as a note of racial separation until the period for the Incarnation was come, gave way then to a new dispensation with increased emphasis on personal religion and the provision of means adequate to ensure it (Heb_8:6-13). Yet the ancient covenant, even that with Abraham, was everlasting (Gen_17:7), and still stands in its supreme purpose (Lev_26:44 f., Act_3:25, Rom_11:26 f.) of making men the people of God, the new elements consisting mainly in the adoption of more effective influences and inspiration. The Exile is sometimes thought of as marking the dissolution of the Old Covenant (Jer_31:31 ff.), though the new one was not fully introduced until some centuries later. The act of making the New Covenant is compared with the transactions in the wilderness (Eze_20:36 ff.). On Gods part there is forgiveness with the quickening of the inner life of man (Eze_36:24 ff.). And both the activity and the blessedness are associated with the Messianic expectations (Jer_33:15 f., Eze_37:21-28, Luk_1:20).
In the later OT writings the word covenant, as appears from the previous citations, has lost much of its technical signification, and does not always denote even a formal act of agreement, but becomes almost a synonym, and that without much precision, for the conditions of religion (Psa_103:18). St. Paul recognizes a series of covenants (Rom_9:4, Eph_2:12) on an ascending scale of adequacy (2Co_3:6, Gal_4:24 ff.; cf. Heb_7:22; Heb_8:6 ff.); and Sinai is but a stage (Gal_3:15 ff.) in the course from Abraham to Christ.
Of special phrases, two or three may present some difficulty. A covenant of salt (Num_18:19, 2Ch_13:5) is a perpetual covenant, the eating of salt together being a token of friendship as sealed by sacred hospitality. The salt of the covenant (Lev_2:13) has probably the same primary suggestion, as at natural accompaniment of the sacrificial meal, and with it constituting an inviolable bond. Sometimes the two great divisions of Scripture are called the books of the Old and of the New Covenant respectively. The name Book of the Covenant (see next article) is given to Exo_20:22-23; that of Little Book of the Covenant to Exo_34:11-26. A distinction is often drawn between the Covenant of Works, assumed to have been made by God with Adam (Gen_2:17), and that of Grace or Redemption (2Ti_1:9), whereby Christ becomes to man the medium of all spiritual blessings.
R. W. Moss.
Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible
Edited by James Hastings, D.D. Published in 1909
Hebrew berit, Greek diatheekee. From baarah "to divide" or" cut in two" a victim (Gesenius), between the parts of which the covenanting parties passed (Gen_15:9, etc.; Jer_34:18-19). Probably the covenanting parties eating together (which barah sometimes means) of the feast after the sacrifice entered into the idea; compare Gen_31:46-47, Jacob and Laban.
"A COVENANT OF SALT," taken in connection with the eastern phrase for friendship, "to eat salt together," confirms this view. Salt, the antidote to corruption, was used in every sacrifice, to denote purity and perpetuity (Lev_2:13; Mar_9:49). So a perpetual covenant or appointment (Num_18:19; 2Ch_13:5). The covenant alluded to in Hos_6:7 margin is not with Adam (KJV "men" is better, compare Psa_82:7), for nowhere else is the expression "covenant" applied to Adam's relation to God, though the thing is implied in Rom_5:12-19; 1Co_15:22; but the Sinaitic covenant which Israel transgressed as lightly as "men" break their every day covenants with their fellow men, or else they have transgressed like other "men," though distinguished above all men by extraordinary spiritual privileges.
"Covenant" in the strict sense, as requiring two independent contracting parties, cannot apply to a covenant between God and man. His covenant must be essentially one of gratuitous promise, an act of pure grace on His part (Gal_3:15, etc.). So in Psa_89:28 "covenant" is explained by the parallel word "mercy." So God's covenant not to destroy the earth again by water (Genesis 9; Jer_33:20). But the covenant, on God's part gratuitous, requires man's acceptance of and obedience to it, as the consequence of His grace experienced, and the end which He designs to His glory, not that it is the meritorious condition of it. The Septuagint renders berit by diatheekee (not suntheekee, "a mutual compact"), i.e. a gracious disposal by His own sovereign will. So Luk_22:29, "I appoint (diatithemai, cognate to diatheekee, by testamentary or gratuitous disposition) unto you a kingdom."
The legal covenant of Sinai came in as a parenthesis (pareiselthee; Rom_5:20) between the promise to Abraham and its fulfillment in his promised seed, Christ. "It was added because of the (so Greek) transgressions" (Gal_3:19), i.e. to bring them, and so man's great need, into clearer view (Rom_3:20; Rom_4:15; Rom_5:13; Rom_7:7-9). For this end its language was that, of a more stipulating kind as between two parties mutually covenanting, "the man that doeth these things shall live by them" (Rom_10:5). But the promise to David (2 Samuel 7; Psalm 89; 2; 72; Isaiah 11) took up again that to Abraham, defining the line, the Davidic, as that in which the promised seed should come.
As the promise found its fulfillment in Christ, so also the law, for He fulfilled it for us that He might be "the Lord our righteousness," "the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth" (Jer_23:6; 1Co_1:30; Rom_10:4; Mat_3:15; Mat_5:17; Isa_42:21; Isa_45:24-25). In Heb_9:15-18 the gospel covenant is distinguished from the legal, as the New Testament contrasted with the Old Testament "Testament" is the better translation here, as bringing out the idea of diatheekee, God's gracious disposal or appointment of His blessings to His people, rather than suntheekee, mutual engagement between Him and them as though equals.
A human "testament" in this one respect illustrates the nature of the covenant; by death Christ chose to lose all the glory and blessings which are His, that we, who were under death's bondage, might inherit all. Thus the ideas of "mediator of the covenant," and "testator," meet in Him, who at once fulfills God's "covenant of promise," and graciously disposes to us all that is His. In most other passages "covenant" would on the whole be the better rendering. "Testament" for each of the two divisions of the Bible comes from the Latin Vulgate version. In Mat_26:28, "this is My blood of the new testament" would perhaps better be translated "covenant," for a testament does not require blood shedding. Still, here and in the original (Exo_24:8) quoted by Christ the idea of testamentary disposition enters.
For his blood was the seal of the testament. See below. Moses by "covenant" means one giving the heavenly inheritance (typified by Canaan) after the testator's death, which was represented by the sacrificial blood he sprinkled. Paul by testament means one with conditions, and so far a covenant, the conditions being fulfilled by Christ, not by us. We must indeed believe, but even this God works in His people (Eph_2:8). Heb_9:17, "a testament is in force after men are dead," just as the Old Testament covenant was in force only in connection with slain sacrificial victims which represent the death of Christ. The fact of the death must be "brought forward" (Heb_9:16) to give effect to the will. The word" death," not sacrifice or slaying, shows that "testament" is meant in Heb_9:15-20. These requisites of a "testament" here concur:
1. The Testator.
2. The heirs.
3. Goods.
4. The Testator's death.
5. The fact of His death brought forward. In Mat_26:28 two additional requisites appear.
6. Witnesses, His disciples.
7. The seal, the sacrament of the Lord's supper, the sign of His blood, wherewith the testament is sealed. The heir is ordinarily the successor of him who dies, and who so ceases to have possession. But Christ comes to life again, and is Himself (including all that He had), in the power of tits now endless life, His people's inheritance; in His being heir (Heb_1:2; Psa_2:8) they are heirs.
Fausset's Bible Dictionary
By Andrew Robert Fausset, co-Author of Jamieson, Fausset and Brown's 1888.
Covenant. The Hebrew berith means primarily "a cutting", with reference to the custom of cutting or dividing animals in two and passing between the parts in ratifying a covenant. (Genesis 15; Jer_34:18-19. In the New Testament, the corresponding Greek word is diatheke, which is frequently translated testament, in the Authorized Version. In its biblical meaning two parties, the word is used ?
1. Of a covenant between God and man; for example, God covenanted with Noah, after the flood, that a like judgment should not be repeated. It is not precisely like a covenant between men, but was a promise or agreement by God.
The principal covenants are the covenant of works ? God promising to save and bless men on condition of perfect obedience ? and the covenant of grace, or God's promise to save men on condition of their believing in Christ and receiving him as their Master and Saviour.
The first is called the Old Covenant, from which we name the first part of the bible the Old Testament, the Latin rendering of the word covenant. The second is called the New Covenant, or New Testament.
2. Covenant between man and man, that is, a solemn compact or agreement, either between tribes or nations, Jos_9:6; Jos_9:15; 1Sa_11:1, or between individuals, Gen_31:44. By which each party bound himself to fulfill certain conditions and was assured of receiving certain advantages.
In making such a covenant, God was solemnly invoked as witness, Gen_31:50, and an oath was sworn. Gen_21:31. A sign or witness of the covenant was sometimes framed, such a gift, Gen_21:30, or a pillar or heap of stones erected. Gen_31:52.
Smith's Bible Dictionary
By Dr. William Smith.Published in 1863
The Greek word διαθηκη occurs often in the Septuagint, as the translation of a Hebrew word, which signifies covenant: it occurs also in the Gospels and the Epistles; and it is rendered in our English Bibles sometimes covenant, sometimes testament. The Greek word, according to its etymology, and according to classical use, may denote a testament, a disposition, as well as a covenant; and the Gospel may be called a testament, because it is a signification of the will of our Saviour ratified by his death, and because it conveys blessings to be enjoyed after his death. These reasons for giving the dispensation of the Gospel the name of a testament appeared to our translators so striking, that they have rendered διαθηκη more frequently by the word testament, than by the word covenant. Yet the train of argument, where διαθηκη occurs, generally appears to proceed upon its meaning a covenant; and therefore, although, when we delineate the nature of the Gospel, the beautiful idea of its being a testament, is not to be lost sight of, yet we are to remember that the word testament, which we read in the Gospels and Epistles, is the translation of a word which the sense requires to be rendered covenant. A covenant implies two parties, and mutual stipulations. The new covenant must derive its name from something in the nature of the stipulations between the parties different from that which existed before; so that we cannot understand the propriety of the name,
new, without looking back to what is called the old, or first. On examining the passages in Galatians 3, in 2 Corinthians 3, and in Hebrews 8-10, where the old and the new covenant are contrasted, it will be found that the old covenant means the dispensation given by Moses to the children of Israel; and the new covenant the dispensation of the Gospel published by Jesus Christ; and that the object of the Apostle is to illustrate the superior excellence of the latter dispensation. But, in order to preserve the consistency of the Apostle's writings, it is necessary to remember that there are two different lights in which the former dispensation may be viewed. Christians appear to draw the line between the old and the new covenant, according to the light in which they view that dispensation. It may be considered merely as a method of publishing the moral law to a particular nation; and then with whatever solemnity it was delivered, and with whatever cordiality it was accepted, it is not a covenant that could give life. For, being nothing more than what divines call a covenant of works, a directory of conduct requiring by its nature entire personal obedience, promising life to those who yielded that obedience, but making no provision for transgressors, it left under a curse every one that continued not in all things that were written in the book of the law to do them. This is the essential imperfection of what is called the covenant of works, the name given in theology to that transaction, in which it is conceived that the supreme Lord of the universe promised to his creature, man, that he would reward that obedience to his law, which, without any such promise, was due to him as the Creator.
No sooner had Adam broken the covenant of works, than a promise of a final deliverance from the evils incurred by the breach of it was given. This promise was the foundation of that transaction which Almighty God, in treating with Abraham, condescends to call my covenant with thee, and which, upon this authority, has received in theology the name of the Abrahamic covenant. Upon the one part, Abraham, whose faith was counted to him for righteousness, received this charge from God, Walk before me, and be thou perfect; upon the other part, the God whom he believed, and whose voice he obeyed, beside promising other blessings to him and his seed, uttered these significant words, In thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed. In this transaction, then, there was the essence of a covenant; for there were mutual stipulations between two parties; and there was superadded, as a seal of the covenant, the rite of circumcision, which, being prescribed by God, was a confirmation of his promise to all who complied with it, and being submitted to by Abraham, was, on his part, an acceptance of the covenant.
The Abrahamic covenant appears, from the nature of the stipulations, to be more than a covenant of works; and, as it was not confined to Abraham, but extended to his seed, it could not be disannulled by any subsequent transactions, which fell short of a fulfilment of the blessing promised. The law of Moses, which was given to the seed of Abraham four hundred and thirty years after, did not come up to the terms of that covenant even with regard to them, for, in its form it was a covenant of works, and to other nations it did not directly convey any blessing. But although the Mosaic dispensation did not fulfil the Abrahamic covenant, it was so far from setting that covenant aside, that it cherished the expectation of its being fulfilled: for it continued the rite of circumcision, which was the seal of the covenant; and in those ceremonies which it enjoined, there was a shadow, a type, an obscure representation, of the promised blessing, Luk_1:72-73.
Here, then, is another view of the Mosaic dispensation. It was added, because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made, Gal_3:19. By delivering a moral law, which men felt themselves unable to obey; by denouncing judgments which it did not of itself provide any effectual method of escaping; and by holding forth, in various oblations, the promised and expected Saviour; it was a schoolmaster to bring men unto Christ. The covenant made with Abraham retained its force during the dispensation of the law, and was the end of that dispensation.
The views which have been given furnish the ground upon which we defend that established language which is familiar to our ears, that there are only two covenants essentially different, and opposite to one another, the covenant of works, made with the first man, intimated by the constitution of human nature to every one of his posterity, and having for its terms, Do this and live; and the covenant of grace, which was the substance of the Abrahamic covenant, and which entered into the constitution of the Sinaitic covenant, but which is more clearly revealed, and more extensively published in the Gospel. This last covenant, which the Scriptures call new in respect to the mode of its dispensation under the Gospel, although it is not new in respect of its essence, has received, in the language of theology, the name of the covenant of grace, for the two following obvious reasons: because, after man had broken the covenant of works, it was pure grace or favour in the Almighty to enter into a new covenant with him; and, because by the covenant there is conveyed that grace which enables man to comply with the terms of it. It could not be a covenant unless there were terms, something required, as well as something promised or given,duties to be performed, as well as blessings to be received. Accordingly, the tenor of the new covenant, founded upon the promise originally made to Abraham, is expressed by Jeremiah in words which the Apostle to the Hebrews has quoted as a description of it: I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people, Heb_8:10 :words which intimate on one part not only entire reconciliation with God, but the continued exercise of all the perfections of the Godhead in promoting the happiness of his people, and the full communication of all the blessings which flow from his unchangeable love; on the other part, the surrender of the heart and affections of his people, the dedication of all the powers of their nature to his service, and the willing uniform obedience of their lives. But, although there are mutual stipulations, the covenant retains its character of a covenant of grace, and must be regarded as having its source purely in the grace of God. For the very circumstances which rendered the new covenant necessary, take away the possibility of there being any merit upon our part: the faith by which the covenant is accepted is the gift of God; and all the good works by which Christians continue to keep the covenant, originate in that change of character which is the fruit of the operation of his Spirit.
Covenants were anciently confirmed by eating and drinking together; and chiefly by feasting on a sacrifice. In this manner, Abimelech, the Philistine, confirmed the covenant with Isaac, and Jacob with his father Laban, Gen_26:26-31; Gen_31:44-46; Gen_31:54. Sometimes they divided the parts of the victim, and passed between them, by which act the parties signified their resolution of fulfilling all the terms of the engagement, on pain of being divided or cut asunder as the sacrifice had been, if they should violate the covenant, Gen_15:9-10; Gen_15:17-18; Jer_34:18. Hence the Hebrew word charat, which properly signifies to divide, is applied allusively in Scripture to the making of a covenant. When the law of Moses was established, the people feasted in their peace-offerings on a part of the sacrifice, in token of their reconciliation with God, Deu_12:6-7. See CIRCUMCISION.
Biblical and Theological Dictionary by Richard Watson
PRINTER 1849.
A covenant was an agreement between two parties that laid down conditions and guaranteed benefits, depending upon a persons keeping or breaking the covenant. It was sealed by some form of witness (Gen_21:22-32; Gen_31:44-54; 1Sa_18:3-4; Mal_2:14).
Covenants between God and the people he created, however, differed from purely human covenants. They were not agreements between equals, because God was always the one who gave, and people were always the ones who received. No human being could negotiate an agreement with God or make demands upon him. Gods promises originated in his sovereign grace alone, and those who received those promises could do nothing but accept his directions.
Through one man to the world
From the time of the earliest recorded covenant (Gods covenant with Noah, and with the human race through him), features of grace are prominent. The covenant originated in Gods grace and depended upon Gods grace for its fulfilment. The rainbow was the sign, or witness, that sealed the covenant (Gen_6:18; Gen_9:8-17; see GRACE).
Having promised to preserve the human race (Gen_9:15-16), God then revealed that he had a plan of salvation for it. This plan again was based on a covenant that originated in Gods grace. In his sovereign will God chose one man, Abraham, promising him a multitude of descendants who would become a nation, receive Canaan as their homeland, and be Gods channel of blessing to the world (Gen_12:1-3; Gen_15:18-21; Gen_17:2-8; Act_3:25).
God confirmed his promise to Abraham by a covenant ceremony. The ancient custom was for the two parties to kill an animal, cut it in halves, then pass between the two halves, calling down the fate of the slaughtered animals upon themselves should they break the covenant (Gen_15:9-11; Jer_34:18). But in Abrahams case, only God (symbolized by a smoking fire-pot and a flaming torch) passed between the halves of the animal. He alone made the covenant and guaranteed its fulfilment (Gen_15:17).
Abraham, however, had a responsibility to respond to Gods grace, and his response would determine whether he would enjoy the covenant benefits. A truly spiritual relationship could exist only where people responded to God in faith and obedience. The rite of circumcision, which God gave as the sign and seal of the covenant, gave Abraham and his descendants the opportunity to demonstrate such faith and obedience. Those who responded to Gods grace by being circumcised kept the covenant; those who did not were cut off from it. The covenant depended upon God, but only those who were obedient to God experienced the communion with God that was the covenants central blessing (Gen_17:9-14; see CIRCUMCISION; OBEDIENCE.)
Developed through Israel
Once the promised nation existed and was on the way to its promised homeland, God renewed the covenant made earlier with Abraham, this time applying it to the whole nation. Since Moses was the mediator through whom God worked in dealing with the people, the covenant is sometimes called the Mosaic covenant. It is also called the Sinaitic covenant, after Mt Sinai, where the ceremony took place.
God, in his sovereign grace, had saved the people of Israel from bondage in Egypt and taken them into a close relationship with himself. Grace was again the basis of Gods covenant dealings (Exo_2:24; Exo_3:16; Exo_4:22; Exo_6:6-8; Exo_15:13; Exo_19:4-6; Exo_20:2). As in the covenant with Abraham, so in the covenant with his descendants, the central blessing was communion with God; for he was their God and they were his people (Gen_17:7; Exo_6:7; Lev_26:12). Again, the people would enjoy this blessing only as they were holy in life and obedient to God (Exo_19:5-6). The people understood this and agreed to be obedient to all Gods commands. They were in no position to argue with God; they could do nothing but surrender completely to his will (Exo_24:7-8; see also LAW).
The two parties to the covenant were then bound together in a blood ritual. Half the blood was thrown against the altar (representing God) and half sprinkled on the people (Exo_24:3-8).
But this blood ritual was more than just a dramatic way of swearing loyalty to the covenant. The Passover had shown the people of Israel that blood symbolized life laid down to release those under condemnation of death (Exo_12:13). Blood was linked with release from the penalty of sin; therefore, the blood ritual at Sinai was an indication to Israel that it began its formal existence as Gods covenant people in a condition of ceremonial purity (Heb_9:19-22; see BLOOD).
All this ceremonial procedure emphasized once more that the covenant with Israel, following the covenant with Abraham, was based on divine grace, not human effort (Gal_3:17-18). Nevertheless, the people had to keep their part of the covenant if they were to enjoy its benefits (Exo_19:5; cf. Gen_17:9). God had no obligation to bless his people when they disobeyed his covenant commands, though in his mercy he was patient with them (Lev_26:27-33; Deu_4:25-31; Deu_7:9-10; Neh_9:33; Heb_3:16-19).
Note on the form of the covenant
The covenant between God and Israel was of a kind that people of the time understood. It was similar in form to the common Near Eastern treaty by which a sovereign overlord made a covenant with his subject peoples.
Such a treaty was not a negotiated agreement. It was an authoritative document prepared by the overlord, declaring his sovereignty over his people and laying down the order of life he required of them. The features of these ancient documents are well illustrated in the book of Deuteronomy, which was written in the form of a covenant document. (For details see DEUTERONOMY. Concerning the illustration that likens the covenant between God and Israel to the marriage covenant see LOVE, sub-heading Steadfast love.)
Towards a specific goal through David
After the promised nation had become established in the promised land, God revealed the next stage in directing his covenant purposes towards their ultimate goal. The promised offspring of Abraham through whom God would send his salvation to the world was Jesus the Messiah (Gen_12:3; Gen_12:7; Gal_3:16; Gal_3:29).
God prepared Israel to produce the Messiah by choosing from the nation one person, King David, and promising that his dynasty would be the channel through which the Messiah would come. God gave David this promise by means of a covenant that followed on from his earlier covenants, namely, those with Abraham and with the nation Israel (2Sa_7:12-17; 2Sa_23:5; Psa_89:3-4; Psa_89:28-37).
Jesus therefore was the true fulfilment of all Gods covenant purposes. The Abrahamic covenant led to the Sinaitic covenant, which in turn led to the Davidic covenant, which led finally to Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the world (Luk_1:32-33; Luk_1:72-73; Act_13:17-23).
The new covenant
Former covenants, then, were but a preparation for that saving work of God through Christ which the Bible calls the new covenant. Or, to put it another way, the new covenant fully develops the features consistently displayed in the former covenants.
Like the former covenants, the new covenant originates in the sovereign grace of God (Rom_3:24; Rom_5:15-21; Eph_2:8-9; Tit_3:5). Through it God makes unworthy sinners his people and promises to be their God (Heb_8:8; Heb_8:10; 1Pe_2:9-10). But if people are to enjoy that life-giving relationship with God which is the covenants central blessing, they must respond to Gods grace in faith and obedience (Gal_3:14; Heb_5:9; 1Pe_1:2). Also, since faith involves perseverance, they must continue in the covenant (Col_1:23; cf. Heb_8:9; see PERSEVERANCE).
Yet there are great differences between the old and new covenants. All former covenants were imperfect not in the sense of being wrong, but in the sense of being incomplete. They belonged to the era before Christ and therefore could not in themselves bring salvation. Only the atoning death of Christ can do that (see ATONEMENT). Therefore, until Christ came, there was always the need for a new covenant, one that carried with it better promises (Heb_8:6-9; Heb_8:13; Heb_10:9-10).
The new covenant, in contrast to the old, is not concerned with a particular nation, nor is it concerned with any nation as a whole. Rather it is concerned with individuals, regardless of their nation. It does not demand obedience to a set of laws, but puts Gods laws in peoples hearts. It does not need priests to mediate between God and individuals, for all believers know God personally and have direct fellowship with him. There is no remembrance of sins through repetitive sacrifices, for all sins are at once removed and are gone for ever (Heb_8:10-12). (For further details of the contrast between the old and new covenants see HEBREWS, LETTER TO THE.)
Jesus Christs atoning death is the basis of the new covenant. He is the mediator through whom God makes the covenant, and he is the sacrifice whose blood seals the covenant (1Co_11:25; Heb_9:15; Heb_12:24). Through that same blood, sin is forgiven completely, so that Gods people enter the covenant not with mere ceremonial cleansing, but with actual cleansing (Mat_26:28; cf. Heb_9:19-22). This is an eternal covenant, for there will never be another to follow it. Covenant grace is fully revealed, and the blessings that flow from it are eternal (Heb_10:16-18; Heb_13:20).
Bridgeway Bible Dictionary by Don Fleming
PRINTER 1990.
Covenant
a mutual contract or agreement between two parties, each of which is bound to fulfill certain engagements to the other. In Scripture it is used mostly in an analogical sense, to denote certain relations between God and man. (See Danville Review, March, 1862.)
I. Terms. In the Old Test. בְּרַית, berith' (rendered league, Jos_9:6-7; Jos_9:11; Jos_9:15-16; Jdg_2:2; 2Sa_3:12-13; 2Sa_3:21; 2Sa_5:3; 1Ki_5:12; 1Ki_15:19, twice; 2Ch_16:3, twice; Job_5:23; Eze_30:5; confederacy, Oba_1:7; confederate, Gen_14:13; Psa_83:5), is the word invariably thus translated (Sept. διαθήκη; once, Wisdom of Solomon 1:16, συνθήκη; Vulg. faedus, pactum, often interchangeably, Genesis 9, 17; Numbers 25; in the Apocrypha testamentum, but sacramentum, 2Es_2:7; sponsiones, Wisdom of Solomon 1:16; in N.T. testamentum [absque foedere, Rom_1:31; Gr. ἀσυνθέτους]). The Hebrew word is derived by Gesenius (Thes. Heb. p. 237, 238; so First, Hebr. Handzw. p. 217) from the root בָּרָה, i. q. בָּרָא, he cut, and taken to mean primarily a cutting, with reference to the custom of cutting or dividing animals in two, and passing between the parts in ratifying a covenant (Genesis 15; Jer_34:18-19). Hence the expression to cut a covenant (כָּרִת בְּרַית, Gen_15:18, or simply כָּרִת, with בְּרַיתunderstood, 1Sa_11:2) is of frequent occurrence. (Comp. ὅρκια τέμνειν, τέμνειν σπονδάς, icere, ferire, percuterefoedus. See Sicvogt, De more Ebraeor. dissectione animalium foedera ineundi, Jen. 1759.) Professor Lee suggests (Heb. Lex. s.v. בְּרַית) that the proper signification of the word is an eating together, or banquet, from the meaning to eat, which the root בָּרָהsometimes bears; because among the Orientals to eat together amounts almost to a covenant of friendship. This view is supported by Gen_31:46, where Jacob and Laban eat together on the heap of stones which they have set up in ratifying the covenant between them. It affords also a satisfactory explanation of the expression a covenant of salt (בְּרַית מֶלִח, διαθήκη ἁλός,, Num_18:19; 2Ch_13:5), when the Eastern idea of eating salt together is remembered. If, however, the other derivation of בְּרַית. be adopted, this expression may be explained by supposing salt to have been eaten or offered with accompanying sacrifices on occasion of very solemn covenants, or it may be regarded as figurative, denoting, either, from the use of salt in sacrifice (Lev_2:13; Mar_9:49), the sacredness, or, from the preserving qualities of salt, the perpetuity of the covenant. (See below.)
In the New Test. the word διαθήκη is frequently, though by no means uniformly, translated testament in the English Auth. Vers., whence the two divisions of the Bible have received their common English names. This translation is perhaps due to the Vulgate, which, having adopted testamentum as the equivalent for διαθήκη in the Apocrypha, uses it always as such in the N.T. (see above). There seems however, to be no necessity for the introduction of a new word conveying a new idea. The Sept. having rendered בְּרַית(which never means will or testament, but always covenant or agreement) by διαθήκη consistently throughout the O.T., the N.T. writers, in adopting that word, may naturally be supposed to intend to convey to their readers, most of them familiar with the Greek O.T., the same idea. Moreover, in the majority of cases, the same thing which has been called a covenant (בְּרַית) in the O.T. is referred to in the N.T. (e.g. 2Co_3:14; Hebrews 7, 9; Rev_11:19); while in the same context the same word and thing in the Greek are in the English sometimes represented by covenant, and sometimes by testament (Heb_7:22; Heb_8:8-13; Heb_9:15). In the confessedly difficult passage, Heb_9:16-17, the word διαθήκη has been thought by many commentators absolutely to require the meaning of will or testament. On the other side, however, it may be alleged that, in addition to what has just been said as to the usual meaning of the word in the N.T., the word occurs twice in the context, where its meaning must necessarily be the same as the translation of בְּרַית, and in the unquestionable sense of covenant (comp. διαθήκη καινή, Heb_9:15, with the same expression in 8:8; and διαθήκη, 9:16, 17, with Heb_9:20, and Exo_24:8). If this sense of διαθήκη be retained, we may either render ἐπὶ νεκροῖς, over, or in the case of, dead sacrifices, and ὁ διαθέμενος, the mediating sacrifice (Scholefield's Hintsfor an improved Translat:on of the N.T.), or (with Ebrard and others) restrict the statement of Exo_24:16 to the O.T. idea of a covenant between man and God, in which man, as guilty, must always be represented by a sacrifice with which he was so completely identified that in its person he (ὁ διαθἐμενος, the human covenanter) actually died (comp. Mat_26:28). SEE TESTAMENT.
II. Their Application. In its Biblical meaning of a compact or agreement between two parties, the word covenant is used
1. Properly, of a covenant between man and man; i.e. a solemn compact or agreement, either between tribes or nations (1Sa_11:1; Jos_9:6; Jos_9:15), or between individuals (Gen_31:44), by which each party bound himself to fulfill certain conditions, and was assured of receiving certain advantages. In making such a covenant God was solemnly invoked as witness (Gen_31:50), whence the expression a covenant of Jehovah בְּרַית יְהוָֹה, 1Sa_20:8; comp. Jer_34:18-19; Eze_17:19), and an oath was sworn (Gen_21:31); and accordingly a breach of covenant was regarded as a very heinous sin (Eze_17:12-20). A sign (אוֹת) or witness (עֵד) of the covenant was sometimes framed, such as a gift (Gen_21:30), or a pillar, or heap of stones erected (Gen_31:52). The marriage compact is called the covenant of God, Pro_2:17 (see Mal_2:14). The word covenant came to be applied to a sure ordinance, such as that of the shew- bread (Lev_24:8); and is used figuratively in such expressions as a covenant with death (Isa_28:18), or with the wild beasts (Hos_2:18). The phrases בִּעֲלֵי בְרַית, בְרַית אִנְשֵׁי, lords or men of one's covenant,' are employed to denote confederacy (Gen_14:13, Oba_1:7). SEE CONTRACT.
2. Improperly, of a covenant between God and man. Man not being in any way in the position of an independent covenanting party, the phrase is evidently used by way of accommodation. SEE ANTHROPOMORPHISM. Strictly speaking, such a covenant is quite unconditional, and amounts to a promise (Gal_3:15 sq., where ἐπαγγελία and διαθήκη are used almost as synonyms) or act of mere favor (Psa_89:28, where חֶסֶדstands in parallelism with בְּרַית) on God's part. Thus the assurance given by God after the Flood that a like judgment should not be repeated, and that the recurrence of the seasons, and of day and night, should not cease, is called a covenant (Genesis 9; Jer_33:20). Generally, however, the form: of a covenant is maintained, by the benefits which God engages to bestow being made by him dependent upon the fulfillment of certain conditions which he imposes on man. Thus the covenant with Abraham was conditioned by circumcision (Act_7:8), the omission of which was declared tantamount to a breach of the covenant (Genesis 17); the covenant of the priesthood by zeal for God, his honor and service (Num_25:12-13; Deu_33:9; Neh_13:29 Mal_2:4-5); the covenant of Sinai by the observance of the ten commandments (Exo_34:27-28; Lev_26:15), which are therefore called Jehovah's covenant (Deu_4:13), a name which was extended to all the books of Moses, if not to the whole body of Jewish canonical Scriptures (2Co_3:13-14). This last- mentioned covenant, which was renewed at different periods of Jewish history (Deuteronomy 29; Joshua 24; 2 Chronicles 15, 23, 29, 34; Ezra 10; Nehemiah 9, 10), is one of the two principal covenants between God and man. They are distinguished as old and new (Jer_31:31-34; Heb_8:8-13; Heb_10:16), with reference to the order, not of their institution, but of their actual development (Gal_3:17); and also as being the instruments respectively of bondage and freedom (Gal_4:24). Consistently with this representation of God's dealings with man under the form of a covenant, such covenant is said to be confirmed in conformity with human custom by an oath (Deu_4:31; Psa_89:3), to be sanctioned by curses to fall upon the unfaithful (Deu_29:21), and to be accompanied by a sign (אוֹת), such as the rainbow (Genesis 9), circumcision (Genesis 8), or the Sabbath (Exo_31:16-17). Hence, in Scripture, the covenant of God is called his counsel, his oath, his promise (Psa_89:3-4; Psa_105:8-11; Heb_6:13-20; Luk_1:68-75; Gal_3:15-18, etc.); and it is described as consisting wholly in the gracious bestowal of blessing on men (Isa_59:21; Jer_31:33-34). Hence also the application of the term covenant to designate such fixed arrangements or laws of nature as the regular succession of day and night (Jer_33:20), and such religious institutions as the Sabbath (Exo_31:16); circumcision (Gen_17:9-10); the Levitical institute (Lev_26:15); and, in general, any precept or ordinance of God (Jer_34:13-14), all such appointments forming part of that system or arrangement in connection with which the blessings of God's grace were to be enjoyed.
CYCLOPEDIA OF BIBLICAL, THEOLOGICAL AND ECCLESIASTICAL
press 1895.
BUSCADAVERDADE
Visite o nosso canal youtube.com/buscadaverdade e se INSCREVA agora mesmo! Lá temos uma diversidade de temas interessantes sobre: Saúde, Receitas Saudáveis, Benefícios dos Alimentos, Benefícios das Vitaminas e Sais Minerais... Dê uma olhadinha, você vai gostar! E não se esqueça, dê o seu like e se INSCREVA! Clique abaixo e vá direto ao canal!
Saiba Mais
-
Nutrição
Vegetarianismo e a Vitamina B12 -
Receita
Como preparar a Proteína Vegetal Texturizada -
Arqueologia
Livro de Enoque é um livro profético?
Tags