Biblical Covenants

Let's talk about covenants. A covenant, in its most simplistic definition, is a promise. A Biblical Covenant is a promise of God, found in the Bible, made to His people. There are conditional covenants, meaning that both sides have an obligation to one another, but if either side fails on their end then the other side is no longer obligated to their end. There are unconditional covenants, meaning that no matter what one side does, the other side is still obliged to keep their end. God has made both kinds of covenants in the Bible. It is important to understand God's covenants, because some of them form the basis of our salvation. I am going to discuss five covenants: the Adamic, the Abrahamic, the Mosaic, the Davidic, and the New Covenant.

The Adamic Covenant is found in Genesis 3, specifically verse 15, and is essentially unconditional on God's end. He promised Adam and Eve that He would use the seed of the woman (who was to be the future Messiah, none other than Jesus) to crush the head of the serpent (Satan). Crushing a serpent's head would be a death dealing blow; this would be the ultimate defeat of Satan. God promised to do this and no action was required of Adam or Eve for God to fulfill His promise. As you can see, this directly related to Christ's atoning, redemptive work; our salvation. This was God's first promise of the coming Messiah and the defeat of Satan.

The Abrahamic Covenant is found in Genesis 12:1-3, and is repeated and expanded in Genesis 12:7, 13:14-17, 15:1-21, 17:1-22, and 22:15-18. This is also an unconditional covenant of God, made to Abraham and his descendants (the Hebrews/Israelites). This is the promise to make a nation of Abraham's descendants (Israel), and to give them the land of Canaan (the Promised Land). God stated He would cause these things to happen and nothing was required in exchange from Abraham. God gave Abraham commands, but if you read closely, the covenant God made was not contingent upon Abraham keeping any commands. In this Covenant, God also declared that through Abraham and his descendants, all the nations/peoples of the earth would be blessed. This was a further prophecy of the coming Messiah, and a narrowing of the lineage to Abraham. This certainly relates to our salvation. It is through Israel that the Messiah has come to the world. Thus, the apostle Paul tells us in Romans 11:17 that we (Christians) are grafted into the vine of Abraham and God's promise of the Messiah.

The Mosaic Covenant is found in Exodus 19-24, specifically 19:5-8. It is also further clarified in parts of Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, especially Deuteronomy 28. Read Exodus 19-24 and Deuteronomy 28 to get a good summary. This is a conditional covenant (Exodus 19:5: "Now therefore, if you will... then you shall be..." NKJV). This was the beginning of the giving of the Law to the Israelites and the beginning of ancient Judaism. This covenant established the ancient Jewish priesthood, the sacrificial system, the dietary rules, and the ceremonies (holidays, feasts, etc.). It also gives us an understanding of God's moral laws for humanity. There is so much to say here, but in short, the Apostle Paul tells us that the Law was established as a "schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ" (Galatians 3:24, KJV) and the New Testament explains numerous times that the sacrifices were a foreshadowing of the one and only, true and perfect sacrifice of Jesus.

The Mosaic Covenant did not save anyone. God saves people by grace through faith in Christ. It is Jesus' atoning work that makes salvation possible, not the keeping of the Law of God by mankind. It is the extension of God's grace, imparted to us through the channel of faith, not works of the Law, that is the practical application of salvation. It is the election of God and the enlightening work of the Holy Spirit that calls people to salvation, not the pursuit of God by an unregenerate humanity (but that gets us into a free agency/election or free will/predestination conversation, which can be a topic for another time). The Mosaic Covenant was the method by which mankind was to approach God during the dispensation from the Exodus (Moses) to the First Advent (Jesus' First Coming). The Law has now been fulfilled and the Mosaic Covenant has been "replaced" by the New Covenant, which I will discuss shortly.

The Davidic Covenant is found in 2 Samuel 7, specifically 7:12-16, and Jeremiah 33:17-21, and elsewhere (including parts of the Psalms). The Davidic Covenant was an unconditional covenant with some conditional elements. The Davidic Covenant is God's promise that David's line will forever rule the throne of Israel and is very much about the Messiah (Jesus is a descendant of David). We know that there was some turmoil regarding the kingship of Israel after Solomon died, and even a curse upon one of David's descendants by God Himself (thus the conditional elements). Nevertheless, Jesus is a descendant of David and is and will be the King of Israel and all the world upon His Second Advent (Coming). See my blog post "The First Christmas" for more information on this.

Finally we come to the New Covenant, which is the last covenant I will discuss here. The New Covenant is the covenant of our faith, and the basis of Christianity. The New Testament is pretty much about the New Covenant. The New Covenant can be found described throughout the New Testament, but is referenced directly in Hebrews 8:6-13 (partly a reference to Jeremiah 31:31-34). See also Jesus' words in Matthew 26:28 and Luke 22:20. Again, there is so much to say here, but I will keep it brief. The New Covenant is both unconditional and conditional (as I will explain). It is conditional in the sense that its benefits are only extended to those who accept God's grace through faith. It is unconditional in the sense that, for those who accept, God does all the work. It replaces the Old Covenant (which is the Mosaic Covenant, or the Law) as the method by which mankind now approaches God, but it does not destroy the Law, which is still God's Law and will still be used as the basis for the judgment of the unredeemed. Hebrews 8:13 tells us that the New Covenant has replaced the Old, which is now obsolete. Yet Matthew 5:17-18 tells us that Jesus did not come to destroy the Law, but rather to fulfill it. Jesus kept the Law and was therefore the only Man who could be a sacrifice for the man who cannot keep it (and none of us can). Jesus was also God incarnate, so His death can propitiate, redeem, atone for, and extend to all mankind. The New Covenant is the reason why we (Christians) are not required to keep the ceremonial, dietary, and sacrificial portions of God's Law (we are specifically released from those requirements in various places in the New Testament; Acts 10:9-16, Acts 15:10-20, Galatians 5:1-6, Hebrews 10:1-18, and elsewhere). We are still expected to follow God's moral Law, not as a way to obtain salvation, but rather as an outgrowth of our faith, an expression of gratitude, and through obedience and conformity to the image of Christ.

Just as Christ fulfilled the Law, Christianity (the New Covenant) is a fulfillment of Judaism (the Old or Mosaic Covenant). The New Covenant also fulfills the Adamic, Abrahamic, and Davidic Covenants through the First (now past) and Second (yet future) Advents (Comings) of Christ. I know of no prophesied replacement for the New Covenant. The ushering in of the New Covenant established the Church (the Body of Christ; the Bride of Christ) of which all Christians (followers of Christ) living in the Age of Grace/Church Age (the current "dispensation") are a part. I will talk more about dispensations and some special characteristics of the Church in a future blog post regarding dispensations.

That finishes my brief explanation of covenants. Again, thanks for reading. As always, grace and peace to you.

Replacement Theology

There is a doctrine taught by many Christian churches known as Supersessionism, or Replacement Theology. In brief, this doctrine asserts that the Church has replaced, or superseded, the Nation of Israel in regards to God’s program and promises (those yet unfulfilled). Again, in brief, the doctrine asserts that the Nation of Israel forfeited her status as God’s chosen people when she (collectively/corporately) rejected her Messiah (Jesus) and that all of God’s favor and promises were then withdrawn from Israel and bestowed upon the Church.

There is a problem with this doctrine, and that is that it isn’t true. There are many arguments that may sound convincing that have been established by its proponents over the centuries, but the teaching is not found in the Bible, and any passages used by its proponents have been misapplied, misinterpreted, or simply misunderstood. Many of these aforementioned proponents were no doubt sincere and well-intentioned, but perhaps not all.

So where did this teaching come from? Assuming that its originators were operating from a non-nefarious position (and some may have had less than noble motivations), the teaching actually originates from an understandable theological quandary that its proponents were trying to satisfy.

The Nation of Israel ceased to exist in 70 AD/CE, after the Roman Empire leveled Jerusalem and the Jewish Temple (Herod’s Temple, not Solomon’s), and scattered the Hebrew people throughout its provinces (an event known as the Diaspora). Many Christians in the first and second centuries (AD/CE) no doubt expected Christ to return during their lifetimes and re-establish Israel and begin His prophesied kingdom on earth. He had promised to return and established His kingdom during His ministry. As the centuries passed, however, and the New Testament was canonized, and the Old Testament was studied in light of Jesus' ministry and God’s revealed Word written in the New Testament, it became clear that there was a problem. Israel no longer existed as a nation.

The more time passed, the bigger the problem seemed to become. No nation disbanded for so long had ever reformed itself in recorded history. Church theologians (the sincere ones anyway) had the promises of God regarding the Nation of Israel that were present in the Old Testament that clearly had not yet been fulfilled on the one hand, and the reality of the situation of Israel’s non-existence on the other. How could this be explained while maintaining the integrity of God and His Word (without God breaking His promises)? An answer emerged in the halls of Church theologians—Replacement Theology. In order to justify this teaching, explanations had to be made, new interpretations revealed, and Scripture reapplied (in this case, misapplied). Of course, not everyone over the centuries accepted this teaching.

Other theological subjects, such as eschatology (the study of the end times) and the Millennial Kingdom, had to be altered to fit this new doctrine. (How can a literal thousand-year kingdom exist with Jesus ruling as the King of Israel from Jerusalem if Israel was no longer part of God’s program?) So other incorrect teachings arose like “amillennialism” (“no Millennial Kingdom”), which taught that prophecies regarding the Millennial Kingdom were to be interpreted for spiritual and symbolic meanings and applications, rather than literal ones. Again, some theologians may have had less noble intentions (after all, if they could rule over the people instead of Christ, then there would be no need for Him to establish a literal kingdom), but not all.

But we see now through the lens of recent history (the past century) that God can fulfill His promises on His own. Israel became a nation again in 1948. Its borders expanded to include the entirety of Jerusalem in 1967. These are not proofs against Supersessionism, but they could be indicators that the fulfillment of God’s promises for Israel (those that are yet unfulfilled) could be on the horizon. Perhaps.

What is the lesson in all of this? Well, one lesson is that God doesn’t need our help to fulfill His promises, He will do that on His own. But a bigger lesson, I think, is that we don’t need to try to have an explanation for every Biblical teaching that doesn’t completely make sense to us; for example, the Trinity, the sovereign election of God (predestination and free agency), and the dual-nature of Christ (the deity of Jesus). Some of our lack of understanding might be a matter of perspective (this side of eternity, or the imperfection of our minds) like the proponents of Supersessionism who lacked the historical perspective that we have.

Keep in mind, it was not my intention with this post to discuss the particulars of God’s dispensations or covenants (specifically the New Covenant and Christ’s fulfillment of the Law). These are separate doctrines that I don’t tie-in with Replacement Theology as some others might. I consider Replacement Theology to specifically mean that the Church has replaced Israel and that all of God’s promises to Israel were forfeited by them and now apply to the Church.

As always, thanks for reading!