The
Covenant
Stephen
Terry
Commentary
for the December 12, 2015 Sabbath School Lesson
“in
the hope of eternal life, which God, who does not lie, promised before the
beginning of time” Titus 1:2, NIV
When we think of a covenant, the synonym “contract”
comes to mind. When we enter into a contract with someone to purchase a house
or a car, both parties are bound to perform what is required under that covenantal
agreement. If they fail to do so, either party has recourse to the courts to
enforce compliance under the terms of the contract. The same is true of the
marriage contract or any other agreement between two or more parties. The
agreement may be written out and signed or it may only be a verbal agreement sealed
with a handshake. The latter is harder for the courts to enforce because they
must determine if there was truly a mutual understanding of what was agreed
upon. As a result, most contracts have evolved toward the written form where
intent is clear and the parties have signed their assent thereto.
But if written contracts are so clear then why are the
courts needed at all? It is because, even though the terms may be written out,
some will lie about what the contract says for reasons of personal gain. But
this is not an indictment of those few individuals who would be so selfish.
Rather it is an indictment of us all, for each of us has placed self-interest
above the interests of others on occasion, and probably we have done it more
than once. This is the problem of sin, and the Bible says we all are guilty of
it.[i] Therefore we need the
courts to save one another from the consequences of our selfishness. This has
been the case throughout our history with perhaps one famous example being the
decision rendered by King Solomon when two women came before him claiming the
same baby as theirs.[ii]
With the proverbial Solomonaic wisdom, he offered to cut the baby in two so
each woman could have half. One woman agreed, but the other woman preferred to
surrender the child than that the baby lose its life. Reasoning that the woman
who was so selfless was the right woman, he gave the child to her, ignoring the
selfishness of the woman that would split the child.
Selfishness cropped up early on in our history. Eve
ignored God’s warnings and ate the forbidden fruit. Adam also chose his own way
and became her accomplice, taking the fruit from her hand and eating it as
well.[iii] No surprise then perhaps
that their son Cain demonstrated similar selfishness that went so far as to
encompass murder of his brother Abel.[iv] How many millions of times
that act of ultimate selfishness has been repeated since then God only knows.
We have become so very proficient at killing one another. Sadly, even
Christians have taken pride at wielding instruments of death and destruction,
justifying it as necessary for self-preservation. All too often, fueled by
alcohol, drugs, or simply raging tempers, the trigger gets pulled and another
life is swept into the grave and beyond the reach of redemption.
While some might see the stories about Adam and Eve,
Cain and Abel as mythological or metaphorical, the point remains that humanity
has repeatedly and consistently chosen selfishness as its guiding light. In spite of all of this, God has shown Himself
willing to repeatedly enter into covenants with mankind. Even with human
perfidy that often ignores those covenants, God has continually renewed them.
He made the first covenant with that first pair, Adam and Eve, promising
eventual deliverance from the evil represented by that serpent in the garden
with language that is often interpreted to point to a Redeemer to come as a
descendant of Adam and Eve.[v] Perhaps the pair hoped
that Cain would be that Deliverer. What a heart-crushing disappointment it must
have been to find that he had more of the heart of the serpent than of God.
Cain turned out to be the beginning of a spiral downward that would take almost
the entire human race from the face of the Earth through a flood that would
leave only Noah and his family to repopulate.[vi]
After they stepped from the ark that preserved them
through the deluge, God made a covenant with them, and through them, with the
entire human race that He would never bring such a catastrophic flood again.
The implication then might be understood to say “no matter how bad things get.”
This covenant therefore had a double edge. While it might ensure security against
such a disaster in the future, it also limited God’s interference in human
devolution. This distancing of Himself may be why conditions may once again
become as bad as they were then.[vii] Perhaps they will be
even worse.[viii] Because all of us would
be descendants of Noah, that covenant given after the flood would apply to all,
both Jew and Gentile. This perhaps may be behind the limited restrictions
imposed on the Gentile converts by the First Jerusalem Council. They may have
been based on that Noahic Covenant which would have been binding on all mankind
and not just the Jews.[ix]
The concern of that council was the question of whether
or not the Gentiles should be required to confirm the Abrahamic Covenant with
circumcision. That covenant applied to Abraham and to his descendants through
both Ishmael and Isaac. Both boys were circumcised as evidence of that
covenant. In the end it was decided not to place the burden of that covenant on
the Gentiles, since even the Jews had failed to keep all of its terms. This did
not end the controversy as the church continued to struggle with the question
as to whether they were Christians, Jews or somehow an amalgamation of the two.
Increasing distance grew between the Judaizers and those preaching something
new because of the Jewish revolts against Roman occupation which the Christians
refused to take part in. This was perhaps in part because the revolts tended to
be led by individuals who claimed to be the Messiah, individuals like Simon Bar
Kokhba. Of course, since Christians already claimed Jesus as Messiah, they could
not brook a competitor. This would deny the validity of their movement. Eventually
these rifts brought about a complete split between those following Jewish
practices and the newer Christian practices. Evidence of this split can be seen
in the second century in the writings of Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, who strongly
opposed Jewish practices such as Sabbath keeping and called them a denial of
the grace of Christ.[x]
There was a certain amount of animosity from the Jews as
well. Although Jeremiah wrote of a new covenant that would be written on the
hearts of all Israel,[xi] even he did not appear to
see it applying to the Gentiles for he spoke only of Israel and Judah. The
apostles also had trouble seeing the idea of their covenant applying to
non-Jews. It took a special vision for Peter to be willing to go to the home of
Cornelius and present the Gospel to him and his household.[xii] God confirmed that
outreach by pouring out His Spirit on the Gentiles just as He had on the Jewish
believers. Peter’s logical conclusion from that was that God places no
distinction between Jews and Gentiles. However, sadly, as previously mentioned
in reference to Ignatius, the Gentile Christians began to be guilty of the same
exclusiveness practiced by their Jewish brethren. This perhaps more than any
Judaizing practice gives evidence that the character of God has not been
written in their hearts. This is something we continue to struggle with today
as we sometimes see our churches as fortresses against others outside our
faith, and with coldness of unconverted hearts, we see those outsiders more as
perpetrators of evil than as the lost needing rescue. Yet even when our own
hearts are hardened like this, God continues to be willing to renew His
covenant of grace with us.
That covenant of grace is based on our faith in Him.
That’s the only possible way it can work. After all, if God were not to honor
the covenant, what court would we try Him in? We cannot haul Him before the
judge to seek a judgment that would require His performance. We can only have
faith that He will perform all He has promised. Our salvation is contained in
the promises of that newer covenant, and it is our faith that secures it.[xiii] We cannot say, “Look
here, I have done this so I demand my salvation!” There is no ability to compel
on our part; therefore our works have no value in bringing about salvation. We
can only accept God’s offer and receive it on faith. Faith in what? As the
verse at the top of this commentary says, we can have faith in the knowledge
that God does not lie. This covenantal contract He has signed with the nail
prints in His hands, a signature never to be erased. What He has promised, He
will perform. That is the blessed hope of all who give their hearts to Jesus,
and, dear reader, that can include me and you.
