ANALYSIS OF THE COVENANT
The eager student of God's revelation should have an overwhelming desire, an unquenchable passion, to ascertain the truth. He should not be deterred in his search for this "golden fleece" by his own past conclusions or by present popular error. This is said because of certain statements that will be made. Though based upon Scriptural testimony, these will challenge a view so deeply entrenched that even to question it will appear like heresy. Yet, it is not too much to say that our whole personal relationship to God may be directly affected by what is written in the remainder of this volume.
All of us realize that the words "testament" and "covenant" are used interchangeably in the Authorized Version. Thus the apostle Paul speaks of "the reading of the old testament" in 2 Corinthians 3:14, and the writer of Hebrews calls it a "covenant" in Hebrews 8:9. The original word is the same in both instances. In your copy of the sacred Scriptures, the title page probably bears this statement: "The Holy Bible, containing the Old and New Testaments." This statement is correct, but not in the sense it is intended. There are not thirty-nine books in "the old testament." There are not twenty-seven books in the "new testament." In fact, the new covenant, or new testament, was never written with pen and ink at all. The record given by the Spirit states this very clearly.
Because men have labeled the thirty-nine books constituting the Jewish Scriptures the "Old Testament," virtually the whole world has been led to believe that this entire compilation constituted the covenant with God. No idea could be more incorrect. None is fraught with greater possibility for error in understanding the unfolding of God's purpose. Laboring under this delusion, many people have completely missed the purpose of God, which is conveyed in "the new covenant." They have merely substituted one legalistic written code for another as the basis of their service to God and communion with one another.
Any understanding of the "new covenant" must be attained through a proper concept of the old. If the second is not to be like the first, a correct survey of the first will prepare for a rational investigation of the second. What was the nature of the "old covenant"? Why was it given? What did it embrace? What were its bounds and limitations? A proper evaluation of these matters will make it possible for us to place "the Jacob's staff" of our spiritual survey at the exact spot from which to look at the "better covenant, which was established upon better promises" (8:6; KJV).
Let us remember that nowhere in all the sacred writings does God ever suggest that all of the Holy Scriptures from Moses to Malachi constitute "the old testament," or covenant. No inspired writer ever hinted that the "old testament" contains thirty-nine books. Some of these books recount the history and chronicles of the covenant people. One is a collection of songs and psalms used in the praise service of the covenant people. Some contain the literature and proverbs collected by the covenant people. Many are prophetic warnings and promises made to people of the covenant. But the history of such a covenant people is no more a part of their constitution than a book on American history is part of the Constitution of the United States. Such a history may refer to our Constitution, detail our departures from its principles, and urge our return to its original spirit, but it is not the Constitution or our national covenant.
A nation is a social unit, created when a number of clans or tribes associate themselves together for mutual progress and protection. In the very nature of things, the first requirement is a compact, or agreement. Such an agreement is called a covenant, or constitution. When God calls a nation out for himself, it is evident that such a nation must constitute a theocracy. Being such and not a democracy, God must announce the terms of the relationship involved.
The preamble of the constitution was a proclamation of what God had done for them. God never enjoins a covenant upon the human family except upon the basis of prior deeds in their behalf. In this instance, the preface would serve for all ages to identify the people involved and the God whom they were to serve. In solemn tones, the words were uttered, "'I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage'" (Exodus 20:2; RSV). The covenant was made possible by a divine act of deliverance. Freedom was accorded by what God did for them, not by what they did for God.
There followed Ten Commandments, which with the preamble constituted what the inspired writers call "the old covenant" or "the first testament." Since a nation is a social unit, its people sustain a dual relationship--to God and one another. The Ten Commandments are divided into two classes, the first four pertaining to man's responsibility to God; the last six to man's responsibility to man.
The initial Commandment was the keystone in the arch of national purpose. It struck at the very heart of polytheism, and forever made monotheism the foundation of covenant relationship on the part of Israel. "'You shall have no other gods before me'" (Exodus 20:3; RSV). This made the worship of idols an act of treason, a revolt against the sovereign power, and an overt manifestation of conspiracy to overthrow the nation by subverting it from its original purpose and intent. By statute it was made a capital offense.
The second and third statements were made against treasonable intent. Knowing the tendency of man to worship what he creates, it was forbidden to make any graven image or the likeness of any creature in the universe. To bow down before the work of the sculptor or graver, or to give any homage thereto, was also a capital offense. The third Commandment was designed to forbid any lessening of respect or awe for the name of Jehovah. "'You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain'" (v. 7; RSV). To "take the name of the Lord" was to call upon God to witness a promise or vow. This was generally done by saying, "As the Lord liveth I will do this or that." To do so in vain meant to take such an oath in the name of God without any intention of fulfilling it. "Men indeed swear by a greater than themselves, and in all their disputes an oath is final for confirmation" (Hebrews 6:16; RSV). Since this was the final appeal for confirmation, reverence for the name of God would soon disappear if He were called upon to sanction a falsehood or empty promise.
The fourth Commandment stipulated the percentage of time to be accorded the Lawgiver and King. One day in seven was to be assigned to Him in honor of two great events. His creative work ended, and He rested on the seventh day. On the same day He brought the people out of Egypt. By hallowing the seventh day they would be commemorating the creation of the earth and the creation of a nation to honor the God of the universe. The method of consecration was the same that God himself originally employed: rest, or relaxation, and absolute cessation from creativity.
Before we mention the fifth Commandment, a few words are in order about the method of perpetuating the knowledge of the covenant. There was no provision made for propagandizing people of other nations. No recruiting program was inaugurated. If one who dwelt among the people desired to enroll with them, he could do so by allowing himself and other males in the family to be circumcised. This was voluntary. There was no solicitation for him to do so. It is true that after they had been scattered among all nations, the descendants of Abraham, having burdened their law with cumbersome traditions, enlisted Gentiles whom they transformed into fanatical zealots worse than themselves, but this was not the original intent.
Carrying forward the patriarchal procedure, the fathers were directly charged with the responsibility of instructing their children. The solemn duty was enjoined immediately following the Shema, the watchword of Israel. After pronouncing it Moses said, "And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart: and thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk to them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up" (Deuteronomy 6:6, 7; KJV). Each home was to be a school upon whose gates and doorposts these things were written.
This implies that the Torah, as Israel used the term to designate the "Law of Moses," was simple enough in essence for the fathers to expound and for the children to understand. It was only when professional teachers arose and eventually divided into representatives and defenders of various schools of thought that the word became obscured by vain janglings. Inasmuch as the parents were ordained as the sacred teachers, it is not surprising that the next Commandment, following those relating to the proper attitude toward God enjoined reverence for them. "Honour thy father and thy mother" (Exodus 20:12; KJV). The parent stood in the room of God to the offspring, giving them the Torah as God gave it to mankind originally.
The remainder of the Ten Commandments constituted the great moral or ethical code intended to set the people apart from the degenerate worshipers of other gods. Taken together they compose "the old testament" or covenant. All other laws, statutes, and judgments, grew out of a relationship to these. While other laws carried a penalty for violation, the national existence was not necessarily impaired or destroyed by disregard for them. But the Ten Commandments constituted the national covenant, the constitution. Upon this covenant the nation had been formed, and by that covenant it would continue to exist. A disregard for the covenant would bring about the dissolution of national sovereignty, unless the breach was repaired firmly and decisively.
The books of history, poetry, and prophecy, are not part of the covenant. They are Scriptures, or writings, which grew out of the relationship created by the covenant, but they are not "the first testament," as God employs that term. That which established covenant relationship and created the nation was one thing. The sacred books written to the covenant people, or nationals, constituted a wholly different thing. Because we have familiarly and thoughtlessly spoken of the thirty-nine books as composing "the old testament" and have subscribed to this popular error, it is necessary to reexamine the Scriptures related to this matter.
But one may ask what difference it makes. This is the refuge of those who would rather continue in error than discover truth. We have already established that God's entire relationship with man has been revealed as being on a covenantal basis. Does it make a difference whether we have a correct or an incorrect view of what constitutes a covenant of God? Can any professed follower of our Lord be respected who ridicules, derides, or scoffs at a matter so grave that it strikes at the very root of our approach to Deity? Is one deserving of reverence as an instructor in holy things who deliberately chooses to ignore truth and continues to teach error? Such may be worthy of those who would place a sect above all else. Surely it has no place in the life or thought of men and women who love the truth more than life itself.
There is an even more serious and sobering aspect. The covenantal relationship of old was a school of instruction for those who live under "the new covenant." If we mistake the nature of the "old covenant," its scope and breadth, we can as easily be wrong about the new. If this happens, we may ignore the ongoing purpose of God and merely substitute one system of legality for another as the ground of justification. By doing this we will again bind a yoke upon men "which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear" (Acts 15:10; KJV).
It is easy to develop a pharisaical attitude about the New Covenant Scriptures as about the Old. If we condition our relationship with God on the basis of knowing a compilation of sacred writings, rather than faith in Jesus, we actually make the Bible our God. As a result, we become inconsistent and insecure. Every interpretation, exegesis, or opinion that disagrees with our own is considered treason. Our problem is that we make the basis of our hope an agreement with men, not a covenant with God. One may be wrong about many things who is in a covenant relationship, but the covenant is not broken by his error. God's covenants are made with a variety of men. They do not all think alike, nor can they all do so.