THE LORD SPOKE (January 05)

Daily Reflections from Scripture:

Old Testament: Genesis 12-14

There are three basic kinds of covenants found in the Bible. One may be called a Parity Covenant. It is made between equals. Two kings or two commoners enter a mutual agreement (see Gen. 21:27; 26:31; 31:44-54; etc.). Participants might call each other “brother”. This format would, for obvious reasons, never apply to any covenant between man and God.

One that would though, is the Suzerain-Vassal Covenant. It is a conditional promise based on the vassal’s faithfulness to the king. The sovereign demanded loyalty in exchange for his protection (see Josh. 9:6,8; Josh. 24; Ezek. 17:13-18; Hos. 12:1). It was a covenant made between a greater and a lesser and its primary characteristic was the conditional clause, “If you will..., then I will....” Participants would be known as “lord” and “servant” or even “father” and “son”.

A similar kind of treaty between non-equals is known as the Royal Grant Covenant but, in this case, there is no conditional clause. It constitutes a flat-out promise by a greater to a lesser (see I Sam. 8:14; 22:7; 27:6; Est. 8:1). It often involved a grant of land or some other benefit as the result of exceptional service and was often passed down to the servant’s heirs, but only if they continued in their father’s footsteps.

This provides the clue for understanding the Abrahamic Covenant. First mention is here in Genesis 12:1-3 and it is unequivocally a Royal Grant. Six times God says, “I will” and there is not conditional stipulation in His promise to Abraham. Likewise in its repetition and amplification in Genesis 15:9-21, there is no hint of “If you will..., then I will....” God flat-out promises Abraham that He will bless him.

However, when we get to Genesis 17, a condition is placed upon Abraham’s descendants. They must “keep the covenant” and the outward sign of their total commitment was circumcision. In a way very similar to the Davidic Covenant (see Ps. 89:30-37!), the condition was not attached to the promise itself but only to the individual participants. In other words, God would fulfill His promise no matter what, but the benefits to individual participants would depend upon their spiritual condition.

Now, since we Gentiles have been grafted into this Abrahamic Covenant (see Rom. 9-11), apply that thought to our situation and relationship to God. Food for thought!


New Testament: Matthew 5

The first impression when hearing the words, “you have heard it said...but I say to you” is that there is a contrast between the two statements. It sounds like Jesus is saying, “The common thinking is _______, but that’s all wrong. I want to tell you that really it should be ________.”

But that’s not it at all. If you look closely at the six times this terminology is used in Matthew 5, the Lord never denies the truthfulness of the first, well-known statement. In effect He says, “You’ve heard it said _______. Well, I want to tell you it’s all of that and more besides!” It’s not a contrast at all. It’s like a major addition on top of what was the conventional wisdom in all six cases.

That should have been clear enough from His words in 5:17-18.

Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

We speak of verbal inspiration... this could be called letteral inspiration! Yod (“jot”) is the smallest Hebrew letter and the “tittle” (KJV) is the smallest stroke that differentiates between some of the look-alike Hebrew letters. That’s how far the fulfillment of Scripture goes. That’s why Jesus says our righteousness must exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees.

By the way, there’s that Greek word πληρὸω (playro’o) for “fulfill” again. Jesus’ relationship to the Law was “to fill it full” or “flesh it out”. Remember Paul’s words: “the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ” (Gal. 3:24). Jesus’ words provide an answer to the charges of His critics that His teaching was an attack on the Law and the Prophets. Instead He has authority to explain the real meaning of the Law (vs. 17). In doing so, He reveals the terrible lie in the Pharisees’ claim to righteousness (vs. 18-20). His examples show that God demands righteous thinking as well as righteous acts. Righteousness is a matter of the heart and not only behavior (vs. 21-42). By insisting on “perfection” Jesus reminds us that true righteousness is actually found only in being like God (vs. 43-47).