ChristadelphianBooksOnline
The Agora
Pictures Of Redemption

The death of the covenant-victim

The central feature of our meeting together as believers is the memorial by which we remember the sacrificial death of our Lord and Saviour, as well as his resurrection. This is commemorated in the bread and the wine. We easily see the bread and the wine as symbols of his body and his blood -- his life dedicated to God, and his very special death, also dedicated to fulfilling the purpose of his Father.

Following the pattern of the Law of Moses, we understand that the life and death of Jesus Christ was the unique and perfect and all-inclusive offering for sin: "Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!" (John 1:29). "Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people" (Heb 9:28). "This priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins" (Heb 10:12).

What may not be so apparent is another "picture of redemption" -- very much related to the sacrifice for sins, which is at the very heart of the redemptive process -- related, but at the same time distinct, and deserving of separate treatment: the death of the covenant-victim.

At the Last Supper, Jesus instituted the memorial meal, saying, as he took the cup and gave it to his disciples:

"Drink from it, all of you. This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins" (Mat 26:27,28).

"All of you", says Jesus, who will have a part in me, who will enter into this covenant (some manuscripts have "NEW covenant") with my Father and me, must signify your agreement by drinking of this cup of wine.

"For this is my blood of the new covenant" -- not testament, as the KJV has, but surely... covenant! What Jesus calls the blood of the NEW covenant is what the writer to the Hebrews calls the blood of the ETERNAL covenant (Heb 13:20).

If there is a new, and eternal, covenant -- then there must also have been an old, and temporary, covenant, which is supplanted. And we find that this is true:

"When Moses went and told the people all the LORD's words and laws, they responded with one voice, 'Everything the LORD has said we will do'... Then he sent young Israelite men, and they offered burnt offerings and sacrificed young bulls as fellowship offerings to the LORD. Moses took half of the blood and put it in bowls, and the other half he sprinkled on the altar. Then he took the Book of the Covenant and read it to the people. They responded, 'We will do everything the LORD has said; we will obey.' Moses then took the blood [of the sacrifices just offered], sprinkled it on the people and said, 'This is the blood of the covenant that the LORD has made with you in accordance with all these words' " (Exo 24:3,5-8).

Here was a covenant that God confirmed with man, specifically with the people of Israel, through the blood of the sacrifices. Virtually everything pertaining to the Law of Moses -- the tabernacle, the altar, the vessels, the priests, and the common people, as well as the actual Book in which the covenant was written -- all this was sanctified by the sprinkled blood (Heb 9:19-22). The blood of the sacrifices was, legally speaking, the means by which the whole of the agreement was sealed or confirmed; without the sprinkled blood on all the parts, or parties, of the covenant, there would have been no covenant! (The leaders of Israel also saw God on the mountain, and then participated in a special meal: Exo 24:11.)

But this was not the first covenant, nor was it the first promise, that God had ever communicated to man. Paul speaks of an earlier covenant (yes, even earlier than the Mosaic) in his letter to the Galatians:

"The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed... The law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise" (Gal 3:16,17).

The promise to Abraham, which might also be called the covenant with Abraham, was pronounced 430 years before the other covenant made with Moses and Israel, described in Exodus 24. Yet -- strangely -- the covenant made with Moses is treated as the older covenant, whereas that made with Abraham -- though spoken much, much earlier -- is treated as the newer covenant. And the reason would seem to be this: that the Mosaic covenant was confirmed IMMEDIATELY, in the sprinkled blood of the sacrifices, and in the fellowship meal, whereas the Abrahamic covenant was not confirmed when first given.

To illustrate, think of two contracts, one drawn up in, say, 1950, BUT NOT SIGNED AND SEALED; and the other drawn up in, say, 1960, and signed and sealed immediately. The 1950 contract -- though all ready to be legalized, remains unsigned and unwitnessed until, let us say, 1980 -- and so, in that sense, when it is finalized, it becomes the newer and later contract, although written first.

So the Mosaic covenant was confirmed immediately. But the covenant made by God with Abraham (like the 1950 contract in the illustration) was not so confirmed at the beginning; rather, it had to be taken on faith by Abraham and his descendants -- in fact, Paul and other New Testament writers make much of this fact: that Abraham was justified by his FAITH in what God had promised (see, for example, Rom 4), although he never received what was promised, but only saw it afar off (Heb 11:13).

The covenant with Abraham could only be confirmed -- "signed and sealed and delivered", so to speak -- by the shed blood of the covenant-victim, which was the Lord Jesus Christ (so Paul argues in Gal 3:1,13,16,19,20). Thus may be understood the words of Jesus: "This is the new covenant in MY blood!" And since nothing can replace or supplant it, once it has been confirmed and established, this Abrahamic covenant becomes also the "eternal covenant", in contrast to the Mosaic covenant, which was temporary, and destined to "disappear" (Heb 8:13).

What are the terms of the Abrahamic covenant? To answer this requires a brief review of part of Genesis:

(a)	Gen 12:1-3: "The LORD had said to Abram, 'Leave your country, your people and your father's household and go to the land I will show you. I will make you into a great nation and I will bless you; I will make your name great, and you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse; and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you.' " God was making a covenant with Abraham that would involve a great blessing, not just for Abraham, nor even for Abraham's family only, but for all families of the earth.
(b)	Gen 13:15-17: "All the land that you see I will give to you and your seed forever. I will make your seed like the dust of the earth, so that if anyone could count the dust, then your seed could be counted. Go, walk through the length and breadth of the land, for I am giving it to you." The "forever" indicates that this covenant will involve a resurrection and eternal life. The promise of a special Land (the land of Canaan, or the land of promise, identified in Gen 15:19-21) indicates that this eternal life will be enjoyed on the earth, in God's Kingdom.
(c)	Gen 15:6: "Abram believed the LORD, and he credited it to him as righteousness." In other words, God justified Abraham, or declared him righteous, not on the basis of some great work that Abraham completed successfully, but on the basis of Abraham's wholehearted and devoted acceptance in faith of God's promise.
(d)	When Abraham asked how he might know that he would inherit this land forever (Gen 15:8), he was asking for a confirmation of this great and precious promise. In answer, God told Abraham to take certain sacrificial animals and divide them, arranging a part of each animal in each of two different portions, set opposite one another (vv 9,10). Then, when darkness came, "a smoking firepot with a blazing torch" -- an obvious reference to the Glory of Yahweh Himself -- "appeared and passed between the pieces" (v 17).

Now this was not so much a sealing of the covenant as it was an enacted parable, of how the covenant would be sealed in time to come. To understand this ritual, we need to divert ourselves from Genesis for the moment and consider another passage that gives further detail about the covenant-victim.

"The men who have violated my covenant and have not fulfilled the terms of the covenant they made before me, I will treat like the calf they cut in two and then walked between its pieces. The leaders of Judah and Jerusalem, the court officials, the priests and all the people of the land who walked between the pieces of the calf, I will hand over to their enemies who seek their lives. Their dead bodies will become food for the birds of the air and the beasts of the earth" (Jer 34:18-20).

The immediate context of these verses need not concern us here; instead, we focus on the details of this unusual procedure. First, all parties to the covenant must pass between the separated pieces of the sacrificed calf. Evidently, such a practice was common in the Middle East -- evidence of such a practice has been found among other peoples of the area, and not just Jews. Two individuals, or two groups, would decide to make a solemn covenant, or contract, with one another; it might be a purely secular matter, having to do with property rights or business arrangements. To confirm the agreement, they would sacrifice an animal, cut the animal in pieces, separate the pieces, and then pass between the parts, or meet in their midst. They would also participate in a common meal of fellowship, each partaking of the animal which they had sacrificed and separated. Thereby they would confirm, by a gesture of great solemnity, their mutual understanding of the terms of their agreement.

They were saying something else as well, something very profound and sobering: if anyone violated the terms of that covenant, then he was deserving of the same fate that had befallen the covenant-victim; he was deserving of death. In fact, he would have already eaten his own condemnation, in the meal itself!

Quite possibly, this is the basis, too, for the oft-repeated and rather enigmatic vow: "The LORD -- or God -- do so to me, and more also, if...": Rth 1:17; 1Sa 3:17; 14:44; 20:13; 25:22; 2Sa 19:13; 1Ki 2:23; 2Ki 6:31; etc. May God do WHAT, exactly? The same thing that was done to the covenant-victim!
Likewise, it explains the Hebraism, where "to make a covenant" -- as we might put it -- is, literally, "to CUT a covenant"!
Also, it may account for the rather gruesome procedure adopted by the Levite, when he cut up his dead concubine into twelve pieces and sent the pieces around to the various tribes (Jdg 19:29).
...As well as what Saul did, similarly, with two oxen (1Sa 11:7), and what Samuel did with Agag (1Sa 15:33).
...And the words of Jesus in Mat 24:51, where the fate of the unfaithful servant was to be "cut in pieces" or "cut asunder"!
Notice also how Isaac and Abimelech (Gen 26:28-31), and Jacob and Laban (Gen 31:44-54) confirm their agreements by a "sacrifice" and a meal.

This form of a covenant, which was common in the ancient near east, was appropriated and used by Almighty God in describing the everlasting covenant He was going to make with mortal man. But the significance of Genesis 15 is that, when God is making this covenant with Abraham, it is God only (the smoking firepot with a blazing pot) who passes between the parts. Man is not called upon to do so, at this time. Thus God Himself is saying, 'I am making this covenant with you, but I will decide the time and place for its final confirmation.'

We now know that this covenant remained pending until its final confirmation, which was the death of the true and eternal covenant-victim -- Jesus himself: "This is MY blood of the new covenant."

*****

Continuing with the Genesis review...

(e)	Gen 17:5: Abram receives a new name, "Abraham", by which he is to be known subsequently, and to all generations. This indicates his new status in the sight of God: "a father of many nations" -- reminding us of the promise that all nations will be blessed through him.
(f)	God now shows His faithfulness in His covenant with Abraham, by blessing Abraham and Sarah with a special "seed", Isaac, who is miraculously conceived (Gen 18:9-14; 21:1-2). Although hated by his brother (actually, half-brother) Ishmael, Isaac is nevertheless marked out as the special "seed" of Abraham, through whom the promises are to be fulfilled.
(g)	Then, in Gen 22, the special "seed" Isaac is sacrificed by the father (not literally, but it was plain that Abraham was willing to do so: see how Rom 8:32 quotes Gen 22:16 in this regard) and then figuratively "resurrected": "Figuratively speaking, he did receive Isaac back from death" (Heb 11:17-19). This is all a pattern of the true seed who was to come, who would be conceived in an even greater miracle, who would be hated by his brethren, who would be (literally) put to death and (literally) raised from the dead. In this, Jesus would "possess the gate of his enemies" -- the greatest enemy being death and the grave (Gen 22:16-18; cp Rev 1:18; 20:6; 1Co 15:26,55,56).
(h)	Finally, in Gen 24, Isaac -- after being "raised from the dead" -- receives a bride selected for him out of the Gentiles, and perpetuates the promised line from Abraham onward.

In all this, and especially in the parabolic history of Abraham's "seed" Isaac, God was showing Abraham -- and other men and women of faith -- how He would work, in subsequent times, through the life of the greatest "seed" of Abraham, the Lord Jesus Christ (Mat 1:1; Gal 3:27-29; etc), to confirm His everlasting covenant. And so it was said, by Jesus himself, that "Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad" (John 8:56).

******

"For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant" --

...that is, he is the one who "stands between" the two covenanting parties, God and man...

-- "that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance [cp Gen 12:1-3; 13:15-17] -- now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant [the Mosaic covenant]" (Heb 9:15).

The next part of this quotation requires special attention. It is quoted first of all from the NIV:

"In the case of a will, it is necessary to prove the death of the one who made it, because a will is in force only when somebody has died; it never takes effect while the one who made it is living" (Heb 9:16,17).

The whole of this translation, not that much different from the KJV and various other versions, presumes the Greek word "diatheke" to be a will, or testament, which is only in force after the death of the testator. But the primary meaning of this word is 'covenant', not 'will' or 'testament'. This is a very secondary and specialized meaning of the word. In short, every will is a covenant, but not every covenant is a will!

However, some translations (notably the Emphatic Diaglott) seem to have gotten it right, assuming the more general meaning of "covenant". And thus we might translate vv 16,17:

"For where a covenant is made, there must of necessity be the death of the covenant-victim. For a covenant is only in force over a dead body [this is Jer 34:18-20!], because it is not binding as long as the covenant-victim lives."

Weymouth's translation has this footnote: "It is possible that the real meaning is, 'For where a covenant is made, there must be evidence of the death of the covenant-victim...' " With this Bullinger is in general agreement, and Rotherham has an interesting note on the word "covenant": "The New Testament word 'diatheke' signifies 'covenant' because it is the Septuagint rendering of the Hebrew 'berith' which everywhere in the Old Testament means covenant and covenant only... It is a word in common use to denote all sorts of covenants between all sorts of persons." Rotherham then goes out to trace the obvious connections with "berith" (covenant) in Exodus 24 and "diatheke" (covenant) in Mat 26:27,28 -- passages we have already considered -- as a guide to its meaning in the Letter to the Hebrews.

The point is obvious: If Christ were making a "last will and testament", then it could only have effect if he remained dead. But he has been raised from the dead, to share in the benefits of the "diatheke", indeed, to receive the benefits of the "diatheke" first of all for himself, before it could be for others. And so -- since Christ is not dead, but gloriously and eternally alive -- the whole idea of a testament and a testator breaks down totally when applied to him and the saints.

*****

Coming full circle, we now return to the place where we sit as believers around the memorials of the bread and wine. Paul is speaking to us:

" 'This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.' For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes" (1Co 11:25,26).

'I am the covenant-victim,' Jesus says. 'And if you want to be a part of this covenant between my Father and Abraham, the eternal covenant -- involving the forgiveness of sins, freely provided by the Father through me, and resurrection from the dead to a Kingdom inheritance -- then you must partake of the covenant-victim. You must meet with the Father between the pieces of the sacrifice, and eat of my flesh, and drink of my blood.'

Jesus surely had this aspect of the covenant-victim in mind when he said:

"I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty... I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him. Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me" (John 6:35,53-57).

'But beware,' Jesus might have added. 'If you take this solemn step, to make an everlasting covenant with God -- through my blood -- then there are serious consequences. The bread and the wine -- my body and my blood -- which you eat will be to your own condemnation if you fail to fulfill your part of the agreement, if you turn your back on this covenant with our God.'

"Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself" (1Co 11:27-29).

The ultimate blessing of God Almighty -- forgiveness of sins, and eternal life in His Kingdom -- for those who remain faithful to the end. But "the LORD do so to me, and more also" -- the curse of the covenant-victim -- upon those who deny their Lord, thus eating and drinking damnation to themselves.

A solemn choice indeed.