GRACIOUS CHARACTER
OF THE DIVINE COVENANTS

We saw last week that, after the Fall, there are seven divine covenants whichwere initiated by God with His people (through a representative), viz.:Adamic Covenant, Noahic Covenant, Abrahamic Covenant, Mosaic Covenant, DavidicCovenant and the New Covenant. We saw that these divine covenants are, in fact,structurally united to each other, and carry the same theme: “I shall be yourGod, and ye shall be My people.” This means that each of the divine covenants must,in fact, be a progressive manifestation of the same everlasting covenant. Wesee that the promise of the Adamic Covenant is that a Messiah will die onbehalf of God’s people so that the covenantal theme may be realised; the NoahicCovenant adds that the world will be kept from destruction until the wholenumber of the elect be brought under the Messiah; the Abrahamic Covenant adds asacrament which distinguishes God’s people, including their children, from therest of the people in the world; the Mosaic Covenant adds stipulations forcovenant life, as well as another sacrament which directly points to thepriestly ministry of the coming Messiah; the Davidic Covenant reveals thekingly character and office of the Messiah; and finally the New Covenant bringsto culmination all that is promised.

In examining the theme of each of the divine covenants, we confirmed that eachone has to do with the salvation of God’s people. In other words, it is notabout building the nation of Israel as a nation, but as the covenant people ofGod. Indeed, God is not even primarily concerned with the whole number of theexternal, visible gathering of people who profess to be in league with God. Heis rather, primarily, concerned with the “children of the promise” or His elect.The external, visible people are called “His people” only because the visiblepeople is viewed organically as one with the whole being identified accordingto the better part. In other words, as the children of the promise or the electwere found largely in the nation of Israel under the Old Covenant, the nationwas known as the covenant people of God or as the elect nation.

In this article, we add a further proof to the unity of the covenant, and thereality of a Covenant of Grace spanning redemptive history from the Fall to theconsummation of all things. As it is our thesis that the Covenant of Grace orthe everlasting covenant manifests itself in subordinate covenants, we mayaccomplish our purpose by showing that each of the divine covenants manifests agracious unconditional character pertaining to salvation. In other words, wewant to show that there is only one way of salvation, namely by grace throughfaith in the Lord Jesus Christ (cf. Eph 2:8–9; Rom 1:17), throughout the spanof redemptive history.

It is sufficient for us to examine the covenants under the old dispensation, asfew would doubt the gratuitous character of the New Covenant.

Adamic Covenant

The Adamic Covenant is most assuredly gratuitous. Adam had just broken theCovenant of Works and had fallen into an estate of sin and misery. While thenatural mind might expect God to punitively impose an exacting requirement ofconformity to a plethora of laws and ordinances in order for man to be saved,the Bible strikingly reveals that this was far from the case. Adam, and thewhole human race, which he represented, is indeed punished for his sin, butsalvation as declared in the protevangelium would come not byhis own effort but by a Saviour whom the LORD would send. Notice that nocondition at all is given to Adam or to his seed in order to the fulfilment ofthe promise.

Adam understood this gracious provision for his and his children’s salvationand demonstrated his faith in the promise when he called his wife Eve, becauseshe was mother of all living (Gen 3:20). Furthermore, by providing coveringsfor Adam and Eve’s nakedness, made with the skin of a slain animal, God was infact typically prefiguring His atoning grace through the cover for sin that thedeath of Christ would provide. Salvation for Adam and Eve and their posterity,in other words, was gratuitously initiated by God under the Adamic Covenant.

Noahic Covenant

The gracious character of the Noahic Covenant is even clearer than in theAdamic Covenant. Genesis 6:5–7 declares that the depth and extent of thewickedness of man had provoked God in His decision to destroy him from the faceof the earth. But in sharp contrast to this solemn declaration of condemnation,Genesis 6:8 declares that “Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.” This is amost significant statement within the inaugural context of the Covenant and isillustrative of the nature of the Covenant itself. But could the statement meanthat Noah merited grace? Robertson’s exposition is most helpful and succincthere:

It may be that God’s grace had keptNoah from sinking to the levels of depravity found among his contemporaries.But nothing indicates that Noah’s favoured position arose from anything otherthan the grace of the Lord himself. The term “grace,” which describes God’sattitude to Noah, occasionally refers to something other than a response ofmercy to a sinful situation (cf. Gen 39:4; 50:4; Num 32:5; Prov 5:19; 31:30).But when describing God’s response to fallen man, “grace” depicts a mercifulattitude to an undeserving sinner. In Noah’s day, every initial formation ofthe thoughts of man’s heart… were only evil all the day. But Noah found gracein the eyes of the Lord.

Although Genesis 6:9 affirms that Noah was a “righteous man,” structuralconsiderations characteristic of the book of Genesis forbid the conclusion thatNoah received “grace” because of a previously existing righteousness. Thephrase “these are the generations of…” which begins Genesis 6:9 occurs 10 timesin Genesis. Each time the phrase indicates the beginning of another majorsection of the book. This phrase decisively separates the statement that “Noahfound grace” (Gen 6:8) from the affirmation that Noah was a “righteous man”(Gen 6:9). God’s grace to Noah did not appear because of this man’srighteousness, but because of the particularity of God’s program of redemption(Op. Cit., 112–3).

Despite this clear exposition, it may be argued that if the preservation ofNoah and his family is a picture of salvation, then Noah did work and was savedby work after all, he built the ark. But this argument falls apart when webegin to consider the fact that ark itself would not save Noah and his familywere it not for the supernatural protection of the LORD as intimated by thephrase “the LORD shut him in” (Gen 7:16). The building of the ark was rather amessage to the unrepentant people living during the days of Noah (cf. Heb11:7).

A further and most remarkable indication of the gracious character of theNoahic Covenant may be found in the reason given by the LORD for itsestablishment:

And the LORD smelled a sweet savour;and the LORD said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more forman’s sake; for the imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth; neitherwill I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done (Gen 8:21).

This reason given seems almost incongruous. If the imagination of man’s heartis evil continually, should not the LORD continue to destroy the earth for thewickedness of man? Commentators have long struggled with this issue, and newertranslations of the Bible have replaced the word “for” with “although” (NKJV)or “even though” (NIV). But however it is translated or explained it is clearthat man does not deserve God’s promise of preservation at all. If he deservesanything at all, it is continual destruction. Indeed then, the Noahic Covenantis fully gracious. This is further confirmed by the fact that no condition isactually attached to the fulfilment of the Covenant.

Abrahmic Covenant

The gracious character of the Covenant of Grace finds its full expression inthe Abrahamic Covenant through God’s dramatic act of ratification of theCovenant as recorded in Genesis 15:8–18. This act should best be interpreted asa self-maledictory oath (cf. Jer 34:18–20), in which God anthropomorphicallycalls upon Himself a curse of dismemberment if He fails to fulfil His promiseto Abraham (see Murray, Covenant of Grace, 16). We note also thatAbraham was not called to pass through the pieces at all, which clearly indicatesthat the Abrahamic Covenant, and so the Covenant of Grace, is not merely amutual compact or agreement between two equal parties. Rather, it is aunilateral “bond-in-blood sovereignly administered.” The fulfilment of thiscovenant is therefore not dependant on man’s keeping it at all. It restsentirely on the LORD and therefore is totally gratuitous.

It may be argued that a condition of circumcision seems to be attached to thefulfilment of the Covenant, therefore annulling its gracious character. This isparticularly seen Genesis 17:14, “And the uncircumcised man child whose fleshof his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people;he hath broken my covenant.” To answer this object, it must first be admittedthat Genesis 17:14 does indeed specify a condition. But at the same time, itmust be categorically denied that this is a condition of the Covenant. To saythat it is a condition of the covenant is to understand that “the covenant isnot to regarded as dispensed until the conditions are fulfilled and that theconditions are integral to the establishment of the covenant relation”(Murray, Covenant of Grace, 19). To do so would be to deny theimmutability of the promise of God, which the author of Hebrews alluded to whencommenting on God’s cutting of the covenant with Abraham (Heb 6:13–18). Howthen should we understand the condition in Genesis 17:14? Murray answers thisquestion cogently:

The continued enjoyment of thisgrace [which is dispensed in the covenant relationship] and the relationshipestablished is contingent upon the fulfilment of certain conditions. For apartfrom the fulfilment of these conditions the grace bestowed and the relationshipestablished are meaningless. Grace bestowed implies a subject and reception onthe part of that subject. The relation established implies mutuality. But theconditions in view are not really conditions of bestowal. They are simply thereciprocal response of faith, love and obedience, apart from which theenjoyment of the covenant blessing and of the covenant relation isinconceivable. In a word, keeping the covenant presupposes the covenantrelation as established rather than the condition upon which its establishmentis contingent (Ibid, 19).

Murray’s argument finds a strong biblical support from Moses himself inDeuteronomy 9:4–5, where he no doubt refers to the Abrahamic Covenant:

Speak not thou in thine heart, afterthat the LORD thy God hath cast them out from before thee, saying, For myrighteousness the LORD hath brought me into possess this land: but forthe wickedness of these nations the LORD doth drive them out from before thee.Not for thy righteousness, or for the uprightness of thine heart, dost thou goto possess their land: but for the wickedness of these nations the LORD thy Goddoth drive them out from before thee, and that he may perform the wordwhich the LORD sware unto thy fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (italicsmine).

Indeed, it is because of the gracious character of the Abrahamic Covenant, thatwe find the Apostle Paul arguing for “salvation by grace through faith,” by thefact that Abraham was declared righteous and so experienced the covenantalrelationship even before he was circumcised (Rom 4:1–25).

Mosaic Covenant

While it is generally agreed that the Abrahamic Covenant displays its graciouscharacter very vividly, the same is not usually said of the Mosaic Covenant. Infact, the Mosaic Covenant is generally not recognised by Dispensationaltheologians as being gracious at all.

Perhaps the reason for this failure to see grace in the Mosaic Covenant can befound in the interpretation of the introductory statement of the MosaicCovenant found in Exodus 19:5, “Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed,and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above allpeople: for all the earth is mine.” On the surface, this statement seems tomake the Covenant conditional upon obedience, but Murray correctly observesthat the verse does not say, “If ye will obey my voice and accept the termsstipulated, then I will make my covenant with you” (Murray, Op. Cit.,24). Rather, the Covenant is presupposed, and Israel is called simply to keepit. Of course, the fact that Exodus 19:5 does carry a conditional elementcannot be denied, but what is conditioned upon obedience is not the covenantrelationship itself but the enjoyment of the blessings which the Covenantcontemplates.

In the same way, a false interpretation of Exodus 24:7–8 may suggest that Mosesinaugurated the Covenant on the basis of the obedience of the people:

And he took the book of thecovenant, and read in the audience of the people: and they said, All that theLORD hath said will we do, and be obedient. And Moses took the blood, andsprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, whichthe LORD hath made with you concerning all these words (Ex 24:7–8).

Once again, the error lies in the assumption that the Covenant has not alreadybeen established despite the fact that the text says, “the covenant, which theLORD hath made.” The point is: the Covenant had already been established andMoses was merely ratifying and sealing it by the sprinkling of blood.

The Davidic Covenant

We have already seen that the Davidic Covenant is most clearly referred to inPsalm 89. It is also in this psalm that we see the unconditional and thereforegracious character of the Davidic Covenant most clearly:

My mercy will I keep for him forevermore, and my covenant shall stand fast with him. His seed also will I maketo endure for ever, and his throne as the days of heaven. If his childrenforsake my law, and walk not in my judgments; If they break my statutes, andkeep not my commandments; Then will I visit their transgression with the rod,and their iniquity with stripes. Nevertheless my lovingkindness will I notutterly take from him, nor suffer my faithfulness to fail. My covenant will Inot break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips. Once have I swornby my holiness that I will not lie unto David. His seed shall endure for ever,and his throne as the sun before me (Ps 89:28–36).

Essentially, God’s promise is that no matter what happens, David’s seed willremain on the throne. This promise of God is referred to again and againthroughout the history of the Kingdom of Judah. When Solomonwent astray towards the end of his reign, the Lord warned him that all thetribes saved one would be rent away from him, and the reason for that oneexception is the covenant He had made with David (1 Kgs 11:12). Solomon’s sonRehoboam was an evil king, yet the Lord allowed him to sit on the throne, forDavid’s sake (1 Kgs 15:4). King Jehoram was a friend of Ahab. He was not a goodking at all, and God could have destroyed Judah for his wickedness, but Herefrained for David’s sake (2 Kgs 8:19).

From this, it may be seen that the Davidic Covenant is unconditional. But twoquestions may be asked. Firstly, if it is entirely unconditional, and God willnot revoke His promise, then why is it that after Zedekiah in 586 BC, no childof David continued to sit on the throne? The answer to this apparentinconsistency is to be found in the fact that the descendants of David, underthe Old Covenant, were only fulfilling the promise of the Davidic Covenanttypically just as the conquest of Canaan onlyfulfilled the promise of the Abrahamic Covenant typically. It was only whenChrist was ascended on high after His resurrection and was seated on the righthand of the throne of God that the promise of the Davidic Covenant was trulyfulfilled.

But secondly, it may be asked: How does the Davidic Covenant teach salvation bygrace through faith? To answer this question, we must realise, first of all,that the Davidic Covenant does not stand alone, but is a development of theearlier divine covenants. But the fact that the redemptive element is still infocus can be seen in Isaiah 55:3, “Incline your ear, and come unto me: hear,and your soul shall live; and I will make an everlasting covenant with you,even the sure mercies of David.” The individual who is included in the DavidicCovenant, comes into active participation in the Covenant by faith, and enjoysthe benefit of the deliverance and kingship of Christ.

Conclusion

We have shown that each of the divine covenants under the Old Dispensation isindeed gratuitous. This, together with the fact that they do not standindependently, but are structurally and thematically united, shows that theyare in fact manifestations of the one Covenant of Grace which is developedprogressively over the ages according to God’s infinite wisdom. CovenantTheology is not a theological framework imposed upon the Scripture. Neither isit to be derived only from a few verses in Scripture, such as Romans 5:12–21,though it would have been sufficient were it so. It is, rather, a theology ofredemption progressively revealed in the Word of God, like a flower opening apetal at a time until it is at full bloom with the incarnation of Christ andthe inauguration of the New Covenant.

—JJ Lim