Tag Archives: covenant

August 13, 2023 · 7:25 am

National Covenant Blessings?

While I was reading Dr. Valerie Hobbs’ latest excellent book (No Love in War), I was reminded of an aberrant theology that I had heard in my childhood.

(Of course, now might be a good time to plug this book. Please get it. It will help you understand some of what is happening in the Reformed world. So much of what she writes was an echo of my childhood church in the 60s and 70s, with the same damage, the same theological errors and the same teachers. I had left them behind years ago, but this theology was part of what drove me out of my denomination. Like bad milk, it has a way of coming up again and again. Back in the day, it was called postmillennial reconstruction, or theonomy, or both. Today, it is nationalism, or dominionism, or all of the above).

But- moving on. The theology that was impressed on us was that the covenant curses of Deuteronomy 27 have come upon this nation (the United States) because of sin (which they give the fancy name of “covenant disobedience”. The corollary is that if we as a nation want the covenant blessings of Deuteronomy 28, then we need to obey, which is given the fancy name of “Covenant faithfulness”.

I had forgotten this. I know that I had (and still do) frequently hear “We don’t deserve God’s blessing”. The anthem of my childhood is “God Bless America”, which has the connotations in Christian circles of covenant faithfulness.

Covenant faithfulness is generally defined as minorities and women know their place, liberals stay out of everything, white old men rule everything, the poor deserve it anyway, and empathy is sinful. I am not making this stuff up. Please read what the dominionists are writing.

What makes it so powerful is fear. We are afraid that if we are compassionate to the poor, give dignity to the LGBTQ community, listen to the black experience, acknowledge the brutality of slavery and own up to it, allow women to vote, of, God forbid, vote for the other party – then God will curse the nation because of covenant disobedience. The alternative to this is covenant faithfulness, which will be defined by me. Covenant disobedience is communist, feminist, woke, social justice, and socialist. It doesn’t matter what those words mean. We all know it when we see it.

It surprises me that the Reformed world has fallen so quickly for such basic theological errors. I think that there is a strange separation in the minds of those who follow these things. On the one hand, they talk about the gospel, free grace, the person and work of Christ. And on the other hand, they talk about national covenant blessings. But these two things cannot exist together.

This was the same error of the Pharisees. They believed that in order to have God’s covenant blessings, they must put a stop to sinners. The Sabbath breakers and the tax collectors and the prostitutes and everyone who isn’t us. “You were altogether born in sin, and you would teach us??” (John 9)

They knew he was born in sin, because he was born blind. Blind people are not blessed. Therefore, they broke the covenant, otherwise they would be enjoying the blessings of the covenant, and wouldn’t be born blind.

The formula is very simple. Those people, who are not like me – they are minorities, foreigners, women, children, disabled, woke, LGBTQ – they are the ones who are blocking God’s covenant blessings from coming on America like they used to.

In 2016, I was astounded that the whole seeming evangelical world welcomed Donald Trump. A foul mouthed, reviling, abusive, crooked, racist thug – as the savior of America.

But then I remembered that the crowds shouted for Barabbas while crying out for Jesus to be crucified. At least Barabbas tried to do something about all of those Romans getting in the way of God’s covenant blessings.

So let’s look at the very, very basic theological errors.

First, the blessings and cursings of Deuteronomy were given to the nation of Israel, which was the visible church in the world. The nation was where God chose to place his name and reveal himself. But God cannot dwell with sin. Any sin.

Second – the nation of Israel failed. Over and over and over. There was NEVER a time when they were faithful to the covenant. NEVER. Seriously, this is the point of the whole Old Testament. How can you read through Genesis to Malachi and come to the conclusion that America will do better?? Even if they had the option.

If you read the Old Testament and come to the conclusion that you will do better, if only a powerful leader would get rid of the libtards, then all you are doing is adding pride to your multitude of sins.

The Pharisees taught the exact same thing, and God did not tolerate it in them either.

The point of the whole Old Testament is this. God cannot be at peace with anyone who breaks his covenant, any more than a husband can live with an adulterous wife. And after centuries of playing the whore against God, God cast them off (Hosea – the whole book).

The New Covenant (Jeremiah 31:31-34) is different. If God simply established another covenant like the first one, mankind would fail again – because that is what we inherited from Adam. Sin, misery and death.

We need a covenant mediator.

So Jesus, the True Seed of Abraham (Galatians 3:16) , took all of the covenant curses upon himself, as it is written, “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree” – Deuteronomy again…

He was crucified so that we might all know that these covenant curses are taken away in him. The old has passed away.

And now, for the new. His righteousness (His covenant faithfulness, his chesed) merited the promises of covenant blessings, for God cannot lie.

Not one nation, not one people, not one congregation, not one person, has ever, ever, ever earned God’s covenant blessings. There is none, no not one.

And the corollary – not one person, not one has escaped the judgment of God by their merit. It is of the Lord’s mercies that we are not consumed.

If Jesus had done what the Pharisees insisted, and brought fire and brimstone down on the sinners, not one person would be left.

Not one.

And so it is today. When we call for God’s judgment on the sinners, how far back will YOU have to stand. Remember that God sees the heart.

To put this practically – has there EVER been a time when the United States earned God’s blessing? Has there ever been a time when justice rolled down like water? Where the poor and the needy were relieved? Where justice was given to men AND women, white AND black, old AND young?

If God came in judgment, none of us would stand.

Except in Christ. By faith we flee to him and cling to him alone. HE is our covenant mediator.

In HIM was have all of the blessings that are possible. EVERY spiritual blessing, Paul tells the Ephesians.

And the curse is taken far from us. There is therefore now NO condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. None.

And no one merited it, except for Jesus. There has never been a covenantally faithful nation. Never. Not one.

There has never been a covenantally faithful person. Not one. No, not even you.

Only Jesus. Only Jesus.

We used to believe “Sola Christus” (Christ alone). I wonder what happened.

Keep proclaiming the gospel. The good news. If we still have to earn covenant blessings, that isn’t good news at all. That is bad, bad news.

The good news is that Jesus has already finished all of that. It is finished. Done.

Now go rest. The day will come when this world, with the remnants of sin and death and misery will be wiped clean, as will my heart, and we will walk with God forever in the New Heavens and the New Earth. No politician can give you that. Don’t aim too low.

One-Time
Monthly
Yearly

Make a one-time donation

Make a monthly donation

Make a yearly donation

Choose an amount

$5.00
$15.00
$100.00
$5.00
$15.00
$100.00
$5.00
$15.00
$100.00

Or enter a custom amount

$

Your contribution is appreciated.

Your contribution is appreciated.

Your contribution is appreciated.

DonateDonate monthlyDonate yearly

9 Comments

Filed under Gospel, Nationalism

Tagged as , ,

December 29, 2017 · 4:27 pm

On Unconditional Covenants

“Marriage is not a contract; it’s a covenant.”

Maybe you’ve heard that. It’s catchy. Someone says it at a big conference, everyone nods. They go back to their churches and repeat it. Everyone nods. And so it goes viral.

But does it actually mean anything? I’ve heard it explained that covenants are unconditional, but contracts can be broken. Hmmm.

This got me thinking about covenants and whether they are actually unconditional, and then I started thinking about falsification theory. I know. My mind flits.

Falsification theory was first mentioned by Karl Popper and popularized by Anthony Flew. Both, to my knowledge, were atheists. But they made interesting observations. The thinking is that for a statement to be meaningful at all, it must be falsifiable. I’ll try to explain. If I say that Felicity is a cat, what I mean is that there is a creature in my yard named Felicity and she belongs to a category of creature called a cat. It means something. If someone came to my back yard and proved to me that Felicity was indeed a raccoon, then my statement would be proven false. It is a falsifiable statement. If the statement was not falsifiable, then it is meaningless.

If, for example, I stated that Felicity is a cat, and what I meant by it was that Felicity is whatever you wish Felicity to be, and even her existence is up for debate, then I actually am not saying anything at all and should just keep quiet. In that case, when I say Felicity is a cat, and you say, “No, that is a raccoon” and I respond with, “mmm yes. That’s what I said. Cats and raccoons and fish are all one. It’s whatever you want it to be,” then you could justly accuse me of speaking nonsense. My statement is non-falsifiable. I should be pelted with rocks and garbage. Or perhaps a raccoon.

“This post is weird”

“I thought he was going to talk about marriage”

I’m getting there. When we say things like “covenants are unconditional”, it seems to me that we are making the same mistakes as those who speak non-falsifiable gibberish. If a covenant means anything, of course it can be broken. Otherwise it isn’t actually saying anything at all.

If, for example, I say to my wife “I promise to love you and honor you” and what I meant by it was “I plan to do whatever I want whenever I want to” then I actually haven’t vowed anything at all. I haven’t made a covenant or a commitment or anything of that nature. I was simply speaking gibberish, and again deserve to be pelted with rocks and garbage, because my wife was counting on my words meaning something.

It is commonly stated that the New Covenant is unconditional. But is this really true? Is it actually true that God will just zap us into heaven and we can do whatever we like to do whenever we want to do it?

The teaching of scripture is not that the New Covenant is unconditional, but that Christ has fulfilled the covenant in our place. He also creates in us clean hearts as was prophesied by the Prophets:

33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. (Jer 31:33)

We are justified, sanctified and glorified in Christ. Our salvation is assured in Christ. It can never be lost in Christ. But this is far different than saying that the covenant is unconditional.

Even the covenant with Abraham was conditional.

Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore, thou, and thy seed after thee in their generations. This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised…. And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant.
(Gen 17:9-10, 14)

We need to be more careful with our speech. How can an unconditional covenant be broken? Did God say to anyone, “Live exactly the way that you want to and do whatever you want when you want to do it. It’s all good.”

Never!

It is also true that we can never fulfill the conditions of the covenant. But this is different than saying that the covenant is unconditional. The gospel is that Christ has fulfilled the covenant in our place. He is the mediator of the New Covenant.

To say that a covenant is unconditional is to speak gibberish. How can I enter into covenant with you if the covenant doesn’t mean that I will do something and that you will respond in some way? Are we just speaking gibberish?

Classical Reformed Theology speaks about unconditional election, but this is a different thing. It was an answer to the claims of the Remonstrants that God’s election is dependent upon foreseen faith. The Council of Dort answered that God’s election flows from his good pleasure alone, and does not flow from a condition of any kind that he foresees as being fulfilled by the creature. Someone somewhere simplified the decrees of the council with the acronym TULIP, but to my mind, that is an over-simplification of the Canons of Dort. (For those new to TULIP, the “U” stands for “unconditional election.”)

But this doesn’t say anything about “unconditional covenants”. A covenant is an arrangement between two parties. In the case of God’s covenant with man, it is decreed by a sovereign and is therefore non-negotiable. God says, “I will be a God to you, and you will be my people”. He didn’t say, “I will be a God to you and you can dance around a calf or whatever if that makes you feel groovy.” When Israel whored after other gods, God called them “covenant breakers” and finally issued a bill of divorcement.

Because God never speaks gibberish, a covenant means something. It asserts a relationship based upon conditions and therefore can be broken. Just as a statement that is non-falsifiable is meaningless, so a covenant that cannot be broken is gibberish.

If by “unconditional covenant” you mean that Christ fulfills all of the conditions of the covenant and I stand before him perfect and whole as if I had never committed nor had any sin, then I’m with you. I wish that you would use different language, but you have no argument. If, however, you mean that God is stuck with taking us to heaven no matter what we do in this life as long as we accepted Jesus into our hearts at church camp when we were teenagers because we wanted to get it on with Betsy – then I am going to have to part ways.

The Jews thought like this. John said to them, “Don’t say that you are children of Abraham. God is able of these stones to raise up children of Abraham.” God is never “stuck” with a scoundrel because of some nonsense about an “unconditional covenant”. Repent, and be converted.

Back to our original statement. “Marriage is not a contract; it’s a covenant”. I still think this is meaningless. But I fear that it is used to teach this strange and unbiblical idea that covenants are unbreakable, even though scripture is full of those termed “covenant breakers”.

To apply it to marriage, a man takes a vow. He says, “I promise and covenant before God and these witnesses to love, honor, and cherish you, to keep myself only for you, as long as we both shall live.”

These are solemn vows. If they are unbreakable vows, then they mean nothing. They are like a cat who is also a raccoon. But God would not have us speaking gibberish. If a man fails to love, fails to honor, fails to cherish, and is unfaithful, he has BROKEN THE COVENANT!

If that is not the case, let’s change our wedding ceremonies to whatever we want, marry our livestock, dance naked in jello, and do as we please. Words apparently mean nothing.

Call it a contract or a covenant, we take solemn vows when we marry. Our spouse takes solemn vows. The solemn vows are dependent upon one another. A woman won’t vow those vows to a man who has no intention of vowing those vows. Lives are at stake, which is why we take solemn vows. If one of the parties taking those vows has no intention of keeping those vows, then the covenant is broken.

Let’s look at it from a business standpoint. I sign a contract promising that I will haul a cord of wood to your barn in exchange for 200 dollars. Since words mean things, this is an enforceable vow (or contract, or covenant – whatever you want to call it.) If I fail to haul the wood to your barn, then the covenant is broken, and you are not obligated to pay me 200 dollars.

Covenants can and are broken, because of the hardness of men’s hearts. This is what Jesus meant when he said concerning the decree of divorce, “Because of the hardness of your hearts, Moses wrote that.”

Men and women are covenant breakers. For the sake of order, it is sometimes necessary for the law to recognize that the covenant is broken. God would not have his children in bondage to the gibberish of the devil. Shine some light on it. Speak words that mean what they say. Keep your vows.

This is what a Christian does.

21 Comments

Filed under Divorce, Marriage

Tagged as , , ,