GALATIANS: ...Two Covenants

Before we move toward the closing of the letter to the Galatians, let’s take a visual look at the world of biblical covenants and try to place Paul’s arguments in their context with pictures.

The first thing we need to be able to see is that covenants are made between two parties (for the scope of this conversation, I will not be diving into the different kinds of covenants that exist; we have talked before about Suzerain-vassal covenants and I have recommended The Epic of Eden by Sandra Richter in order to get introduced to the ideas). This idea seems like a no-brainer, and yet I find it is the one thing we seem to lose track of in the conversations surrounding covenantal theology. The covenant applies to the parties that make it.

With this in mind, the first biblical covenant that we run into is the Noahic covenant. (Some have identified the Adamic covenant, but for the sake of this conversation, we will start with Noah.) When you go back and look at the end of the story of Noah, it is clear that God makes this covenant with all of creation.

The next covenant we might identify is the Abrahamic covenant. Unlike the Noahic covenant, the parties of this covenant are more specific and defined. The Abrahamic covenant is made between God and Abraham’s descendants.

By extension, the rest of Abraham’s descendants will fall under the same Abrahamic covenant.

Just to make sure we are following along with our reasoning, let’s check a few test cases, starting with Esau. Is Esau under the Noahic covenant? Yes; the Noahic covenant is between God and all of creation. Is Esau under the Abrahamic covenant? Yes; he is Abraham’s grandson. The same would apply to Isaac, Ishmael, Jacob, and any other descendants from Abraham (i.e., through Keturah). Let’s try someone else. What about Nahor, the brother of Abraham? Is Nahor under the Noahic covenant? Yes; every human being (and animal, for that matter) is under the Noahic covenant. Is Nahor under the Abrahamic covenant? No; he is not a descendant of Abraham.

Hopefully all of that makes sense, as it’s time to add the next layer. Eventually, Jacob will have twelve sons who will become a nation and will stand at the bottom of Mount Sinai and enter into what we call the Mosaic or Sinai covenant.

Just to make sure we’re tracking, let’s run some test cases here. Are the Jews under the Sinai covenant? Yes, of course. Are descendants of Esau under the Sinai covenant? No, they were not present at Sinai. The two parties present at Sinai were God and the descendants of Jacob/Israel.

What throws the Jewish world of the New Testament into chaos is the introduction of the God-fearing Gentiles (or the theosabes).

The Gentiles are clearly under the Noahic covenant, and there is no debate about that (even today, a Gentile could attend a Jewish synagogue service and bless them and their story by referring to himself as a ben Noah, or a “son of Noah”). The question is what to do when they want to become a part of the family. Many Jews in the first century would have argued that, covenantally, God is working through the Jewish people, so the Gentiles need to take on circumcision (and the Law it represents) and fall under the Sinai covenant.

But Paul’s argument is revolutionary. He uses Genesis 15 to claim that the Abrahamic covenant is not based on circumcision, but on faith. He also argues that God’s story has always been about God’s promises. The promise has always preceded the Law and the story of God has never been about the Law that was introduced 430 years after the promise. This means that it is faith that makes one a member of the Abrahamic covenant. He then argues that Gentiles who have faith in the promises of God are b’nei Abraham, or “sons of Abraham.” This claim in Galatians is revolutionary, for it says that a Gentile who lives by faith in the promises of God is MORE than a “son of Noah.” He/she is an adopted “son of Abraham.”

By extension, it becomes clear through the visuals that a Jew would not cease to be a Jew. All descendants of Israel entered into an everlasting covenant with God that remains intact within God’s larger story. What Paul’s gospel does is ensure those Torah-observant lives find their proper place and their priestly calling within God’s narrative. The reality of Jesus and the resurrected Christ does not change their calling in the world, but it does invite a whole bunch of adopted children into the family of God — children who have their own unique calling within the family. This is where we turn our attention to next.

I find that putting Paul’s argument into pictures can help our mechanical, western minds grasp the argument Paul is making. Paul is saying that the issue of God’s story cannot be the Law. The Law was given for its own purposes (to be the “pedagogue”) within the larger story, but the story is about the promises of God. He is insistent that circumcision cannot be the marker of God’s covenant with Abraham, because Abraham was justified before he was ever circumcised. Abraham was justified by faith; faith is what it means to be a true descendant of Abraham.