Hebrews 8:8-13: Covenant, Milkshakes, and the New World Order.

Presented to Swift Current Corps, 11 October 2009
By Captain Michael Ramsay

Click HERE to read the scriptures
Click HERE to read a related children's story, Jeremiah.

Today we are going to be speaking about the new world order a little bit. I’m not talking about the new world order that the US Presidents have been proclaiming ever since the Soviet Union dissolved or even the one that seems to be shaping up these days with China at the helm. I’m talking about the new world order that the Lord proclaimed when Christ conquered Sin and Death (Romans 5-8, 1 Corinthians 15:20-28, see Hebrews 2:14-15). There are many parts of this new world order that the preacher of the sermon to the Hebrews (Remember that the book of Hebrews is probably a sermon and not a letter) concentrates on in this section of the scriptures (Hebrews 7:1-10:39): He speaks about a priestly order enacted in the tradition of Melchizedek (7:1-8:13), a new priestly worship (9:1-15), death and purification (9:16-28), benefits of priestly ministry and the sacrifice of Christ, and about worship in this new world order (10:19-39).[1] And a fundamental aspect of this new world order is a so-called new covenant that accompanies it. It is this new covenant that we will be focusing on today as it is expressed particularly Hebrews 8:8-13.[2] First, however, I think that there are some general things that we should look at.

What is a covenant?

Can anyone tell me what a covenant is? A covenant is an agreement or a contract. The most commonly translated word for covenant (Berit[h], diatheke in the LXX), actually refers to being bound, tied or even shackled together.[3] Some common covenants that we have in our day and age are our Soldiership covenant (full membership in The Salvation Army), our Officer’s covenant (part of our ordination process) and – of course – the marriage covenant. With the word for covenant meaning to be shackled together, the marriage covenant (and others) always makes me think of that expression, “the old ball and chain” – it isn’t really so far off the true meaning and it is actually a good thing. Maybe instead of an old chain we should more positively phrase it as a seatbelt though: same idea but a much better image. Covenants meant are to keep us safely strapped in, safely bound together before the Lord.

Being bound to God or another person is like a three-legged race where we are tied to our partner for a purpose: to run a race.[4] In a three-legged race you’ll notice that some people run it with ease while others fall and trip all over each other. I’ve seen dads tied to their kids who’ve simply picked them up and run without breaking the tie that binds.

This is very much like how a covenant works. If we tie ourselves to God or anyone else in a sacred vow and do not follow God closely, it’s impossible to even finish, let alone win the race and experience victory with Christ. If we try to go our own way, we will crash like unsuccessful partners in a three-legged race.

On the other hand, if we move in step with each other, bound together by the tie of holy covenant, the race is easy and one can often move even faster than if she were running on her own. It is like this with our covenants before God, if we remain faithful and lean on our Heavenly Father we will find life’s race a lot easier. This is in essence what a covenant is: it is a contract, an agreement, a tie that binds us to our partner in life’s three-legged race and when Lord is involved that tie will not be broken until the race is successfully completed.

What is this ‘old’ covenant?

So if a covenant is a tie that will not be broken then that raises the question, what are the new and old covenants? From our text today (Hebrews 8:8-13; cf. Jeremiah 31:31-34) we are speaking about the importance of a new covenant and if there is a new covenant then we know, of course, as Hebrews Chapters 7-13 record, there is an old covenant (See Hebrews 7:18-19; 8:6-7, 13; 10:13). We will look at the new covenant in a little bit here but first, in order to fully understand it, I think we need to look at the old covenant: what is this old covenant that the homiletician to the Hebrews is preaching about here?

We know that there are actually many old covenants made as part of the Old Testament, in the old world order. In the old covenant, in the Old Testament of the Bible some of the Big ones include God’s covenant with Noah (Genesis 9:17; Numbers 25:12). What was it that God promised Noah? Never again to flood the earth (Genesis 9:8-17). What was the symbol of this covenant? A Rainbow. Genesis 9:8-17)

Remember Genesis 6-9: the world was evil and deserved to be destroyed but God showed mercy to Noah’s family and the animals of the earth and He showed Noah how to make an Ark (a big boat), which he did, and with this humans and all the other animals of the earth were saved from extinction. Remember that God took Noah’s family and two of some of the animals and seven of others. God then made a covenant and a promise to Noah that He wouldn’t destroy the earth by flood again (see Hebrews 11:7). He left it open should He decide to destroy it some other way (fire, nuclear holocaust, plague, etc.) but He promised never to destroy the earth by flood again.

Another covenant: a really important covenant that God made (I would say probably the most important on the other side of the cross) would be the covenant He made with Abraham (Genesis 12-17; cf. Hebrews 11:8). What did the LORD promise Abraham? That all the nations of the earth would be blessed through him (Genesis 12:3); that his descendants would be as numerous as the sand on the seashore (Genesis 22:17) or stars in the sky (Genesis 15:5, 22:17, 26:4); and that, provided his descendants were faithful, they would occupy the land of Canaan (Genesis 15:7-21). What was the symbol of this covenant? Circumcision (Genesis 17). Who is the one through whom this covenant that all the nations of the earth will be blessed is completed? Jesus.[5]

There was also the covenant that God made with David (2 Samuel 7, 2 Samuel 23:5; 1 Chronicles 17; cf. Psalms 89:3, 28-29; 93; 110:4). This comes into play a little bit in Hebrews here as well (especially in Hebrews 3:7-4:13).[6] This covenant stated that God would build a house, a dynasty for David’s descendents and that David would never fail to have an heir sit on his throne (2 Samuel 7, 1 Chronicles 17). This covenant was eventually fulfilled/completed through Jesus, of course, who sits on this throne forever.

These covenants all intermingle a lot in the history, truth, and the prophetic imagination of the Hebrews.[7] The main covenant of which we are speaking about in our text today (Hebrews 8:8-13, 10:19-39) though is the covenant with Moses. The covenant with Moses states that the people with inherit the Promised Land if they are faithful to the Lord; this covenant with Moses includes the Decalogue [Ten Commandments] and the Law; see Exodus 20, Exodus 34, Deuteronomy 5, Deuteronomy 10).

Roughly sketched out, the covenant here is that God will be the Hebrew’s God and they will be His people and He will give them the Promised Land IF they simply remain faithful to Him and His Law (Deuteronomy 5:32, 33). This condition is important. That is some of what the prophet Jeremiah was dealing with in the children’s story we read earlier and this is most certainly what the preacher of Hebrews is dealing with here (Jeremiah 31:31-35; Hebrews 8:8-13). Jeremiah said that if they abandon their covenant with the LORD then it will be no good to them and they will need a new one if they leave their old one behind. The preacher to the Hebrews (Hebrews 8:13) says that the old one now has now become ‘obsolete’.

What were some of the features of this old covenant that is now obsolete?

This old covenant was very, very important to the Hebrews people. There whole society was founded upon it. It was more important but not entirely dissimilar to the Canadian Constitutional Acts of 1982 and 1867 or even the Magna Carta and Habeus Corpus. There were a number of activities and ceremonies that were involved in the many cultural traditions that related to this old covenant, such as circumcision (this was actually directly related to Abraham’s covenant but often seen in light of the Mosaic covenant; John 7:22, see Genesis 17:11); ceremonial hand-washing; worshipping at the Temple (They would try to go here at least once a year); priests and Levites who had various jobs relating to the covenant; Sabbath (even though this has its roots even before Moses, in creation itself; See Genesis 2:2, Exodus 20:11, Hebrews 4); the Ten Commandments (the Law and the prophets are closely associated with it too; see Exodus 20, 34; Deuteronomy 5, 10); frequent sacrifices (of course); and much more.

Between all of these things relating to Moses, the election of the Hebrews for the task of proclaiming salvation to the world (see Genesis 12:3), the Temple and the Torah – even though the Israelites did not live up to the terms of the covenant – these ceremonies were very significant to the people. They loved them. They were extremely important to them; it was like a number of things are to some of us who have been involved with The Salvation Army for a while: the band, timbrels, songsters, Soldiers, Officers, uniforms, emergency disaster work, community and family social work, evangelism, League of Mercy (Community Care Ministries), thrift stores, etc.

But even more than that – Moses, election, the Temple, the Torah and all their ceremonies and holidays were as important to them as is to us: birthday parties, Sunday church services, New Years celebrations, Christmas, Christmas Eve, and Easter. It would be as difficult for the Hebrews to imagine life without the ceremonies of the old covenant, as it would be for us to imagine winter without Christmas. What are some other things that are very important to us in our culture – that are part of our everyday life? Our national anthem at hockey games and school assemblies, our public schools themselves, Medicare, and even our own Canadian style hospitals.

The old covenant covered every aspect of the Hebrews’ lives. The old covenant was as important to people then as a child’s birthday party or Christmas holidays and all they entail are to us here today. Our text (Hebrew 8:8-13) is saying that God has taken this whole important system to the Hebrews (like Christmas trees, Easter eggs, nativity scenes, and birthday presents to us), crumpled it up like a piece of paper and thrown it into the garbage. This would be even more devastating for them than if God took all of our Canadian Christmas traditions, crumpled them up and tossed them in the same garbage can. God says that their very important covenant is old. Jeremiah says that they need a new one. The preacher of this sermon to the Hebrews says that it is obsolete and should be thrown away and even replaced. Can you imagine how difficult that would be for the Hebrews of that day and age to deal with?

What happened to this ‘old covenant’? Why is it obsolete?

So what happened then? Why was all that the people knew and loved in the old covenant simply crumpled up and tossed away? Hebrews 8:13 records that this old covenant is now obsolete and even at the time this sermon to the Hebrews was preached it was already fading away. Why was it fading away already? How is it obsolete? What happened to this covenant? The terms of the covenant were broken. The Israelites broke them. The covenant was a conditional contract and Israel broke the conditions of it. Like we saw in the children’s story today, ‘Jeremiah’ (www.sheepspeak.com./jeremiah.pdf),[8] ancient Israel turned their backs on God. Israel turned their backs on their fellow YHWH worshipers. They betrayed the Lord and they betrayed each other. It would take much too long to run through all or even many of the times that Israel (The Hebrews) defied God or how they broke their covenant. One of the key ways, however, would be their neglect of the disenfranchised[9]: the poor, the widow, the immigrant (see for example, Exodus 23:6,11, Leviticus 19:10,15, 23:22, 27:8, Deuteronomy 15:7, 15:11, 24:12-15, 1 Samuel 2:8, Psalms 22:26, 34:6, 35:10, 82:3, Isaiah 61:1, Ezekiel 16:49, 18:12, 22:29, Amos 2:7, 4:1, 5:11-12, 8:4-6, Zechariah 7:10, Matthew 6:19-21, 19:13-26, 25:31-46).[10] One comment pertaining to this that I would point us towards is in the New Testament Gospels themselves. Remember when Jesus was asked about the old covenant and the Law? What did He say summed up the whole Law and the prophets? (Matt 22:36-40; see also Luke 10:25-28, Exodus 20, 34, Leviticus 19:18, Deuteronomy 5, 10)? Love God and Love your neighbour. How does one love one’s neighbour? By Looking after the most vulnerable in society, by turning the other cheek, and by bringing others to the Lord (see Matthew 6:19-21, 19:13-26, 25:31-46). Micah 6:8 says that we are to ‘love justice, love mercy, and to walk humbly with our God’. The Hebrews didn’t do this. They did not live up to the terms of the agreement.

An important point to remember here is that this covenant wasn’t exactly cancelled (See Leviticus 26:42-44; Deuteronomy 7:9; Judges 2:1; Matthew 5:17-20, 24:35; Luke 16:17, 27:33; Romans 3:3-4, 31, 7:1-6) rather it was completed (fulfilled) by the advent of Christ (See John 19:30). Remember that we said when we were defining covenants that when they are made with the Lord, He will be faithful until they are completed[11] (See Leviticus 26:42-44; Deuteronomy 7:9; Judges 2:1; Matthew 5:17-20, 24:35; Luke 16:17, 27:33; Romans 3:3-4, 31, 7:1-6). This old covenant wasn’t forsaken. It was completed or even renewed like a library book or a rented movie. When the allotted time for borrowing a book or a movie is completed, it can be renewed. We must not forget though that, as there is a penalty to pay if we fail to live up to the rental terms – if we’re late or damage the book/video there are late fees - so too there was a penalty that Christ paid on our behalf before He renewed our covenant[12] (see Jeremiah 31:31ff, Ezekiel 36:16ff, Joel 2:28ff, and also Deuteronomy 10:16; 30:6; Jeremiah 4:4; 6:10; 9:25; Ezekiel 44:7). Let me explain by exploring a couple of more questions.

Was there anything wrong with the old agreement itself?

Was there anything wrong with the old covenant, the old agreement itself that is now obsolete? Yes and no.[13] No, in that the old covenant was certainly fair: God promised that He would look out for His chosen covenant partners and He did. He let them enter His rest so long as they loved Him and their brothers and sisters. It is like any of us who are parents saying, “all right children, we can all go for a milkshake at the ‘Land of Milk and Honey’ ice cream parlour after dinner so long as you kids don’t fight and don’t give me a bad time.” This seems fair.[14] The problem is that the children of Israel just wouldn’t stop fighting and they weren’t very nice to their Father either. They were always fighting. They were always hurting each other. And they didn’t even bother to obey their curfew. They were likely to not even come home at all. Instead they’d hang out all night in the hill country with the Baals when they should have been spending the night safely in the protection of their Father’s house. And when they did come home the children of Israel would fight amongst themselves about all of this and more too. They didn’t show their love for their Father or for their brothers or their sisters.

A big part of the problem with Israel’s disobedience was that God promised them the metaphorical milkshakes from the ‘Land of Milk and Honey’ ice-cream shop IF they would JUST be good. And even though they didn’t deserve it, God really still wanted to give them their ‘Land of Milk and Honey’ milkshakes (See for examples Isaiah 3:1-6; 8:16-22; 9:1-7; Jeremiah 31, Amos 9, Micah 2:1-11-13; 5:1-4). Not only that: He wanted to drink the milkshakes with them in the ‘Land of Milk and Honey’ ice-cream shop, Himself. He wanted to spend this quality time with His children. He wanted to have fun with them. He wanted to give them all of this and much more but they just wouldn’t stop fighting and they just wouldn’t listen to Him so He just wouldn’t give them their reward.

This was the purpose of the milkshake incentive: the purpose of the Law, the old covenant, was to bring people closer to God so that they could experience His Salvation. God’s Law, His old covenant – that He set up so that His children could come for the eternal ice-cream with Him – this Law, that was created for good, actually wound up preventing His children from getting the ice-cream that God wanted to share with them. Because they were bad and they didn’t deserve this ice cream, God was very sad. God kept His part of the covenant. God wanted to enjoy that milkshake with them in the ‘Land of Milk and Honey’ ice-cream parlour but they just wouldn’t co-operate (See Romans 3:3,4). This old covenant failed to bring people into a Salvific relationship with God (Hebrews 8:7-9; See Hebrews 4, Numbers 14 and Deuteronomy 1; See also Galatians 3-4). God’s chosen people, the children of Israel failed Him; the Law therefore did not provide for their (our) salvation (see Galatians 3 and Romans 2:1-14).

What is this new covenant?

Since this old covenant did not give us the Heavenly milkshake, what about the new covenant? What is it? Can God use the new covenant as a way to share the milkshake of eternal life with us? What is this new covenant that is God’s seemingly new idea? Firstly we should note that it’s not really a new idea at all.[15] God knew all along that He would eventually implement this new covenant. He knew this even before He put the old one in place but this new one comes into place with Jesus’ incarnation, death, and resurrection (cf. Genesis 15:7-21; Jeremiah 34:18-20; Romans 7:1-7).[16] Jesus’ death fulfils the old covenant: it is finished (John 19:30). The old one – as bad as we were at living up to it - was not thrown out before it was finished; it was only discarded after it was completed on the cross.

It is like with our children. Our girls are only 7 and 8 right now but we know that someday there will be curfews and guidelines for using the car but there is no need for those to come into place just yet. We know this new order will eventually be coming to our home; it is not here yet but it is inevitable. Likewise, God knew that this new covenant was inevitable even before He made the old one.[17]

As far as my children are concerned, even further down the road (and probably an even better analogy to God’s new covenant), relating to these curfews and guidelines for driving the car that we will eventually have for our girls: there will come a time when even these rules will no longer be needed. Our children will grow up and be ready to have a relationship with us, and the world, as responsible adults. If we do our job as parents, then our children will grow up to love God, read their Bibles, love their neighbour and clean up after themselves – all on their own, without our rules to make them do it. They will do their chores and assignments as adults living and working in the world without us needing us to enforce our old house rules. (If we try to enforce our old house rules after our children have moved out, it will not work: our whole relationship with our children will inevitably fail.) This is what the Law and the old covenant is like; it was only good until the enactment of the new covenant at the advent of Christ (Galatians 3:24-25). The advent of Christ is like humanity’s coming of age – it is our growing up, our leaving home for the final time (Galatians 4:4).[18]

Paul tells us in Galatians 3:23-25 that the old covenant and the Law was needed but that the people were being imprisoned and guarded by the Law. He says that the Law –depending upon your translation -was our guard, our disciplinarian, our custodian, or some translations even say our schoolteacher. In Galatians 4, the Apostle Paul goes on to explain the Law as if it were this guardian servant who is the tutor of a small child. The guardian servant only has any authority until the child is grown, then the child has authority over her servant. And now we are here today; we are like the twenty-something year-old son or daughter who is making her way in the world today without our tutor, without our teacher, without our parents’ house rules but still with our Heavenly Father’s very real love. This is what the new covenant is. We no longer have the house rules to follow but because God raised us well, we can read our family history (the Bible) and because we are His children we can live the way He would have us live and this is good (1 Thessalonians 5:12-24). And the really good thing too is that – just like a Christian parent of an adult child – if for some reason we do become confused in life, we can always come to God. God is even closer than a phone call away; God is as close as a prayer.

Let us call upon Him now.

http://www.sheepspeak.com/

---
[1] Thomas G. Long, Hebrews (Interpretation: a Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching: Louisville, Kentucky: John Knox Press, 1997), p. 82. Tom Long presents this in an easy to read chart.
[2] Leon Morris, The Expositor's Bible Commentary, Pradis CD-ROM:Hebrews/Exposition of Hebrews/VII. A New and Better Covenant (8:1-10:39)/B. The Old Covenant Superseded (8:8-13), Book Version: 4.0.2 : The idea of the new covenant is not confined to this epistle. It is implied in the narratives of the institution of the Lord's Supper in the first two Gospels (Matt 26:27-28; Mark 14:23-24). What is the meaning of "covenant" in these passages unless the new covenant is in mind? And it is explicit in Luke's longer narrative (Luke 22:20) and in Paul's account (1Cor 11:25). Paul also saw Christian ministers as "ministers of a new covenant" (2Cor 3:6). The new covenant is thus one of the strands in the NT teaching about what Christ has done for us. While it emphasizes radical novelty, we should not overlook the fact that it also points to continuity. The new arrangement retains the term "covenant" and it is established on the basis of sacrifice. It refers to the fulfillment of what is superseded rather than outright opposition to it.
[3] Leon Morris, The Expositor's Bible Commentary, Pradis CD-ROM:Hebrews/Exposition of Hebrews/VI. Melchizedek (7:1-28)/C. Christ's Priesthood Superior Because of:/2. The divine oath (7:20-22), Book Version: 4.0.2 has a good discussion on the meaning of the word ‘diatheke’ in this context and argues well for its equivalence to Berit[h].
[4] See my article by this title in The Officer Magazine. Captain Michael Ramsay ‘The Three-Legged Race’ The Officer Magazine (September – October 2008) on-line at: http://www.sheepspeak.com/images/Three%20Legged%20Race_doc.pdf
[5] Cf. Commissioner J. Edward Read, Keepers of the Covenant. (Whitby, Ontario: J. Edward Read, 1995) p. 15. Sarna, Genesis, pp. 114-115, Terence E. Fretheim, The Book of Genesis, 446. See also John H. Sailhamer Abraham and the covenant (15:1-21) and Ronald F. Youngblood, The Expositor's Bible Commentary, Pradis CD-ROM: Second Samuel/Exposition of Second Samuel/II. Epilogue (21:1-24:25)/A. The Lord's Wrath Against Israel (21:1-14)
[6] Thomas G. Long, Hebrews (Interpretation: a Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching: Louisville, Kentucky: John Knox Press, 1997), pp. 3&28. See also Fred B. Craddock, The Letter to the Hebrews (NIB 12: Nashville, Tenn.: Abingdon, 1998), p. 5. and William L. Lane, Hebrews 1-8 (WBC 47A: Word Books: Dallas Texas, 1991), p. liii.
[7] I borrowed the term ‘prophetic imagination from Walter Brueggemann, The Prophetic Imagination. Revised and updated. (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2001).
[8] Captain Michael Ramsay, Sarah-Grace Ramsay and Rebecca Ramsay, ‘Jeremiah’, available on-line: www.sheepspeak.com./jeremiah.pdf
[9] Cf. Captain Michael Ramsay, 'Good News to the Poor: Comparing a Christian Worldview as expressed in Luke’s Gospel to Marx'. Presented to William and Catherine Booth College March 2009. Available on-line at www.sheepspeak.com
[10] God has always had a concern for the vulnerable even as is recorded in the OT: Deut 15:4 says, “However, there should be no poor among you, for in the land the LORD your God is giving you to possess as your inheritance, he will richly bless you,” Cf. also: Exod. 23:6,11, Lev. 19:10,15, 23:22, 27:8, Deut. 15:7, 15:11, 24:12-15, 1 Sam 2:8, Pss. 22:26, 34:6, 35:10, 82:3, Isa. 61:1, Eze. 16:49, 18:12, 22:29, Amos 2:7, 4:1, 5:11-12, 8:4-6, Zec. 7:10.
[11] Covenants that are made with or before the LORD will not be broken before they are fully completed (see Judges 2:1; Matthew 5:32, 19:9; Romans 3:3-4, 7:2; 1 Corinthians 7:10-14; Luke 16:15-16; Mark 10:1-12; Matthew 5:32, 19:9)
[12] Cf. Tom Wright, ‘The Great Acquittal: Justification by Faith and Current Christian Thought’, Ed. Gavin Reid, London: Collins, 1980, p.13ff.
[13] David W. Chapman, ‘Notes on Hebrews 8:7’, (ESV Study Bible: Crossway Bibles: Wheaton, Illinois 2008) p. 2373: ‘The old covenant was not wrong; rather it was weak and ineffective (7:18-19)…’
[14] Leon Morris, The Expositor's Bible Commentary, Pradis CD-ROM:Hebrews/Exposition of Hebrews/VII. A New and Better Covenant (8:1-10:39)/A. Christ's "More Excellent" Ministry (8:1-7), Book Version: 4.0.2: The author brings out the superiority of the new covenant by referring to the supersession of the old one. If there had been "nothing wrong" with the old covenant, there would have been no place for the new. That the new covenant has now been established is itself evidence that the old one was not adequate. (For the line of argument, cf. 7:11 ff.) The old covenant was lacking not so much in what its terms spelled out as in the fact that it was weak and unable to bring men to God (cf. 7:18 f.; Rom 7:10 f.).
[15] Cf. Fred B. Craddock, The Letter to the Hebrews (NIB 12: Nashville, Tenn.: Abingdon, 1998), pp. 100-101.
[16] See Captain Michael Ramsay, 'Covenant: When God is Bound... a look at Genesis 15:7-21' in the Journal of Aggressive Christianity, Issue 52 (December 2007 – January 2008). See also ‘Sarna, Genesis, PP. 114-115, Terence E. Fretheim, The Book of Genesis, p. 446. Cf. also Anet, p.532 and John H. Sailhamer, Abraham and the Covenant (15:1-21).
[17] Cf. William L. Lane, Hebrews 1-8 (WBC 47A: Word Books: Dallas Texas, 1991), p. 209 and R.A. Harrisville, The Concept of Newness in the New Testament (Minneapolis, Min.: Augsburg, 1960), pp. 48-53.
[18] Pastor Brian Craig, Emmanuel Baptist Church, in a conversation with me in 1987 made a very good argument explaining the Law and the old covenant in these terms. It has remained firmly in my mind ever since.