Covenant Class, Lesson 3

The Covenant Relationship Lesson Three

“Relational dynamics” of the covenant relationship.

In physics, “dynamics” are the branch of mechanics that deals with motion and the way in which forces produce motion. Another definition is “the forces that tend to produce activity and change in any situation or sphere of existence.” We are now considering the forces that make for success or failure in a covenant relationship.

Just how serious is a covenant?

When the ancients made a covenant, they sometimes killed an animal (or split it in two, see Gen. 15:8-11, 17-18; Jer. 34:18-19).  The implied meaning was:  “if I should fail to honor you by meeting my obligations (laws, vows, etc.), then may something happen to ME that was AT LEAST AS BAD as what happened to this animal” (see, for example, Ruth 1:17; 1 Sam. 20:13; 2 Sam. 3:9)!  One ancient treaty reads this way:  “This head is not the head of the ram, but the head of Mati’-ilu of Agusi, his sons, his nobles, and the people of his land.  If Mati’-ilu violates this oath, as the head of this ram is struck off…so will the head of Mati’-ilu be struck off.”  In fact, from this custom, the language the Hebrews used for making a covenant was “to cut a covenant”!  It is not clear if the dire consequence was left entirely up to God to enforce, or if the offended party had the right himself.  Over time, the actual slaughter was not included in making some covenants, but the serious nature of the relationship was retained. 

From the rites, linking the death of an animal with the formation of a covenant, came the association of the covenant with blood (Ex. 24:8; Matt. 26:28).  The “blood of the covenant” becomes the link between partners.  Covenants are deadly serious! 

Two ways with covenant obligations…

The following flow-chart shows that covenants are inherently conditional, depending on whether partners honor or fail to honor their obligations:

 

Covenant Obligations (laws, vows, etc.)

Faithfulness ("chesed")                       Unfaithfulness ("sin")

Reward:  Blessings            Punishment:  Curses

Relational Dynamics at work…

Peace (Hebrew, “shalom”) is “the ideal state of fellowship in every relationship” and so the goal of covenant relating.  Peace is the enjoyable state of relationship when partners honor the covenant and love one another.  It feels so good!  It is the place where the good fruit of a healthy relationship may be enjoyed by all.  God sets His partner in a “shalom” status.  In covenant, we are at peace with God and are duty-bound to keep peace with other members of the “covenant community” (church, see Eph. 4:3).

The way partners achieve “shalom” is through love and faithfulness.  Love is the foundation of every covenant.  Partners expect love of one another, beyond the stated legal obligations of the covenant.  Therefore partners continually scrutinize one another’s behavior for signs showing whether this love is real, or a fraud.  In this, covenant partners have eyes like hawks!  The crucial indicator is diligence in keeping the terms of the covenant.  This is faithfulness (or its absence), and it is the surest sign of love (or its absence).  Later we will look at the Hebrew word “chesed”, which expresses covenant loyalty

God is the perfect covenant partner, since His love and faithfulness are demonstrably flawless.  But every human partner fails the obligations of covenants, and the word for this failure is “sin.”  Sin is more than just the breaking of a religious taboo; it is even more than breaking God’s law or commandment.  Sin is the relational failure resulting from an unmet obligation.  Thus, the reason disobeying God is a “sin” is because it violates one’s relationship with God.  And, sin also takes place in relationships with people.  We can sin against God, or against other people.

God’s love is unconditional, but human success or failure in a covenant with God is very conditional!  God loves partners who succeed; and He loves those who fail.  Yet, His love will not guarantee your success or mine, nor will it prevent our failure.  Paul put this forward as a “trustworthy saying” (2 Tim. 2:11-13):

“If we died with him, we will also live with him;

if we endure, we will also reign with him.

  If we disown him, he will also disown us;

if we are faithless, he will remain faithful, for he cannot disown himself.”

 

The outcome of a covenant, depending on faithfulness or unfaithfulness, is either blessings or curses.  God first witnesses the vows, then He guarantees the fitting consequence will overtake each covenant partner.  After meeting God at Mt. Sinai and entering the covenant, Israel had these consequences visibly associated with two different mountains—Gerizim and Ebal (Deut. 11:26-29; chs. 27-28).  Blessings may include health, prosperity, victory in war, or peace.  Curses may include natural calamity, defeat in war, sickness and plague, exile, death, sterility, misery, poverty, or famine.  Ultimately, of course, we should think here of Heaven and Hell.

Can you see that much of what we call “religious language” is really the language of covenant?  Peace, love, faithfulness, sin, etc….  While we are on this, we should include righteousness.  Righteousness does not exist apart from a relationship.  A righteous person is measured not against a code of moral standards, but against his responsible handling of relational obligations.  It is a useful translation of the Hebrew word, “chesed” (lovingkindness or covenant-loyalty).  James D.G. Dunn writes:  “…the righteousness of God can be defined quite accurately as ‘God’s covenant-faithfulness.”

In the next lesson we will consider how any human can succeed in covenant.

Covenant Class, Lesson 4

The Covenant Relationship Lesson Four

Marriage as a Covenant

This is truly an exciting part of this study.  We will see that what we can learn from Christianity will help us better understand marriage, and the reverse is just as true!  And the reason is that both are covenants.

Biblical passages on the marriage covenant

In the Bible, marriage is declared to be a covenant relationship.  In two OT passages, spouses are chastised for violating their marriage covenants.  In Prov. 2:17, adultery is condemned because it is a wife’s violation of the covenant with “the partner of her youth.”  In Malachi 2:10-16, God is both “witness” to the covenant and its “enforcer”, bringing curses after sins.  After flooding His altar with tears and asking why He has treated them so, God declares that the cause is husbands marrying of pagan women at the expense of the covenant with “the wife of your youth.” 

In Ezekiel 16:8, God speaks of His covenant relationship with Israel metaphorically in terms of marriage:  “Later I passed by, and when I looked at you and saw that you were old enough for love, I spread the corner of my garment over you and covered your nakedness.  I gave you my solemn oath and entered into a covenant with you, declares the Sovereign LORD, and you became mine.”  We see interesting parallels in Ex. 6:4-6 and Ruth 3:9.  In Exodus, we see that covenant partners have possession of each other:  “you became mine.”  And in Ruth, the same idiom for taking a wife is used, “I spread my garment over you.”  Marriage is a covenant.

Unequally yoked weddings

Sometimes when two unbelievers are married, one of them becomes a Christian.  They are not to divorce although they are now “unequally yoked” (1 Cor. 7:12-14).  However, Paul does command Christians not to become “unequally yoked” to unbelievers (2 Cor. 6:14).  In the first situation, a conversion led to the unequal yoking; in the second, it would be a wedding or, perhaps, another covenant. 

Paul did not specify marriage/wedding in this passage.  Likely he had broader concerns over the mixing of Christianity with paganism.  But in his Jewish background Paul found God’s wisdom prohibiting spiritually-mixed marriages (Deut. 7:2-3; Mal. 2:11).  The metaphor of “unequally yoked” suggests the folly of harnessing together two incompatible animals who would only wind up working against each other.  The same happens when true and false spiritualities attempt an alliance.  And our understanding of covenant relating helps us here.  The primary enforcer of a covenant is one’s deity and, when two partners answer to two different divine authorities, the result must be confusion and disorder.  The covenant is designed to provide a relational foundation that produces stability.  An unequal yoke sets the stage for the opposite.

Covenants are “mutually instructive”

As Ezekiel (and Hosea) drew comparison between the “old covenant” and marriage, Paul did the same with the “new covenant” and marriage in Ephesians 5:21-33.  Paul makes it clear that his fundamental topic is Christianity, and the point here is that it works just like marriage!  Since both are covenants, the same dynamics—the same relational “nuts and bolts”—work in each.  So, the covenants are mutually instructive!

Marriage and forgiveness

Paul’s specific application is that the “authority issue” (between a husband’s leadership and a wife’s submission) can be made workable by the covenantal model used between Christ and the church on the same issue.  Here, we will try a different issue by seeing if we may gain special understanding for the way forgiveness works in Christianity when we see how it works in a healthy, functional marriage. 

All human partners fail one another and their relationships.  And spouses usually are very alert to what a partner’s words and deeds signify for the quality of love he or she brings to the covenant.  Sometimes a failure is so monstrous that is signifies a total absence of love, and therefore spells the end of the relationship.  The covenant may be considered “broken.”  For example, Jesus allowed a divorce (a breaking of the covenant) when one spouse commits fornication (Matt. 19:9)—and this is quite telling since we know that “[God] hates divorce” (Mal. 2:16).  Likewise, there are some sins huge enough to make void the covenant a Christian has with God (e.g. Gal. 5:4). 

Smaller sins may, perhaps, be forgiven more easily.  However, we must keep sight of the way sins signify love, or the lack of love.  Sometimes even a “huge” sin may be forgiven, if the offended spouse considers the offender’s love still valid.  Still, his or her every action henceforth will, no doubt, be scrutinized all the more intensely.  Sometimes, even the “little things” may be taken to signify a lack of love, and this can break a covenant.  In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus considered “smaller sins” (like lust) to be as serious as the “bigger” sins (like adultery), probably because both are equally negative signifiers of covenant love.

The evaluation of love is flawless, when performed by God.  Humans, however, can sometimes misinterpret and cautions apply (like warnings against wrongful judgmentalism).  Still, this is normal and required covenant behavior.

Forgiveness and repentance

“Nobody can be perfect or sinless.  However, anyone can relate responsibly.”

 Since we all fail, it is essential for those who want to succeed in covenant to be responsible for their failings (sins).  The most responsible answer to any relational failure is repentance.  It is more than saying “I’m sorry”, and even more than actually being sorry.  Repentance means a thorough confrontation of self that leads to a sincere rejection of the wrong and of whatever motivated it.  Sin evidences the devaluation of one’s partner; repentance restores his or her value.  Sincere repentance can—and should be—taken as a sign that the offender still loves the victim, in spite of it all.  Testing that sincerity afterward is basic survival for covenant relators.  Conversely, a refusal to repent may be taken to signify the presence of a hard, unloving heart that simply does not value the covenant partner.

Repentance, as a signifier of true love, leads to forgiveness and restoration of a stressed—or even broken—relationship.  The covenant is gracious, and responds to the apparent love of a repentant offender with its own love for him or her.  It is strong enough to endure even repeat offenses (Matt. 18:21ff.).

Can failure-prone humans succeed in a covenant?

When we sin, we are pained that our partner may be offended, angry, and perhaps of a mind to end the relationship.  As noted above, “Nobody can be perfect or sinless.  However, any of us can relate responsibly.”  If we truly love our covenant partner (whether spouse or God), we can put on humility and sincerity as we offer repentance.  We make it known that, in spite of our failure seeming to indicate otherwise, we have love for the one we hurt.  Still, it may leave us feeling totally unworthy of being forgiven. 

This seems to be what John was trying to alleviate, “Dear children, let us not love with words or tongue but with actions and in truth.  This then is how we know that we belong to the truth, and how we set our hearts at rest in his presence whenever our hearts condemn us.  For God is greater than our hearts, and he knows everything” (1 John 3:18-20).  Sometimes we simply have to let go of feelings of unworthiness, and trust our relationship and our partner.  The feeling is natural, because no one ever owes us forgiveness after we wrong them.  Truly, we owe a debt we cannot repay, and we would feel a lot better if we could!  But covenants dispense grace, which by definition means treating better than is deserved.  Out of love, partners will forgive each other.  When every effort to relieve guilty feelings fails, sometimes the only thing left is to take the advice of the old preacher:  “You just have to take it and bury it in blood!”

The final hope, for we who are failures, can rest only in the knowledge of God.  Our hope finally rests only in His faithfulness, love, mercy, and readiness to forgive.  As Brian A. Wren so delicately phrased it,

Great God, in Christ you call our name    Then take the towel, and break the bread,

and then receive us as your own,               and humble us, and call us friends.

not through some merit, right or claim,    Suffer and serve till all are fed,

but by your gracious love alone.                And show how grandly love intends

We strain to glimpse your mercy seat       to work till all creation sings,

and find you kneeling at our feet.            to fill all worlds, to crown all things.

God wants you to succeed, and He proved that at the Cross.

Covenant Class, Lesson 5

The Covenant Relationship Lesson Five   Lesson One

How long does a covenant last?  The major determining factor is the faithfulness each partner brings to the relationship.  God often declares that He is making a covenant “forever” or “in perpetuity”.  However, it will last until mutually agreed, or until circumstances change, or until one party breaks the covenant making it null and void (Smith, 20).  So “forever” means basically, “as long as the treaty lasts.”  The word “forever” is rather potential and hopeful, not a legally binding guarantee.  To say that “a covenant lasts forever” essentially means it will last until it is no longer viable. 

When a covenant breaks….  One partner determines when the other’s sin breaks the covenant.  It is a judgment call, and even repeated or severe offense may be tolerated until it seems obvious that the offender’s action indicates the fraud of his/her love and shows also a lack of commitment to the relationship.  The offended partner then releases himself or herself from further obligation and the relationship is ended.   

Sometimes sin does NOT break a covenant!  Abraham sinned, and so did many in his community.  The same can be said for David, Levi, and Moses and their generations.  In such cases, God often makes the determination that the relational failure is not indicative of a lack of love or commitment.  Rather, the sin was the result of plain weakness or some other cause other than lovelessness or faithlessness.  The claim to love stands, as does the commitment to faithfulness.  It is worth considering that this covenantal understanding holds the key to the mysterious saying in 1 John 5:16-17.  It also explains why intercessory prayer can sometimes be effective, and other times is declared futile (Jer. 7:16; 11:14).  God know the heart.  Everyone having a heart sins, but some of those sinning still love the Lord and hold to a faithfulness that is unbroken even by the sin.  Sometimes the God-loving, God-devoted sinner even doubts his own heart, but God-who-knows-the-heart still sees love and devotion beyond the sin (1 John 3:20).

If this is true (and it is), then it follows that a sinning covenant partner does not fall out of the covenant and re-enter with each ensuing repentance.  One does not “fall from grace” with every sin.  Again, it depends on whether or not it was a “sin unto death” (i.e. a sin that truly gives evidence of fraudulent love and abandoned faith).  If it was not a “mortal sin”, then the repentance strengthens the weakened relationship.  It does not have to re-connect it.  This relational dynamic is readily learned from the marriage covenant, in which spouses do not consider every failure a “divorce”! 

Can a “broken covenant” be restored?  What if there has been a “sin unto death”?  What if a partner’s heart has gone hard and cold, abandoning the covenant and its obligations?  Can the relationship be restored?  The answer must be a “yes” so qualified that it becomes pessimistic. 

God is seen to extend offers of grace and mercy when a punitive curse is plainly in order (Joel 2:13-14; Zech. 9:11-12; Acts 2:37ff.).  However, there is a limitation operating, not on God’s part, but on the part of the sinner that may be insurmountable.  Essentially, the issue is this:  God gave the ultimate incentive already (the redemptive death of His Son on the Cross), and if there is no greater offer to be found then there seems to be nothing to hold the covenant-breaker except that which failed to hold before.  The only possibility, perhaps, is that the Cross may now be seen and understood more meaningfully at last than it was at the first.  For if it were understood, no effective incentive remains to win again the covenant-breaker’s heart.  This is the situation underlying the terrifying sections of Hebrews (6:1-8; 10:23-31). 

The state of the fallen:  It is sometimes suggested that a fallen away Christian is still in a “superior” state to a non-Christian, because he or she will not need to be re-baptized.  The logic does not hold in covenantal understanding, because a covenant-breaker ends in a state that is WORSE than the original pre-conversion state (2 Peter 2:20-22).  He or she is with Satan on the “curse” side of covenant eventuality; the rest of the covenant community are bound for blessing with God.

Covenant relationships between God and a “covenant community”….  God often enters agreements with groups, and these often begin with a single representative.  For example:  Abraham and his “seed”, David and his ensuing dynasty, Levi and his priesthood, etc.  Thus, these covenants are “trans-generational”, lasting far beyond the lifespan of the originator or of many generations within the “covenant community.”

God’s faithfulness and continued obligation endures beyond the failure(s) of individuals within the community.  However, the blessing or reward of individuals depends on their own faithfulness (cf. the “wilderness generation” of Israel) and it is common to see “if clauses” in the covenant language (e.g. see the “punishment clause” in the Davidic covenant, Ps. 89:28-33).  Mont W. Smith writes, “The covenant promises were to a group….An individual could lose his part in the promises by unbelief or disobedience….the promise to a group could be virtually unconditional with God.  That is, He would do what He had promised—with the group.  An individual’s right to the promise was very conditional.  He had to keep the covenant.  He might fall outside the blessings himself because of unbelief, but the group that was faithful could indeed inherit the benefit of the covenanted promise.”  The covenant promises to Abraham’s community were declared null and void for any uncircumcised male (Gen. 17:14)—obviously quite apart from any thought or action on his part! 

It is as though God “sees past” these individual failures and foresees, if only hopefully, a future time when the covenant is again honored within the community.  God can be seen to long for the opportunity to bless His covenant people (Lev. 26:40-45; Psalm 89:28-52; Jer. 33:20-25; Ezek. 17:11-21).

The “New Covenant” supercedes the “Old Covenant.  In Deut. 31:16 God predicts Israel will break the covenant and that He will respond by forsaking and destroying them.  Likewise, Moses predicts covenant breaking as he urges that his final song be memorized (Deut. 31:19-22).  Israel is said numerous times to have broken the covenant (Ezek. 44:7; Jer. 11:10; 22:9; 31:32; Hosea 6:7; 8:1).  Still, God shows incredible grace and faithfulness, sending appropriate “curses” but holding out hope for a future blessing for the people He loves.

Finally, God sends His Son to “cut” a New Covenant in His own blood!  The broken covenant is not simply abolished immediately and finally, but is made to give way before a New Covenant of superior quality (Heb. 8:7).  The old covenant community is not cast off by God, but is the first to receive the offer of the New (“crossdecking”), and so the baptized Jews become the original members and the new nucleus of the new covenant community (NCC)—the Church of Christ!  In Jesus and His NCC the aims and intentions of the Old are fulfilled (Matt. 5:17). 

The majority of Jews rejected the NC of Jesus and so stand doubly condemned.  They are the heirs of a broken covenant and the rejectors of another, far superior covenant.  Similarly, the priesthood covenant with Levi gave way to the newly resumed priesthood of Melchizedek (Heb. 7:1-17).  God’s formal covenant relationship with Israel under Moses ended with the 70 AD destruction of the Jerusalem temple (Matt. 23-24).    

Covenant Class, Lesson 6

The Covenant Relationship Lesson Six

In a single word, “chesed”sets forth one of the most important ideas in the Bible. The tannaic rabbi Simon the Just taught: "The world rests upon three things: Torah, service to God, and bestowing kindness (chesed)" (Pirkei Avot 1:2). Chesed is here the core ethical virtue. A statement by Rabbi Simlai in the Talmud claims that “The Torah begins with chesed and ends with chesed.” (wickipedia).

 

Defining “chesed”.  The Hebrew word “chesed” defines in a single word the quality or qualities necessary for successful covenant relating.  It is the “relational dynamic” par excellence!  Unfortunately, it is also a word with a long history of imperfect translation.  Early translators, who were unfamiliar with its role in covenants, sought to define it simply by the apparent role it played in relationships.  And so, they defined it as “kindness”.  They simply noted that when one was said to have “chesed” toward another, kindness resulted.  True as this may be, it yields a rather trite and unhelpful rendering.  After all, kindness may simply be a trait of personality, and may be extended beyond any meaningful relationship (such as kindness to strangers or to animals).

A further step, but one that still comes short, is the move from “kindness” to “lovingkindness.”  This is kindness motivated by love, and it brings us closer to the essence of relationship.   

But “chesed” is understood only according to its functioning in the most meaningful of relationships.  Much of what follows is drawn from the book, “What The Bible Says About Covenant” by Mont W. Smith (College Press, 1981).  Nelson Gleuck produced a study of the word and suggests the meaning of covenant-keeping or acting in a supportive way to a partner in covenant.  Significantly, he suggests that “chesed” is not possible outside of a covenant.  It is the very essence of covenant, as the doing of what was pledged.  Thus, “chesed” is close kin to “faithfulness”, “righteousness”, “being true to”, or “keeping faith with”.  As such, we are looking not merely at a personality trait (kindness), but at a moral and relational term.  It answers the issue of whether or not one keeps the covenantal obligations to which he has committed himself, of whether or not he is a “promise keeper.” 

So, let’s consider some other proposals for a good translation.  Aubrey Johnson suggests, “loyalty to covenant terms.”  He also suggests that “chesed” indeed has an element of affection within itself.  Johnson and Gleuck would agree that the core meaning was “faithfulness to commitments and to legitimate expectations.”  If “chesed” involves “love”, it is love not merely as an emotion of affection but love expressed in faithful action.  Daniel Elazar (wickipedia) suggests “loving covenant obligation”.

The Theological Dictionary of the New Testament notes that chesed “is particularly well adapted to bring out the sober legal character of the legal relationship…”  It belongs to the language of obligation, responsibility, and the binding nature of promises.  Old Testament scholar, Walther Eichrodt describes the importance of this key word:

One particular type of conduct expected from fellowship as an immediate result of the conclusion of the [covenant] was the duty of loyal mutual service; without the rendering of [chesed] on both sides the maintenance of a covenant was in general unthinkable.  Hence there was a strong, living conviction in Israel that Yahweh’s kindness and readiness to succor was something which could be expected of him in view of his having established the covenant relationship.  The redemption from Egypt was early understood as an act of this succoring love, and for all his terrifying power the God of Sinai is also the loving protector, who remains true to his promises and exerts his power for the good of his covenant people.  The very first clause in the terms of the covenant is a pledge that he wills to be the God of this people:  ‘I am Yahweh thy God!’  (Ex. 20:2).  This is echoed in what he teaches men about himself in order to assure them of a loyalty and love consonant with the covenant relationship, and his leading them mightily through the wilderness, in his forgiving of their transgressions.  It is this knowledge which enables men to glorify him for his unshakable benevolence, in face of which all the destructive designs of the enemy and even all demonic powers must give way.  (Theology of the Old Testament, vol. 1, pp. 232-233).

Translating “chesed” as “mercy”.  When the Old Testament was translated into Greek (called the “Septuagint” or “LXX”, about two centuries BC), the Greek word for “mercy” was used to translate the Hebrew “chesed.”  This makes its way also into various English translations.  Why was “mercy” chosen?  The reason is not clear, but one explanation is that since a covenant-partner would be hurt or damaged by another’s failure to meet obligations, keeping these obligations actually showed “mercy” by sparing this hurt. 

Even so, it is clear that “mercy” is often an unhelpful or even misleading translation.  Jim Myers notes, for example, that in Psalm 136 the “chesed” of God is celebrated in the repeated refrain, “His chesed endures forever”.  Since the Psalm celebrates the angry and vengeful wrath of God upon Israel’s enemies, the translation “mercy” comes across as ironic indeed!  It will be seen that “faithfulness” might have served as a better translation.  The same applies to the words of Jesus in Matthew 9:9-13, where He declares in v. 13, “I desire mercy, not sacrifice” (quoting Hosea 6:6).  Consider this translation instead, “I desire covenant-faithfulness, not sacrifice.”

Myers thus follows Rabbi Harold M. Kamsler’s suggestion that the word needs a reciprocal meaning, like “loyalty.”  The same applies in usages of “mercy” in Matt. 12:7 where we read, “If you had known what these words mean, `I desire mercy, not sacrifice’…” we might suggest the chesed of Hosea 6:6 might be better translated like this, “`I desire covenant-faithfulness, not sacrifice’.”  And consider Matt. 23:23-24:  “But you have neglected the more important matters of the law--justice, mercy and faithfulness.”  A better translation (if Jesus were speaking Hebrew) might be, “But you have neglected the more important matters of the law—justice [or, righteousness], covenant-keeping and faithfulness”  (such a translation makes the three words virtual synonyms).  So, “chesed” must be defined in a “one another”, reciprocal way.

Defining “chesed” through parallel passages:  Often, an idea is expressed in different, or in parallel ways that help the reader make sense of it.  Consider the way chesed is used in these passages, noting the words used in your translation.  It will be easily seen that chesed occurs here in company with several other terms that are closely related as essential “relational dynamics” of covenant.

Psalm 25:10—“All the paths of the Lord are chesed and faithfulness, for those who keep his covenant and his decrees.”

Psalm 26:3—“For your chesed is before my eyes; and I have walked faithfulness to you.”

Psalm 40:10-11—“I have not hidden your saving help within my heart, I have spoken of your faithfulness and your salvation; I have not concealed your chesed and your faithfulness from the great congregation.  Do not, O Lord, withhold your mercy [or compassion] from me; let your chesed and your faithfulness keep me safe forever.”

Psalm 85:10—“Chesed and faithfulness will meet; righteousness and peace will kiss each other.”

Psalm 89:3—“I declare that your chesed is established forever; your faithfulness is as firm as the heavens.”

1 Kings 8:23—“He said, ‘O Lord, God of Israel, there is no God like you in heaven above or on earth beneath, keeping covenant and chesed for your servants who walk before you with all their heart…”

Jer. 2:2-3—“Go and proclaim in the hearing of Jerusalem, Thus says the Lord:  I remember the chesed of your youth, your love as a bride, how you followed me in the wilderness, in a land not sown.  Israel was holy to the Lord…”

Hosea 6:6—“For I desire chesed and not sacrifice, the knowledge of God rather than burnt offerings.”

Hosea 12:6—“But as for you, return to your God, hold fast to chesed and justice, and wait continually for your God.”

Micah 6:8—“He has told you, O mortal, what is good; and what does the Lord require of you but to do justice, and to love chesed, and to walk humbly with your God?”

Micah 7:18-20—“Who is a God like you, pardoning iniquity and passing over the transgression of the remnant of your possession?  He does not retain his anger forever, because he delights in showing chesed.  He will again have compassion upon us… You will show faithfulness to Jacob and chesed [unswerving loyalty—NRSV] to Abraham, as you have sworn to our ancestors from the days of old.”

“Chesed” and truth.  In the OT, the two terms are often teamed up in a common expression.  As children of the scientific age, we often think of “truth” in terms of facts that correspond to reality.  We think in categories of “correct” and “incorrect”.  However, the ancients contemplated covenant-partners being “true” to one another.  Likewise, Jesus declared, “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples.  Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free."  He meant more than cold, doctrinal correctness.  Jesus is looking for covenant-partners who are “true” to Him.