When God swore by himself

For example, there was God’s promise to Abraham. Since there was no one greater to swear by, God took an oath in his own name, saying “I will certainly bless you, and I will multiply your descendants beyond number.”

Then Abraham waited patiently, and he received what God had promised.

Now when people take an oath, they call on someone greater than themselves to hold them to it. And without any question that oath is binding. God also bound himself with an oath, so that those who received the promise could be perfectly sure that he would never change his mind. So God has given both his promise and his oath. These two things are unchangeable because it is impossible for God to lie. Therefore, we who have fled to him for refuge can have great confidence as we hold to the hope that lies before us. This hope is a strong and trustworthy anchor for our souls.

(Hebrews 6:13-19a, NLT)

This is one of the most fascinating parts of the Bible. In the midst of proving the incomparability of Christ the writer adds a few words about God's covenant with Abraham. Everything he says is really quite simple, and yet so profound!

We know, as Abraham did, that every word from God is true, every message reliable, every promise unbreakable. So why would God go so far beyond that and bind himself with an oath too? Well because people suck, and although just a single one of God's promises should be enough, it so very often isn't. With God's oaths, and covenants, there's no excuse to a lack of faith.

I believe that many Biblical teachers today do not give these covenants the prominence they deserve. All of us acknowledge they are important, but many put them second when explaining how we should understand the scriptures. Sure, they are only a small part of the full text and God's other promises far outnumber them, but well, when God binds himself we should take notice! I believe that the Biblical covenants should form the basis of our Biblical meta-narrative. Any framework or model formed around anything else is unhelpful and doing us a disservice, if not outright heretical. I suspect that two popular models, Covenant Theology and Dispensationalism, do this, with the former putting the Covenant of Grace ahead of the Biblical covenants, and the later with the dispensations.

I hope to put aside some time to study the Biblical covenants, and post my findings on this blog. I want to investigate what exactly the terms of the covenants were, and more generally, find out what "covenant" meant for those in the Ancient Near East. I want to study how the covenants interact together, and how they fit into the wider scriptures. And I'll try to find what is the most helpful and faithful meta-narrative, or hermeneutic, that we can develop.

Please join me! All comments, suggestions and ideas will be greatly appreciated.