Copyright © 1999 by William D. Barrick.  Cited with permission.

 

 

 

Inter-covenantal Truth and Relevance:

Leviticus 26 and the Biblical Covenants

 

 

William D. Barrick, Th.D.

       Professor of OT

The Master's Seminary

       Sun Valley, CA

 

Leviticus 26 consists of parenetic revelation given at Sinai on the threshold of

Israel's wilderness wanderings. The pericope's relevance is best understood in the light

of the apparent tension that the promulgation of the Mosaic Covenant had created with

the Abrahamic Covenant. After three disturbing apostasies at Sinai, Leviticus 26 explains

the relationship between the two covenants and reemphasizes the exclusive lordship of

Yahweh. Although Leviticus 26 antedates Paul's teaching in Galatians 3:17 by fifteen

centuries, the same truth is proclaimed: "the Law, which came four hundred and thirty

years later, does not invalidate a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to nullify the

promise."1

The respective emphases of both covenants were advanced by the blessings and

curses of Leviticus 26. While the blessings were relevant to the Abrahamic Covenant's

promises regarding land and blessing, the cursings represented a five-stage process of

Mosaic Covenant vengeance.2 The purpose of the cursings was to produce confession of

guilt, humility, and restitution--elements that may be seen as anticipating either the

Deuteronomic (or Palestinian) Covenant or the New Covenant.3 Restitution involved the

sabbatical principle, a significant element of the Mosaic Covenant. The sabbatical

principle is central to Leviticus 26. Yahweh is Lord of both space (the land) and time (the

sabbaths). The Land-Giver and Exodus-Causer will always be loyal to His covenants and

to His covenanted people. In addition to its direct links to the Abrahamic and Mosaic

covenants, Leviticus 26 also has bearing upon the existence of a covenant that Israel

entered in Moab. Later prophetic revelation was anchored in Leviticus 26 and

Deuteronomy 27-28.

This paper will discuss the inter-covenantal aspects of Leviticus 26 as it relates to

the following subject areas: (1) covenant, (2) law, (3) Yahweh, (4) promise, (5)

repentance, and, (6) revelation. The parenesis in Leviticus 26 has something to contribute

to each of these areas of OT theology.

 

1 NASB. All translations in this study are the author's own unless otherwise indicated, as here.

2 The five stages are: (1) debilitation and defeat (Lev 26:16-17), (2) drought (vv. 18-20), (3) devastation by

wild beasts (vv. 21-22), (4) deprivation by siege (vv. 23-26), and (5) deportation (vv. 27-38).

3 There are a number of similarities between the Deuteronomic Covenant and the New Covenant. See

Dennis T. Olson, Deuteronomy and the Death of Moses: A Theological Reading, Overtures to Biblical

Theology (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1994), 126-58 (esp. 153-56).



Inter-covenantal Truth and Relevance: Leviticus 26                                                                                     2

Barrick, Far West ETS, April 23, 1999

 

Covenant

 

"Covenant" (tyrb) is employed eight times in Leviticus 26 (vv. 9, 15, 25, 42 ter,

44, 45). It always denotes a binding relationship of Yahweh to His people Israel. This

relationship provided Israel with a life which had a goal and with a history that had

meaning. In all its occurrences in this pericope, "covenant" promotes the concept of the

sovereignty of Yahweh, the covenant-giver. In six of the eight uses of the term, the first

person singular suffix ("my") is attached (vv. 9, 15, 42 ter, 44). Yahweh Himself is

always the antecedent. The unilateral nature of the covenants is implied by this form of

reference. Yahweh Himself established the covenants, and He alone. Yahweh's personal

intervention in the history of Israel is a central theme of the covenants. His lordship is

personal and absolute. The covenant lays hold of the people of Israel and demands

unconditional surrender to the will of God. Loyalty to the covenant must be more than

outward acquiescence, it must be an inward reality. The "uncircumcised heart" (v. 41) is

the antithesis of this loyalty:

      The covenant Lord demands heart-consecration which reflects the fulfillment of the

      consecration sworn in the circumcision oath. Circumcision is an oath-rite. To be

      uncircumcised would be to place oneself outside the juridical authority of Yahweh

      and a refusal to consign oneself to the ordeal of the Lord's judgment for the final

      verdict on one's life-eternal weal or woe.4

 

The Abrahamic Covenant

          Yahweh's covenant with Abraham appears to underlie the references to "covenant"

in verses 9, 42, and 44. The theme of a fruitful population is an echo of the Abrahamic

Covenant in Genesis 17:6, 7, 19, and 21 (cf, also, Exod 6:4 and Deut 8:18). Verse 9 may

be employed as an example of the distinctions made within the passage concerning the

Abrahamic and Mosaic covenants. The Abrahamic Covenant is characterized by the

following elements: (1) The theme of promise, (2) emphasis on divine fulfillment, and (3)

references to land, prosperity, and blessing and/or cursing. On the other hand, the Mosaic

Covenant is characterized by: (1) the theme of law, (2) emphasis on human

responsibility, and (3) references to sabbath, sanctuary, and divine sovereignty. Although

verse 9 is in the midst of Mosaic Covenant material, it displays Abrahamic vocabulary,

phraseology, and theme. Its message is pertinent to that brief span of time immediately

following the revelation of the Mosaic Covenant at Mt. Sinai. In effect, the message was:

the revelation concerning law is equal in authority to the older revelation concerning

promise. In order to receive the promised blessings contained in the Abrahamic

Covenant, Israel would have to obey the stipulations of the Mosaic Covenant. In other

words, the Mosaic Covenant would be the program by which Israelites would manifest

their faith by faith's works (cf. Jas 2:14-26).

         Each of the three references to "my covenant" in verse 42 is associated with one of

the patriarchs:

 

4 Meredith G. Kline, By Oath Consigned: A Reinterpretation of the Covenant Signs of Circumcision and

Baptism (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 1968), 47-48.



Inter-covenantal Truth and Relevance: Leviticus 26                                                                                     3

Barrick, Far West ETS, April 23, 1999

 

                                                                        bvqfy ytyrb-tx ytrkzv  -42a

and I shall remember my covenant with Jacob

   qHcy ytyrb-tx Jxv   -42b

         even my covenant with Isaac

  rkzx Mhrbx ytyrb-tx Jxv -42c

yea, I shall remember my covenant with Abraham

   -------------------------------------------------------------------

rkzx              Crxhv                   -42d

and I shall remember the land

 

The triple employment of rkz sets the tone of this section.5 The first person references

indicate that Yahweh Himself will respond to Israel's repentance when it occurs. When

Israel repents and turns back to Yahweh, it is the Abrahamic Covenant that will be

reconfirmed or renewed. Thus, the blessings and cursings of Leviticus 26 are set against

the backdrop of the Abrahamic Covenant. The same covenant may also be in view at

verse 44 in Yahweh's promise not to be the one to initiate any breach of the covenant.

The blessings recited in Leviticus 26:4-12 are at least in part a fulfillment of the

covenant made with Abraham. Those blessings fall into six categories:

 

(1) productivity (vv. 4-5; cf. Gen 24:35, 27:28; 30:43)

(2) peace (v. 6; cf. Gen 22:17)

(3) power (vv. 7-8; cf. Gen 22:17)

(4) population (v. 9; cf. Gen 12:2; 15:5; 17:6)

(5) provision (v. 10; cf productivity, above), and

(6) presence (vv. 11-12; cf Gen 17:7, 8).

All these blessings were associated with the land that Israel would receive from Yahweh.

They are consistent with various statements and restatements of the Abrahamic

Covenant.

 

5 In addition to the repetitions in verse 42, the following elements should be noted: (1) The elevated style

of 42abc is nearly a tristich containing synonymous parallelism. This does not mean that the three men are

synonymous. The proper names are but modifiers of tyrb. The last phrase of 42 and the subsequent

context confirm that only one covenant is being described. (2) rkz forms an inclusion opening and closing

the section in order to maintain the emphasis on remembrance. The absence of rkz in 42b helps the

inclusio develop. (3) Jxv in 42bc continues the concept initiated in 42a. Its absence in 42d confirms the

individual nature of that stich. (4) The patriarchal names are the reverse of the triad's usual order (a hapax

phainomenon in the OT). The backward look to the original Abrahamic promise served to confront Israel

with their covenant relationship to Yahweh. (5) The apodosis (the protasis is in vv. 40-41) is concluded by

42d. The substitution of Crxh for tyrb focuses attention on the central promise of the covenant: the land.

The patriarchs are not the center of attention, the land grant is. (6) Verse 42d repeats the yqtl form of rkz

(cf. 42c) in order to maintain the continuity between 42abc and 42d. Therefore, 42d is best understood as a

concise summary of 42abc. (Note, also, that rkzx Crxh in 42d is immediately followed by bzft Crxh

in 43a. This case of contrastive anadiplosis is significant in that the Israelites' forsaking of the land must

precede the divine remembering of the land.)



Inter-covenantal Truth and Relevance: Leviticus 26                                                                                     4

Barrick, Far West ETS, April 23, 1999

 

The covenant curses of Leviticus 26:14-38 are at least in part a removal of the

Abrahamic blessings. Disobedience on the part of Israel would result in the following

changes:

      (1) Rather than possessing the land (Gen 12:1; 15:7, 18-21; 17:8), Israel would be

dispossessed from the land (Lev 26:33-38).

      (2) National greatness (Gen 12:2) would be turned into humiliation, inferiority, and

insignificance (Lev 26:29, 32, 36-37; Deut 28:43-44).

      (3) Blessing (Gen 12:2; 22:17) would turn to cursing (Lev 26:14-38; Deut 28:15-

68).

      (4) Instead of being a blessing (Gen 12:2-3; 22:18), Israel would become a curse

(Lev 26:32, 36-37a; Deut 28:25, 37).

       (5) Multiplication (Gen 12:2; 15:5; 17:4-6; 22:17) would be replaced by diminution

(Lev 26:22, 29, 38; Deut 28:18, 20-22, 53-57, 62).

       (6) Success over Israel's enemies (Gen 22:17) would turn to defeat at the hand of

their enemies (Lev 26:16-17, 32, 36-38; Deut 28:25, 31, 48, 52, 68).

The basis for Yahweh's historical extraction of Israel from Egypt was the Abrahamic

Covenant (cf. Gen 15:13, 14). While the nation resided at Mt. Sinai, they would

remember that covenant as part of their theological heritage. They experienced the

beginning of the historical fulfillment of its promises.

The Abrahamic Covenant demonstrated that Israel's national identity was, not of

their own making. That covenant provided them with the hope of landedness at a time

when they were landless. Leviticus 26:1-13 revealed to Israel that the recent covenant

given at Mt. Sinai (the Mosaic Covenant) did not nullify the Abrahamic Covenant. The

central concept of the Abrahamic Covenant was the land of promise (v. 42). The Mosaic

Covenant would not conflict with the landedness promised long before.

Even the phraseology of covenant disloyalty ("uncircumcised heart," v. 41) was a

reflection of the impact of the Abrahamic Covenant on the theology and life of Israel.

Circumcision was the outward manifestation of inward commitment to the Abrahamic

Covenant (Gen 17:9-14). Personal commitment and accountability were implicit even in

the unilateral pact that Yahweh made with Abraham while the latter was in a deep sleep

(15:12-21). Divine sovereignty and human responsibility are not opposing concepts in the

biblical covenants. Indeed, it was because Yahweh was the sovereign Lord that the

human vassal must obey Him. Human accountability would be nonexistent (at least,

nonbinding) if it were not for the divine character. Yahweh's Lordship as revealed in His

covenant with Abraham is not altered by subsequent covenants. Since the sovereignty of

God is not altered, neither are the promises of His covenant altered or nullified (cf. Gal

3:17).

 

Sinaitic Covenant

In Leviticus 26 attention is directed to the Mosaic Covenant by the prominence of

the immediate historical context at Sinai and the legal nature of some of the terms used in

the chapter ("statutes, commandments," v. 3; "commandments, statutes, ordinances," vv.

14-15; "statutes, ordinances, laws," v. 46). The precepts of verses 1-2 have the Mosaic

Covenant in view:

           prohibition of idols

           observance of sabbaths, and



Inter-covenantal Truth and Relevance: Leviticus 26                                                                                     5

Barrick, Far West ETS, April 23, 1999

 

           reverence for the sanctuary

Any remaining doubt is removed by the clear statements of verses 15, 45, and 46. This

legal emphasis sets the stage for covenant vengeance in verse 25. It also promotes the

sense of Yahweh's Lordship which was already present in the Abrahamic Covenant. The

covenant at Sinai was based upon the historical deliverance of Israel from Egypt. That

deliverance was in accord with the prior covenant (vv. 13, 45). It was intended to identify

more narrowly the people of Yahweh. The Abrahamic Covenant's identification of the

land of promise was supplemented by the refined definition of the people of promise. Just

as the outward seal/sign of the Abrahamic Covenant was circumcision, so the seal/sign of

the Sinaitic Covenant was the observance of the sabbaths (cf. Lev 25; 26:2, 34-35, 43).

The seal/sign of each covenant affected the realm of the other covenant: the covenant of

the land (Abrahamic) was related directly to the people by circumcision, and the

covenant of the people (Mosaic) was related directly to the land by the sabbaths.6 Thus

the two aspects of these covenants (the land and the people) were bound together. The

land was for the people, and the people for the land.

         The legislation connected with the Mosaic Covenant encouraged a serious mindset

regarding submission to the divine overlord. It also produced humility with reference to

the unworthiness of Israel to be the special people of God, the chosen people (cf. Deut

7:6-11). Right behavior by the people of Yahweh was the means of witnessing to the

nations. By such behavior Israel participated in the testimony that Yahweh Himself

initiated by means of their miraculous deliverance out of Egypt (cf. Lev 26:45). The

legislation marked Israel as the people belonging to Yahweh, the Exodus-Causer.

Disobedience to the absolute sovereign of Israel's history would also result in the

removal of covenant blessings associated with the Mosaic Covenant. The following

aspects of the Mosaic Covenant would be rendered inoperable by the exile:

      (1) Though previously a people above all the nations (Exod 19:5; Deut 26:18-19),

Israel would be abhorred by Yahweh and treated as the tail of all the nations

            (Lev 26:30; Deut 28:43-44).

      (2) The kingdom of priests (Exod 19:6) would become ceremonially unclean and

their sacrifices unacceptable (Lev 26:31).

      (3) The holy nation of Israel (Exod 19:6) would be burdened with guilt (Lev 26:39)

and characterized by a heathenlike uncircumcised heart (v. 41).

      (4) Israel's history of national deliverance (Exod 19:4) would turn into a history of

national exile (Lev 26:33, 38).

Sinai was but the commencement of the relationship between God and Israel. God and

the nation must identify with each other if the wilderness years were to lead to the

promised land. The apostasies of Sinai7 only served to remind the nation why Yahweh

 

6 A distinction between a covenant of the land and a covenant of the people should not be pressed to an

extreme. The Abrahamic Covenant also identified the people of promise, referring to them as the

descendants of Abraham. It became clear, however, that some of the descendants of Abraham (through

Ishmael) would not be the people of promise. The Mosaic Covenant clarified the situation regarding the

identification of the covenant people.

7 The golden calf incident provoked the public shattering of the covenant tablets (Exod 32:19). About 3000

died that day (v. 28). Two priests, sons of Aaron, also died at Sinai when they did not follow divine

instructions concerning service at the altar (Lev 10:1-2). Later, a man was executed because of his

blasphemous appropriation of the name of God (Lev 24:10-23).



Inter-covenantal Truth and Relevance: Leviticus 26                                                                                     6

Barrick, Far West ETS, April 23, 1999

 

gave them legislation. They needed standards. Without the order those standards would

produce, there would be chaos and anarchy. The nation must be prepared for their

inheritance, the land. The means of preparation would be instruction, parenesis.

Instruction is the primary concept of hrvt (v. 46). Leviticus 26's focus is on

identification with the covenant deity/suzerain, Yahweh (cf. v. 45).

 

Deuteronomic Covenant8

The many parallels between Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 27-30 present the

reader with a problem of relationship. How is the Deuteronomic Covenant related to

Leviticus 26? The similarities of structure (blessing and cursing), the revelation of the

ultimate chastisement for breach of covenant (exile preceded by siege which deteriorates

into cannibalism), and a time sphere subsequent to the impartation of the Mosaic

Covenant demonstrate a relationship in content. However, similarity is not identity. No

third covenant is ratified in Leviticus 26. No third covenant is described in terms of a

relationship to the past covenant (Abrahamic) and the present covenant (Mosaic). The

connotation of a future covenant may be present; however, that connotation would not

have been identified with Deuteronomy 27-30 by those who received Leviticus 26. The

former passage was revealed to the new generation of Israelites while they were camped

on the plateau of Moab. The latter was revealed to their parents and grandparents while

they were still at Mt. Sinai (Lev 26:46). Leviticus 26 may be considered a prophetic

preview of the Deuteronomic Covenant only in the sense that the basic theological

concepts of the Moab covenant are present in the pericope. However, Leviticus 26 does

not specify that covenant per se. Leviticus 26 does not provide a formal prophetic

announcement regarding any future covenant.

          Revelation is progressive in nature. The seeds of one age become the flowers of yet

another age. The seed of the Deuteronomic Covenant is present in Leviticus 26. The

blessings and cursings of that chapter were transitional. They prepared Israel for the land

while they were at Sinai prior to commencing their wilderness wanderings. Transitional

revelation would be expanded and formalized in a covenant upon arrival at the threshold

of the land (on the plateau of Moab). The title deed to the land (the Abrahamic

Covenant), the constitution for the people of the land (the Mosaic Covenant), and the

rights to the riches of the land (the Deuteronomic Covenant) would then provide the

nation with all the revelation necessary to live within the land itself.

 

8 For the sake of discussion the Deuteronomic Covenant will be defined as the pact God established with

Israel on the plains of Moab (Deut 27-30). That covenant was entered by Israel's oath (Deut 29),

confirmed by sacrifices and public deposit at Shechem (Josh 8:30-35), and renewed by common consent at

Shechem near the end of Joshua's ministry (24:1-28). Synonyms for this covenant include Deuteronomic

Covenant and Covenant on the plains of Moab. Cf. Charles Caldwell Ryrie, The Basis of the Premillennial

Faith (Neptune, NJ: Loizeaux Brothers, 1953), 58-59; Otto Eissfeldt, The Old Testament: An Introduction,

trans. Peter R. Ackroyd (New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1965), 214-17, 226, 230; S. R. Driver, An

Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament (New York: The Meridian Library, 1956), 71; TDOT,

s.v. "tyriB;," by M. Weinfeld, 2:256, 268-69; Moshe Weinfeld, Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomic School

(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1972), 59-116; Delbert R. Hillers, Covenant: The History of a Biblical Idea

(Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1969), 58-64,134-42.



Inter-covenantal Truth and Relevance: Leviticus 26                                                                                     7

Barrick, Far West ETS, April 23, 1999

 

Land

Every gift to the nation of Israel was also a summons to an obligation before the

covenant suzerain, Yahweh. The land grant to Israel involved the people's identification

with Yahweh. The Land-Giver was summoning the people to service. The summons was

both beneficial and binding. Benefits were conditioned upon obedience to the command

of Yahweh. The enslaved nation was delivered from Egypt and became bond slaves

belonging to Yahweh (v. 13). The prior bondage differed from the latter in that the latter

brought blessing (vv. 2-12). No such rewards accrued as a result of Egyptian bondage.

The land grant predated the existence of Israel per se. Abraham received the land

grant at the time of his own exodus from Mesopotamia. Israel's national identity was

established under Moses at the time their exodus from Egypt. God in His sovereignty

controlled the history of the land and the people. “From the roughly 160 cases in which

biblical passages speak of Jahweh's giving the land to Israel, more than half contain

references to ‘the fathers.’”9 It is significant, therefore that reference is made to "the

ancestors" (v. 45) in a context related to the Mosaic Covenant. This establishes a

continuity of covenants. Just as Abraham's descendants claimed the Abrahamic Covenant

while they were at Mt. Sinai, so, in the future days, an exiled people would repent and

claim the covenant made with their ancestors at Sinai. Willingness to identify themselves

as Yahweh's people will qualify them for restoration to the land.

The land of promise is depicted as the setting for the fulfillment of both blessings

(vv. 4-12) and curses (vv. 14-38). Reward and retribution could not be fulfilled

elsewhere. The landedness of Israel was essential for fulfillment. Israel could not receive

landed prosperity without the land. On the other hand, Israel could not be exiled from the

land until they had first possessed it.

           Interestingly, the land itself was treated as a separate participant in the covenant. It

could be the recipient of the restitution of sabbaths that it had been denied (vv. 34-35,

43). It was a land belonging first to Yahweh. As its sovereign Lord, He had authority to

grant it to Israel. He presented the title deed to Abraham's descendants. Any intermediate

generation who were disloyal to the covenant would be subject to expulsion from the

land (vv. 33-44). Yet, the land would remain, kept in store for the future generation who

would obey the precepts of Yahweh. The generations may come and go, but the land

would abide as the Abrahamic Covenant's material entity. By means of sabbaths Yahweh

intended to preserve the fruitfulness of the land for the ultimate possessors (cf. Lev 25).

Therefore, disobedience to Yahweh's sabbatical legislation was considered a sin against

the land. Even more, it was a sin against future generations since such a breach of the

covenant resulted from greed. Such greed would rob the land of its fruitfulness and rob

future generations of its provision.

Landedness made it possible for the people to be tempted in the areas of self-

sufficiency, idolatry, and sabbath breaking. Such temptations could be resisted by

remembering the history of the people and the land. Remembering the covenant deeds of

Yahweh would remind the people that the land they enjoyed was an unearned gift. The

exiled people, remembering the Lord of the land, would confess their guilt and make

restitution (vv. 40-41). Their remembering and acting upon that memory would, in turn,

 

9 J. N. M. Wijngaards, The Dramatization of Salvific History in the Deuteronomic Schools, OTS 16

(Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1969), 73.



Inter-covenantal Truth and Relevance: Leviticus 26                                                                                     8

Barrick, Far West ETS, April 23, 1999

 

result in Yahweh remembering the land (v. 42). He would then preserve the covenant

blessings for His people.

At Mt. Sinai, the land represented hope. In the wilderness, the land represented

hope. In the land, when the hope was fulfilled, the land presented the people with a

challenge. They were challenged to exercise faith in the God of the covenant. Such faith

had not been exhibited by those who apostasized at Sinai and who died in the wilderness.

 

Heilsgesehichte

Heilsgeschichte ("salvation history") was the foundation of the Mosaic Covenant

(vv. 13, 45). Yahweh is the God of history. He is the sovereign Lord of time and of place.

Divine election and deliverance are the main factors in Israel's history. Nothing that

Israel possessed was a result of her own work. Yahweh as Creator and Giver had

graciously and mercifully associated Himself with this nation. As the Lord of history, He

controls all history. He can move entire nations in order to chastise disobedient Israel and

return her to the land in the time of her repentance. The God of history can prepare the

nations for receiving the exiled people (cf. Joseph, Gen 50:20). The nations would

swallow up the scattered Israelites (Lev 26:33) and would make them vanish (v. 38). Yet,

Yahweh would preserve a remnant so that a new history could begin. Israel must trust the

God of history who controls all time, places, and nations.

 

Breach and Preservation of Covenant

Israel might breach (rrp, vv. 15, 44) the covenant, but Yahweh could not (v. 44).

The "uncircumcised heart" (v. 41) of disobedient Israel reflected her disloyalty to the

divine covenants. Yahweh could never be disloyal. He is always faithful because He is

"Yahweh their God" (v. 44).

Breach of covenant occurred when Israel disobeyed the stipulations of the Mosaic

Covenant (v. 15). Idolatry and sabbath breaking, especially, constituted breach of

covenant (vv. 1-2). Such an action was willful. It would result in the nullification of

blessings associated with the Abrahamic Covenant and identification associated with the

Mosaic Covenant. Any infraction of Mosaic legislation was deemed rebellion against the

sovereign will of the suzerain-legislator, Yahweh.

          Yahweh, however, "remembers" (rkz) His covenants. He preserves the covenants.

The covenants contained both blessing and cursing. Blessing and cursing were initiated

by promise, and implemented by legislation. Promise emphasized divine sovereignty;

legislation highlighted human responsibility. When Israel was unfaithful, Yahweh yet

remained faithful. The suzerain's faithful preservation of the covenant is in sharp contrast

to the vassal's failure to submit. Covenant history confirms both divine dependability and

human culpability.

The Abrahamic Covenant was identified as a covenant with roots in the history of

Israel. It involved Jacob, and before him, Isaac. Before Isaac, it was granted to Abraham.

Verse 42 presented this confirmation of prior history.10 As the Abrahamic Covenant was

preserved (and would continue to be preserved), so also the Mosaic Covenant would be

preserved for future generations (v. 45). Yahweh's deeds in history illustrate His

 

10 See above, 4.



Inter-covenantal Truth and Relevance: Leviticus 26                                                                                     9

Barrick, Far West ETS, April 23, 1999

 

faithfulness to preserve the covenant in spite of the failure of one generation to be faithful

to it.

 

Law

Religious enthusiasm is insufficient for proper participation in the covenant

relationship with God. Enthusiasm without identification leads to confusion.

Identification produces unity within and recognition from without. At Mt. Sinai, the

apostasies of the golden calf, the strange fire, and blasphemy demonstrated what an

unguided and unstructured religious fervor can produce. Seeing that the emphasis of

divine law is upon Yahweh Himself, any breach of the law is defiance directed against

the Law-Giver. The stipulations of law exhibit the nature and personality of the law-

giver. The morality of the law is a reflection of Yahweh's morality. Israel's faith is

grounded in the precepts of divine law. Divine law identified Yahweh as the Creator of

the heavens and earth, the Promise-Giver, the Land-Giver, and the Exodus-Causer. Every

statute was a testimony to the election of the people and a witness to their identification

with their sovereign Lord.

         A variety of terms are employed for law in Leviticus 26: hqH/qH ("statute"), hvcm

("commandment"), Fpwm ("ordinance"), and hrvt ("law/instruction"). These terms

represent the entire law promulgated at Mt. Sinai. The law was to be "kept/preserved"

(rmw) "obeyed" (fmw), "walked in (ordering the life)" (jlh), and "practiced" (hWf) (cf.

vv. 3, 14-15). Therefore, the law did not serve as mere ornamentation. It was Israel's

constitution. The nation of Israel derived their identity from their observance of

Yahweh's commandments.

The legislation promulgated at Sinai did not contradict the promise given to

Abraham. The legal covenant (Mosaic) supplemented the promissory covenant

(Abrahamic). The latter did not nullify the former. Mosaic legislation was a means of

implementing Yahweh's suzerainty. It reaffirmed His lordship over His people prior to

their entry into the land promised to Abraham's descendants.

 

Relation to Covenant

As already observed,11 law supplemented covenant. Stipulations were a part of the

treaty form employed by several cultures in the ancient Near East. Thereby the suzerain

could identify himself as the overlord, the one with authority to establish the calendar,

ordain boundaries, grant life, or deal out death. Without legislation, authority would not

be clarified. Every covenant must have an authority in which it resides, an authority

capable of meting out the punishment required for breach of covenant. A covenant