THE OLD COVENANT by S. B. Whitney

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Mar 19, 1901

THE OLD COVENANT

By S. B. Whitney

S. B. WHITNEY

In considering the subject of the covenants as presented in the book of Galatians, it is necessary to keep in mind the fact that the apostle is dealing with personal experiences and not with theories, his object being to distinguish between a correct Christian experience and deceptive human inventions; and his illustrations are cited to serve this purpose. To illustrate the covenants, the two Jerusalems are used, thus representing the two classes of people who are denominated their children. This use of the word Jerusalem is of frequent occurrence in the Scripture.

It follows, therefore, that the condition of those cities, as regards bondage or freedom, is determined by the condition of the children. In this case, instead of the children following the condition of the mother, the mother, contrary to nature, partakes of the condition of the children. In other words, the bondage or freedom does not pertain to the cities as such, but to those whom they represent, so that “Jerusalem which now is” is said to be in bondage because that is the condition of those represented by it. This distinction, it would seem, should make plain the subject.

The conditions proposed by Jehovah were not impossible nor unreasonable; nor was the acceptance of them by the people wrong of itself; for the terms were only what are required under the new covenant, and were no more than what had been done and was then being done by some, at least, of that people. Of Abraham it was said, “He obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.” Gen. 26:5. And of Caleb it is written: “But my servant Caleb, because he had another spirit with him, and hath followed me fully,” etc. Num. 14:24. Again, chap. 32:12: “Save Caleb the son of Jephunneh the Kenezite, and Joshua the son of Nun; for they have wholly followed the Lord.” See also Heb. 11:4–10, 24–26.

Wherein, then, lies the trouble with the old covenant? Wherein was that covenant faulty? The bondage was not in the covenant, nor necessarily in the making of it, for that would involve God himself; but the bondage of the people and the faultiness of the covenant resulted from the spirit in which they entered into it; from their unbelief and carnality, which rendered them incapable of performing what they had solemnly promised. With this agrees the reason given for the discarding of that covenant: “For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. For finding fault with them, He saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: . . . because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not.” Heb. 8:7–9.

In this principle lies the object lesson. The danger still exists which confronted the Galatians. The tendency to substitute human ideas for gospel truth yet remains. In the new covenant the law of God is written in the hearts of those who accept it. The children of Israel were permitted to enter into the old covenant because they “had to a great extent lost the knowledge of God and of the principles of the Abrahamic covenant,” and “had no true conception of the holiness of God, of the exceeding sinfulness of their own hearts, their utter inability, in themselves, to render obedience to God’s law, and their need of a Saviour;” and “all this they must be taught.”

If we, like them, enter into covenant with God because we think we must, to be saved, or for the sake of reward, and are lacking in some respects, as they were, we are under the old covenant, and there is still occasion for the exhortation, “Cast out the bond woman and her son;” which is the “putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ.” Gal. 4:30; Col. 2:11.