Covenant

Covenant has become an ordinary word in our common biblical vocabulary. We hear the stories of the covenant that God made with Abraham or the covenant that the Israelites made with God at Mt. Sinai. There is, however, a deeper meaning and significance of covenant that is often overlooked. In order to understand this deeper notion of covenant, it is important to examine its etymology and semantic range. Once a clear meaning of its origin and its universal linguistic usage is established, it is essential to delve into the cultural context in which its meaning was formed. With all these aspects understood, it is then possible to comprehend the particular covenants in Scripture, all of which are fulfilled in the new and eternal covenant, Jesus Christ.

The word covenant comes from the Latin word convenire which means “to come together, to be agreed upon” (cf. Webster’s New World Dictionary). This definition seems to presume that covenant signifies some sort of contract. In examining the Hebrew word for covenant, however, it appears that this is not the case.

The word for covenant in the Hebrew text is berith. The term used to express the action of making a covenant is karath berith, which literally means “to cut a covenant” (259, Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament). There are many speculations to the root of this word berith. Some say it comes from the Akkadian word “birit” which literally means “between, among” (254, Theological Dictionary). Others speculate that it is related to the Akkadian word “biritu” which means “clasp or fetter” (255, Theological Dictionary). The most plausible explanation that I found is that in its root form “BRT,” berith means “curse.” Thus, karath berith means “to cut a curse.” This might sound quite peculiar to a western ear; nevertheless, for the people of the ancient world, the notion of cutting a curse was customary. What is astounding, in fact, is that many languages, some of which are not even Semitic, share this same terminology when they express their concept of covenant.

In Sumerian, the words “Nam Erim2…Kud” are frequently found expressing the notion of cutting a curse. Nam and Erim2 form the idea for curse, while kud is the word for cut. The rituals for cutting a curse, which were typically public observances, were customarily performed in a temple or near a temple gate (cf. Kitz, 206-207). For example: “di-kud-e-xx kan4 dnin-urta-se3 nam-erim2 kud-re-d[e]3 ba-an-sum-mu-u[s], which means, “The judges sent him to the gate of Ninurta to cut a curse” (Kitz, 206). In Aramaic, or Phoenician as some call it, the words “krt ’lt ‘lm” are found on a tablet from Arslan Tash in present day Syria and also express the idea of cutting a curse in relation to keeping some evil beings away (Theological Dictionary, 259). In Homeric Greek the words “horkon temnein” are found in the Iliad and the Odyssey in reference to some sacrificial ceremony (Kitz, 48). Thus, the same phrase is found in an agglutinative language, in a Semitic language, and in an Indo-European language. In addition to these languages, however, both Akkadian and Hittite have similar concepts, for instance: “risku u mamitu” which is the Akkadian for “agreement and conditional curse” and “ishiula lingais” which is the Hittite for the same (Kitz, 50-51). Thus, the fundamental concept of a curse being some sort of binding oath is almost universal.

The question still remains, however: why use the phrase “to cut a curse” in making a covenant? This is where the cultural context of how covenants were performed becomes essential. Covenants were made all the time. It was a common way of establishing relationships with people and deities. Covenants could be established between soldiers and their general, between man and wife, between a king and his people, or between a person and a local deity (Theological Dictionary, 264). A covenant usually included three main parts: first, a ritual was performed which usually consisted of the cutting of animals and the passing between them; second, the terms were pronounced which consisted of the pronouncement of all punishments in case of transgression; finally, a sign was manifested which involved the erection of a shrine, the insertion of a bodily mark, or some kind of lasting testament to the promise.

The people of the Ancient Near East knew the significance of all these steps. They realized that in the covenant ritual, a person placed a conditional curse on himself. If the covenant was violated, punishment was understood to come upon the offender just as it came upon the animals. In more simple terms, they understood that they either kept the covenant or had the curse come upon them i.e., cut in two like the animals in the sacrifice. Thus, as we look at the Hebrew original, karath berith and discover its root essence, we come to understand that “Covenant is not a contract, it is a pledged, personal commitment” (McCarthy, 17). More than that, it is a conditional self-curse.

Now that the concept of covenant is understood, there seems to be a certain covenantal relationship unlike any other. In fact, there seems to be a certain deity unlike any other. This deity of the Israelites actually makes covenants with His people, which is entirely unique to all other nations. Nowhere is there found a covenant being initiated by a deity. Nevertheless, this deity freely chooses a special relationship with His people.

There, in fact, is a history of this relationship which can be found in the Sacred Scriptures. At creation, this deity, God, establishes the Sabbath as the sign of his covenant with all creation represented by Adam, the first human being. Berith is not used in this covenantal action simply because this is not a formal covenant. Nonetheless, this is where the special relationship of God as Creator is first established.

After this relationship is severed, God reestablishes His covenant with all humanity represented by Noah. This is where berith is first used and where God’s formal covenant with His people begins. After Noah performs the ritual sacrifice, God imparts his sign of the covenant, the rainbow, and promises never again to destroy the earth (Gen. 9: 1-17). The rainbow was important for Noah because it symbolized a bow without an arrow. An arrow was the symbol for lightning and Noah’s concept of God was most likely that of a storm deity, the ruler of the heavens. By putting the arrow aside, God made known that he wanted to reestablish his peace with all mankind.

It is in the establishment of the covenant with Abraham, the father of all Israelites and Ishmaelites, that we first see use of the words karath berith. After Abraham sacrifices six animals, God literally conditionally self-curses Himself and passes between the pieces in the symbol of a flaming torch (Gen. 15: 9-18). The covenant terms are God’s words to Abraham: “You shall be the father of a multitude of nations” (Gen. 17:4). The covenant sign is circumcision which was thought to enhance fertility and therefore, ensure regeneration. This is significant because Abraham’s concept of God was probably that of a fertility deity, a deity that brought forth life. With this sign, God communicates his desire to establish his covenant with His people forever.

As the Israelites grow in number and power, their loyalty and faith in God is often weakened. Moses, the leader of the Israelites seeks to restore this relationship by having the people cut a covenant with God. After sacrificing the animals, Moses reads the conditions of the curse, splashes the blood from the sacrifice on the altar and on the people. Then all the people declare: “All that the Lord has spoken, we will do and we will be obedient” (Exodus 24:7). God, then, gives them His law, the Ten Commandments, the sign of the covenant which the people must follow. The people of Israel understood that they placed a curse upon themselves through the death of a living animal. Blood was the symbol of the very life of any living and mobile being. Thus, they realize that if anyone of them violated God’s law, they would literally invite Him to bring death upon them.

The tribe of Israel eventually forms a great kingdom under the dynasty of King David and God seeks to form a covenant solely with him and his lineage (II Sam. 23:5). The Davidic covenant, however, is a very different type of covenant mostly because the covenant ritual is not recorded in the Bible. The Bible does possess the terms of this covenant which are God’s words: “I will establish your descendents forever and build your throne for all generations” (Psalm 89:4). The sign of this covenant is the eternal kingship which will ultimately be fulfilled in Jesus Christ. The Davidic covenant illustrates the deep relationship that God has cultivated with his people throughout the centuries. God expresses his love for David when he says, “You are my son. Today, I have begotten you” (Psalm 2:7). With these words, God literally adopts him as His own son.

It is an obvious fact of history that David’s dynasty did not last very long. Nevertheless, Jesus Christ, a descendent of David, fulfills this promise of eternal kingship and all the other promises revealed by God in the covenants beforehand. In relation to Adam, Christ brings life into the world instead of sin. With Noah, Christ establishes the waters of Baptism as the entrance into new life. Christ is Abraham’s descendent and fulfills his covenant by establishing the new covenant with all peoples. With Moses, Christ fulfills the Old Law and brings it to completion in the New Law. With David, Christ, who is seated at the right hand of the Father, becomes eternal heir to David’s kingship.

The ritual of the New Covenant is not the cutting of a curse, but the outpouring of a blessing: Christ’s Body and Blood. In the ancient rituals of covenant, cursed bread was eaten as a form of conditional self-curse. In the new ritual, the celebration of the Eucharistic Feast, instead of eating the bread of a curse, the bread of death, Christians eat the bread of a blessing, the Bread of Life. Instead of covenant terms, Christ makes a promise: “I will be with you always, even until the end of the age” Matthew 28:20).