Introduction
In our previous article we noted that
theologians disagree concerning whether the Abrahamic
Covenant is conditional or unconditional. Dispensational
theologians contend that the covenant is unconditional
in nature (not dependent upon Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and
their physical descendants, the people of Israel,
meeting conditions for the fulfillment of its promises).
Many Covenant theologians claim that the Abrahamic
Covenant is conditional (dependent upon Abraham, Isaac,
Jacob, and the people of Israel meeting conditions for
the fulfillment of its promises). Some Covenant
theologians believe that the covenant is unconditional,
but that the national promises to Israel must be
interpreted allegorically, not literally. Those who
claim that it is conditional point to statements in some
biblical passages, such as Genesis 17:1-2; 22:16-18, and
26:3-5, as their proof.
On the surface, these statements
appear to indicate that the Abrahamic Covenant is
conditional in nature. But before that conclusion is
drawn, several significant things should be noted.
The Significant Things To Be Noted
First, the biblical statements that
appear to indicate that the Abrahamic Covenant is
conditional in nature were made years after God formally
established the covenant with Abraham in Genesis 15.
When God formally established the covenant, He stated no
conditions. This is significant, because, according to
Galatians 3:15, once a covenant is established no
conditions are added to it. Thus, to conclude that the
statements of Genesis 17:1-2; 22:16-18, and 26:3-5
indicate that the Abrahamic Covenant is conditional is
to say that God added conditions to the Abrahamic
Covenant after it was established and thereby violated
the principle of Galatians 3:15.
Second, when the covenant was formally
established, only God passed between the halves of the
animals. A deep sleep came upon Abraham so that he could
not move between them (Genesis 15:8-18). This indicated
that the fulfillment of the covenant’s promises was
totally dependent upon God, not upon Abraham meeting
certain conditions. The only time that both parties of a
covenant would pass between the pieces of animals was
when the fulfillment of the covenant was dependent upon
both parties keeping commitments. Concerning the
significance of God alone moving between the halves of
the animals, George R. Berry wrote, "Here it is to
be noted that it is a smoking furnace and a flaming
torch, representing God, not Abraham, which passed
between the pieces. Such an act, it would seem, should
be shared by both parties, but in this case it is
doubtless to be explained by the fact that the covenant
is principally a promise by Jeh. He is one who binds
Himself" ("Covenant," The
International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, ed. James
Orr [Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company,
1957], Volune II, p. 727).
Third, God formally established the
Abrahamic Covenant in response to Abraham’s question,
"Lord GOD, whereby shall I know that I shall
inherit it [the land]?" (Genesis 15:8). In the
immediate context (v. 7) God had just reminded Abraham
of the fact that He had brought him out of Ur of the
Chaldees in order to give him the land of Canaan to
possess it. In response to this reminder Abraham asked
God for proof that he would fulfill His promise to give
him the land. God consented to give such proof and
formally established a solemn covenant with Abraham as
that proof. The point is that the purpose for the formal
establishment of the Abrahamic Covenant was that of
assuring Abraham that God would keep His word.
The total focus of the covenant was the faithfulness of
God to His commitment. The focus had nothing to
do with the faithfulness or obedience of Abraham or his
physical descendants, the people of Israel. If the
fulfillment of the promises of the Abrahamic Covenant
depended in any way at all upon the faithfulness of
anyone other than God, how could that covenant
accomplish its intended purpose—confirming proof to
Abraham that God would keep His word to give him the
land of Canaan?
Fourth, the Abrahamic Covenant was
still in effect even after the patriarchs of Israel had
sinned several times. Although Abraham had sinned
several times (Genesis 16:20) after the covenant had
been established, God later confirmed the covenant with
his son, Isaac (Genesis 26:1-4). In spite of Isaac’s
sin after that confirmation (Genesis 26:6-11), God later
confirmed the covenant with his son, Jacob (Genesis
28:13-15; 35:9-12; 48:3-4). Even though Jacob and his
sons were guilty of various sins (Genesis 37:18-36;
38:12-26), Joseph regarded the covenant to be in effect
at the end of his life and was convinced that it would
continue to be so into the future (Genesis 50:24-26).
Several generations after Joseph, when the people of
Israel were enslaved in Egypt, God made it clear to
Moses that the Abrahamic Covenant was still in effect
(Exodus 2:24; 6:2-8).
Fifth, even after the nation of Israel
had sinned in numerous ways over the course of several
centuries, King David regarded the Abrahamic Covenant to
be in effect with Israel in his day. In 1 Chronicles
16:15-18 David exhorted the Jews, "Be ye mindful
always of his covenant; the word which he commanded to a
thousand generations, even of the covenant which he made
with Abraham, and of his oath unto Isaac, and hath
confirmed the same to Jacob for a law, and to Israel for
an everlasting covenant, saying, Unto thee will I give
the land of Canaan, the lot of your inheritance"
(compare Psalm 105:8-11). Why would David exhort Jews of
his day to be mindful of the Abrahamic Covenant
if it were no longer in effect with them? Why would he
exhort Jews to remember the covenant always, and
why would he specifically call attention to the promise
concerning Israel’s possession of the land if at any
point in history that promise of the covenant could be
annulled?
Sixth, Moses promised that, even
though Israel would become idolatrous and evil and would
be scattered from the land and suffer because of its
sin, in the latter days it would have opportunity to
return to God and be obedient because God would
not fail Israel, nor destroy it, nor forget the
Abrahamic Covenant which He swore to their fathers
(Deuteronomy 4:25-31). Several things should be noted
concerning this promise. First, it is the same people
(literal Israel, the physical descendants of Abraham)
who would depart from God and be scattered from the land
of Canaan (v. 26) who would also have the opportunity to
return to Him and be obedient in the latter days. This
implies that the literal nation of Israel will still
exist in the latter days and that God will have a
program for that nation during that period of history.
Second, the Abrahamic Covenant would still be in effect
with the literal nation of Israel in the latter days in
spite of its idolatry, evil, and traumatic history of
dispersion and suffering. Surely that would not be true
if the continuation of that covenant with Israel were
dependent upon the faithfulness or obedience of that
nation. Third, Moses made it clear (v. 31) that this
promise in Deuteronomy 4 would continue to be in effect
because of God’s faithfulness. Even though
Israel would fail Him, He would not fail it. He would be
faithful to His covenant commitment which He had sworn
to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
The next article will consider more
significant things that indicate that the Abrahamic
Covenant is unconditional by nature.
