First Quarter 2003
Adult Sabbath School Lessons: "The Promise"
Special
Insights #4
Lesson
3: All Future Generations
January
11-17, 2003
(Produced
by the Editorial Board of the 1888 Message Study Committee)
The
Bible is clear that God's covenant is a promise on His part (Galatians
3:16-21). Never does it say that when God gave us His New Covenant that He
made "a bargain" or "a deal" with man, or a mutual
"agreement," or a "transaction" compact. This is
evident by reading God's New Covenant promises to Abraham (Genesis 12, 13,
14, 15, 16, 17) and to Moses (Exodus 6:6-8), and to Jeremiah (31:31-34).
Man's promise or "bargain" is never asked for.
The
dictionary definition of "covenant" is "a binding and
solemn agreement made by two or more individuals, parties, etc. to do or
keep from doing a certain thing; a compact" (Webster's New World
Dictionary). But this dictionary definition fails to understand the
biblical doctrine of God's New Covenant—which is a "third-angel's-
message-in-verity" promise. One can't expect a secular dictionary to
probe biblical meanings.
But
that popular definition still intrudes in our Sabbath School Quarterly.
Tuesday's lesson says of "the biblical covenant that … God and
humanity enter into an agreement. Very simple. … They [the people] have
their part to do … [their] end of the deal," or
"agreement." Mingling of the Old and New Covenants creates
confusion. If by "biblical covenant" the Quarterly means the New
Covenant, nothing in the Bible supports that view. But if the Quarterly
means the Old Covenant, yes, indeed; it's man's promises and
"bargain"-making all the way through.
What
does Scripture say? Is the "the third angel's message in verity"
a justification-by-faith salvation all of God, or is it partly of our own
works? This issue perplexes many sincere people. How can we give
sufficient emphasis to grace without weakening our devotion to obeying the
law?
We
have seen how the Lord gave Ellen White a vision in which she was shown
that "the view of the covenants as it had been taught by Brother
Waggoner was truth" (Letter 30, 1890). "Night before last I was
shown that evidences in regard to the covenants were clear and convincing
… the position that Brother Waggoner presented" (Letter 59, 1890).
Waggoner discusses the dictionary idea of "bargain"-making:
"After
the Flood God made a 'covenant' with every beast of the earth, and with
every fowl; but the beasts and the birds did not promise anything in
return. Genesis 9:9-16. They simply received the favor at the hand of God.
That is all we can do—receive. … That which makes all the trouble is
that even when men are willing to recognize the Lord at all they want to
make bargains with Him. They want it to be an equal, 'mutual' affair—a
transaction in which they can consider themselves on a par with God. …
Do not forget as we proceed that the covenant and the promise are the same
thing … Remember also that since only righteousness will dwell in the
new heavens and the new earth, the promise includes the making righteous
of all who believe. This is done in Christ in whom the promise is
confirmed" (The Glad Tidings, pp. 71, 72).
"But
surely we must promise SOMEthing!" is our cry. "If God's New
Covenant is His promise to save us without our promising something in
return, doesn't that weaken our obedience to the law?
For
well over a century we have had problems grasping what our
"part" of the so-called "deal" is. According to the
Bible, it is learning how to believe God's New Covenant promise in the
light of John 3:16.
Our
Quarterly suggests a solution with an interesting analogy. A man falls
overboard. Someone on deck wants to throw him a life preserver. Our
authors say, "The one in the water has to agree to his end of the
'deal,' and that is to grab on." And that, we are told, is God's
"covenant"—a two-way bargain or mutual agreement before the
"savior" throws a rope.
But
wait a moment. Does any man on deck demand any drowning person to promise
something before he throws the rope? Must the man in the water agree to a
"deal" or "bargain" first? Could any rescuer in the
world be that crass? How can we represent God as being like that?
For
sure, we sinners must grab the rope; but the motivation is gratitude for
what has ALREADY been done, not making a promise or a "deal"
first.
The
"Savior" standing safely on deck throwing a rope to the sinking
sinner is the Roman Catholic "Christ" who dares not take or
assume our fallen, sinful nature lest he also become a sinner like we are.
The Roman Catholic Christ has no concept of conquering or "condemning
sin" in fallen, sinful flesh or nature. The basic assumption is that
sin is invincible so long as it has taken residence in sinful human
nature. And the ancillary doctrine of course is that so long as we humans
are still in our fallen, sinful nature, it is a "chimera" to
dream of overcoming sin per se. Perfection of character, it follows, is
impossible until glorification when our sinful nature is radically changed
into a sinless one at the physical coming of Christ. This anti-"third
angel's message" view is intrinsic to the popular idea of the New
Covenant being a "bargain," a "deal" worked out on
both sides of an "agreement." It's native to the Immaculate
Conception idea.
Again on Wednesday our Quarterly wants to insert "some
implied obligations on our part when we … see the rainbow" after
Noah's Flood. There it is again—a "mutual bargain" or
"deal" or "agreement" and it again creates confusion.
Didn't
God put His rainbow in the sky before exacting any promise from us?
Of course there is an obligation on our part when we see the rainbow, but
it comes AFTER God takes the initiative to put it in the sky. It is
motivated by heart appreciation for what God HAS done, not to
"bargain" for some future doing by God. God entered into no
"bargain" or "deal" with us before He gave His only
begotten Son for us. He just did it.
Thank
Him for the clear assurance that we are totally dependant on God's grace.
So true. The pity is the confusion engendered by mixing the Old and New
Covenants.
Next week: Did God ask Abraham to walk between the
divided halves of the animal carcasses? Does He ask us to make solemn-oath
promises to Him?
|