Grace and Covenants

I personally have learned a great deal from talking about grace and the freedom that comes from a realization that we don’t have to save ourselves. Last week, Carolyn asked where did grace come from? Was it present in the garden? Others wondered about the relationship between grace and works. It just seems like grace is too good to be true: It’s just simply too easy, requiring not enough effort on our part. Frankly, things just don’t add up. 

In the garden are two trees: The Tree of Life and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. They seem to contrast how we might relate to God. They might be understood as the tree of grace and the tree of works. The Tree of Life has fruit which is freely available to all. It sustains life, and eating of it assures eternal life. It raises the question: Is grace something that we need to continually partake of in order for it to be effective? 

Like grace, the end product of the Tree of Life is salvation. It, too, is free and everlasting. The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil is the tree of works, of the law, of right and wrong, of discrimination. The end product of eating from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, God says, is death. Paul calls it the law of sin and death:

 Therefore there is now no condemnation at all for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death. (Romans 8:1-2) 

In these verses, Paul contrasts two laws, two trees, two ways by which we might relate to God. From the beginning, it seems, there have been two ways to relate to God: The way of works and the way of grace, the law of the Spirit and the law of sin and death. The law of the Spirit is the gospel, the good news of Jesus Christ and the gospel of grace. 

The law of sin and death is the Old Testament law of God. The law itself is holy and just and good (Romans 7:12) but because we’re fallen mankind we cannot keep the law on our own, the results of which is only sin and death—for those who are under the law. Here is the connection:

 …this commandment, which was to result in life, proved to result in death for me; for sin, taking an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me, and through it, killed me. (Romans 7:10-11) 

The death referred to here is the separation from God spoken about in the garden of Eden. So we see that the garden shows the two ways to relate to God: The way of grace, symbolized by the tree of life, and the way of the law—the way of works—symbolized by the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. 

The law is deadly not because the law is bad but because the law requires discrimination, which is not something in the skill set of mankind, particularly fallen mankind. There’s good reason why good and evil are mysteries (as we’ve been studying—the mystery of godliness and goodness, and the mystery of iniquity and evil) because discrimination between good and evil is the work of God. It is the work of a divine enterprise, not a man-made enterprise.

These two ways of relating to God, established and symbolized in the garden, are further understood by the concept of covenants set up by God. In the scriptures, they’re referred to as the Old Covenant, which is sometimes called the Abrahamic or the Mosaic covenant; and the New Covenant, the covenant about which Jesus speaks at the Last Supper. 

In the old covenant, God encounters Abram and calls him out of his native land of Ur of the Chaldeans and tells him that he intends to make of him a great nation: 

 After these things the word of the Lord came to Abram in a vision, saying, “Do not fear, Abram, I am a shield to you; Your reward shall be very great.” But Abram said, “Lord God, what will You give me, since I am childless, and the heir of my house is Eliezer of Damascus?” Abram also said, “Since You have given me no son, one who has been born in my house is my heir.” Then behold, the word of the Lord came to him, saying, “This man will not be your heir; but one who will come from your own body shall be your heir.” And He took him outside and said, “Now look toward the heavens and count the stars, if you are able to count them.” And He said to him, “So shall your descendants be.” (Genesis 15:1-5) 

This covenant is reconfirmed in Genesis 17: 

 Now when Abram was ninety-nine years old, the Lord appeared to Abram and said to him,  “I am God Almighty; Walk before Me, and be blameless. I will make My covenant between Me and you, And I will multiply you exceedingly.” Abram fell on his face, and God talked with him, saying,  “As for Me, behold, My covenant is with you, And you will be the father of a multitude of nations. No longer shall you be named Abram, But your name shall be Abraham; For I have made you the father of a multitude of nations. I will make you exceedingly fruitful, and I will make nations of you, and kings will come from you. I will establish My covenant between Me and you and your descendants after you throughout their generations as an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and to your descendants after you. And I will give to you and to your descendants after you the land where you live as a stranger, all the land of Canaan, as an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.” 

 God said further to Abraham, “Now as for you, you shall keep My covenant, you and your descendants after you throughout their generations. This is My covenant, which you shall keep, between Me and you and your descendants after you: every male among you shall be circumcised. And you shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskin, and it shall be the sign of the covenant between Me and you. And every male among you who is eight days old shall be circumcised throughout your generations, including a slave who is born in the house or who is bought with money from any foreigner, who is not of your descendants. A slave who is born in your house or who is bought with your money shall certainly be circumcised; so My covenant shall be in your flesh as an everlasting covenant. (Genesis 17:1-13) 

Notice that the end product of the Old Covenant is a physical nation, the nation of Israel. It is a physical nation of Abraham’s physical seed. It will occur in a physical land, the land of Canaan. The covenant is sealed by blood, the blood of the circumcision. The covenant is sealed by man’s blood. It is sealed by the blood of Abraham and his heirs. 

Abraham apparently has no fait in God’s promise. Because we see, as we read on, he and Sarah laughing at God, and God shows up and asks Abraham: “Is anything too hard for the Lord?” 

Miraculously, Isaac is born, and with him begins the covenant promise. In time, Jacob’s sons form the 12 tribes of Israel, and are put into bondage in Egypt and become a great nation, just as specified in the Covenant.  The liberation of the Israelites from Egypt and their journey on the road between Egypt and Canaan, which is a metaphor for the road of life, is a study in grace. 

But we see at work in Exodus 19 an establishment of the Old Covenant, the Mosaic Covenant, which was centered around God giving the divine law to Moses on Mount Sinai. In this covenant, God promises blessings in exchange for obedience. If Israel is obedient, God will bless the Israaelites. If they disobey, God will punish them: 

 Now then, if you will indeed obey My voice and keep My covenant, then you shall be My own possession among all the peoples, for all the earth is Mine; and you shall be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.’ These are the words that you shall speak to the sons of Israel.” So Moses came and called the elders of the people, and set before them all these words which the Lord had commanded him. Then all the people answered together and said, “All that the Lord has spoken we will do!” And Moses brought back the words of the people to the Lord. (Exodus 19:5-8): 

The response to the covenant request is clear: “All that the Lord has spoken we will do!” Notice that the end product of this covenant—these laws—will make Israel a kingdom of priests and a holy nation. Here we see the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil in action. This is a way of relating to God on the basis of law, on the basis of obedience and work. This nation is a physical nation, made up by the physical seeds of men; an old covenant sealed by man’s blood. The end product is community, tribal security. It is mission driven. The end product should be a nation of priests, enabled to do good to others to represent God, but this has nothing to do with their individual salvation. 

The nation of Israel and much of the old covenant is an illustration of living without grace. Living without grace is living by the mantra: “All that the Lord has spoken we will do!” The problem is, that’s not a promise we can keep, because it’s a promise of man, sealed with mankind’s blood, the blood of the circumcision. Blood from the circumcised penis is blood from man’s organ of life. Man’s organ of life can make a physical nation, but it cannot sustain a promise to be good. 

Someone asked me a few days ago: “Why did the Jewish nation never get the idea that Jesus was the Messiah?” I think the answer is: They never understood grace. Their relationship with God was based upon a promise that they could not keep. It was based on man’s blood, based on the law of sin and death. Jesus, on the other hand, was the embodiment of grace. He was grace because God is grace. And that’s why he promised a new covenant—in his blood, not man’s blood, but God’s blood. 

At the last supper, he took a cup and said:  “This cup, which is poured out for you, is the new covenant in My blood.” (Luke 22:20) The New Covenant is sealed with God’s blood. This is grace. This is the tree of life—the symbol of grace. It is God’s way of relating to us. It is the new covenant sealed in God’s blood. The end product of the new covenant is salvation. 

While grace is seen often in the Old Testament, the physical nation of Israel is set in contrast to the new covenant of grace. Israel demonstrates fully and continuously the condition of fallen man, trying to determine what is right and what is wrong, trying to live by the law, sometimes being good, often being bad, working out our own salvation. It is important to emphasize again that the end product—the physical nation of Israel, the tribal security, the community, and people being set apart because of their laws are set apart for mission, even if they don’t always achieve it. 

Reaping benefits when obeying law and reaping losses when not adhering to law is not necessarily a bad thing. There is value in law-keeping. There are plenty of useful benefits. This is why we are called to obey. It strengthens community, it stabilizes the tribe, it produces a better life. It emphasizes mission. But it is important to know that salvation is by grace alone. Living a lawless life is difficult and painful but it doesn’t make you less in God’s eyes. Living a life abiding by the law may make your life better, but it doesn’t make you more favorable to God. 

So Israel provides a picture of living by the law and by the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. Jesus, on the other hand, is the tree of life and is the way of grace. If this is true, what is the relationship between works and grace? How can you be lost if grace is so abundant and so free and so ever present? How do you fall from grace? Maybe another way of asking is: What is the unpardonable sin that grace cannot cover? 

Bryan: I’ve often wondered: Was it so bad to know or understand the difference between good and evil? Why was that prohibited? If they had not eaten of the fruit, would Adam and Eve ever have known the difference between good and evil, or would they have lived forever without that knowledge? Is it important to know the difference? I’ve never quite figured out why it seemed to have been prohibited. It’s almost like the creator was a little bit scared of them knowing or understanding the difference between the two. 

To me, it seems like knowing or understanding the difference between good and evil would make you want to be good, that the desire to be good would be stronger, knowing the consequences of evil. So I’ve never really fully understood about why there was such a difference between the two. If they weren’t supposed to know about it, why was it there? We’ve talked about the power of choice, but I’m not sure why the knowledge of good and evil would have been such a bad thing.

C-J: I don’t think it’s about being concerned whether Adam and Eve would sin. God knows all things, always has. And we have to recognize that these were not children. These were mature adults who had an established relationship with God. God walked with Adam and Eve in the cool of the day, and they discussed things. So I don’t think it was about could they handle it. 

I think God is always looking for relationship. And just like children that grow up and mature and wander and want to start asking really big questions, there comes a time that a parent has to let the individual who has matured to the point that they can ask those questions require that independence for continued growth, through their own lens, their own purpose—an initiative that God gives to each of us. Free will is so critical to the development of a society because diversity is essential for the survival of a species. You don’t want cookie-cut Christians, you don’t want cookie-cut anything. It can’t perpetuate itself. 

Going back to the messiah: In the Old Testament the word means salvation, to save, to salvage. The bullets that would define a potential Messiah had to be a prophet, a man without blemish, and if he wasn’t he was thrown off a cliff or stoned, etc. He had to be a leader. He had to have that discernment of wisdom. He had to be a warrior. He had to lead people into battle and encourage courage where people didn’t even know they had courage. And he had to be a restorer of peace. 

So if you look at the definition of the Messiah and you see a transpose, the message Jesus was saying is the people who made this compilation, this book that we call the Bible and the literal, inspired Word of God, Jesus was saying that there was revelation. He saw it through a different lens. It’s time to embrace others. It’s time to realize that Rome has come, and that if we don’t coalesce, we will lose not just our nation, we will lose our identity through assimilation. That was a very profound thing for Jesus to be saying, and always telling them to be prepared, to be aware, to find community, to stop arguing among themselves.

We are continually in a state of receiving grace. We are continually in a state of understanding the law as it applies to us in this time and place. And we need community to be that reflection in the mirror, like: “You got that wrong. Connie, you got that wrong. You need to go back, look at the word of God, be in fellowship, and pray that God will reveal that you would understand, and we will support you there.” I definitely think grace is something that is abiding, because God says “I am with you always.” But being in the same place where God is at the same time?… That’s God’s hand. That’s not anything I can do. Sometimes I think I’m doing okay and other times I go, “Oops, I better back up here.” Grace in relationship is, like any relationship, continual.

Bryan: Was there grace in the garden?

Donald: To me, that is a fundamental question. We tend to just move past it because I don’t think we really know, or we may think we know but I’m not sure that we really do. I would even extend it beyond the garden. I think what Carolyn asked is a very foundational question. You have God in the Old Testament and there is God in the New Testament, but Christ is the center of the New Testament. If you don’t have grace, then it is works. And it seems like Christ or God did demand things of human beings. 

The word “Messiah” kind of fits between both the Old Testament and the New Testament. Was there grace in the garden? Or it was just a space that Adam and Eve were told: “Don’t go there!” We’ve talked about man attempting to be God, wanting to be God. Part of our understanding was, if I could understand like God understands, then I could do as God does. Maybe. But that doesn’t answer the question about grace in the garden. I tend to think there wasn’t grace at that point. Did grace begin when Christ died for our sins and rose again?

C-J: I think works are a reflection of the internal condition of the individual. Whatever we do is a reflection of the condition of our spirit. As for grace, when two people become parents, hopefully there is a love that cannot be described, nor can they anticipate the depth of it, or what they’re willing to do with it. I think the creation of anything, whether it’s a flower or a flower garden or relationship, grace is in the midst. So I believe grace was in the garden, and also that there were two trees in the garden. I really believe that the love is immeasurable that God has in his creation expressed.

Donald: To answer the question of grace in the garden, I think we first need to ask: Can grace exist, or did grace exist, where no sin exists?

Bryan: If grace is defined as relationship, then grace was there in the garden. But if grace came into being as unmerited favor, to me that connotes that grace became available after sin. So it depends on how you define it: If it’s defined as relationships, then it was always there; but if it’s unmerited God’s favor, regardless of our choices, then to me that signals that it came after the fall.

Donald: Chris’s question is excellent. Is grace needed without sin? Will there be grace in heaven?

Anonymous: We won’t need it. 

C-J: It will be fulfilled. Grace, of course, is going to be in heaven. For but by grace, we wouldn’t be there. Grace will be fulfilled.

Reinhard: Grace was in the garden of Eden as the unmerited gift of mercy, compassion, and love, and it appeared again and again during the Israelites’ flight from Egypt, beginning with the fact that God led them out of it. In the New Testament, Paul wrote that Jesus came not to abolish the law but to fulfill it, and that the law points us to how to live a righteous life as God’s people, obeying God. Without law, we don’t know what direction to take in life. But thanks to God, grace covers our shortcomings. Human beings will always fail to obey the law in many, many instances instances in life, but grace will cover it and provide salvation.  

We’ve talked about hyper grace—the notion that we can just do anything, without worrying about the consequences. I don’t think that’s right, because the law still applies in our lives. It provides the guidelines for how to live according to God’s will, to obey him. But only by grace can we enter heaven. In every institution or relationship there, there’s always limiting rules and regulations in order to have healthy relationships. In order to become of good standing in organizations we have to follow certain rules and regulations. God gave grace to human beings; it’s always been there, Grace leads us to God, in order for us to attain salvation, eventually, and enter heaven.

Sharon: Isn’t grace part of the character of God, which should have been from the beginning of time? Love and grace are really, for me, part of God’s “forever” character. It’s a gift that he gives of himself. So I can’t understand why it might not have existed. You can’t separate that from the core essence of who God is. It’s not an incident. It’s not a tangible thing. Is it not really part of the essence of what God is and who God is? 

Susan: I’m with Sharon, I think it’s in his innate character, which means it’s in the beginning and it will be in heaven. I also see it in the Old Testament, in that the salvation of a lot of people, especially in the lineage of Jesus, was through their belief. Not once was it through their law abiding. Scripture says Abraham believed, and Moses believed, and David believed—the whole lineage believed, and their belief equated to their righteousness. It’s never commented that it was their law keeping that equated.  

I think the law was put in prior to Jesus to be a very faulty way of giving grace as an option. But it never worked. And so Jesus was sent to show that this was a very faulty way and that he has a much better way that is a perfect way, and it was through the shedding blood of Jesus that we got complete perfection.

Donald: There are things that we just kind of move past because we don’t understand them. I read somewhere this week we will never understand God. It’s not in our capacity to understand. The concept of grace and the concept of three persons in one are difficult for me. A husband and a wife become one but not physically, but we’ve been taught to understand that God is One, and that Christ is within God.  

That concept is very challenging to me. In the Old Testament, you recognize that they were separated from each other, physically, for some time. Where does Grace come from? Yes, it’s the character of God. But it seems that Christ is more associated with grace than God is.

Don: Anyone want to stick up for God?

Carolyn: The 10 Commandments is the law which will never be done away with. When we’re under grace, we have all the Mosaic laws, all the laws that the Seventh Day Adventist Church adds, but what law encompasses the freedom that grace gives? Are we ruled by only the 10 Commandments? I know we do it in love, we do it because we love Jesus, and so forth; but in relation to grace, what laws, specifically, are we talking about? 

Michael: I think the answer is clear but very hard to accept; namely, that with grace, all laws fall. This is especially hard to accept for Christians. It is surprising that Jesus does not figure all that much of our discussion, yet that’s what Christianity is about! I think we need more emphasis on the grace that comes through Jesus. We keep going back to the Old Testament but we’re under a new covenant. It’s not the Israelites’ covenant. It’s a completely new covenant and a completely new way of living.

C-J: Regarding the Trinity, there are lots of different ways to teach that idea. For me, the Trinity is about relationship. So what makes a father a father is there has to be offspring. What makes a son is this relationship, and the Holy Spirit is this essence, all the things we’ve talked about of grace. So instead of separating them, think of them as unified, always being unified. Even Jesus says, “I, the father of one, will send another, the Holy Spirit.” We use the dove or other metaphors, but really it’s the essence: “I will bring understanding through this thing we call grace.”  

I don’t separate them as entities— God the Father in the center on a throne, one to the left, one to the right. It’s a unison, an understanding of perpetual grace, of understanding being and becoming. If you do it that way, then you don’t trip, and when you go to speak to people who are unbelievers, that is an answer that can be embraced, I believe, by all traditions, because every tradition recognizes the divine and a creator.  

But when you start attaching all these rules, they’re like: “Well, what makes you think you’re right?” So let God do the work, and when they start asking questions, then you can give them the answer, according to your traditions and faith. But I think that it’s all about relationships in the Divine.

Anonymous: I would respond to Michael that it’s not a new covenant—it’s the same covenant with a change in the sign of the covenant. It was man’s blood, and now it’s Jesus blood, but the same terms apply: God is our God and we are his sons and daughters, with the promise of salvation. When God talked to Abraham, he told him his offspring would be as numerous as grains of sand and the stars of the sky. God is doing his part of the covenant, which is bringing people to salvation. Jesus came to do that. So it’s the same covenant, except for the blood of Jesus is the sign.  

I don’t think the law was ever faulty. Scripture says it’s good and pure and holy. God must have intended to bring salvation through Jesus Christ, starting with the law and ending with salvation, with Jesus’ sacrifice. So it’s the same thing. When Jesus came, according to Paul:  

 “For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death.” (Romans 8:2) 

By “the law of sin and death” Paul does not mean the 10 Commandments. He means our bondage to sin, which will be done away with. We’ll be getting victory over sin through Jesus. So the law is not done away with. It’s the moral law. It’s God’s character. It’s not going to change. However, the means to salvation is different. The sign of that covenant is different. When we get the victory over sin, we end up doing and living and following and keeping the moral law without any effort on our own, because Jesus freed us from the law of sin. 

As Sharon said, it’s the character of God to be graceful all the time, since the beginning. It’s the core substance of God. But since grace abounds where sin abounds, in eternal life there would be no sin, so why would we need grace? I’d like to think that God gave us his ultimate grace all through our lives, all the time of the earth. But he is what he is, and is not going to change. He gave it all. There is no more grace than the grace of eternal life.

Robin: Jesus said that he didn’t come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it. I think what that means, perhaps, is that Jesus was the only one, when he took on humanity along with his divinity, who was able to keep all the law all the time. The rest of us are condemned because we’ve all sinned. But Jesus fulfilled the law, and then it is grace, where he stands in our place before any accusation. It’s a grace that says “I was victorious over the condemnation of the broken law, because I fulfilled it, and I am going to give that victory to this person, to share it.” So the law tells us what sin is because to break these laws is sin. 

Michael: Exactly. He did not fulfill it just for himself. The promise and the mission of Jesus was to fulfill it for everyone, for all of us.

Robin: That’s the grace part. The grace says, “I’m the only one who has fulfilled it, but I’m going to share.”

Sharon: I think for me, it’s simply that Christ’s death on the cross is evidence of the grace of the character of God. And it’s such a gift. We can’t probably overthink it from our carnal perspective. But it’s an amazing, wonderful, cherished gift that we get from Jesus.

Chris: If grace is the character of God, does that characteristic have to be exhibited or known in a place where sin (or something to contrast it against or have that characteristic be exhibited) really need to come out or be known? In other words, does grace have to be shown in a world where something like sin does not exist? Does that characteristic have to exist?

C-J: Yes. Even though my parents are dead, I believe they chose to love me. They’re no longer here. Maybe my DNA is here but yes, it still exists. I don’t see God, but there was a work done and it’s transformative. 

Donald: In a perfect universe, would we know what sin was? You have to have something to contrast it to. 

Chris: That’s really what I’m trying to get at. How do I know that there’s a characteristic in my human mind, if I have nothing to contrast it against?

Donald: If you saw lightness all the time and never saw darkness, you wouldn’t understand what darkness is. I wouldn’t even talk about grace. I wouldn’t know what grace was because all I know is one thing.

Don: Maybe this is partly the answer to Brian’s question, why are there two trees in the garden? In heaven, we see only one tree—only the tree of life is in heaven. What do you make of that in terms of the question?

Bryan: Without knowing both sides of the coin, how do you fully appreciate the one? The fact that there’s only one tree in heaven is very comforting to me. Grace and sin have already run their course. We’ve seen the difference, unfortunately. Satan has been vanquished so there’s no reason for him to be there. There’s no reason for any influence to be there. There’s no reason for any choice of sin to be there.  My point early on was why the two trees were there, and can you fully appreciate the one without knowing the other?

C-J: What if you were to consider that we would be beings without form and that we communicated through consciousness—an awareness that isn’t this dimensional or multi dimensional? Then it wouldn’t even be an issue, because we would be energy in space and time. And we communicated intuitively.

Reinhard: In the many defeats suffered by the Israelites in the Old Testament God always said: “If you return to me, I will subdue your enemies.” I think that’s the grace God gave them. Returning to God meant worshiping him, giving up their idols, and so on. Today we still have the grace of God to subdue our enemies. The Old Testament didn’t say much about individual salvation but the New Testament promises victory in our personal war to overcome the devil and secure our salvation. The way to share our grace is to show love, compassion, and mercy to others. This is the proof of grace, of the goodness of God, reflected through us, and that is something we can share with others.

Donald: In the Old Testament, there’s evidence of grace in the prodigal son. The son who never left was really working under the law. He couldn’t understand why the father would be so full of grace to a son who had actually turned his back on him and gone another way. Yet the father accepted him completely.

Don: Why do you think grace elicits such strong and adversarial emotions?

Donald: I saw this text this morning: 

 Now I urge you, brothers and sisters, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all agree and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be made complete in the same mind and in the same judgment. (1 Corinthians 1:10)   

So good luck with doctrine! In order for that to actually be true, then grace must prevail, because it’s so simple, and it should be for all people. But we have made this extremely complicated and pitted one idea against another enough.

Susan: Paul, obviously, went head to head with Peter and James in the early church over this whole issue of does the law stand? Is it just strictly grace? What’s the role of the Law? Galatians has a huge and a very complicated study about Paul going back to the Old Testament trying to tie in where the law fit into his revelation directly from Jesus on the road to Damascus, and how it worked.  

And then even Peter, after accepting it, would still fall back and want to do what he was comfortable with as far as the very important laws that they observed. And they just go round and round. It’s probably not going to be cleared up in this generation. It’s been around for a long time. Regardless, both Peter and Paul had very important salvation given to them from Jesus and different missions. Both struggled with it. It’s obviously a struggle.

Don: Next week we’ll study the controversy in Galatians 2, and Paul and Peter’s contention about why this is such an emotional issue. 

* * *