Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - RE: Richard:Re: [Corpus-Paul] Toward a Theology of OT Covenant

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "John Brand" <jbrand AT gvsd.mb.ca>
  • To: Corpus-Paul <corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: RE: Richard:Re: [Corpus-Paul] Toward a Theology of OT Covenant
  • Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 14:32:58 -0500

From: "Sheila E. McGinn, Ph.D." <smcginn AT jcu.edu>
To: "'Corpus-Paul'" <corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Subject: RE: Richard:Re: [Corpus-Paul] Toward a Theology of OT
Covenant
Date sent: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 14:05:49 -0400
Organization: John Carroll University

> Richard and John, hope you don't mind my butting in, but I am
> wondering _which_ covenant with Abram you mean (i.e., Gen 12:1-4; 15;
> or 17)? Or are you using this category more to refer to inferences
> based on Paul's use of the figure of Abraham? Paul seems to me to be
> pretty selective about how he uses the Genesis material. Sheila McGinn

John responds:
With reference to the Abram narratives, Richard and I have been focusing on
each of the
instances to which you are making reference. Our present conversation is
focusing on
Genesis 17:7 'I will establish [heqim] my covenant between me and you and
your
descendants after you throughout their generations for an everlasting
covenant, to be
God to you and to your descendants after you.'

My point develops that of W.G. Dumbrell "Covenant and Creation" (Paternoster
Press,
1997) who notes that when a covenant is first made carat is used (i.e.
Genesis 15:18 'on
that day YHWH made [carat] a covenant with Abram'). But when the terms of the
covenant are carried out, heqim is used (i.e. Genesis 17:7). Thus, I would
see these
references to covenant as the same covenant in the original vorlage of
Genesis which I
think restricts how we are to interpret Paul's use of the Genesis material.
More particularly, Richard and I are looking at the obligation of the Abram
covenant (if
there is any obligation) versus the Mosaic covenant. Genesis 17:1 has YHWH
saying
'walk before me and be blameless' and followed by 'I will confirm (natan) my
covenant
between me and you.'

This suggest that there is an obligtion in the covenant idea with Abram which
is used in
Genesis as a model for the other families of the earth (i.e. Genesis 12:1-4).
As Noah was
a blameless man, this would underline the reason why God 'establishes' the
covenant he
had made with Adam through Noah and his seed (Genesis 9) rather than the
others who
perished in the flood. The Adamic covenant applies to all but is established
only with
those who fulfill the conditions.

My basic disagreement has to do with Covenant Theology and the idea that
perfect
obedience was required of Adam in his prefallen state. This covenant was
supposedly
abrogated due to the fall and a new covenant of grace based on a
substitutionary
atonement looking forward to Christ. I would contend that perfect obedience
was not
required of Adam's descendants and that the justification of Genesis (and
therefore of
Paul) was an intrinsic righteousness (vs extrinsic) which looked to the
sacrifice but
accounted only those who were deemed righteous as justified.

Hope this helps. You are most welcome to join into the discussion.




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page