Fundamental Biblical Hebrew and Aramaic

 Theology, the Pentateuch, and Covenants

What is theology? 

Theology is the study of God and the world around Him. Webster's dictionary defines theology as "The science of God or religion; the science which treats of the existence, character, and attributes of God, his laws and government, the doctrines we are to believe, and the duties we are to practice." Saint Augustine, in the fifth-century, defined theology as "Rational discussion respecting the deity." A. H. Strong, a 20th-century theologian, said that theology is "the science of God and the relations between God and the universe." Charles Ryrie, a famous dispensationalist theologian, says theology is "thinking about God and expressing those thoughts in some way." (Basic Theology [Wheaton, IL: 1986], 9). Millard Erickson, a modern Baptist theologian, says that theology is simply "the study or science of God." (Christian Theology [Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2001], 22).

Most simply put, theology is the study of God. It comes from the word theos, which is Greek for "God," and -ology, which is from the Greek word logos, meaning "word." Most literally, then the word theology means "words about God" or "the study of God." If one were to use the term generically, it functions much like "philosophy" or "worldview." People often use the word this way in secular venues. Many times it is used very correctly, speaking only about God. This is called "theology proper." Theology is a belief system that is built upon intellectually and emotionally held commitments concerning God and man. Next is systematic theology, which combines these different aspects to make helpful divisions. 

As Dr. Wayne Grudem explains it, "systematic theology is any study that answers the question, 'What does the whole Bible teach us today?' about any given topic." This highly organized, topical approach to exploring Scripture is fundamental to understand because it brings together different areas of study. 

Systematic theology is different from:

Historical theology

Historical theology studies how Christians have understood various theological topics throughout history. This form of theology informs us of the insights and mistakes others have made studying Scripture over the centuries. While systematic theology sometimes draws from this historical information, it uses other sources as well.

Philosophical theology

Philosophical theology studies theological topics mostly without the use of the Bible. It uses the tools and methods of philosophical reasoning and attempts to discern what can be known about God from observing the universe. This can help us understand right and wrong thought forms in our culture and others. Again, systematic theology sometimes draws from this information, but philosophical theology doesn't provide a holistic understanding of theological topics.

Apologetics

Apologetics defends the validity of the Christian faith, directly addressing objections to the Bible and Christianity. This helps us connect our topical exploration of Scripture to evangelism, and overcome the specific barriers that an unorganized understanding of Scripture can create.

Ethics

While Systematic theology emphasizes what God wants us to believe and know, Christian ethics emphasizes what God wants us to do—and what attitudes he wants us to have.

Systematic theology vs. biblical theology

Biblical theology gives special attention to the teachings of individual authors and sections of Scripture and frames each lesson within the historical development of Scripture. It answers questions like, "How does the teaching about prayer develop over the history of the Old Testament and then the New Testament?" These questions come close to the questions that systematic theology answers, like, "What does the whole Bible teach us today about prayer?" These disciplines overlap at the edges, and parts of one study blend into the next. Biblical theology traces the historical development of a doctrine, so your understanding of that particular doctrine changes as the historical setting progresses. Biblical theology also focuses on how the biblical authors and their original audience understood each doctrine.

Systematic theology makes use of biblical theology and often builds on its results. At some points, especially where great detail and care is needed in the development of doctrine, systematic theology will even use the same methods as biblical theology, analyzing the development of each doctrine through the historical development of Scripture. But the focus of systematic theology remains different: it focuses on the collection and summary of all biblical passages on a subject, and attempts to summarize the teachings of Scripture in brief, understandable, and carefully formulated statements.

Systematic theology results in doctrines. Doctrine is what the whole Bible teaches us today about a particular topic. It's the answer to the questions systematic theology asks. Doctrines can be broad, like "the doctrine of God," or more focused, like "the doctrine of God's eternity," or "the doctrine of God's justice." Trying to understand what the Bible teaches us is like fitting together a jigsaw puzzle. Systematic theology helps us fill in the border and some of the significant pieces. But no matter how much we study, we'll never know everything that the Bible teaches about everything, so our puzzle will have gaps with pieces remaining. The goal of systematic theology is to help Christians put as many parts into their "theological jigsaw puzzle" as they can, with as much accuracy as possible. The doctrines studied in systematic theology act as guidelines to help us continue filling in other areas and adding new pieces for the rest of our lives.

When people ask, "What does the Bible say about ___?" the answer involves looking at more than one verse. And it's not enough to scour a single epistle or even the New Testament. Systematic theology gives us an organized, careful way to step back and see what the Bible has to say, from Genesis to Revelation. Inevitably, someone studying a systematic theology text will have many of their personal beliefs challenged, modified, refined, or enriched. Our study is going to explain the theology of the Pentateuch. 

Introduction to the Pentateuch

The first five books of the Bible (both Hebrew and Christian) are foundational to all of Scripture and rank as one of the most essential portions of the Word of God (Wolf: 1991 An Introduction to the Old Testament Pentateuch. Chicago: Moody Press:17). This is so because its theological and historical revelations are necessary for an understanding of the rest of the Old Testament and the New Testament as well. These five books contain, for example, God's revelation about the origin of the world with its emphasis on the creation of man made in the image of God, how sin entered human history and the judgment that followed, and the origin of the nation of Israel and its covenant–relationship to Yahweh.

For the Jew, these five books contained an authority that the rest of (their) Scripture—the prophets and the writings—did not seem to match. This is evident in that when the Jews were driven into exile, it was the books of Moses that were read most frequently in the synagogues. The first five books of the Bible have, from the earliest of time, been taken by the Jews to constitute a unity known to them as the Law. To the Jews, the word Torah best described this part of Scripture as this biblical Hebrew term means not only the "law" but also "teaching" or "instruction" which more completely characterizes God's communication to the Israelites through Moses (Wolf: 1991 An Introduction to the Old Testament Pentateuch. Chicago: Moody Press.:18). The first five books of the Bible have commonly come to be referred to as the Pentateuch, a word derived from the Greek penta, meaning, "five," and teuchos, originally meaning "a case for carrying papyrus rolls" but in later usage, meaning the "scroll" itself. The division of these writings into five separate books may owe its origin to a practical consideration as one scroll containing all the words would be cumbersome. 

Before developing a synthesis of the individual books of the Pentateuch, it is helpful to consider issues about its authorship, author, a chronology of events and dating of composition, theological emphases, and covenant forms which dominate the compositional structure of the text from Exodus through Deuteronomy. Much has been written on an introduction to the Pentateuch, and the topics considered here are discussed in detail in other works, some of which are cited in the text and referenced in the bibliography. The intent here is to deal with these issues only to the extent necessary to carry out the goal of this work, which is to develop a synthesis of each book of the Pentateuch. Some of these topics have a direct bearing on developing such an integration, while others provide a framework within which to understand the Pentateuch better.

Authorship of the Pentateuch

Wolf (1991:51) has noted that few subjects in Old Testament studies have generated more discussion and more disagreement than the question of who wrote the Pentateuch. Opinions range widely, with some arguing that every word was written by Moses, while others insist that Moses had nothing whatever to do with the writing of the Pentateuch. Instead, it is claimed that certain ancient sources, labeled J, E, P, and D, were the original documents from which the Pentateuch was formed and that the writers of these alleged documents, the Yahwist, Elohist, Priestly writer, and the Deuteronomist, are regarded as the authors of the Pentateuch.

While the issue of authorship is minimally vital in the process of understanding the Pentateuch, the subject of the text's unity of composition is essential to develop a synthesis of the text. It is necessary, therefore, for this study to establish authorship of the Pentateuch.

Conservative biblical scholarship, while acknowledging problems associated with Mosaic authorship, generally adheres to the traditional Jewish and Christian position. In contrast, liberal biblical scholarship tends to reject Mosaic authorship in support of the documentary hypothesis. This development of a synthesis of the Pentateuch is in agreement with the traditional Jewish and Christian position. It assumes Mosaic authorship and, therefore, a unity of composition of the text. To argue in favor of Mosaic authorship would be extensive and not the purpose of this study. Nevertheless, it is helpful to present in brief a case for Mosaic authorship.

Continuity/unity of narrative story

The five books of the Pentateuch present a coherent picture of the origins of humanity, its fall to sin, and the results. It also offers a cohesive picture of the birth and development of Israel as a nation in a covenant–relationship with Yahweh (Wolf 1991:18-19). Furthermore, except for Genesis, these books focus on the life and ministry of Moses whom God raised to lead the sons of Israel out of bondage in Egypt and into that covenant-relationship with Himself, and to, but not into, the Land of Promise as a fulfillment of His promise to Abraham. The continuing role of Moses as the protagonist in Exodus through Deuteronomy, and the central focus of Yahweh's developing covenant–relationship with Israel, following the promises He made to Abraham, serve to unify the books of the Pentateuch.

Continuity/unity in narrative structure

The main narrative sections of the Pentateuch are concluded by poetic material, sometimes followed by an epilogue (Sailhamer 1990:7-8). For example, at the close of the patriarchal narratives stands the blessings of Jacob, which are written in poetic form in Genesis 49 and an epilogue in chapter 50. The Exodus narratives are concluded by the song of Moses (Exodus 15) written in poetic form, and the wilderness wanderings are followed by Balaam's oracles (Num 23-24) written in poetic form. And at the end of the Pentateuch, there is a double poetic section containing Moses' song of witness and blessing on the twelve tribes (Deut 32-33), followed by an epilogue (Deut 34).

Continuity/unity in grammatical features

Along with the overall continuity in the narrative, certain grammatical features underscore the unity of the Pentateuch. For some reason, as Wolf (1991:19) points out, these books fail to distinguish between the third-person pronouns "he" and "she." Instead of making this distinction like the rest of the OT, the Pentateuch uses only the masculine form.

While it is possible to conclude as some have that the witness of the Pentateuch itself to Mosaic authorship can be understood as confirming only that Moses wrote certain portions of the text, there is nevertheless other credible biblical evidence to support his writing of the text. And while it would seem that certain parts of the Pentateuch were additions from later periods of Israel's history (Wolf 1991:58-60), it does not invalidate that Moses could have written the majority of the text. For example, the declaration of the humility of Moses (Num 12:3) would hardly be convincing if it came from Moses' judgment. Equally challenging to determine in the Book of Numbers is the origin of the Balaam story (Num 22-24). Since Moses was not a participant in these events, or even an observer of them, their background as Scripture is somewhat problematic. These and other examples suggest later additions to the text of the writings. Nevertheless, there is reasonable evidence to support Mosaic authorship, and it is reasonable to conclude, along with both Jewish and Christian tradition, that authorship of the Pentateuch is to be ascribed to Moses.

The person of Moses

From a Jewish perspective, the dominant figure of the Pentateuch and, to a certain extent, of the entire OT is Moses. Abraham plays a key role in Genesis, but his stature and accomplishments do not match those of Moses. Although Abraham was the founding Father of Israel, Moses was the one who organized the nation, promulgated their laws, and, under God, led them for forty years through the wilderness. Throughout this time, he was a prophet, a priest, and, in effect, a king/ruler as he directed every facet of Israel's national life. The NT highly praises both Abraham and Moses, but it was Moses who appeared on the Mount of Transfiguration, along with Elijah, to talk with Jesus (Matt 17:3-8).

Though he was born into a Jewish household as a member of the tribe of Levi, he was raised an Egyptian by Pharaoh's daughter and given an education befitting a prince of the royal house. Moses' concern for his people in later life led directly to his self-imposed exile from Egypt. His calling by God after forty years in the desert of Midian set him aside as a prophet, one who would speak the word of God to the sons of Israel and Pharaoh. In his role as a prophet, Moses was unique. When Aaron and Miriam claimed that God spoke through them as well as through Moses, God replied that he spoke with Moses face to face, not through dreams and visions (Num 12:6-8). The uniqueness of Moses' role as a prophet of God is demonstrated in his prediction that God "will raise for you a prophet like me" (Deut 18:15, 18). After many centuries of prophets coming and going, Israel was, at the time of Christ's appearance, yet looking for the prophet of whom Moses spoke (John 1:21). According to Acts 3:21-23, this was fulfilled in Christ.

Closely associated with Moses' prophetic role were the "miraculous signs and wonders" that Yahweh performed through him, first in Egypt, and then in the wilderness (Deut 34:10-11). A prophet was also a man of prayer interceding on behalf of others (see, for example, Gen 20:7). Moses' intercession on behalf of Israel (Exod 32:11-14) demonstrates his function as a mediator between God and Israel. The year that Israel spent at Mount Sinai was a significant time for Moses, for it was then that he served as lawgiver and became the mediator of the covenant Yahweh entered into with the sons of Israel. The people were afraid to listen to the authoritative voice of God, so God spoke to Moses, and Moses gave them the laws and statutes (Exod 20:18-19). Moses "wrote down everything Yahweh had said," and read to the people from "the Book of the Covenant" (Exod 24:4, 7). Moses' role as lawgiver is connected with the writing of the Pentateuch since all five books are referred to as "the Law."

At Mount Sinai, Moses also directed the establishment of worship under the leadership of the priests and Levites. Moses officiated at the ordination of the priests, offering the prescribed sacrifices, and applying the blood required by the Levitical Law (Lev 8). Thus, before Aaron was installed as high priest, Moses was Israel's priest. It is evident from this that for Moses to officiate at the inauguration of the Aaronic priesthood, he necessarily must have been sanctified. Since there is no record of this happening, it is clear that God Himself must have blessed Moses, likely at the burning bush incident when he was told by God to take off his sandals because he was on holy ground (Exodus 3:1-6; compare this with Isa 6:1-7). And it was Moses who received from Yahweh the plans for the construction of the Tabernacle and the regulations for the various offerings (Exod 25:9; Lev 7:37-38). Significantly, Moses remained the spiritual leader of Israel even after the priests and Levites were carrying out their responsibilities.

Dating and chronology of the Pentateuch

Chronology is the backbone of history. Absolute chronology is the fixed central core around which the events of the nation must be correctly grouped before they may assume their exact position in history and before their mutual relationships may be adequately understood. Without exact chronology, there can be no history. Until a correct chronology of a nation has been established, the events of that nation cannot be correctly integrated with the events of neighboring areas. The importance of developing a chronological framework to understand the history of the Old Testament, including the Pentateuch, is evident.

Establishing a chronological framework of the Old Testament in general, and the Pentateuch in particular, is problematic, however, because biblical data, the primary source for establishing a chronology, is generally for some person, such as a king (Jeremiah 1:2-3 and Daniel 1:1), or events, such as an earthquake (Amos 1:1) and results, therefore, in a relative rather than "absolute" dating of incidents and persons. It is beyond the intent of this brief section to discuss what is meant by an absolute chronological framework. Suffice it to say that such a frame can be established for examining the history of a nation to other nations based on historical records of that nation.

To establish an absolute chronology, some chronological reference point needs to be developed or identified. The Western world chooses the birth of Christ as that reference point. Given that point, a chronology can be derived backward and forward in time. This does not solve all the problems associated with establishing a robust chronological framework, one that will allow for the study of all nations. There must be points of intersection between countries, societies, cultures (see Daniel 1:1 as an instance of crossing between Israel and Babylonia).

Composition

Assuming Mosaic authorship, then the Pentateuch would have to have been written sometime between the time of the Exodus and the death of Moses, namely, between 1446 and 1406 BC. Given this, it is possible that Genesis, Exodus, and Leviticus were composed during the one year Israel was encamped at Mount Sinai (1446-1445 BC). The books of Numbers and Deuteronomy would have to have been completed in the final year of Israel's forty years of wandering in the wilderness (1407-1406 BC).

The recipients of the Pentateuch are clearly the Israelites, redeemed and delivered from bondage in Egypt, separated to Yahweh, and then brought into the covenant relationship with Him at Sinai. It would seem that the books of the Pentateuch were directed to every generation of Israel because the covenant entered into at Sinai and renewed on the Plains of Moab was cut with every age and not just the one ratifying it as recorded in Deuteronomy 29:14-15. However, having said that, it is clear that the immediate recipients of the books of Genesis, Exodus, and Leviticus would likely have been the Exodus generation, while the direct recipients of the books of Numbers and Deuteronomy would have been the second generation from the Exodus.

Theological types of Christ appearing in the Pentateuch

Identifying major theological themes and emphases is an essential aspect of correctly understanding a book of the Bible. These themes are derived individually for each book of the Pentateuch. There is, however, one aspect of these themes which runs throughout the Pentateuch, and it is appropriate to discuss it here in the introduction. That theme is the theological type of Christ. Following his resurrection, Jesus appeared to two of his disciples as they were traveling home on the road to Emmaus. Not recognizing him, they engaged him in conversation, which led to his criticizing them for not understanding that the Christ was to have suffered before entering into his glory. Then beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself (Luke 24:13-27). 

A biblical type may be defined as a historical person, object, institution, or event that has, in addition to its historical significance, a divinely intended future relevance. In this function, it foreshadows a corresponding person, object, institution, or event, known as an antitype. Types are limited to only two categories, and any supposed type that does not fit one of these two categories is not legitimate. A model can be substantiated when the NT designates it as one. A second category allows for types that are not explicitly designated as such but are strongly implied by the meaning expressed in the text. In this latter case, there is a correspondence between type and antitype. The following is a summary of the types of Christ revealed in the Pentateuch.

Adam is recognized as a type of Christ in as much as the NT explicitly designates him as such; ". . . as did Adam, who was a pattern (type/typos) of the one to come" (Rom 5:14). Both entered the world through a particular act of God as sinless men. Adam is the head of the old creation; Christ is the head of the new creation. Through Adam's one transgression, there resulted from condemnation to all men; through Christ's one act of righteousness, there arose from the justification of life to all who believe in Him (Rom 5:15-19).

Melchizedek (righteous king of Salem) is declared a type of Christ in Hebrews 7. Speaking of him, the writer of Hebrews states that without a father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, he, like the Son of God, remains a priest forever (Heb 7:3). Thus Melchizedek typifies Christ as a high priest. For as David declares of Christ in Psalm 110:4, "The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind: You are a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek."

In Genesis 22, it is recorded that Abraham was called upon by God to offer up his son Isaac as a sacrifice, a burnt offering (Gen 22:2). The similarity between this and what is implied by John 3:14-16, strongly suggests a typical relationship between Isaac and Christ through a correspondence of circumstances. This is strengthened when it is taken into consideration that Isaac was born of miraculous events, and was the heir to all the promises of God. Furthermore, as Christ willingly gave himself up to be the "lamb of God," so too, it would seem that Isaac gave himself in obedience to his Father even unto death.

Joseph typifies Christ in some ways to His first and second advents. Joseph, like Christ at His first advent, was rejected by his brothers and sold into slavery for a price. Like Christ, Joseph suffered persecution and hardship before being exalted. Like Christ, Joseph endured several levels of humiliation going from favorite son to servant, and then a slave before being exalted as ruler of the land (see Phil 2). Like Christ, Joseph was maltreated by his brothers, who intended it for evil, but God effected it for good. In this regard, Joseph was sent before his brothers to prepare the way for their deliverance in the time of great famine (Gen 45:4-8; 47:23-25; 50:20-21). In this way, Joseph was used to effect a blessing upon the elect seed and other families of the earth in a typical fulfillment of the Abrahamic Covenant, even as Christ will do at His second coming. 

Judah, the elect line through whom the ruler would come (Gen 49:10), is a type of Christ at His first coming by correspondence in the willing offer of himself as a substitute for his brother. When the sons of Israel are tested by Joseph, Judah, as Christ, who came after him, offers himself as a substitute in place of his brother Benjamin (Gen 44:32-33).

Moses is a type of Christ by correspondence in several ways. Most notable, he is the only biblical person other than Christ to hold the three offices of a prophet (Deut 34:10-12), a priest (Exod 32:31-35), and king, [although Moses was not king, he nevertheless functioned as ruler of Israel] (Deut 33:4-5). As a prophet, Christ was the prophet like Moses of whom Moses spoke (Deut 18:15; John 1:45; Acts 7:37). Further, both were endangered in infancy, both renounced power and wealth, and their brethren rejected both, both were deliverers, lawgivers, and mediators. Additionally, Moses, like Christ, offered himself as a substitute for the nation after the people sinned by worshiping the golden calf at Sinai. However, unlike Christ, God did not accept Moses' offer but instead received his intercessory request to forgive the people.

The Passover lamb is a type of Christ to the sacrificial offering of himself. By correspondence, the lamb, like Christ, was without blemish and was sacrificed as a substitute with the blood being applied to effect atonement for sin. In this same way, every animal sacrifice offered to effect atonement for sin is a type of Christ. 

The rock from which water sprung in the wilderness is a type of Christ, for 1 Corinthians 10:4 declares that "they drank of the spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ."

The bronze serpent on the stake (Num 21:4-9) is a type of Christ as Jesus Himself declares in John 3:14, "And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so, must the Son of man be lifted up, that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life." Both the serpent and Christ are lifted up. Faith is involved in both cases. Those who looked on the serpent were delivered and received or did not lose their physical life, while all who "look" on Christ lifted up on the cross by faith receive eternal life.

Next, we will be going into the Covenants of the Pentateuch. 

There were three types of covenants in the ancient Near East: 

(1) a grant covenant, which was usually "a reward for notable fidelity," in which only the superior party swore an oath; 

(2) a vassal covenant, which was often "imposed by the superior party to control the behavior of the inferior" party, in which only the inferior party swore an oath; and 

(3) a kinship covenant, which "emphasizes mutuality and familial relationship," in which both parties swore an oath.

Israel's relationship with God began as an extension of "familial kinship by an oath or as a sacred family bond:" (1) a bond because it unites the two parties permanently; (2) family because the two parties become kin;  (3) sacred because the relationship is "solemnized and enforced by oaths taken in God's name." However, in the Pentateuch, we see God's relationship with Israel, which begins as a parity or kinship relationship, deteriorate after God's people repeatedly rebel against him to the point that their relationship seems more like a vassal relationship than a family relationship.

Three covenants are recorded in the Pentateuch; the Noahic, the Abrahamic, and the Mosaic. From the perspective of biblical history, the Abrahamic Covenant and the Mosaic Covenant are of primary importance in that they play a significant role in the developing relationship between Yahweh and Israel. In the following, each covenant is briefly discussed in terms of its nature, function, and form.

THE NATURE AND FUNCTION OF THE COVENANTS OF THE PENTATEUCH

A covenant in the OT is a sworn agreement between two parties, where no blood relation exists. The Pentateuch contains examples of covenants between individuals, nations, and between God and man. On the national level, similarities between biblical covenants and international treaties, especially the Hittite suzerainty treaties of the second millennium BC, have been recognized. The basic structure of these treaties has been compared at length with the covenant entered by Yahweh and Israel at Mount Sinai. 

NOAHIC COVENANT

The Noahic Covenant was an everlasting covenant made with Noah and his descendants—all of humanity from that point on in time—in which God promised unconditionally that never again would He destroy the earth and all the flesh on it with a flood (Gen 9:8-11). As a sign of the covenant, God designated the rainbow as a reminder (to mankind) of His binding promise. While this covenant is important because it reveals that God would never again bring a flood judgment on mankind, it provides no revelation concerning His relationship with Israel or the nations as do the Abrahamic and Mosaic covenants.

ABRAHAMIC COVENANT

God's covenant with Abraham marks the theological high point of Genesis and perhaps of the entire Pentateuch. (See Mitchell 1970 for a consideration of Abram's understanding of the covenant.) First expressed in Genesis 12:1-3 in the form of a promise, it is then formally encoded and instituted as a covenant in Genesis 15:9-21 with the sign of the covenant specified in Genesis 17, and then sealed with an oath in Genesis 22:15-18. Affirmation and expansion of the covenant are recorded in chapters 13, 17, and 22. Isaac and Jacob, the elect seed of Abraham, receive confirmation of the covenant in Genesis 26:2-5 and 35:11-12, respectively.

In summary, God promises to bless Abraham, to make him into a great nation, to give him and his descendants the land of Canaan as an inheritance, and to bless all the nations of the earth through him. Like the Noahic Covenant, the Abrahamic Covenant is everlasting (Gen 17:7, 13, 19), and it is unconditional. The only stipulation was that Abraham leave family and home and travel to an unknown land that God would reveal to him (Gen 12:1). In the ceremony ratifying the covenant, God alone took an oath passing between the pieces of the slaughtered animals (Gen 15:17). Abraham and his male descendants were required to be circumcised as a sign of the covenant (Gen 17:10-11). Galatians 3:17-18 emphasizes the promissory nature of the Abrahamic Covenant and affirms that the giving of the Mosaic Law did not set aside the former covenant, which came 430 years later. After the passing of several centuries, God proved His faithfulness by remembering His covenant with Abraham and effected Israel's redemption from Egypt to bring the descendants of Abraham into a relationship with Himself and give them the land of Canaan even as He had promised Abraham (Exod 2:24; 6:5).

MOSAIC COVENANT

In leading the sons of Israel out of Egypt, God was separating them to himself, and in this process, he proposed, at Mount Sinai, to make a covenant with them (Exod 19:1-5). The heart of the Mosaic Covenant is the Ten Commandments. The first of these commandments is foundational to the whole covenant-relationship forbidding Israel to have any other God but Yahweh––"you shall have no other gods before Me" (Exod 20:3). Significantly, this is the stipulation that Israel continuously violated from the very beginning until they were expelled out of the Land of Promise and driven into Babylonian exile. The Mosaic Covenant differs from the Abrahamic Covenant in that it is not called an everlasting covenant. Yet certain aspects of the covenant are referred to as "lasting" or "permanent."  After forty years of wandering in the wilderness, the Mosaic Covenant was renewed by the new generation as they were poised to enter into and take possession of the Land of Promise. This was necessitated by the fact that the Exodus generation had effectively broken the covenant by their defiant refusal to obey Yahweh and enter and take possession of the land of Canaan. Such treaty renewal was common among the Hittites when one of their vassal kingdoms had had a change in rulership. At the time of Israel's covenant renewal, the stipulations were brought up to date considering Israel's changing conditions of going from a nomadic to a sedentary lifestyle. 

In the Pentateuch, God's covenant with Israel went from being simple and easy to understand, to a complex set of rules and regulations which required specially trained ministers. The Old Testament is more than a history of Israel. It is a history of the covenant in which God revealed, little by little, His character and His plans and purposes for humanity. The drama of unfolding covenants brings us to the renewal of the covenant in the Lord's Table and baptism.