BERITH.ORG| BERITH.ORG |
|
|
|
Adam, Noah, and the Kingdom: The Fulfillment of the Commission to Adam in the Old Testament The Abrahamic Covenant The dispersion of man from tower of Babel is catastrophic in certain respects but it does not begin to compare with the de-creation judgment of the flood. Rather, by dividing mankind into competing groups, God undermined the Satanic unity of apostasy that the tower attempted to impose, thereby obviating the necessity of another global cataclysm. Then, from the tribes that had been dispersed throughout the world, He chose a man for Himself. Like Noah before him, Abraham became the new head of a new covenant. Although the fact is often overlooked, the promise that God gave to Abraham is unquestionably grounded in and an extension of the covenants with Adam and Noah. Abraham is to be blessed and be a blessing to others with the result - the climax of the promise - that through him all the world would be blessed (Gen. 12:1-3). This includes promises for innumerable descendents (Gen. 15:5; 17:2-5; 22:17), land (Gen. 15:13 ff.; etc.), kings as descendents (Gen. 15:6), global blessing (Gen. 18:18; 22:18), and victory over enemies (Gen. 22:17). It would be more than odd if we should interpret these promises as if the were not rooted in the previous covenant promises of blessing, even though some of the language used is new. There are, in fact, both theological and literary connections that we must understand in order to appreciate the unity and organic growth of covenantal revelation in history. The promise that the seed of Abraham would be as abundant as the dust or stars is theologically based in the command to be fruitful and multiply given to Adam in the Garden and repeated to Noah after the flood, as well as the promise that the seed of the woman would defeat the seed of the Serpent. For God did not merely promise Abraham that he would have many children, but that his children would be the channel of global blessing. In other words, Abraham is seen as one who will multiply physically and spiritually so that his seed fills the whole earth. In the context of the book of Genesis - and especially since there are related promises of defeating enemies which suggest a spiritual warfare - what else can this possibly mean if it does not point to the promise of blessing through the seed of the woman? If there could be any doubt about the theological connections in Genesis, the apostle Paul makes it clear that the seed of Abraham is the seed of the woman (Gal. 3:4 ff.). In addition to the theological themes running through the covenants of Genesis, there are also clear verbal links between the covenants in the repeated use of the verbs "bear fruit" and "multiply." First, the book of Genesis links the covenants of Adam and Noah by a repetition of the basic command to "be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth" (compare Gen. 1:28 with 9:1, 7). Then, God promises Abraham, in effect, that the command for man to be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth will be fulfilled through him. For Abraham's seed is to be like the sands or the stars for number (Gen. 13:16; 15:5). The explicit verbal link is established in the repeated use of the verbs "multiply" and "bear fruit" (Gen. 17:6; 26:22; 28:3; 35:11; 48:4). It should already be plain that we would be profoundly misled if we were to see a mere tribal blessing in all these promises to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. For though the promise of the land of Canaan is linked with the promise of descendents and the promise of kings, these promises are not limited to Hebrews living in Canaan. Abraham and his descendents were chosen to be the means for all humanity to be blessed. In the same way, the promise of victory over enemies should not be seen in nationalistic terms - as if the Hebrews have carte blanche to beat up their neighbors - but as an application of the promise given to Adam and Eve that the seed of the woman would defeat the seed of the serpent. Victory over enemies is a means for spreading blessing to the world, not a means of mere nationalistic glory. Through the theology of the covenants and the verbal links between crucial texts, the book of Genesis announces that Abraham and his descendents are chosen by God to be the instruments through which the commission given to Adam and Noah would be fulfilled. They would be the leaders of the human race in bringing about the kingdom of God, for through them the blessing of the covenant would be spread to all the families of the earth. If this much is undeniable, it should also be apparent that the promise to Abraham, being grounded in the Noahic covenant, should find its fulfillment in the outworking of the normal covenantal processes of history guaranteed by that covenant, rather than through a miraculous intervention of the proportions of the Noahic flood.[4] Premillennialism misses the flow of covenantal history and the underlying relationship between the covenants largely because dispensationalism insists on covenantal eras that are utterly discrete, separate from one another and operating according to distinct and sometimes divergent principles. It is even more remarkable that amillennialism departs from a covenantal view of history, for in general amillennialists hold to covenant theology. However, with respect to the fulfillment of the Abrahamic promises, amillennialism is similar to premillennialism, for it sees these promises being truly fulfilled only after the coming of Christ, the final deluge that brings in an even more catastrophic judgment than the one in the days of Noah. Amillennialists like Hoekema ignore the eschatology of the Garden of Eden and miss the meaning of the covenant with Noah. The rest of the covenants, beginning with Abraham, are not grounded in original creation or the re-creation of the world after the flood. The notion of covenantal salvation, therefore, lacks roots and true salvation and redemption wait for the post-historical world.
[4] The emphasis here is on the idea of intervention of catastrophic proportions, like the flood. I do not deny that God does miracles throughout history. In fact, we should emphasize that miracles are in no way an "intervention" in the flow of covenant history. They are part of God's normal covenantal leading and blessing. Sign miracles are special. They are covenantal signs that normally are associated with periods of covenantal transition. But again, they are part of God's covenantal rule of the world. The flood, by contrast, was not "normal." It was global covenantal de-creation that will only find a true analogy in the judgment of the second coming of Christ at the end of world history. It is a promise that final judgment at the end will be victorious over the hosts of Satan that remain. But it is not "normal" covenantal historical leading.
Table of Contents
|
|
|
|
