60. An everlasting covenant. Though Israel had faithlessly broken the covenant, her unfaithfulness could not alter the faithfulness of God. He was willing to enter into new covenant relationship in the day of repentance. Unfortunately, because of the continued faithlessness of the remnant, the fulfillment was delayed until the gospel era, when the permanence of the covenant was assured in that it no longer rested upon a national basis, but upon an individual basis. Nevertheless, the greater permanence offered at the time of the return of the exiles was never accepted.
The Bible presents two basic covenants, the everlasting (which later became known as the new) and the old. A failure properly to define the term “covenant” and correctly to distinguish between the old and the new covenants has given rise to much misunderstanding. The everlasting covenant is simply God’s arrangement for the salvation of the human race. The expression is, for practical purposes, synonymous with the term “the plan of redemption.” This covenant was made with Adam in Eden and later renewed to Abraham (see PP 370). It represented the setting into operation of a plan whereby man might be restored to the position he had lost. Man needed pardon for his transgression. Forgiveness became possible through the work that the Son of God was to do in His incarnation, life, and death. Man’s character needed to be brought back into harmony with the divine image. Divine power was promised, which, when accepted by man, would expel sin from the life and incorporate the righteous character traits into the soul.
This covenant, or arrangement, for salvation was made with Adam, but it applies equally to men in all ages. In times this same covenant became known as the new covenant, simply because its validation by the sacrifice of Christ came after the validation of the old covenant, which occurred at Sinai.
The old covenant was made at Sinai. Why was this covenant necessary when an adequate arrangement for salvation was already in existence? The old covenant was never intended to take the place of the everlasting covenant; neither was it designed to be an alternative means of salvation. An examination of the historical background will help to clarify its objective. In their slavery in Egypt the Israelites had, to a large extent, lost their knowledge of God and of His requirements. Their reeducation would require time. Spiritual truth is only gradually comprehended. The acquirement of one truth makes possible the acquisition of another. God began His instruction at Sinai by informing the people that the objective of His plan was to bring their lives into harmony with His character. However, the purpose was stated objectively, “Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine: and ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation” (Ex. 19:5, 6). At the time the Israelites understood little of what was involved. They agreed to the broad statement of the objectives and replied, “All that the Lord hath spoken we will do” (Ex. 19:8). It was God’s plan to go from here and instruct the people as to how these objectives could be achieved. Gradually, as they would be able to comprehend, He would unfold to them all the details of the everlasting covenant (see , Supplementary Material, on Ex. 19:3-8).
Unfortunately the people never seemed to progress beyond the first lesson in their spiritual instruction. They grasped the idea of the necessity of obedience. Such a philosophy they had learned in Egypt. Hence, they sought the favor of God by endeavoring to render an outward obedience to the divine requirements. All attempts by God to show the necessity of a new heart, and of divine grace to render such obedience possible, met with repeated failure. Save for individual exceptions such an attitude continued throughout the whole period, and this despite repeated appeals by the prophets to accept the higher relationship. On the new covenant see Jer. 31:31-34; Heb. 8:8-13; PP 370-373.