17:2–8, 22:16, 26:3, 26:24, 28:3, 35:11, 47:27, 48:3.
98. Eichrodt, Theology of the Old Testament, 2:30–32.
99. Beale, Temple, 35.
100. Fletcher-Louis, “Jesus and the High Priest,” 5.
101. On the concept of sacrifice in the Old Testament see K. Hanson, “Blood and Purity,” 215–30.
102. Quell, “Diatheke,” 2:113. Quell argues that covenants are solemn oaths that have the form of a specific covenantal ceremony:
a. bә·rît “to cut” is used in summary description of the whole transaction recorded; b. there is a record of the divine attestation and the unalterable validity of the compact; c. more precise details are given of the mutual agreement; d. there is an oath in acknowledgment of the divine guaranteeing of correct intention; e. a sacrifice is offered; and f. the covenant brethren share a common meal. (Modified slightly; Hebrew and Greek letters transcribed into English.)
Also see Hahn, Father Who Keeps, 20–30. Hahn describes the difference between a covenant and a contract: 1. Covenants involve solemn oaths that curse those who break them, opposed to contracts that merely involve promises. 2. Covenants involve an exchange of persons. This is similar to what we have seen with the idea of self-donation being present in God’s promises.
103. Hahn, “Broken Covenant,” 428–29. Hahn thinks that the symbolism revolves around death. Perhaps, but that is not the only symbolism we will observe. Also see Hahn’s aforementioned Kinship by Covenant. Beyond Hahn’s own work, he helpfully provides the following contemporary bibliography (Hahn, “Covenant in the Old and New Testaments,” 263–92): Baltzer, Covenant Formulary; Brueggemann, Covenanted Self; Cross, “Kinship and Covenant,” 3–21; Dumbrell, Covenant and Creation; Faley, Bonding with God; McCarthy, Treaty and Covenant; McCarthy, Old Testament Covenant; McKenzie, Covenant; Mendenhall, Law and Covenant; Nicholson, God and His People; Perlitt, Bundestheologie im Alten Testament; Rendtorff, Bundesformel; Walton, Covenant; Weinfeld, “Covenant of Grant,” 184–203; P. Williamson, Abraham, Israel and the Nations.
104. See AE 1:221–22. Luther makes a similar argument.
105. Milgrom, Leviticus 1–16, 1079–84.
106. Luther interprets the statement this way. See AE 2:70–73.
107. See argument in von Hofmann, Der Schriftbeweis, 1st ed., 2.1:143–50. Also see Hahn, Kinship by Covenant, 44–48. Hahn makes the interesting suggestion that animal sacrifice is also significant because it points to the destruction of idolatry. In other words, a great deal (in fact most) idol worship in the ancient world was directed to images of idols (see Rom 1:23). In Exodus, Moses tells Pharaoh that the children of Israel must take their livestock with them because sacrificial activity would offend the Egyptians (Exod 8:25–27). Hahn suggests that this occurred because the Egyptians worshiped these animals as gods. Later on, the Israelites worship a calf. On the Day of Atonement, a bull is sacrificed (Lev 16:3, 8). It is also strongly implied that they worship goats or goat gods of some sort (17:7). Two goats are offered up on the Day of Atonement (16:5).
108. The same passage condemns Ham descendants, most notably the Canaanites and the Egyptians who will be judged by God because of their wickedness. Nevertheless, Hagar the Egyptian later in Genesis is shown to be an inheritor of some of God’s promises (though certainly not the promised seed as Muslims claim). Similarly, Isaiah 19:19 tells us that the Egyptians will eventually believe in the one, true God and that he will rescue them. Ultimately, as the Abrahamic covenant states and the prophets attest later on, all peoples of the earth will be blessed through Abraham and his descendants. Therefore, it appears that descendants mean those who follow his sin. Hence Ham’s spiritual descendants are intended by Noah’s curse. Likewise, it is obvious not all Israelites or descendants of Japheth are blessed, but only those who have faith. See Luther’s argument to this effect in AE 2:174–86.
109. See comments in Peter Leithart, House for My Name, 64–65. Joseph also hearkens back to Adam, the protological priest-king and anticipates Christ, the eschatological priest-king. He not only reigns in Egypt, but he is married to the daughter of an Egyptian priest. See Gen 41:50.
110. See Leithart, 1 and 2 Kings, 51–52.
111. Hahn, Kinship by Covenant, 98.
112. Kass, Beginning of Wisdom, 201.
113. See discussion in Hahn, Kinship by Covenant, 116–22.
114. Many interpretrs have acknowledged this. See Boice, Genesis, 118; R. Davidson, Genesis 12–50, 45; Gill, Exposition of Genesis, 271–72; Hamilton, Book of Genesis, 429–38; Hasel, “Meaning of the Animal Rite,” 61–78; Leupold, Genesis, 1:480; Maher, Genesis, 102–4; von Rad, Genesis, 181; Van Seters, Abraham in History, 100–103; Westermann, Genesis 12–36, 228.
115. See argument in R. Davidson, Genesis 12–50, 45; Leupold, Genesis, 1:488–89.
116. R. Daly, Christian Doctrine of Sacrifice, 41–44.
117. Ibid., 42.
118. Ibid., 43.
119. Hengstenberg, Christology of the Old Testament, 1:53–56. Obviously the covenant between God and Abraham includes the coming of the “seed” that will bless all nations, but also the possession of the land and the many descendants. This is, quite literally, fulfilled in the exodus and growth of the nation in the Old Testament history. It is spiritually fulfilled in Christ through all who have faith becoming heirs to the promise (as Paul shows in Galatians and Romans) and through the possession of the new heavens and earth. The land of Israel is of course included within the whole of creation.
120. Leupold, Genesis, 1:520–21.
121. See discussion in Hahn, Kinship by Covenant, 123–30.
122. Levenson, Death and Resurrection, 55–143.
