Creation and God’s Person:

Creation in the Law

Obviously, the Law begins the Bible’s sustained interest in creation and its attendant
theology. It is here that themes such as God’s personal involvement with human beings,
God’s sovereignty, God’s power, God’s giving of standards, and God’s willingness to
forgive erring human sinners have their origins. It is also here that the fact that God is the
only creator, indeed the only deity, begins its key role in Biblical Theology. In some way
all subsequent doctrines flow from these truths, all of which are founded on the principle
that the Lord is the creator. These truths must be received and processed through human
reason, but in the end they must be accepted as true by faith.

Genesis 1-2 is the most crucial passage in the Law concerning creation. This text does not
include everything the Law, let alone the Bible has to say about creation, but it does
provide the framework for all that follows. Though Genesis 1-2 offers important insights
about the human race and the created order, its most significant instruction is in the area
of God’s person. As Ken Mathews observes, these chapters teach, “God is not merely an
idea. He is Eternal Being whom we can know and experience personally.” Once one
grasps the importance of God’s person, it is then possible to place human beings and the
created order in their proper perspective.

From Genesis 1:1-25 God has been personally involved with creation as a whole. He has
personally hovered over the waters, spoken the world into existence out of nothing, called
the result of the creative activity “good,” and named each portion of the world order.
Now the Lord adds to his personal involvement in his creation, for in 1:26-31 God makes
man and woman in his image, blesses them,and commands them to care for the earth.
Though many interpretations of “God’s image” have been offered, at the very least the
term means that human beings are able to relate to God in a way different from animals,
plants, or planets. Only human beings can relate to God through spoken communication;
only human beings receive God’s personal blessing; only human beings are stewards of
the rest of the created order. Barth comments, “It is in consequence of their divine
likeness that men are distinguished from all other creatures with autonomous life, by a
superior position, by a higher dignity and might, by a greater power of disposal and
control.” Human beings have both more privileges and more responsibilities than all
God’s other creatures.

Genesis 2:1-3 highlights God’s satisfaction with creation and God’s kindness. All that
needs to be done has been done and is good. Thus, God has completed all creation tasks.
Now God ceases to create anything new and enters into the satisfaction and rest that
come from doing a task completely and perfectly. Then, to set an example for human
beings, God rests on the seventh day and sets that day apart as a day of rest for all time.
Work must not become the only constant element in human life. Ceasing, rest, and
satisfaction must punctuate life when life is fully “good.”

Theological inputs

1
At the end of the Genesis creation accounts certain theological elements are in place.
First, the Lord has been portrayed as unique, personal, sovereign, caring, and good.
God’s character is firmly presented as the core of all that is best in creation. Whatever is
good about the heavens and earth can be traced directly back to God. Second, human
beings are entrenched as the flawed stewards of creation. Third, sin must be overcome for
creation to return to its intended purpose. Readers are left to cling doggedly to the belief
that the personal God capable of creating the created order will also have the ability to
recreate it as needed. In fact, the ` promises made alongside the punishments set out
for the erring humans indicate that God will defeat evil through the offspring of a woman,
an event that will in turn undo the damage done by sin (see Gen 3:15). Until then,
however, the creation must groan for deliverance (see Rom 8:18-25), cared for by the
very ones who caused it to fall from its previous heights.

Creation and God’s People:

Creation in the Prophets
The Bible’s emphasis on creation hardly stops with the Law. Indeed, the Prophets handle
creation themes in a manner calculated to deal with the specific problems in their eras as
well as with the larger problems related to human sin left unresolved at the end of the
Law.
Though other prophets could certainly be cited, Isaiah and Amos are good representatives
of how the prophetic literature uses creation themes to correct and exhort the people of
their day. Both Isaiah and Amos focus on how a proper grasp of creation theology can
form, or re-form, God’s people into a holy nation.

Isaiah 40-48 addresses an audience that has been devastated by the Assyrian invasion
known as the Sennacherib Crisis, which occurred c. 711 or 701 B.C. Due to this crisis the
people of God were dispirited, and felt as though the Lord had abandoned them (see Isa
40:1-27). Thus, they were looking to other religious options instead of the one God
revealed in scripture

Isaiah responds to this situation by applying creation theology to the people’s attitudes
and actions. First, he deals with their feelings of rejection by highlighting God’s
greatness, power, sovereignty, and mercy in 40:12-31. Clearly, Isaiah expects to hearten
Israel by reminding them that the powerful, sustaining creator is on their side, comforting
and helping them. He also wishes to bring them closer to the personal God with whom
they entered into a covenant in the Law.

Second, in 43:1-44:8 Isaiah attempts to eliminate other gods from Israel’s consideration.
To do so, he states that the Lord, the creator, formed Israel (43:1) and has been with
Israel in the past (43:2). Therefore, Israel must not be afraid now (43:5- 6), for the Lord
will restore all those he has created for his glory (43:7). If God has created Israel for his
glory, then it stands to reason that God will gain glory for himself by sustaining the
chosen people during this horrible time

2
Further, Isaiah bluntly states that the Lord is God and there is no other god (43:10). Paul
Hanson asserts, “With these magisterial words monotheism enters the disarray of a world
long mired in the confusion of contentious gods (cf. Psalm 82).” Clearly, if there is no
other god, then there is no other savior (43:11). If there is no other god, then there is no
other god for either Israel or the nations. This one God orders human events. There is no
one to stop him (43:13). Israel should draw close to God because of the past, as 43:1-7
stresses, but also because there is no other deity with ontological substance. Isaiah
counsels Israel to forget about other gods because they are not real. A stronger
monotheistic statement could hardly be made.

Finally, in 43:14-44:8 Isaiah proclaims that the Lord will prove his uniqueness by
declaring the future. The best proof of this sovereign knowledge of contingent future
events is the promise to send Cyrus, who has not yet been born, to release Israel from
bondage, was fulfilled in 535 B.C

Third, Isaiah looks well beyond the current created order to an ideal future in 65:17-25.
At the end of time the creator will “create new heavens and a new earth” (65:17).
Weeping and illness will cease (65:19-20). Frustration with work, one of the
consequences of sin according to Genesis 3:17-19, will no longer be a factor in human
existence. Peace among all creatures will be restored (65:24-25). Coupled with the fact
that Isaiah 25:6-12 has already promised that death, the veil that lies over all people, will
be removed at the end of time, this promise of new heaven and new earth by the creator
amounts to an eternal promise with no negative components. Creation itself will be
remade. Death will be eradicated. The question is whether or not Israel will believe the
creator or whether they will turn to other deities.

Amos is not as interested in comforting and instructing as he is in waking up a stubborn,

sinful nation. Working c. 760- 750 B.C., Amos seeks to warn the northern kingdom of
Israel to repent before judgment comes. To achieve his purposes he calls upon creation
theology at three crucial junctures to punctuate his emphasis on the day of the Lord.

Why should Israel be terrified? Why should Israel repent? Because the creator has
decided to judge (4:12-13). The very one who devised creation, who made mountains,
who knows human thoughts, and who rules night and day is now devising judgment for
them. Israel must seek God (5:1-7), or the creator, the one who controls darkness and
light and the raging seas, will pour out wrath on them (5:8-9). Those currently at ease in
Zion will go into horrible exile (6:1-7). Judgment will come (7:1-8:3), for the one who
made the heavens and earth will bring it to pass (9:5-6). These texts use the fact that the
Lord is the creator to warn (4:12-13), express God’s wrath over injustice (5:8-9), and
announce the end of God’s patience with a rebellious people (9:5-6)

Creation and the Worship and Wisdom of God:

Creation in the Writings

Throughout history the people of God have turned to the psalms for use in personal and
corporate worship. Here the faithful have found sources of instruction, inspiration,
consolation, chastisement, and hope. In these texts the faithful have discovered divine

3
revelation that expresses praise, petition, and lament. The doctrine of creation is one of
the themes that conveyed these elements of worship. Though other emphases could be
noted, the psalms use creation theology to stress God’s majesty and God’s uniqueness as
a means of highlighting the fact that the Lord merits worship.

Psalms, Proverbs and Job also make significant use of creation theology where creation
theology is strategic for declaring God’s personal wisdom and absolute sovereignty over
the created order.

In Psalms 8 Creation themes are used to demonstrate God’s greatness, God’s authority
over human beings, and human responsibility in the created order. Without question, this
text claims that a worshiper in tune with creation theology inextricably links worship and
action. Moreover in In Psalms 90 Creation theology becomes the basis, then, for
intercession, for healing, and for confession of sin.

Job and Proverbs have as high a view of God’s person and worth as the psalms, but they
use these beliefs to make different theological points. For Job the issue is whether or not
the creator is faithful, trustworthy, and kind. God’s power is never questioned in the
book. Rather, God’s use of his unlimited authority and strength is under scrutiny. Thus, it
is vital that in Job chapters 38-42 emphasize the capable and kindly manner in which
God, the creator, rules creation.

4
 PEOPLE OF GOD

Israel the chosen people

The understanding of Israel as God’s chosen people puts a major stumbling block in
order to understand mission statement for the un- chosen. In Deuteronomy 7:6, “For you
are a people holy to the LORD your God. The LORD your God has chosen you out of all
the peoples on the face of the earth to be his people, his treasured possession”, raises a
serious question about the non- elect.

God’s activity among the nations culminates in a promise given to Abraham, an

outworking of the universal covenant. According to John Bright Israel’s history begins
with Abrahams call. Israel however is not to be seen in isolation. God deals with one
people, Israel, in order to deal with the entire world.

God’s promise to Abraham has two aspects. First,” I will make of you a great nation.”
Second, “in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.” The first aspect is
particularistic in nature while the other universalistic. God in accomplishing his salvation
“is particularistic in method, but universalistic in promise, design and effect”. (Gal 3:14).

Election (bahar): Its basis and its danger

Israel was called out of its specific corner of the earth as humankind came from the planet
earth. Mission, however, sends people to every part and corner of the earth and cannot be
limited to any single piece of property or tied to any individual culture or history.
Admittedly two major obstacles to any missionary’s work are the restriction imposed by
the ethnic boundaries of culture and language and a foreign country suspicion of migrant
aliens. Each country guard its land and its elect status against intruders, be they
missionaries, business people, journalist or soldiers. The Old Testament doctrine of a
chosen people develops out of this common secular phenomenon and seems to sanction
ethnic constraints upon the outsiders.

The doctrine of a chosen people can be traced on the remote origins of Israel’s religion.
Even in Israel’s pre-history, a process of differentiation and separation was continuously
at work: God chose Abel and then Seth instead of Cain (Gen 4:4, 25-26), Shem instead of
Noah’s other sons Ham and Japheth (Gen 9:25-27), Abraham instead of Nahor, Haran
Lot (Gen 11:27). This background of singling out one person out of many others is
summarized in Gen 12:1.

The religion of Israel formally began with God bringing Israel out of Egypt and revealing
a special covenant to Moses on Mount Sinai. The initial statement of the covenant is so
important that it became the first of the Ten Commandments for the Jewish people: "I
am the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. (Ex

5
20:2).The theological urgency of being God’s possession out of all the people on the face
of the earth (Deut 14:2) caused the writers of the bible to insert at the beginning of the
account of the Sinai covenant. (Ex 19:4-6).Paul –Eugiene Dion calls this passage the
“document capital” on election.
For Israel the divine choice was not linked with ancient privileges and landed property as
seen in the A.N.E context but was considered under these terms: a choice by a personal
God, in favour of a helpless people, with promises and gifts to be held as loaned and
borrowed, never as possessed and owned, as signs of love rather than indicators of
power, as goods to be shared instead of riches to be hoarded and defended. This
conditional nature of the election – a threat to lose one’s possession if they were ever
held with pride and sensuality – led to that absolute condition of helplessness that assured
divine compassion and choice.

Covenant people

The Hebrew word that is translated as "covenant" in our Bibles is berit, and it is defined
as the following:

covenant, alliance, pledge

1a) between men
1a1) treaty, alliance, league (man to man)
1a2) constitution, ordinance (monarch to subjects)
1a3) agreement, pledge (man to man)
1a4) alliance (of friendship)
1a5) alliance (of marriage)
1b) between God and man
1b1) alliance (of friendship)
1b2) covenant (divine ordinance with signs or pledges)

Berit can refer to covenants made between man and God, man with man, the marriage
relationship, and other forms of alliances. The term is related to the word for cutting, and
this concord with the fact that the act of covenant making in Hebrew is the idiomatic
katab berit, "cut a covenant."

A.N.E and Biblical covenant

Archaeology has provided us with examples of covenants from all over the Ancient
Near East, dating from around 750 BC as far back as the third millennium. Two main
types of covenant are evident. The first is an agreement between equals called a parity
agreement. (2 Sam. 5:11; 1 Kings 5:1-2). The second, between a Lord and his vassal, is
known as a suzerainty or vassal treaty. (Josh. 9:3-27)& (2 Sam. 21:1-3).

6
As early as 1931 V. Korosec identified the six basic elements in the structure of Late
Bronze Age Hittite treaties, but it should be noted that not every treaty contained all of
these elements.

a) Title / Preamble. This identified the giver of the treaty, his titles and the nature of the
relationship between that parties (whether parity or suzerainty). In the case of suzerainty
treaties the vassal was bound by an exclusive relationship with the suzerain.

b) Historical Prologue. The history of the relationship between the two powers was
recalled in order to make the vassal feel obligated to the suzerain because of the benefits
he had received in the past. Out of gratitude the vassal would then seek to fulfil the
suzerain’s wishes which followed. It is important to note that in order to instil this sense
of obligation the history of relationship recounted had to be factual .

c) Stipulations. Typically these were casuistic in form, i.e. "If you do such and such a
thing, then you act in disregard to your oath." They commonly included the following
requirements: no alliances were allowed with other nations; no enmity was permitted
with other vassal states; the vassal must mobilise its armies when called upon by the
suzerain; the vassal must be loyal to the suzerain; no asylum must be given to refugees
(cf. 1 Kings 11:40); vassals must appear before the suzerain annually (usually with
tribute) (cf. Exod. 23:17); and disputes between vassals were to be settled by the
suzerain.

d) Provision for deposit in the temple and periodic public reading. The treaty had to
be made known to the people of the vassal state and become a part of their thinking.
Deposit in the temple placed it at the heart of their society and emphasized that there was
no higher appeal that could be made against its commands and served to remind the gods
of their obligations.

e) The list of witnesses. The deities of both the suzerain and vassal are called upon to
witnesses and enforce the treaty. Often the gods of mutual enemies were included in
order to ensure that there could be no power to whom the vassal could legitimately
appeal. In addition to the gods the "(deified) mountains, rivers, springs, sea, heaven and
earth, the winds and the clouds" were also listed. Enforcement of a covenant by the gods
themselves was intended to make it self-policing and reduce the need for military force.
Clearly it was inappropriate for other deities to be included in the biblical covenants (cf.
Deut. 4:35), but not for certain elements of the world to be referred to as witnesses to
divine statements (Deut. 32:1; Isa. 1:2; Mic. 6:1-2). The idea of witnesses to covenants is
apparent in the setting up of piles of stones and pillars (Gen. 31:44-52; Josh. 22:25-26),
while at other times the Israelites themselves served as witnesses (24:22-23).

f) Blessings and Curses. Obedience to the terms of the covenant brought corresponding
blessings and disobedience cursing similar to those described in Deuteronomy 28.

g) Oath & Solemn Ceremony. The most common method of ratifying a treaty involved
the cutting up of an animal. The unspoken implication was that if the covenant was

7
broken, then the offender would become like the animal. It is thought that from this
ceremony is derived the common Hebrew idiom karat berît - "to cut a covenant" (Gen.
15:18; Jer. 34:18) Whatever the original derivation of the term it seems to have meant
simply "to make a covenant".

h) Note of Sanctions. If the treaty were to be broken the suzerain could then act as the
agent of the deities and attack the vassal kingdom.

God's Covenant with Abraham

Parties: God & Abraham (and his descendants)

Terms: live in Canaan/circumcise the boys/"walk before Me and be
blameless"/endure the Egyptian bondage (Genesis 17)
Promises/Curses: Abraham would be great, his descendants would be a great nation in
Canaan, and the blessing to all nations would come through "his
seed" (Genesis 12:1-3)
Oath swearing: walking "between the halves" (Genesis 15:7-21)

The Structure of the Suzerainty Covenant Compared With the Mosaic Covenant

Exodus Deuteronomy Joshua

Title / Preamble 20:1 1:1-5 24:1-2

Historical Prologue 20:2 1:6 - 3:29 24:2-13

4; 5-11
20:3-17, 22-26; 21- 24:14-15
Stipulations, basic & detailed
23, 25-31; Lev. 1-25 plus 12-26 (16-25)

a) 31:9;24-26 a) 24:26
Provision for a) deposit in the
a) 25:16; cf. 34:1,
temple and b) periodic public
28, 29 b) 31:10-13 b) 8:34
reading

31:16-30, 26;
The list of witnesses 24:4 24:22
32:1-47
a) Lev.26:3-13 a) 28:1-14 a) implicit in
a) Blessings and b) Cursings
b) 26:14-33 b) 28:15-68 b) 24:19-20

8
 (cf. 8:34)

(Oath & Solemn ceremony) Exod. 24:1-11 Deut. 27:1-8 8:30-35

(Note of Sanctions) Deut. 32

CHARACTERSTICS

1. Covenants involved two parties and mutual obligations. In the ancient Near
East, two parties, often kings with their people or other kings, and each side had
various obligations to uphold to make the covenant in force.
2. Covenants are made between superiors and inferiors and between equals. We
see that a king will make a covenant with his people or with a king of a lesser
city, or pacts of mutual protection with kings of equal standing.
3. Covenants often involved protection and assistance. A king would enter into a
covenant with his people to protect them in exchange for their obedience and
economic support, and such a king would also enter into a covenant with
neighboring peoples to not attack them and to gain military assistance if
necessary.
4. Covenants were dissolved at the will of either party and/or lack of fulfillment
of obligation.

In Conclusion we can ascertain four characteristics of Biblical covenant rhetoric between God
and humans: 1) it originates with the higher power of the parties engaged; 2) it holds an
expectation for reciprocated goods; 3) it has an external verification; and 4) it implies a future
directive for a chosen people. These four conditions comprise what we may term "the old
covenant."

The “New Covenant”

Key Scriptures: (Matthew 26:28; Hebrews 8:6; 9:15; 12:24)

Parties: "whoever" will, in faith, swear allegiance to Jesus
Terms: Christ-likeness and advancement of world mission

9
Promises/Curses joint-heirs with Christ (whatever He got, we get)
Oathswearing: Christ's death was God’s “good-faith” offering of covenant blood
(Acts 17:31) and we contact it by faith and make our “covenant
pledge” (eperotema) in our submission to Christian baptism (1Peter
3:21)

The Contrast between Old & New Covenants According to the Writer to the
Hebrews*

Old Covenant New Covenant

Earthly (9:1) Heavenly (8:1-2)

Copy and a shadow (8:5; 9:23; 10:1) Real and true (8:2; 9:24 10:1)

Mortal human priests (7:23) Immortal High Priest (7:24)

Regulated by the Law (8:4) Divinely administered (8:1-2)

Administered by sinful priests (9:7) Administered by a sinless High Priest (4:15)

Sacrifices constantly repeated (9:6-7, One sacrifice carried out once for all time (9:12,
25; 10:11) 26; 10:10, 12)

Offered the blood of animals (9:18-22) Jesus offered his own blood (9:12, 26)

Limited efficacy (10:1-4) Eternal efficacy (10:12)

Leads to sanctification and a cleansed conscience

No inner cleansing achieved (9:9)
(9:14; 10:14)

THE LAW

10
1. Moral Law. This is the part of the law that is always true and is the standard by which
we know who God is and the guidelines that we are to properly respond to Him. It is true
for all culture in all time periods in all situations. There is no one in the world who can
claim freedom from this law outside of Jesus Christ. This law is found in the 10
commandments and is found in Exodus 20:1-17 and Deuteronomy 5:6-21.
2) Civil Law. These are laws that we see in the OT that lay out how Israel was supposed
to function as a nation, and are ways they dealt with the various rules and regulations of
living in the land. It would be a similar way that in the various countries we have a speed
limit, how much the income tax is. These are not transferable to us, we do not have to
obey them, but they do point us to Jesus, and therefore, we can learn from them. 2
Timothy 3:15 explains that, ‘All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for
teaching, for reproof, (rebuke), for correction.’ What this means is that even though we
are not required to obey it, it becomes useful because it points to how Jesus Christ rules
in the church in the New Testament. Many times, this kind of work takes some time and
effort to see.
3) Ceremonial Law. The third type of law, which is similar to the civil law, is the
ceremonial law. This is a category of laws that instructed Israel in how they were to set
up their system of worship, which included the structure of the tabernacle and later the
temple as well as the entire sacrificial system. Jesus stated that He replaced the temple
with Himself. Therefore, we are not required to obey these laws. (John 2:18-21) By doing
this, Jesus not only changed the way in which all people would worship, in effect, he
saved us from having to follow the ceremonial law. In spite of this, understanding these
laws is very helpful since they give us a shadow or picture of how Jesus works in our
lives. (Hebrews 10:1)

What is our relationship as Christians to the Law?

 The Old Testament Law is part of a contract that instantiated a covenant
between Israel and the Lord. It was shape according to the habits of the
time, with Israel as the vassal and the Lord as the suzerain. The suzerain
agreed to provide protection and certain specified advantages, the vassal
promised faithfulness and a certain way of conduct. As always in such
contracts, the penalties for being disloyal is explicitly stated and agreed
upon.
 The Old Testament is not our covenant. As Christians we have entered into
a new covenant. Obligations from the old covenant only apply if they have
been renewed explicitly.
 Some commandments of the old covenant have explicitly not been renewed
(this part of the old covenant is often called the civil law of Israel and the
ritual law of Israel).

11
  A part of the old covenant is renewed in the New Testament and explicitly
stated in it. It therefore applies to us. (Some aspects of the ethical law are
renewed). Eg. see Matthew 22,40 and Matthew 5,21-48.
 The whole law of the Old Testament is still God’s word for us, even if it is
not God’s command for us anymore (cp. Matthew 11,4). 2 Timothy 3,16
applies here as well! God’s justice, love and holy standards can be seen
here! Look to Galatians 3,23 in order to find out what the law did! Don’t
forget God’s history of salvation!

LAND: The promise of people

Yahweh commands Joshua to divide the land as an "inheritance" for Israel. Repeatedly in
Joshua 13-19, the land given to the tribes is called "inheritance." This is another clue for
the Book of Joshua and the biblical theme of the land. Land is never just dirt. It is
inheritance. Land carries social and spiritual meaning that goes beyond agricultural
potential. For traditional farmers, land bonds them to family and God. This bonding
imposes limitations and obligations regarding its use and distribution.

Inheritance is a theologically rich concept that guided Israel's relationship to the land. The
basic idea is that the land is Yahweh's land. "The earth is the Lord's," the psalmist could
sing (Ps. 24:1). "The land is mine," says Yahweh (Lev. 25:23). Throughout Joshua 13-19,
land is first and foremost an inheritance given to Israel by Yahweh. Land is Yahweh's gift
to be passed on from generation to generation.

The idea that God owns the land had not only theological significance but also real
sociological meaning-- land in ancient Israel was not conceived of as private property. It
was a trust or "loan" administered by Israel on behalf of Yahweh. Land was the
inheritance of the tribe. The tribe apportioned the land according to families. The plot or
"portion" each family received was their participation in the tribal inheritance. Each
family enjoyed lasting rights to use the land, but never as a commodity that could be
bought and sold for private gain. Their portion was family property. They managed it on
behalf of the entire tribe.

But this sociological significance was never separable from theological or spiritual
meaning. For the ancient Hebrew, land as inheritance meant Yahweh's presence and
faithful fulfillment of God's promise. Land was viewed as the historical manifestation of
the covenant Yahweh had made with Israel's ancestors. Land was the sign of salvation.
Thus, in Psalms 16:5-6 and 142:5, "portion" is equated with total assurance of God's
presence.

The Israelites couldn't do with the land as they might choose. Land as inheritance
required that it be used only in ways faithful to Yahweh. This meant social justice. Thus,
the Old Testament laws relating to social justice are, to a great extent, laws about the

12
land. The Deuteronomic laws say much about land use. The ancient traditions of Sabbath
and Jubilee (Ex. 23: 10-11; Lev. 25; Deut. 15:1-18) are especially direct. These date from
the origins of Israel. They required that crop land lie fallow during certain intervals. This
1

sustained its capacity to grow crops. Family land that had been lost was to be returned to
its original owners (Lev. 25). These laws also required that debts be pardoned (Deut. 15:
1-3) and that Hebrew slaves and bonded servants be set free. The law that part of the
harvest be left for the poor (Deut. 24:19-22) is another example of social legislation
regulating land use. Managing the land and social justice were united in ancient Israel.
This unity is based on the idea of land as Yahweh's inheritance

Chastised People

If God is love then why does he chastise them?

1. God’s love in seen not so much in emotional terms but in covenantal terms.

There is nothing in the Israelites that can stand as a merit or a worth to receive

God’s love, rather it is a love that flows from God’s free pleasure to honor his

broken covenant.

2. The covenant does not mean that God owes his love to Israel. The love of God in

Hosea drastically supersedes his covenantal obligations to Israel and the

obedience of Israel drastically undermines their covenantal obligations to God.

The contrast is not accidental; surely God shows the worth of his justice and his

love in His message to His people.

3. The love of God disciplines his people to draw them into its fullness. The motif in

chapter 6, “He has torn us to pieces, but He will heal us, He has injured us, but he

will bind up our wounds” demonstrates the disciplining character of God towards

His people.

4. The love in Hosea is always pointing back to his acts in history that demonstrated

God’s love. The love grounded in history. The crisis of Hosea was not simple the

people in front of him, rather it was a long tradition that had slowly slipped into

13
 crisis. The no longer knew God, they no longer looked back and remembered his

acts in history, and hence they no longer knew of His love.

Old and New Israel

One of the great theological battlegrounds of orthodox Christianity throughout the

centuries has been the nature and character of the Church, especially in relation to its
biblical predecessor, Israel. The two major views are that:

1. The Church is a continuation of Israel –Replacement theory

2. The Church is completely different from Israel –New creation theory

14