Acts 7 - Covenant Review and Progress

Stephen's defense in Acts chapter 7 reviews covenant sequences and displays the major points or aspects of the covenant. There are probably several covenant models, but I've mostly read about and been exposed to the 5 point model. This is most thoroughly introduced and expounded in a book entitled That You May Prosper, written by Ray Sutton, who is currently a bishop in the Reformed Episcopal Church.

In Sutton's model the 5 points of the covenant follow the acronym THEOS;

1. Transcendence

2. Heirarchy

3. Ethics

4. Oath

5. Succession

Or a bit more expanded like this;

1. Transcendence/immanence

2. Heirarchy/authority/representation

3. Ethics/law/dominion

4. Oath/judgement/sanctions (blessings and cursings)

5. Succession/continuity/inheritance

North has popularized this with these 5 analogous questions;

1. Who is in charge of this company?

2. To whom do I report?

3. What are the rules?

4. What do I get for obedience, what do I suffer for disobedience?

5. Does this outfit have a future?

Consider these points as you read the following account of God calling Abram in Genesis 1:1-3.

"Now the LORD had said to Abram: 'Get out of your country, from your family and from your father's house, to a land that I will show you. I will make you a great nation; I will bless you and make your name great; and you shall be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and I will curse him who curses you; and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed."

1. God is transcendent (above Abram), yet immanent (present with Abram).

2. Abram will be blessed, with a great name; (authority and representation).

3. God gives a simple law command; leave your home and family to a land I will show you.

4. Blessings and cursings are promised; those who bless Abram will be blessed, etc.

5. The families of the earth shall be blessed in Abram (future hope).

In Acts 7, Stephen reviews the covenant God gave to Abram and he seems to emphasize the 5th point, the succession/future/inheritance/continuity of God's covenant. This makes sense as a defense because he wants his accusers to see their spiritual heritage hoping they will recognize Jesus Christ as the promised One. So, note Stephen's emphasis on "Succession."

About Abraham, Stephen says in v. 5; "And God gave him no inheritance in it, not even enough to set his foot on. But even when Abraham had no child, He promised to give it to him for a possession, and to his descendants after him."

Continuing on in verse 6; "But God spoke in this way: that his descendants would dwell in a foreign land, and that they would bring them into bondage and oppress them four hundred years."

Then Stephen speaks of those who were begotten through Abraham; Isaac, Jacob, and the twelve patriarchs in verse 8. He summarizes the adventures of the twelve patriarchs.

Again, regarding the 5th point of the covenant, notice v. 17;

"But when the time of the promise drew near which God had sworn to Abraham, the people grew and multiplied in Egypt... "

I like the way this growth of God's people is reported so emphatically and redundantly in Exodus 1:7;

"But the children of Israel were fruitful and increased abundantly, multiplied, and grew exceedingly mighty; and the land was filled with them."

Count the number of times the idea is repeated; 5 times. Do you suppose we are to get the point?

And just 2 verses after Acts 7:17, we read of the way the wicked will deal with this multiplication of God's people;

v. 19; "This man dealt treacherously with our people, and oppressed our forefathers, making them expose their babies, so that they might not live."

The succession or continuity of Christ's covenant has much to do with our children who are hopefully being brought up in the Christian faith. Do we fathers as teachers and leaders in our homes understand the importance of the commission Christ has given us? Do we see that the future of Christian peace, liberty, prosperity, good will amongst men is to a great extent dependent on what we are doing with our children? God has not given fathers/husbands and mothers/wives a more constant and attentive mission field than the one in their own homes, amongst their own children.

Have Christians succumbed to anti-children propaganda? Are Christians sacrificing their children to Molech regarding their education and upbringing? What curse does God speak of in turning "the hearts of the fathers to the children, lest He strike the earth with a curse?" What does God command and teach husbands and wives about children? We better find out, hear it, and obey it, don't you think?

Hope Lutheran Brethren Church is currently involved with an activity about the children who are being killed in the womb by their own mothers, and by those hired to do the job. Many of these infants are children of fornication. It was once common to call them "illegitimate children." Sounds a bit like attempts to make the babies the scapegoats. And there is something reminiscent in their being killed, sacrificed, for their parents' sexual sins and sinful selfish living.

Being involved in protesting abortion, it's vitally important we ask ourselves some serious and probing questions about the motivations for abortion. What are the motivations for denying life to or killing an infant? Maybe some like the following; babies and children are inconvenient, troublesome, expensive, demanding, hard work, etc.

Are there any similar motivations in our own hearts and lives about children? If so, may God grant us repentance, and new hearts.

DR