The term bfrith occurs well on to 300 times in OT, ana is rendered ' covenant ' in AV with a few exceptions, e.g. 'league,' Jos 9"'-, 2S 3'^-, and some other places ; ' confederacy,' Ob', cf. Gn 14". The word is used in a variety of signifi- cations, appearing to mean not only covenant but also appointment, ordinance, law ; and opinions differ on the question what its primary meaning is. Some have assumed that the word i)roperly means a bUateral covenant with reciprocal obligi tions or undertakings, and that tlien being applied to the conditions of the covenant, which were of the nature of binding ordinances, it thus came to have the general sense of ordinance or law. Not very difl'erent from this idea is the other, that, seeing among the Shemitic peoples no authority existed from which law could emanate, the only idea they had of a binding law was that of a contract or agreement on the part of those who were to be bound by it. Others have supposed that the original meaning of birith was ordmance or apiiointment laid down by a single party, but that, as in all such cases a second party necessarily existed, the term came to have the sense of a reci|irocal arrangement. The transition from the primary to the derived sense would on this last supposition be much less natural than it is on the other. The derivation of the word is uncertain. Ges. assumed a root n^j to cut, after Arab., suppos- ing the term derived from the i)rimitive rite of cutting victims into pieces, between which the contracting parties passed (Gn 15", Jer 34"- '"). It is probable that the early phrase to make a covenant, viz. ' to cut ' (nnj) a covenant, was derive<l from this usage ; but it is more natural to suppose that both the idea of birith and the term itself existed independently of the rites employed at its formation in particular instances (cf. Lat. firdus iccre, etc.) More recently it has been suggested that the word may be connected with the As-syr. birtu 'a fetter,' bcritu a fettering, enclosing. It does not quite appear, however, whether the 8ui>- posed verb from wliich ' fetter' is derive<l meant ' to enclose' or ' to bind ' (Del. Assyr. llll'll). At any rate, the word bund woulil api)roximat« more nearly towards expressing the various usages of bfrith than any other word, for the term is used not only where two parties reciprocally bind them
510
COVENANT
COVENANT
selves, but where one party imposes a bond upon the other, or where a party assumes a bond upon himself.
There are two classes of covenants mentioned in OT — those between men and men, and those be- tween God and men. It m,ay be assumed that the ideas associated with the latter class, the divine covenants, are secondary, and transferred from covenants among men.
i. Covenants among Men. — In Gn 26^'- men- tion is made of a covenant between Abimelech, Ahuzzath, and Phicol on the one side, and Isaac on the other. (1) The proposal came from Abimelech, ' Let there now be an oath (or curse, .^^^<) betwixt us, betwixt us and thee, and let us make a covenant with thee' (v.^). (2) The contents or terms of the covenant were that they should mutually abstain from hurting one another, or positively do as Abimelech had done to Isaac, ' we have done unto thee nothing but good, and sent thee away in peace' (v.'*). (3) The covenant was contracted by an oath taken bv both parties, ' they sware one to another' (v.")- Reference is made to a meal or feast provided by Isaac ; but as this took place the night before the covenant was sworn, it formed no part of the covenant ceremonies. What appears to be another version of the same trans- action is given in Gn 21-*- in the history of Abraham. If the transaction there be a different one, the passage has probably suffered interpola- tion from 26-*''- (in LXX Ahuzzath as well as Phicol appears). The covenant in these passages was an international treaty between the two peoples, Israel and the Philistines.
A similar covenant is described in the history of Jacob (Gn SI""*). The passage is composite,and it is not ea^^y to apportion the verses between the sources J and E. The most important part of the passage is v."'- (E). (1) The initiative was taken by Laban, ' Come, let us make a covenant, I and thou' (v.**). (2) A cairn was raised by Laban (or by both) to be a witness, and apparently also a boundary landmark. (3) The terms of the covenant were that neither party should overstep this boundary for harm to the other. (4) Both parties bound themselves by a solemn oath, Laban taking to witness the God of Abraham and Nahor, and Jacob swearing by the Fear of his father Isaac. In v." (possibly J) an addition or a variation appears, having a more personal character, and referrmg to Jacob 8 treatment of Laban's daughters. Refer- ence is twice made to a meal (vv.''*- "), but in neither case does the meal appear part of the covenant ceremonies ; in the second case it was a sacriKcial meal, of which Jacob and ' his brethren,' that is, the Hebrews, alone partook. It is obvious that the covenant here is again an international treaty between Hebrews and Aramieans, to estab- lish Gilead as a boundary-line between the two peoples.