The Covenant
In most groups or communities three kinds of people tend to surface. Those who look for firm leadership to tell them what to do, those who prefer to believe that given time and patience most people are basically capable and sensible and can work it out for themselves, and those who are sure they have all the answers if only people would listen. All usually work themselves into positions where they are most comfortable. One group lines up behind those who seem to know where they are going. One watches with interest and occasional amusement, avoiding either involvement or commitment. The third sharpens their knives.
What all often fail to take into account is that biblical history started one way, developed differently, frequently lost sight of its origin, and constantly had to be reminded. Hence the emphasis around Haggai’s time on the New Covenant.
Forget the western idea which sees covenant primarily in legalistic terms as an agreement between two parties. In biblical terms the Covenant is more an unconditional offer of love awaiting response. In Exodus God takes the initiative. In Deuteronomy the people make their response, openly acknowledging what he has done. God acted long before there was ever any notion of covenant.
The nearest we get to an ‘an agreement’ is that between Moses and the people: ‘if you wish to enjoy the blessings of God, then this is the sort of thing you must attend to’. Not obedience to acquire God’s blessing but an unconditional expression of love in response to love received. Response in gratitude, not conditional bargaining.
This seems to be the basis on which Haggai is operating, possibly reflecting something of Jeremiah’s new covenant as a heart thing, not a head thing (31: 31-34) or Ezekiel’s emphasis on personal commitment and responsibility (18: 1-4), both ideas which seem to have been around at the time.