June 13, 2010

The Difference Between Blood and Salt Covenants

What is the difference between a salt covenant and a blood covenant?

The Salt Covenant is mentioned specifically in three places in Scripture. Leviticus 2:13, Numbers 18:19, and 2Chronicles 13:5. It is implied/referred to in more places. Exodus 30:34-35, Ezekiel 43:23-24, 2Kings 2:19-21, are a few.

"The term "covenant of salt" is indicative of the
everlasting nature of the relationship between the children of salt, and
their Elohim Yahweh. When we hear the term salt, the understanding is that
the things Yahweh addresses are eternal, enduring, never changing, and
abiding forever. All salt covenants then are eternal, and eternally binding
on the sons and daughters of Yisrael..." From(http://www.hebroots.org/hebrootsarchive/0209/0209b.html).
"Traditionally, salt was shared to seal a truce between former enemies or as a symbol of alliance between close friends. Treaties or friendships were often formalized by the partaking of a lick of salt to seal the deal or heal the difference between them.
"Entering into a Covenant of Salt means binding oneself to another in utmost loyalty and truthfulness, even suffering death, rather than breaking the covenant. For this very reason a Covenant of Salt was never done lightly or haphazardly – it deserves serious respect. To the ancient Hebrews, salt represented purification, and was also symbolic of enduring friendship, honesty, and loyalty (2Kin.2:19 -21; 2Chr.13:5). Today some Eastern people still use the phrase: “There is salt between us.” Having no salt, meant disloyalty and barrenness." From (http://www.homeworship101.com/fyi_salt_covenant.htm).

The Blood Covenant is mentioned many times. Such as in Genesis 15, Genesis 31, Jeremiah 34, 1Samuel 18. It is implied or referred to in Genesis 3, Ephesians 6, Hebrews 8-9, Matthew 26, among others.

"Blood covenants were primarily entered into on the basis of differences not similarities. As such, the results of the covenant brought new strengths to obvious weaknesses. The union would tend to make both parties stronger, this was often the purpose for the covenant.
"The terms or conditions of the covenant were not arbitrarily written down. Both parties would go to great lengths to determine the needs of each party. Each party would negotiate these terms before quickly agreeing to the terms. They must consider the cost, that is their own responsibility. What will they gain or are they being deceived or cheated. The covenant was indissoluble once it had been cut. There was no way out, once the ceremony had been completed. Very often a curse or penalty would be incorporated or pronounced upon the party who might willfully default. Such curses were expected to be visited upon the guilty party by the many deity's who had been called to witness the transaction. Most often much of the curse had to do with things beyond the power of man such as sickness and disease, poverty, famine, etc. Such curses would required a supernatural power to execute and it was believed that the gods would perform such curses quickly. Similar blessing were often attached to the covenant which again would require the act of the supernatural entities to perform such as, abundant harvests, prosperity, good health, many children, etc. The blood covenant was the most serious relationship that one man could enter into with another. In many cases, his life would be placed on the line..." From (http://revelationofjohn.com/Ancient.html).

The difference seems to be that a Salt covenant draws the parties together based on similarities and friendship; and a Blood covenant is based on differences in strengths and weaknesses. Both are everlasting, but have certain different, conditional, terms.

1 comment:

  1. I had to look this back up, i really liked reading it last time, so i thought I'd read it again.

    ReplyDelete

If replying anonymously, please do not include a web address in your comment, otherwise it will be considered spam. Thank you.