GOD’S HESED: IT’S MEANING AND IT’S THEOLOGY

___________________

A Paper

Presented to
Dr. Robert Lightner

Piedmont International University

___________________

In Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for the Course

Old Testament Synthesis

___________________

By

Kenneth Banks

Fall 2014

1
 Table of Contents
Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 3

Major Scholarship on the Meaning of Hesed .................................................................... 4

Nelson Glueck – Hesed in the Bible ............................................................................. 5

Norman Snaith -- The Distinctive Ideas of the Old Testament ..................................... 8

Katharine Sakenfeld – The Meaning of Hesed ........................................................... 11

Gordon Clark – The Word Hesed in the Hebrew Bible .............................................. 14

The Meaning and Theology of Hesed ............................................................................. 20

Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 29

Bibliography.................................................................................................................... 31

2
 Introduction
One of the most important Old Testament theological concepts is centered in the

Hebrew term ‫( ֶחֶ֥סֶ ד‬hereafter Hesed).1 This noun was used nearly 250 times in the Hebrew Bible

and it conveys in a profound way how God interacted with people in the Old Testament.2 It

importance can be illustrated from one event in the life of the nation of Israel.

An important event took place in the life of Israel following their deliverance from

Egypt. Moses had been given the tablets of stone representing the Law of Moses and at the same

time the people of Israel had fallen into sin in building the golden calf. Following this sin, God

called upon Moses to bring himself to the mountain of God and to bring another tablet of stone.

God would then inscribe the Law upon the stone again. It was at this second giving of the Law that

God made a remarkable declaration of His nature and His attitude towards Israel in spite of their

sin (Exodus 34:5-7).

On this occasion God introduced Himself in the following way, “The LORD, The

LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth” (KJV). In

this context God chose to declare that he is abundant in goodness. The word that is rendered as

goodness in the KJV is the Hebrew term ‫חֶ֥סֶ ד‬.

ֶ The Hebrew word Hesed is an Old Testament term

which expresses His relationship with Israel in particular and mankind in general. Yet scholars

have debated, what is the meaning of this Biblical term and the theology that is conveyed by this

1
Some scholars prefer the transliteration chesed while others prefer hesed which will be used here in this
paper. Since the issue of pronunciation is not the issue here; but of its meaning the term hesed will be used throughout
the paper.
2

3
term? At the center of the debate is the question of whether this term primarily conveys the idea of

mercy and kindness, the meaning is centered in the idea of God of being bound to His covenant

with Israel, or a combination of both. It is the thesis of this paper that the meaning of hesed is

centered in both of these concepts of kindness and faithfulness. In developing the meaning of the

term we will also be able to develop the theology of Hesed as it is found in the Old Testament.

Therefore the goal of this paper is to examine the meaning and theology of Hesed as it is found in

the Old Testament.

To establish the goal of this paper the subject of hesed will be approached from three
perspectives. The first section will examine some of the scholarly efforts that have been done to

define both the meaning of the term and the theology of the term. The second section will be to

examine the meaning of the term as it is found in various Old Testament contexts. The final

section will attempt to define the theology of Hesed.

Major Scholarship on the Meaning of Hesed

To develop a theology of hesed it is first necessary to examine some of the scholarly

efforts that have been attempted on the subject up to this time. A number of publications that have

examined the subject of hesed include the following: (1) Hesed in the Bible by Nelson Glueck;3 (2)

the two major works by Sakenfeld on the subject: The Meaning of Hesed in the Hebrew Bible and

Faithfulness in Action: Loyalty in the Biblical Perspective4, (3) The Distinctive Ideas of the Old

Testament by Norman H. Snaith;5 and (4) The Word Hesed in the Hebrew Bible by Gordon R.

Clark (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993). Each of these major publications will be

briefly surveyed.

3
Nelson Glueck, Hesed in the Bible, trans. Alfred Gottschalk (Portland: Wipf and Stock Publishers,
2011); this work is considered the classic work on the subject. It was originally published in German in 1927 and was
then translated into English in 1967.
4
Katharine Doob Sakenfeld, The Meaning of Hesed in the Hebrew Bible, (Missoula: Scholars Press,
1978); Faithfulness in Action: Loyalty in the Biblical Perspective, (Philiadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985).
5
Norman H. Snaith, The Distinctive Ideas of the Old Testament (New York: Schocken Books, 1964).

4
 Nelson Glueck – Hesed in the Bible

As already noted, Nelson Glueck published his doctoral dissertation on the subject of

hesed in 1927. Glueck divided the subject into three categories and then put various Bible

passages into those categories: (1) “hesed as human conduct – its secular meaning,”6 (2) “Hesed as

human conduct – its religious meaning,”7 and (3) “hesed as Divine conduct.”8 For Glueck the

concept of hesed centers on the idea that two parties “share an ethically binding relationship.”9 For

Glueck, this ethically binding relationship is true of hesed that occurs between two people and even

when hesed occurs between God and individuals.10

What kind of binding relationships between people did Glueck was considered binding

enough to produce hesed? Glueck suggested that hesed could be present in the following types of

human relationships:

… It becomes clear that hesed is received or shown only by those among whom a
definite relationship exists. Accordingly, what we call the hesed-relationship exists
between:
A. Relatives by blood or marriage, related claims and related tribes
B. Host and guest
C. Allies and their relatives
D. Friends
E. Ruler and subject
F. Those who have gained merit by rendering aid and the parties thereby put under
obligation.11

The passages that Glueck used to produce his conclusions will be examined in the exegetical

portion of the paper.

6
Glueck, 35-55.
7
Ibid, 56-69.
8
Ibid, 70-102.
9
Ibid, 37.
10
Ibid, 37, 56, 70, 75, 79 to name just a few pages that in which Glueck used the idea of a binding
relationship between the two parties. It should be noted that when referring to hesed that is shared between a person
and God, Glueck used the idea of a reciprocating relationship (Glueck, 70, 75, 79).
11
Glueck, 37.

5
 Following the various types of human relationships that will produce hesed, Glueck

dealt “with the extent to which the meaning of the word is influenced by the fact that hesed can be

practiced can be practiced between persons who share an ethically binding relationship.”12 Central

to Glueck’s argument is the idea that human relationships are based on a series of “rights and

duties” that produced certain obligations on the part of individuals.13 A few examples are sufficient

to see how obligations and duties are essential to Glueck’s concept of hesed: “members enjoyed

common rights and they had to fulfill mutual obligations,” “their whole existence was governed by

this reciprocity,” “her hesed obligation,” “his obligation to her,” “to show his master steadfast love,
i.e., to act in accordance with their obligations,” “fulfilling their obligatory duties,” “the Israelites

were obligated to behave,” “their hesed emanated from the mutual relationship of rights and

duties,” and “by fulfilling the obligations of hospitality, Rahab showed hesed.”14 According to

Glueck, hesed even between God and man is on the level of obligation when he states that “the

relationship between God and man, very frequently express by hesed, requires of man the

fulfillment of certain conditions.”15 What is missing from any of Glueck’s assessments of the

meaning of hesed here is the concept of grace, mercy, and kindness as a free expression of one

human to another; it is always the concept of reciprocity.16

The second context that Glueck had for the concept of hesed is that of the religious

realm and the human actions in that realm.17 What differs here with the preceding section is that

12
Glueck, 37.
13
Ibid, 38-55. Glueck uses the language of obligation and duties in every category of human relationship
to the extent that this truly is his idea of what is meant by hesed.
14
Ibid, 38-44; these quotes were taken from every page of every category of relationship which could
have been repeated many times over in the other categories of relationship.
15
Ibid, 41.
16
Ibid, 39.
17
Ibid, 56-69.

6
now the human action is directed towards God.18 Here Glueck in commenting on Hosea allows for

the concept of “benevolence” on the part of God while keeping human action on the level of

obligations:

There is a reciprocal relationship between God and Israel. God provides for His people,
grants peace and rest, stands by to help, and is full of benevolence. The people on the other
hand, must obey the divine commandments, heed His demands, and remain faithful in
thought and deed. Their duties toward God are the unceasing preservation of the true
knowledge of God and continuous adherence to a way of life pleasing to Him. … The
people’s relationship to God was founded on religious and ethical principles. Ethical
conduct was the basis of true religion. Knowledge of God required fidelity and love, both
of God and of men toward one another, manifested by the fulfillment of ethical
commandments. A people acting against emeth and hesed are also incapable of true
knowledge of God.19

Glueck also broadens the responsibility here from the limits of the previous categories to all of

mankind.20 Even when Glueck suggests that hesed involves the idea of love it is love in the sense

of the previous statements on obligation.21 In fact, it is this aspect of obligation that is the most

troubling aspect of Glueck’s work on such a beautiful word like hesed in mercy and graciousness.

Finally Glueck attempts to convey the nature of hesed from the perspective of “divine

conduct.”22 Like the previous two categories of human relationships Glueck couched the divine

conduct in the same language of reciprocity and mutual obligation. For example, when

commenting on Genesis 24, Glueck stated the following:

In these passages hesed is something which is due to Abraham and which Abraham’s
servant expects and asks for from Yahweh because of the special relationship between
Yahweh and his master. … Theirs was a very distinct relationship which imposed upon
them certain rights and duties—a relationship of mutual reciprocity expressed by hesed. …

18
Glueck, 56.
19
Ibid, 56-7.

.20 Ibid, 57.

21
Ibid, 58.
22
Ibid, 70-102.

7
 The hesed of Yahweh is, therefore, not to be understood as “grace,” “favor,” or “kindness,”
but as covenantal relationship between him and Abraham. [Italics added]23

Glueck also allows for the concept of love as embodied in hesed but it is love not as a free

expression but of obligation when he states the following:

Thus hesed can be translated as “loyalty” and also as “love” so as to emphasize that it is
Yahweh’s hesed. However, one must remain aware that a very particular kind of “love” is
meant, conforming to loyalty and obligation and thereby fulfilling the conditions of the
covenant.24

Yet can we ever say that God is obligated by any action of sinful men? God cannot be limited in

any way, nor can he be obligated in any way based on the actions of man.

Norman Snaith -- The Distinctive Ideas of the Old Testament

The second major work detailed here is the work of Norman Snaith. Snaith defines

hesed as the covenant love of God.25 In comparing hesed and ahabah, Snaith stated the following

as to the meaning of hesed:

It is necessary to distinguish between these two words, since both mean ‘love.’ The
difference lies in the fact that chesed, in all its varied shades of meaning, is conditional
upon there being a covenant. Without the prior existence of a covenant, there could never
be any chesed at all. The word represents that attitude to a covenant previously instituted,
and apart from such a case as Isaiah xl.6, it is always conditioned by the terms of a
covenant.26

While Snaith held that this is a dominate theme in hesed it must be acknowledged that this is not

the only meaning behind this important term.

Another important contribution made by Snaith is the recognition that the key to

understanding the meaning of hesed can only be determined through an analysis of the other words

that are used in the various contexts in which hesed is found. Snaith stated that “there are forty-

23
Ibid, 71.
24
Ibid, 73.
25
Snaith, 94-95.
26
Ibid, 94-5.

8
three cases where the noun hesed is linked by means of the copula with another noun.”27

According to Snaith this is an indication that when this occurs “the two nouns thus joined together

are almost synonymous.”28 The summary of these cases includes the following: “To sum up, out of

the forty-three there are thirty associations with ‘faithfulness’ and ‘covenant’ and one ‘stronghold’

as against seven ‘kindness’, of which latter, two are connected with ‘righteousness’.”29 Snaith also

examined the parallels that also occur in the context of hesed as a method for further establishing

the meaning of hesed.30 These parallels are “that characteristic of some Hebrew verses whereby we

have couplets in each verse, wherein the same statement is made, but with different words in each
line.”31 Snaith suggested there are eighteen of these parallels and the meaning of the term hesed “of

which ten are ‘firmness, strength’ against (at most) two ‘kindness’.”32 Despite the emphasis being

upon firmness and strength Snaith made the most useful of statements regarding the meaning of

this term:

These detailed instances involve preponderance in favor of the meaning ‘firmness,

steadfastness’ which is often neglected. We do not desire by any means to deny the
meanings “loving-kindness, mercy” which hesed often has. On the contrary our aim is to
insist that these renderings are often far too weak to convey the strength, the firmness, and
the persistence of God’s sure love.33

Snaith continued with a lengthy statement that exactly expresses the meaning of this wonderful

term:

There are eight cases where the plenteousness (seven) or the greatness (one) of God’s
love is paralleled with His slowness to anger. There are also twelve cases where the

27
Snaith, 100.
28
Ibid, 100.
29
Ibid, 100.
30
Ibid, 100-1.
31
Ibid, 101.
32
Ibid, 102.
33
Ibid, 102.

9
 plenteousness (or greatness) of His chesed is associated with words or ideas of mercy and
forgiveness. Perhaps the most notable example of all is Isaiah liv. 8: “In overflowing wrath
I hid my face from thee for a moment; but with everlasting chesed will I have mercy upon
thee.” Here undoubtedly, as in all cases, chesed has to do with the mercy and forgiveness,
but its true significance, as the chesed of God, is that it is everlasting, determined, and
unshakeable. Wonderful as is His love for His covenant-people, His steady persistence in it
is more wonderful still. The most important of all the distinctive ideas of the Old
Testament is God’s steady and extraordinary persistence in continuing to love wayward
Israel in spite of Israel’s insistent waywardness.34

Snaith gave the following list of passages as examples of these parallel accounts: Ex.34:6-7; Num.

14:18-19; Joel 2:13; Jonah 4:2; Psalms 5:7,69:13, 86:5, 86:15, 103:8, 106:7, 106:45, 114:8; Neh.

9:17, 13:22; Isa 63:7; Jer. 32:18; and Lam. 3:32.35 As will be seen later in this paper these twenty

passages are a very important the key to building both an understanding of the meaning of hesed

and the theology of hesed.

From this high point Snaith continued to emphasize the role of faithfulness in his

understanding of hesed.36 Where Snaith differs a great deal from Glueck is that he never portrays

the hesed of God as being an obligation. In fact, Snaith made this excellent statement that God can

never be placed under obligation by human action:

God is still God, though all men are liars and apostates. There is no ‘must’ about God,
so far as any human circumstances are concerned. The only ‘must’ is what He Himself
wills because of His own nature. Men can know something of this ‘must’ in their
experience of Him, but not in any speculations concerning God or the Right. God chose
Israel because He willed to choose them, Deuteronomy vii: 6-8. It was not because of any
necessity laid upon Him from outside. It was all of His own free, unfettered, and sovereign
will. The realization of this is essential to the understanding of both the Old and New
Testaments.

This too is an important element in understanding the theology of hesed. It is His freedom of

action that highlights the greatness of His hesed because He enters into this kind of relation with

His people willingly.

34
Snaith, 102.
35
Ibid, 102.
36
Ibid, 102-11.

10
 Snaith also explored the development of hesed of God within specific Old Testament

books.37 Space here limits us to just a few relevant points made by Snaith. Hosea’s concept of

hesed “meant God’s steadfast determination to be true to His share of the Covenant obligation

whatever Israel did on her point.”38 Finally Snaith discussed how God’s hesed works with His

righteousness:

God’s chesed for Israel is therefore seen all the more certainly to be sure, and strong,
and steadfast. It stands for God’s eager, ardent desire for Israel, the people of His choice.
There are no words to describe the depth, and strength, and certainty of this Divine
Commission. … God’s determination is that the bond between Him and Israel shall never
ultimately be broken, that the Covenant shall survive, even though with the smallest
remnant. The waywardness of Israel was so inborn, her stubbornness and her rebellion so
sustained, that for the preservation even of the Remnant, God has always, in every age, had
more need of mercy than any other quality. This is why it is often possible to translate
chesed by ‘loving-kindness, mercy’, and apparently to do no violence to the context.39

Therefore Snaith defines this term as covenant love with the understanding that these terms involve

God’s steadfast mercy even in the midst of rebellion and sin.40

Katharine Sakenfeld – The Meaning of Hesed

The third major work on hesed to be examined here is the two works by Katharine

Doob Sakenfeld. Like Glueck before, Sakenfeld defines the context of hesed in terms of

relationships but with a different emphasis.41 In her later work she does not specifically use the

term hesed when discussing the subject, instead opting for the word loyalty.42 It is in the later work

that Sakenfeld suggested the various components that make up hesed (loyalty)—“it is the

37
Snaith, 110-22.
38
Ibid, 111.
39
Ibid, 120-1
40
Ibid, 120.
41
Sakenfeld, Hesed, 3.
42
Sakenfeld, Faithfulness, 2.

11
combination of commitment in relationship, critical need of the recipient, and the freedom of the

actor which characterize occasions for the exercise of loyalty.”43 It is this aspect of freedom of

action on the part of the actor (especially in the case of God) that is the greatest contribution of her

work.44 This element was intended to be a direct answer to Glueck’s emphasis on obligation when

looking at the hesed of God.45

Another important element in Sakenfeld’s treatment of the subject is the relative

positions of the two parties. According to Sakenfeld hesed will occur when the action is

undertaken by a “circumstantially superior party” or a “situationally superior” party towards an

inferior party.46 At first glance this would appear to exclude relationships in which the two parties

are equal. But Sakenfeld avoids this by recognizing that two individuals may be equal on one

occasion and then the situation may change which allows for the expression of hesed.47 This of

course would never apply to God’s expression of hesed because He is always the superior party in

all of His relationships with man.

The need that is met according to Sakenfeld is not the ordinary needs that arise in

various relationships but the extraordinary needs that cannot be met by the person in need.48

According to Sakenfeld “ordinary” actions are “expected because of obligation or commitment”

and “extraordinary” actions are defined as “sometimes going beyond what seems reasonable to ask

of a commitment.”49 It is this definition that highlights just how wonderful God actions are in light

of what He had done for Israel (Exodus 34:4-7). In this light Sakenfeld also asserts that must of the

43
Sakenfeld, Faithfulness, 42.
44
This was intended as a direct answer Glueck’s insistence that God was obligated to act in this way.
45
Sakenfeld, Hesed, 53.
46
Ibid, 7,12, 162, 234.
47
Ibid, 162.
48
Sakenfeld, Faithfulness, 42; Sakenfeld, Hesed,
49
Sakenfeld, Faithfulness, 42-3.

12
Biblical material related to the Mosaic Covenant “tends to focus more on the extraordinary

character of Yahweh’s loyalty to Israel.”50 As will be seen below this is one of the facts that leads

to the understanding that God even though He has turned his face “for a moment” still loves and

cares for Israel (Isa. 54:8).

How do others see the work of Sakenfeld as it relates to the meaning of Hesed? Roop

contrasts the differences between Sakenfeld and Glueck on this subject of hesed:

By connecting khesed so closely to a legal covenant, Glueck chose to emphasize the

obligatory character of the word. Katherine Sakenfeld observes that the earlier biblical
traditions do not make khesed a legal obligation. She insists instead that khesed has a
distinctively voluntary character. Khesed describes assistance different from and perhaps
beyond what civil and religious law requires. While khesed has no legal force, Sakenfeld
points to the expectation that one who can give assistance will do so. This expectation
might be grounded in reciprocal assistance (helping someone in return for aid received) or
in a close family or community relationship that made such assistance part of the ethical
norms of ancient Israel. She further observes that khesed does not refer to everyday acts of
kindness. The one doing khesed acts to assist an endangered person, providing emergency
assistance for those unable to help themselves (Sakenfeld, 1978:44–5, 78–82).51

As Roop correctly recognizes in the work of Sakenfeld, God’s hesed must forever be voluntary so

as to maintain the gracious character of His actions.

It is therefore essential to our understanding of hesed as already noted that it must be

voluntary so that it can be said to be an expression of His love. Again Roop helps us here in both

evaluating Sakenfeld and in our understanding of the meaning of hesed:

Sakenfeld also helps us understand the khesed of God. The term expresses God’s active
assistance both for individuals and for the community. The Bible tells us that God may act
in khesed based on prior divine promise, in response to repentance, or as an act of divine
grace and forgiveness (Sakenfeld, 1978:147–50). Although the biblical tradition affirms
God’s commitment to khesed, the texts never lose sight of the fact that such action is
grounded in divine freedom, not in obligation. Nevertheless, Psalm 136 appropriately

50
Sakenfeld, Faithfulness, 52.
51
Eugene F. Roop, Ruth, Jonah, Esther, Believers Church Bible Commentary (Scottdale, PA: Herald
Press, 2002), 269.

13
 reinforces the affirmation, “The khesed of the LORD endures forever.” Nature declares and
history illustrates the powerful presence of God’s help and protection—divine khesed.52

As a result this helps us to see the majesty and wonder that accompanies God care and provision

for His people and that is embodied in the word hesed.

Gordon Clark – The Word Hesed in the Hebrew Bible

The most recent examination of hesed is the work of Gordon Clark. Clark differs from

previous attempts in two significant ways. The first difference between Clark and previous

attempts concerned the use of computers for analytical purposes.53 This allowed a Clark to do a

comprehensive analysis of the semantic field of ‫ ;חֶ סֶ ד‬which resulted in a full analysis of all of the

relevant Hebrew terms in their context.54 The other significant difference between Clark and other

works on hesed was his use of “structural linguistics” that “produced some valuable results,

confirming insights gained in previous studies, and providing insights into the nature and meaning

of ‫ חֶ סֶ ד‬that have escaped the attention of previous investigators.”55 While it would be too much

here to examine all of the analysis here, it will be helpful to look at various aspects and to survey

Clark’s conclusions.

What are the highlights of the analysis done by Clark? The first is a terminology called

agent and patient, which in simple terms is the one acting with hesed and the one receiving hesed.56

This is necessary because Clark like other major works makes a distinction between hesed in which

humans are the actors and God in His hesed. Clark also distinguishes between personal and non-

52
Roop, 269.
53
Clark, 39.
54
Ibid, 24, 39-43.
55
Ibid, 256.
56
Ibid, 13-14.

14
personal patients.57 Another important contribution is the identification of six Hebrew roots (‫חסד‬,

‫חנן‬, ‫חנן‬, ‫רחם‬, ‫אהב‬, ‫ׂשנא‬, and ‫ )אמן‬and how they coordinate with one another within the context of who

is the agent and who is the patient.58 According to Clark, when God is the agent the occurrence of

the three roots (‫חנן‬, ‫חנן‬, and ‫“ )רחם‬are much higher” than the other three roots.59 The other

contention is that these three roots (including hesed) never occur outside of a personal

relationship.60 Also according to Clark the three roots (‫אהב‬, ‫ׂשנא‬, and ‫ )אמן‬occur most often in the

context of human agents for hesed and outside of a personal relationship.61 Finally has a lengthy

series of chapters where he discusses the interrelationships of various terms, their parallel
constructions, and also various prepositions in the context of hesed.62 Space here limits us to a

survey of his conclusions.

What conclusions did Clark make as to the meaning and theology of hesed? In chapter

six Clark dealt with hesed as it is found in parallel constructions.63 In chapter ten Clark dealt with

hesed as it appears in the very important series construction ‫( חֶ סֶ ד ֶו ֱאמֶ ת‬loving-kindness and truly).64

The conclusions made in these chapters will each be looked at separately.

What is the conclusions and point of chapter six in Clark’s work? Here Clark dealt with

five types of parallel constructions that combine with hesed. The first is hesed with the Hebrew

57
Clark, 14, 55; the purpose of the distinction was done to analyze the role covenants had in the
expression of hesed. Non-personal patients would be those who received hesed without the benefit of being in a
previously binging relationship. This had the effect of dealing Glueck and his idea concerning reciprocity.
58
Ibid, 48-58.
59
Ibid, 50.
60
Ibid, 50; how Jonah 4:2 fits into the picture of hesed relative to a covenant will be addressed below and
whether it is an exception to the point that Clark made here.
61
Ibid, 50.
62
Ibid, 124-256.
63
Ibid, 141-61.
64
Ibid, 235-55.

15
term ‫( ַרח ֲִמים‬tender mercy).65 According to Clark there are four passages (Isa. 63:7, Ps. 51:3, Ps.

69:17 and Lam. 3:22) where this construction occurs “and they always refer to attributes of God.”66

Here Clark argues these two terms “share a common semantic field”67 This makes the meaning of

hesed in this context very synonymous with God’s tender mercies. When commenting on Isa.

54:7-8 Clark makes the astounding connection that “‫ ַרח ֲִמים‬is the means by which Yahweh gathers

Israel to himself after having momentarily forsaken her, while ‫ חֶ סֶ ד‬is the means which prompts him

to have compassion on her after momentarily hiding his face from her.”68 This would make hesed

God’s “motivating force behind” His actions and that motivation manifests itself through His
tender mercies.69

The second parallel construction Clark analyzed involves hesed with the term ‫אֱ מּונָה‬

(faithfulness).70 According to Clark these two terms occur “in parallel eight times in seven

passages—Pss. 36:6–7; 88:12; 89:2–3, 34; 92:2–3; 100:5; and Prov. 20:6.”71 The conclusion that

Clark draws here is that these two expressions are one of part to the whole.72 The term ‫( חֶ סֶ ד‬hesed)

represents the whole and ‫( ֱאמּונִ ים‬faithfulness) representing part of the whole.73 What this means is

that God’s faithfulness is a part (and in fact a necessary part) it does not represent the entire picture

of what hesed means. Clark therefore makes the following point in regards to Psalm 89:49 (89:50

in the Hebrew Bible):

65
Clark, 142-9.
66
Ibid, 142.
67
Ibid, 143-4.
68
Ibid, 144.
69
Ibid, 144.
70
Ibid, 149-54.
71
Ibid, 149; Clark argues that the first six passages refer to the hesed of God and the final passage from
proverbs is an example of human hesed.
72
Ibid, 150.
73
Ibid, 150.

16
 Similarly, God guarantees his oath by his ‫ ֱאמּונָה‬in v. 50, paraphrased as ‘If I do not keep
my promised ‫ חֶ סֶ ד‬for David you may say that I am not faithful’. In this case, Yahweh’s
‫ אֱ מּונָה‬is not only the guarantee that he will keep his promise; it is also what may be termed
the motivator for the promised ‫חֶ סֶ ד‬, and as such it is so intimately related to that ‫ חֶ סֶ ד‬that it
may be regarded as a component part of ‫חֶ סֶ ד יהוה‬. Thus Ps. 89:50 provides evidence in
favour of the hypothesis that ‫ ֱאמּונָה‬is an essential component of ‫ ;חֶ סֶ ד יהוה‬and this may be
part of the reason why these two elements appear in parallel so frequently in situations
where the agent is God.74

As a consequence this too highlights an element of hesed that is dependent upon the context in

expanding the meaning of hesed.

The third type of parallel construction developed by Clark is the combination of ‫חֶ סֶ ד‬

(hesed) with the Hebrew term ‫( ֱאמֶ ת‬truth or certainty).75 According to Clark these two terms “are in

parallel five times, each time with God as agent—once in the prophecy of Micah (7:20) and four

times in the Psalms (26:3; 57:11; 108:5; 117:2).”76 Clark states that the relationship between these

two is to be considered as “overlapping” which leads to this conclusion:

This is certainly so for these elements when they refer to human attributes, where ‫אֱ מֶ ת‬
has been seen as an essential part of ‫ חֶ סֶ ד‬which is the whole. When the reference is to divine
attributes, the two elements are distinguished from each other by the association of ‫ אֱ מֶ ת‬with
the punishment and hardship that is designed to result in the well-being associated with
‫חֶ סֶ ד‬.77

What this means is that the term ‫( ֱאמֶ ת‬truth or certainty) does not add meaning to hesed itself as did

the previous two parallels but gives assurance of the outcomes of hesed.

The fourth parallel construction involves ‫( חֶ סֶ ד‬hesed) with the Hebrew term ‫יְ ׁשּועָה‬

(salvation or deliverance).78 According to Clark these two terms are in parallel “in 2 Sam. 22:51;

Pss. 18:51; 13:6.”79 In all of these passages the recipient of God’s hesed is King David. Clark here

74
Clark, 151.
75
Ibid, 154-6.
76
Ibid, 154.
77
Ibid, 156.
78
Ibid, 156-8.
79
Ibid, 156.

17
seems to suggest that that this term does not provide additional insight into the meaning of hesed

through these parallel passages.80 While this may be true of the meaning of hesed, yet it does aid us

in developing a theology of hesed. What these passages indicate is that salvation and deliverance

are the result of God’s hesed. David was delivered and saved because God had acted with hesed

towards him.

The fifth parallel construction involves ‫( חֶ סֶ ד‬hesed) with the Hebrew term ‫צְ דָ קָ ה‬

(righteousness).81 According to Clark these two terms appear in parallel in in Ps. 36:11, 103:17–

18, and Ps. 143:11–12.82 As with the fourth construction Clark argues that ‫ יְ ׁשּועָה‬does not provide
more meaning to hesed.83 What these passages indicate is that God will provide both hesed and

righteousness to those who put their trust in Him. Based on Psalm 33:5 Clark argues that “‫ צְ דָ קָ ה‬is

a manifestation of Yahweh’s ‫ ”חֶ סֶ ד‬which indicates that it too is the result of God’s hesed.84

In chapter ten Clark deals with the specific construction ‫ חֶ סֶ ד ֶו ֱאמֶ ת‬in various ways and

what are the conclusions that he has reached regarding this phrase?85 Again, the basic idea behind

the term is ‫ ֱאמֶ ת‬truth or certainty. According to Clark the phrase ‫ חֶ סֶ ד ֶואֱמֶ ת‬occurs fifteen times

where God is the agent acting towards humans.86 The first point is as noted above is Cark’s view

that “‫ אֱ מֶ ת‬is an essential component of ‫(“חֶ סֶ ד‬hesed) and therefore the expression “may be regarded

as a single semantic unit.”87 Another important question concerns whether this phrase should be

80
Ibid, 157-8.
81
Ibid, 158-60.
82
Ibid, 158.
83
Ibid, 159.
84
Ibid, 160.
85
Ibid, 235-55.
86
Ibid, 236.
87
Ibid, 241.

18
considered a Hebrew hendiadys “where one component defines the other.”88 Clark agrees with

other scholars that this phrase does often function as a hendiadys and that “the expression

emphasizes that Yahweh demonstrates his faithfulness to his people when extends ‫ חֶ סֶ ד‬to them.”89

Clark also makes this conclusion regarding the nature of this phrase:

Moreover, the occurrence of ‫ חֶ סֶ ד ֶואֱמֶ ת‬in situations where there is ‘a certain elevation,
dignity, or remoteness from ordinary experience’ serves to enhance the complexity and
richness of this expression. … In the expression ‫ חֶ סֶ ד ֶו ֱאמֶ ת‬the central word is ‫ חֶ סֶ ד‬and the
function of ‫ ֱאמֶ ת‬is to modify this main word. When ‫ ֱאמֶ ת‬is used as an attribute of a noun that
refers to an inanimate object it can have the meaning ‘reliable, genuine, lasting’.90

Perhaps another way of saying it is to suggest that this phrase represents a single idea that
emphasizes the certainty with which God extends His hesed.

Finally how does Clark address the issue of obligation; namely, the idea that God is

obligated to act in this way and that it is not an expression of his free will? Clark gives this

excellent summary of this point:

‫ חֶ סֶ ד‬is not merely an attitude or an emotion; it is an emotion that leads to an activity

beneficial to the recipient. The relative status of the participants is never a feature of the ‫חֶ סֶ ד‬
act, which may be described as a beneficent action performed, in the context of a deep and
enduring commitment between two persons or parties, by one who is able to render
assistance to the needy party who in the circumstances is unable to help him or herself.91

Clark also correctly identified this concept as one of the perfects of God. This places this idea with

the realm of theology proper. Clark’s statement here is very appropriate regarding this as one of

the perfections of God:

The use of the word in the Hebrew Bible indicates that ‫ חֶ סֶ ד‬is characteristic of God
rather than human beings; it is rooted in the divine nature, and it is expressed because of
who he is, not because of what humanity is or needs or desires or deserves. Yahweh’s
tenacious commitment to Israel even in the face of their blatant and persistent rebellion

88
Clark, 242.
89
Ibid, 247.
90
Ibid, 254.
91
Ibid, 267.

19
 demonstrates that ‫ חֶ סֶ ד‬is an enduring quality of God. This commitment leads him to punish
his wayward people and to regulate their punishment in such a way that they desire to
return to him. Although it is not at the time apparent to Israel, ‫ חֶ סֶ ד יהוה‬is still available and
Yahweh awaits the opportunity to manifest it again when his people repent and return to
him.92

Therefore it must be considered a joy to see a glimpse into the character of God that is found in the

extremely important Old Testament concept.

The Meaning and Theology of Hesed

What then is the heart of this Old Testament term? It is the view of this writer that

hesed is such a complex gem that no single English word can convey all facets that this reveals to

our mind. There are a number of ideas that convey the thrust of its meaning as found in the Old

Testament. Therefore to establish the meaning of this term we must look at all of the varieties of

ideas that are presented.

Before looking at new material that helps us understand the meaning of hesed it will be

helpful to summarize the meaning of this term as found in the major works already cited. The first

concept that is embedded in hesed as noted above by both Snaith and Clark associate is the idea of

mercy within God’s hesed.93 Also as we noted above for hesed is the “motivating force behind”

God’s actions and that motivation manifests itself through his tender mercies.94 In the following

passages the Hebrew parallelism makes hesed synonymous with mercy: Isa. 63:7, Psalm 51:1-2,

Psalm 69:17, and Lam. 3:22.95 The second idea embedded in hesed that was summarized above is

the idea of faithfulness.96 As noted above faithfulness within hesed can be seen in the seven

passages identified by Clark: “Pss. 36:6–7; 88:12; 89:2–3, 34; 92:2–3; 100:5; and Prov. 20:6.”97 In

92
Clark, 267.
93
Clark, 142-9, 144; Snaith, 102, 120-1.
94
Clark, 57.
95
Ibid, 142.
96
Glueck, 56-57; Snaith, 100; Clark 149-54.
97
Clark, 149.

20
these passages faithfulness is a part of the greater whole of hesed.98 One must also include in this

category the concept that God is committed to the keeping of His covenant with Israel.99 The third

concept that is embedded within hesed is the idea of truth and certainty that assures the outcome of

God’s hesed.100 Clark points to five passages as central to this idea of truth as embedded in hesed:

“once in the prophecy of Micah (7:20) and four times in the Psalms (26:3; 57:11; 108:5; 117:2).”101

This may be similar to the idea of steadfastness as well. The fourth idea embedded within hesed is

the idea of steadfastness which was detailed by Snaith.102 This is the picture of hesed as found in

the book of Hosea.103 An aspect of the steadfastness of God’s hesed is the fact that it will result in
His everlasting hesed (Isa. 54:8). So of those ideas that are summarized above they consist of (1)

mercy and kindness (or Coverdale’s loving-kindness), (2) faithfulness and covenant keeping, (3)

truth and certainty, and (4) steadfastness which leads to God’s everlasting hesed.

Another helpful aid is learning about the meaning of hesed is the work of Charles

Ryrie.104 According to Ryrie there are a number of ideas that are embedded in the idea of hesed.

Those ideas include the concepts of: (1) “the intensity of feeling,” (2) it is that hesed involves a

relationship and that normally this is associated with the idea of God’s commitment to His

covenants with Israel, and (3) that hesed involves the idea of steadfast loving kindness.105 Each of

the ideas put forward by Ryrie will be addressed in turn.

98
Clark, 150.
99
Glueck, 73.
100
Clark, 156.
101
Ibid, 154.
102
Snaith 120-1.
103
Ibid,
104
Charles C. Ryrie, The Grace of God (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1963), 15–17.
105
Ibid, 15-17.

21
 The first principle cited by Ryrie is that hesed “involves an intensity of feeling.”106

Ryrie derives this from the verbal root, quoting from Gesenius.107 Gesenius stated that the sense of

verb ‫ חָ סַ ד‬has “the primary signification appears to be that of eager and ardent desire by which any

one is led” and also it carries the idea of “zeal towards any one.”108 Ryrie continued:

Apparently the root meaning allows for this ardent desire to manifest itself in either
kindness and love or reviling and envy. In Arabic, Aramaic, and Syriac the bad meaning
predominated, whereas in Hebrew the nobler idea took precedence. The evil aspect of this
word occurs only three times in the Old Testament (Lev. 20:17; Prov. 14:34; 25:10).
Intensity of feeling is the first thing to notice about the root meaning of chesed.109

This intensity of feeling is certainly an aspect of the term which comes across as one sees the
circumstances in which God expresses His hesed (Ex. 34:6 following the golden calf, Isa. 54:8 and

the knowledge that God would have to set aside Israel for “a moment”).

The second “important idea in the meaning of chesed” as put forward by Ryrie is that

“it involves a relationship between those involved in the act of kindness.”110 Here Ryrie references

Glueck and his suggestion that hesed is confined to the kinds of relationships that were detailed

above.111 Ryrie of course mentions the element of Glueck’s relationships without mentioning the

obligatory nature of Glueck’s view of hesed. It is debatable whether one can accept Glueck’s

categories without also accepting his sense of rights and obligations. As noted above, this removes

the graciousness of God’s act of hesed which is itself an act of His free will towards those who

were the recipients of His hesed. Ryrie also quoted Torrance in showing that the nature of the

relationships created by hesed “were not regarded as merely ethical or legal, but primarily and

106
Ryrie, 16.
107
Ibid, 16.
108
Wilhelm Gesenius and Samuel Prideaux Tregelles, Gesenius’ Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon to the Old
Testament Scriptures (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2003), 293.
109
Ryrie, 16.
110
Ryrie, 16.
111
Ibid, 16; Glueck, 3.

22
principally religious, and in fact radically bound up with the persistent and unshakable love of

God.”112

The third concept put forward by Ryrie concerning hesed is very similar to those

already seen in the major works presented above (especially Snaith)—steadfast loving kindness.

First of all Ryrie suggests that when the “ideas of intensity and relationship” are combined this

results in the idea that “His grace is firm, persistent, and steadfast.”113 Here Ryrie also references

the insights of Snaith that were detailed above to see this idea of steadfastness.114 Ryrie also

appears to agree with Snaith that the aspect of mercy must be minimized, yet as Clark showed it
too has a place in our understanding.115

Having briefly looked at additional material concerning the meaning of hesed how does

one face the difficulty of translating a Hebrew term in which “There are no words to describe the

depth, and strength, and certainty” of this action on the part of God?116 Three suggestions are

helpful here. The first is the approach that the KJV translators took (as well as others); where they

used various words in a given context to render this Hebrew term.117 This fits the view presented

above that the meaning of this term is not isolated to a single idea but to a variety of ideas based on

the context in which it is found. The second approach is the one taken by the translators of the

ESV in which the overwhelming majority of passages render this word as “steadfast love.” This

approach narrows the meaning to a specific concept and then almost always renders the word using

112
Ryrie 16-17; T. F. Torrance, The Doctrine of Grace in the Apostolic Fathers (Edinburgh: Oliver and
Boyd, 1948), 13-14.
113
Ryrie, 17.
114
Ibid, 17; Ryrie also quoted from the lengthy passage that this paper also quoted earlier, namely, Snaith,
100-2.
115
Clark, 57.
116
Snaith, 120.
117
The KJV renders this term using these words over ten words to render this term with the
overwhelming majority being mercy, kindness, lovingkindness, and goodness.

23
that concept. This would seem to contradict the times when God is highlighting various aspects of

hesed in a given context. Finally a third approach the must be rejected is the one suggested by

Clark. Clark suggests that “‫ חֶ סֶ ד‬cannot be adequately translated in many languages, including

English.”118 Therefore Clark suggests that complexity of this term can be rendered using dynamic

equivalence.119 In an excellent article, Robert Thomas has shown that when dynamic equivalence is

used as a translation technique various interpretations have a way of entering into the process so as

to change the original intent of the Biblical author.120 Therefore this too is to be rejected as the

means of rendering this Old Testament term.

Having established the meaning of this term and also how it should be rendered, how

does hesed affect or develop Old Testament theology? This is what has been referred to previously

as a theology of hesed. Here too Ryrie is helpful in seeing the doctrinal significance of hesed.

Ryrie points out a number of doctrines that are associated with the concept of God’s

hesed.121 For example Ryrie commented on the extent of this concept upon the Old Testament:

It may help in comprehending the extensiveness of chesed in the Old Testament to see
some of the doctrines with which it is involved. This survey will demonstrate the
importance of chesed in the warp and woof of the Old Testament. God’s steadfast loving-
kindness permeates the theology of the Old Testament.122

With over two hundred and fifty usages of this term in the Old Testament, Ryrie is certainly correct

that the theology of hesed permeates the entire Old Testament.

118
Clark, 267.
119
Ibid, 254.

Robert L. Thomas, “Dynamic Equivalence: A Method of Translation or a System of Hermeneutics?,”

120

Masters Seminary Journal vol. 2 (Fall 1990), 149, 176.

121
Ryrie, 17-21.
122
Ibid, 17-18.

24
 What then are the doctrines that are affected by our understanding of hesed? The first is

the doctrine of fellowship with God as it is presented in the Old Testament. Ryrie states the

following in this regard:

Communion with God was made possible in the Old Testament by means of God’s
steadfast loving-kindness. For the righteous man, chesed was a means of entree (Ps. 5:6, 7),
a precious refuge (Ps. 36:7), and the subject of contemplation in the holy place of
communion (Ps. 48:9).123

What Ryrie has touched on here is the realization that just as salvation and fellowship with God is

on the basis of grace through faith in the New Testament it also was in the Old Testament. In the

Old Testament God’s hesed is the primary way in which grace is manifested and show to His

people.

Ryrie also described in effect how hesed was expected to impact the life of an Old

Testament believer.124 Even though this is referring to Old Testament doctrine this is still dealing

with the doctrine of sanctification. For Ryrie, the “divine side” of hesed includes the following:

Covenant relationships with God are regulated by chesed. On the divine side of the
covenant the display of God’s steadfast loving-kindness is guaranteed by God’s faithfulness
(Ps. 25:10) and righteousness (Ps. 103:17).125

And on the “human side” this aspect of hesed as well:

On the human side it was expected that man would keep God’s testimonies, ordinances,
and commandments in a spirit of love and fear (Ps. 25:10; 103:17, 18; Deut. 7:12; Neh.
1:5). Since steadfast loving-kindness is the manifestation of covenant blessing, its
withdrawal is equivalent to judgment and wrath (Jer. 16:5). God’s omnipotence insures that
gracious blessings shall be withheld from those who refuse to observe their covenant
obligations (Ps. 62:10–12).126

123
Ryrie, 18.
124
Ibid, 18.
125
Ibid, 18.
126
Ibid, 18.

25
Where Ryrie differs from Glueck is that Ryrie rightly confines the obligations to the “human side”

of hesed thereby leaving God with freedom to act in a gracious manner. Ryrie even makes the

following well placed statement to aid us:

Even though there is this human responsibility, one must not conclude that the
covenants were necessarily dependent on human merit. Once God’s righteous demands are
met, He is free to act in grace. The enjoyment of that grace often depends on man’s right
relationship with God, but the exercise of that grace depends only on the steadfast loving-
kindness of God.127

Given that the Law was a school master (Gal. 3:24), with the intent of making sin to be more easily

known to the sinner (Romans 7), one can argue therefore that the overriding principle is God’s
loving-kindness. He knew men would fail under the requirements of the Law and His hesed was

there to provide fellowship with God in the face of that failure.

Another important impact hesed on Old Testament theology is the manner in which

God’s hesed is related specifically to the various Covenants in the Old Testament. In fact, there

are aspects of God’s hesed that are directly related to the Abrahamic Covenant, the Mosaic

Covenant, the Davidic Covenant, and the New Covenant. The impact hesed has on each of these

covenants will be treated next.

Elements of God’s hesed are present in the context of the Abrahamic Covenant. In this

case the task is a little more difficult because the first references to His hesed assume that the

relationship is already in place. For example when Lot was delivered from Sodom he declared in

Gen. 19:19 that he had received grace and “thy mercy” (hesed) from God in “saving my life.”128 If

we acknowledge that God exercises His hesed within the context of a relationship then one must

conclude that Lot received mercy on account of Abraham’s relationship with God (Gen. 18). The

127
Ryrie, 18.
128
Genesis 19:19 is the first time in the Old Testament that this term was used in God’s treatment of men.
Assuming that while Job may have been written prior to Genesis the events of Genesis 19 most likely would have
preceded the events in Job when this word was used.

26
actions of Abraham’s servant in Genesis 24 are also predicated on the relationship Abraham had

with God, namely the Abrahamic Covenant.

Another important passage dealing with the Abrahamic Covenant and God’s hesed is

Jonah 4:2. In this passage Jonah declared that the reason he had tried to run from God. Jonah

declared his reason to be: “for I knew that thou art a gracious God, and merciful, slow to anger,

and of great kindness (hesed).” The issue centers on what relationship would be the basis of

Jonah’s belief of how God would act.

What possible relationship was present in Jonah’s declaration of Jonah 4:2? There are a
number of possible solutions to this question. The first is that Jonah was wrong in his assessment

of God’s character. This seems unlikely in light of what God did in turning away His wrath from

the Ninevites (Jonah 4:2) following their belief and repentance. The second possible solution is

that Jonah was convinced that they would be joined to the Mosaic Covenant and that is why God

would act towards them in a gracious manner. In favor of this view is the fact that the formula

Jonah used is the same as the formula that God used when talking with Moses (Ex. 34:6). Yet this

too seems unlikely since the Mosaic Covenant was made with Israel. Therefore the best solution is

to see Jonah’s statement in light of the Abrahamic covenant. Believers of all dispensations are tied

and come under the Abrahamic covenant and so here to God would be acting on the basis of a

Covenant relationship.129

The Mosaic Covenant is also related to God’s hesed in a profound way as well. As was

noted above, one of the most important events in the life of Israel was God’s merciful treatment of

Israel following the sin with Aaron and the golden calf (Ex. 34:4-7). God himself declared that His

actions were due to the fact that He was a God who would act in mercy towards Israel (Ex. 34:6-7).

Ryrie mentions the relationship between the Mosaic Covenant and God’s hesed as well:

129
These types of distinctions between Covenants are simply ignored in the major scholarly works on
hesed because they are written from the perspective of covenant theology with its focus on a single Covenant.

27
 The Mosaic covenant, too, is related to the steadfast loving-kindness of God. Both the
first and second giving of the tables of the law mention chesed (Exod. 20:6; 34:6, 7; Deut.
5:10).130

There deliverance itself must also be considered an act of God’s hesed as well.

The Davidic Covenant is also related to God’s hesed in terms of the attention given to

David and his descendants, as well as its duration. Ryrie made this very appropriate comment on

how God’s hesed is related to the Davidic Covenant:

In particular, the Davidic covenant was related to the chesed of God (2 Sam. 7:15; 1
Chron. 17:13). This steadfast loving-kindness will never be removed, though David’s
descendants would be punished for any disobedience (Ps. 89:33, 34). Further, the chesed is
the basis for prayer, both by the king (2 Chron. 1:8; 6:14, 42; Ps. 89:49) and by the subjects
on behalf of their sovereign (Ps. 61:6, 7). The ultimate fulfillment of the Davidic covenant
is in the Messiah, who Himself shall not be moved because of God’s steadfast loving-
kindness (Ps. 21:7) and whose throne for the same reason will be established forever (Isa.
16:5).131

As we will see later it is especially important to recognize that God’s hesed towards David and his

descendants is everlasting.

The relationship between God’s hesed and the New Covenant is made clear in the

statements that God made in Jeremiah 31. The revelation of the New Covenant is found in

Jeremiah 31:31-34. This promise of a New Covenant follows as part of a series of promises that

were made to Israel beginning in Jer. 31:2 and continuing until the statement of the New Covenant.

In Jer. 31:3 God declares the reason for all of His promises including the New Covenant—it is

through His longing-kindness (hesed) that God has drawn them back to Him therefore, at least in

part, God gave Israel the New Covenant because He is a God who acts with His hesed. Since we

receive the seal of the New Covenant we should also rejoice in God’s hesed and all that it stands

for in the life of believers.

130
Ryrie, 19.
131
Ibid, 18-19.

28
 Finally one theological concept that is related to hesed is how this Old Testament

concept impacts the false notion of covenant theology, namely replacement theology. One

argument against this doctrine is the everlasting nature of God’s love for Israel that manifests itself

in God’s everlasting hesed towards Israel. There are a number of passages that convey God’s

everlasting love for Israel that are also combined with His hesed. A few of the passages include 1

Chron. 16:34-36; Ezra 3:11; Psalms 188:2, Psalm 136 (the hesed Psalm), and Isa 54:8. One

example that is especially important is Isa. 54:8.

The most important passage that details God eternal hesed for Israel is Isa. 54:6-11.
There are two reasons this passage undermines and refutes the doctrine of replacement theology.

The first reason centers on the duration of His hesed towards Israel. In verse 8 God acts with

everlasting hesed (‫עֹולָ֖ם‬

ָ ‫)ּוב ֶחֶ֥סֶ ד‬
ְ which describes the duration of His kindness and mercy towards

Israel. The second reason this passage refutes replacement theology is due to the fact that this

passage establishes why Israel has only been temporarily set aside. God declares that in verse

seven “for a small moment have I forsaken thee” (‫ )בְ ֶ ֶ֥רגַע קָ ָ֖טן ֲעזַבְ ִ ִּ֑תיְך‬which indicates the temporary

setting aside of Israel. Verse ten establishes the timing as being the events of the tribulation that

are detailed throughout the Old Testament. Therefore the theology of hesed helps us to refute at

least in part the idea of replacement theology.

Conclusion
In conclusion this paper has explored the subject of hesed so to better understand its

meaning and its theology. The paper looked at the four major works on hesed to determine their

contribution to the subject. The paper also looked at various additional thoughts to help to define

the meaning of hesed. Finally the paper examined various doctrinal and theological issues that

help to define a theology of hesed.

One of the results of this work is to help correct popular misconceptions that affect

perceptions of the God of the Old Testament. There are those who present the God of the Old

29
Testament as a God of anger and of wrath. Yet as this has seen that is a total misconception of the

character and perfection of God.

In God’s hesed there is the wonderful picture of His steadfast commitment to those who

are in need and in doing so he acts with loving-kindness and mercy. In a single word God has

expressed wonders of His glory as a gracious God. Perhaps the greatest expression His nature is

found in His own declaration of His perfections after Israel sinned a great sin: “The LORD, The

LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering and abundant in goodness and truth” (Ex. 34:6).

All of these expressions are combined into that greatest of Biblical words – hesed.

30
 Bibliography

Glueck, Nelson. Hesed in the Bible. trans Alfred Gottschalk. Portland: Wipf and Stock Publishers,
2011.

Roop, Eugene F. “Ruth, Jonah, Esther”, in Believers Church Bible Commentary. Scottsdale, PA:
Herald Press, 2002.

Ryrie, Charles C. The Grace of God. Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1963.

Sakenfeld, Katharine Doob. Faithfulness in Action: Loyalty in the Biblical Perspective.

Philiadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985.

______ The Meaning of Hesed in the Hebrew Bible. Missoula: Scholars Press, 1978.

Snaith, Norman H. The Distinctive Ideas of the Old Testament. New York: Schocken Books, 1964.

Thomas, Robert L. “Dynamic Equivalence: A Method of Translation or a System of

Hermeneutics?” Masters Seminary Journal vol. 2 (Fall 1990).

Torrance, T. F. The Doctrine of Grace in the Apostolic Fathers. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd,
1948.

31