On the question of why חסד ḥesed is performed and its relationship to covenants, Daniel L. Belnap wrote:
Many have note that a relationship
exists between performing hesed and participation in a covenant
relationship). . . . In at least four relationships, hesed is expected
of one who enters, or who has already been engaged in, a covenant. Abraham and
Abimelech established a covenant between themselves and their offspring, promising
hesed from both, and established because one did hesed earlier.
Similarly, Jonathan and David entered into a covenant promising to do hesed
for one another and their descendants. Though the covenant relationship between
Abraham and Sarah is not explicit, it is their marriage that Abraham relied on
for hesed on his behalf. Even the example of Ahab and the Syrian king,
though not a true hesed act, demonstrates that covenants were associated
with the performance of hesed. Psalm 25:10 tells us, “All the paths of
the Lord are hesed (mercy) and truth unto such as keep his covenant,”
and in Isaiah 55:3 God promises to enact hesed by actually entering into
a covenant as he did with David: “Incline your ear, and come unto me: hear, and
your soul shall live; and I will make an everlasting covenant with you, even
the sure hesed acts (mercies) of David.” In other words, the eternal
covenant God makes with us is characterized by the same true, reliable hesed
acts he did for David.
Yet not all the relationships are
covenantally bound. Saul’s hesed act with the Kenites is not described
in covenantal terms, neither are those acts between the spies of Israel and
Rahab and the spies of Ephraim and the man of Bethel. Ruth may or may not be
covenantally bound to Naomi, but she is certainly not yet covenantally bound to
Boaz when she performs her act of hesed for him. Psalm 107:8 suggests
that all mankind, whether or not in a covenantal relationship like Israel,
should “praise the Lord for his hesed (goodness), and for his wonderful
works to the children of men!” Thus, it is not just a covenant that brings
about hesed and therefore cannot be the only factor in which hesed
is done. So what else is there? Two verses in the Old Testament provide one
other reason for God’s hesed acts. In Jeremiah 9:24 the Lord reveals, “I
am the Lord which exercises hesed (lovingkindness), judgment, and
righteousness, in the earth: for in these things I delight.” Micah points out
that “he retaineth not his anger for ever, because he delighteth in hesed
(mercy)” (Micah 7:18). In other words, God performs hesed because he
likes to do it. It is more than simply his responsibility to do so because of
his covenant relationship; it is his desire to continue doing this work. (Daniel
L. Belnap “’How Excellent Is Thy Lovingkindness’: The Gospel Principle of Hesed,”
in Approaching Holiness: Exploring the History and Teachings of the Old
Testament, ed. Krystal V. L. Pierce and David Rolph Seely [Provo, Utah:
Religious Studies Center; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2021], 61-62)
In an endnote accompanying the above, we read that
The relationship between hesed
and God’s covenant with David is one recognized elsewhere in the Old Testament.
Psalm 89, in particular, emphasizes the two. According to verse 28, God does hesed
for David eternally: “My hesed (mercy) will I keep for him for evermore,
and my covenant shall stand fast with him.” In this reference, the two stand in
parallel: God’s hesed is also his covenant. This may provide an answer
as to what exactly the sure hesed acts of David are. It is also possible
that this sure hesed is associated with the key of David mentioned in
Revelation 3:7, which appears to be the priesthood keys of kingship. David’s
line is promised kingship culminating in the kingship of Jesus Christ, but the
Isaiah reference suggests that anyone who comes unto God can have the same
covenant with the attendant hesed acts. Ann N. Madsen discusses the role
of hesed and covenant briefly in her study, “’His Hand Is Stretched Out
Still’: The Lord’s Eternal Covenant of Mercy,” in Revelation, Reason, and Faith:
Essays in Honor of Truman G. Madsen, ed. Donald W. Parry, Daniel C.
Peterson (Provo, UT: Brigham Young University, 2002), 704-21. (Ibid., 65 n. 21)
