No One Said This Was Going To Be Easy.

I am still trying to keep pace to read the entire Bible in a year, albeit a bit behind. Obviously, I am even further behind on recording my thoughts. It may be a several year project to jot down just basic thoughts on each chapter. This connects to one of the strands of thought that I have been pondering over the past few weeks.

Have you noticed how Abraham almost at once seems to recognize God when He comes and visits, however it is only recorded that God visited Abraham a handful of times. This leads me to one of three possibilities. First is that God visited Abraham more frequently, but those visits were chosen to be omitted. Considering Genesis as an introduction to God, it seems odd that the Genesis writer would fail to mention that. (However, Genesis does fail to mention the first time God called Abraham, which is rather interesting.)

The other two possibilities are even more intriguing. One is that God visits Abraham only a handful of times in his long lifetime. The other is that God was constantly trying to visit, but Abraham failed to notice.

How often do we fail to notice when God is speaking to us? Preoccupied with the daily stresses of life, we miss the God-moments and the God-blessings because we are not looking for God.

Just a thought.

A God Who Feels Pain

If you have been keeping track, you may notice that Genesis introduces God to us. One begins to understand the nature of God as they consider His actions. First we notice God’s power. That God for some reason or another desires, or desired, to create. Moreover, God created everything with a purpose. Man, specifically, was created with both a purpose and a blessing. When the created things act against the intended purpose, curses follow. Even the curses, however, are merciful compared to what curses God could make. Thus far, God has not utterly wiped out creation.
When we arrive at man’s condition in Genesis 6 it is described as without hope. Every inclination of the thoughts of man’s heart tends toward evil at all times. This is a powerful indictment and yet, the Genesis writer writes that God was grieved and His heart was filled with pain.
This all powerful God, who out of chaos and barrenness can create with simply a spoken word feels grief and pain. God feels grief and pain. What causes God to feel grief and pain? The evil bent of man’s heart. That man’s heart is inclined toward evil and not toward God. That man has fallen short of his purpose. These things grieve the heart of God.
God regretted making man. What sort of God feels regret?
And yet, just as God declares He is going to destroy mankind, the writer of Genesis interjects, “But Noah found favor in the eyes of the LORD.”
How does man find favor in the eyes of God? The writer continues. Noah was righteous and blameless among the people of his time. Echoing the epitaph of Enoch, we read that Now walked with God.
God feels pain over those bent towards evil, yet is pleased with those who walk with Him. Noah was a comfort to God. When Lamech named Noah, which sounds in Hebrew like the word “comfort,” he stated that Noah will comfort us in “our labor and painful toil of our hands caused by the ground the LORD has cursed.” Note that Lamech failed to mention that the ground was cursed because of man, and how this may allude to the evil heart’s of man – that they blame God for what they caused. But also note the irony – Noah did not bring comfort to the men of his age, but comfort to God and to the men to come.
God feels pain, grief, and as we learn pleasure. God created man in His own image and the writer of Genesis is implying here that our own emotions are part of that image.

Genesis Chapter 4

Of Cain.
Much discussion is often made of the offerings of Cain and Abel and of God’s rejection and acceptance, respectively, of those offerings. I have heard numerous sermons and Bible studies on the matter, and have even delivered a sermon concerning it. Now, I really have no business delivering sermons, nonetheless, it happened. The point of me mentioning that is that this means I have mulled over this text for a great length in the past. I still feel that what I had learned is important – not important intellectually, but important for the heart. Thus, I will give a bit of summary. For those interested only in the new things I noticed, skip ahead to the next header.
If we give freely to God something of our own, will God always accept it? I think the initial inclination of the heart is a “yes,” but further reflection reveals that the answer is negative. This might seem subversive to our notions of the fairness of God, however, we are only in chapter 4 of the Bible, so our notions should not be so developed. So far we have seen that God has done two things towards man – blessed them, before man could do anything at all, and cursed them, as a consequence of their actions. (Keep in mind, even before cursing them, He promised a solution to the coming curse.)
So here we see that Cain and Abel bring offerings to God. Why they felt such compulsion is up for debate. The best answer I have heard is that God’s sacrifice in order to clothe Adam and Eve served as a prototype. But Cain and Abel felt like, for some reason or other, worshipping God. God accepted one act, and rejected the other.
Why was Cain’s offering rejected? First, it was not a trust-worthy, heart-filled offering. Notice the care the writer of Genesis took to note that Abel brought portions from the firstborn, or best, of his flock. Notice that in reference to Cain’s offering, it only says “some of the fruits” and not first-fruits of the field. This suggests that Cain did not trust God to provide satisfactory nourishment if he gave away the best, and that Cain did not love God enough to give away the best.
Second, it was worshipping God according to Cain, and not according to God. If indeed God’s sacrifice was the prototype for offering to God, then Cain decided to ignore God’s procedure for worshipping Him, and instead follow his own self-made concoction of worship.
Thus, Cain’s offering failed in both heart and form; spirit and truth. In not worshipping fully, Cain opened the way for sin to come in.
Is it not amazing that God is so concerned with proper worship, that He places it as the first human story after the fall. (Here’s a thought – a similar thing happens with Ananias and Sapphira shortly after Pentecost.)

More Curses
The God of blessing reveals more curses that consume man as consequence to sin. “Now you are under a curse” God declares to Cain. And yet, God remains merciful. God places a mark on Cain so that Cain will not be murdered.
We have seen God bless man, before man did anything at all. We have seen God curse man as a result of disobedience, all the while providing a way out from under the curse. Now we see God revealing a curse to Cain, while providing a way for Cain to live and survive while under the curse.
From all first appearances, God is not afraid to curse where it is warranted, but it is God’s desire to bless.

The Introduction of Sin
If Chapter 2 revealed the first thing that was not good (man being alone), Chapter 4 reveals sin for the first time. Interestingly enough, God gives sin hunter characteristics : it crouches, and it desires. God also says that man must master it (as man was supposed to master the animals and plants and the whole earth).

Did God have different standards of purity through the Old Testament?

Something I've always wondered as I read through the Old Testament, and this was brought to light tonight in Genesis 17-19's accounts of Sodom and Gomorrah and then Lot and his daughters, is the different standards people had in regards to sexual habits or practices. We see time and time again throughout the Old Testament things as simple as polygamy, to things as seemingly off-the-wall as Lot's impregnating his own daughters (albeit not while of sober mind). Similar stories abound throughout the stories of Jacob and his sons to the kings of Israel and Judah. We haven't gotten as far yet to read the Mosaic Law concerning sexual purity, but judging from the practices in Jesus' day it seemed pretty strict with severe punishments. But at the same time, people like David and Solomon had multiple wives and the subject is never really brought up as being in conflict with the Law (or rarely even to God's disfavor) except for when David killed a man to get to Bathsheeba.

On the other hand, God destroyed the cities of the valleys of Sodom and Gomorrah because of their wickedness, and has largely been attributed to their sexual deviance as shown in Sodom's treatment of Lot's visitors immediately prior to the city's destruction. However, Scripture does not say it was due explicitly to sexual behavior - just their wickedness, generally. Is the sexual deviance-cause a construct of modern Christian culture, which tends to view sexual sin as the worst possible abomination imaginable? [I am in no way downplaying the nature of sexual sin, as it is sin. Sin separates us from God and therefore all sin should be avoided like the plague.]

Joshua had mentioned recently that he was listening to an audio series about the "Emergent Church", which I only caught bits and pieces of through my conversations with him, that apparent different standards seen throughout the Bible has to be seen through the eyes of context, but I'm not sure what exactly that entails, and whether this seeming contradiction might be an element of that changing context. And there was also something about the need for context and human-wrought "logic" being a construct of modern philosophy. I don't quite know what I'm getting in to here, so I should stop before saying something ignorant. Anyway, this whole post is just an observation. Now perhaps it will spark some debate...?

Genesis 2 and 3

Shortly into the second chapter of Genesis, the first book of the Bible, we get an entirely differing account of creation from the first chapter. If I am honest, and I frequently try to be, I must admit that I have difficulty reconciling the two stories in a literal fashion. I have heard noble attempts to do so, however, they have appeared to me nothing more than mental gymnastics, and deeply flawed ones at that.
Nevertheless, I do not find the two stories contradictory. They do not read like literal accounts. Take the location of Eden, situated at the intersection of parallel rivers, a mythical location. (Perhaps here I should give a cautionary note. I do not mean to imply that these two stories cannot be literally true, or that Eden could not have physically existed, or that the Tigris and Euphrates could not have ever intersected at their source. I simply mean to say that for me to believe the messages the first three chapters convey do not require these things as literal fact, as I see the messages being beyond literal scenarios and speaking to deeper philosophical and spiritual truths – that is, to the character and nature of God, and the tendency of man.)
So, we find ourselves in Eden, located much like the Simpson’s Springfield or Batman’s Gotham. And we find Adam beginning to carry out God’s blessing – demonstrating his authority over the animals by naming them. Just as God named “light” and “day” and “sun” and “moon” and so on and so forth in the first chapter, so too does Adam reflect his creator’s image by naming things.
We also find out for the first time something that is not good. Until now, everything has been good, very good. Now, God states that something is not good. It is not good for man to be alone. Given the traditional assumptions about how Eve made Adam fall, one may wonder at this point if God may not be in error. Nonetheless, God declares that man should not be alone, so He creates a woman for man.
Adam’s declaration of the woman is remarkably similar to God’s declaration of human’s – made in His image. Adam seems to put Eve on an equal playing field.

THE TEMPTATION

Did anyone else notice that the serpent’s question to Eve misquotes God. “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden.’” The angle of the question makes it look like God is denying something to mankind. Eve responds nobly, that the serpent is wrong, but has two fatal flaws. First, she says God said she must not touch the fruit. God did not say they could not touch it. Thus, by misquoting God, she would be open to doubting things God did say when, having touched the fruit, she did not die.
Secondly, she replaced the name and meaning of the tree with the geography of the tree. The tree lost its meaning of “Knowledge of Good and Evil” when it was replaced to the tree “in the middle of the garden.” What a striking condemnation of the human heart! By failing to give the proper name, and the proper respect, to the tree, the command to not eat of it took on a frivolous form. Instead of a protective command, it became simply a “Because I told you so” command. Gone was the deep implication of what it might mean to have knowledge of good and evil. And so, by being able to touch the fruit and beginning to doubt the command, and by failing to recognize the significance of the tree, Eve became susceptible to temptation. How often do we, too, become susceptible to temptation because we reduce the significance of the crime?
Now, Eve’s failure to accurately quote God may have not been entirely intentional. Eve was not present when God gave the command to Adam, so it is entirely possible that Adam misquoted God’s commands to Eve. Perhaps he said to her that she should not even touch the fruit, so as to protect her from the possibility of eating the fruit. Yet another indictment of human nature! In effort to protect those we love, we extend the commands of God.

THE CURSE

Perhaps the most interesting thing that I noticed this time around in Genesis 3, and this is largely due to Jeffrey, was the nature of the curses.
The curse to the woman was first that childbearing would hurt – this I noticed before. But it is the next two that are interesting to me. That her desire would be for her husband, and that her husband would rule over her. I cannot even recall how many times I have heard the charge leveled to the Bible and towards Christianity that it unfairly treats women as subordinate. Yet here, in the very beginning, we see that this subordination was not the intent of God, but rather the consequence of sin.
The consequence to man is similar. Man now, instead of eating of fruits of the garden, which are easy and abundant, now must eat fruit from the fields, which must be toiled over. Man, as provider, must work the land, which will resist.
Thus, we see that traditional gender roles are not in place because the Bible favors the patriarchical system, but rather because of the curse of sin.
In fact, the first expression of gender roles, and the curse in action, occurs right after the curses are given. Adam names Eve. Until that time, Eve did not have a name, because Adam was not in a position of superiority over her. However, due to the curse, Adam exercises the naming power, and the gender roles form.

THE SOLUTION

Before the man and the woman are cursed, the solution to the curse is prophesied. Before man yet understands the consequences of his actions, a solution to those actions is foretold. God, in cursing the serpent, foretells of the offspring of Eve that shall crush the head of the serpent. This is the first prophesy of Jesus.
The second follows shortly after. After the curses, Genesis tells us that God made garments of skin to cover the shame of Adam and Eve. These garments came from an animal, and blood was shed. But it was God who shed the blood of an animal – it was God who made the sacrifice in killing one of His own creations to cover the failure of man. This, too, is a prophesy of Jesus, of whom it is said died to cover our transgressions. Even though man is about to be expelled from Eden, God still looks after man, and covers man. Even though eternal life is about to be removed, God does an act that signifies the future-coming of eternal life.
Man fails. But God acts to save.

Genesis Chapter 1

In the beginning, God.
In the beginning, God created.

God exists from before the beginning. The beginning involves God acting. God acts in the beginning. This particular story is man’s beginning. This particular story is our beginning.

I am amazed at how man is created. God decides that man is to be created. “Let us make man in our image, in our likeness,” he says. It begs a few questions. First, who is “us”? To whom is God speaking? And is it not interesting that the creative impulse of God ascribes only one description to man, that of being in God’s likeness. What does it mean to be created in the likeness and image of God?

Before God creates man, he makes a purpose for man. This was not some haphazard creation. God did not make man, and then determine a purpose, rather, the attributes ascribed to man during man’s creation is first the likeness of God, and second is purpose.

We have purpose. Our purpose does not derive from our situation, heritage, or nationality. Our purpose was determined before we were born.

Then, nearly inexplicably, as if it scripture were aware at the profundity of the thought, scripture repeats itself for the first time. “So God created man in his own image, in his own image he created him; male and female he created them.” (The mention of female is added lest males believe that only they are in God’s image.)

Right after God creates them, before they do anything at all, before even God saw that His creation was good, God blessed them. He blessed them, and reiterated their purpose.

God blessed us. God’s blessing predates our desiring it. It precedes our seeking it. It precludes our earning it.

The First Post - A Journey Through Scripture.

When Jeffrey and I were trying to determine a course of biblical study to help us grow in the knowledge of God, we concluded, through a variety of promptings, that the best course might be the complete course. It turns out that one can read the Bible in the span of a year if they read three chapters a day six days a week, and five chapters on the seventh day. So, on January 24th, 2008, we commited to this course of action and began with Genesis chapter 1.

That particular day, I personally managed only to read through the first chapter, but the discussions we had over what we had read excited us. Over the next few days, I realized that through this course, and through this year, God will be revealing many things through His Word. I felt that it would be important to document what God had shown us.

However, documenting is not enough. God's Word is Living - by this, I mean that it engages us not only in our mental or spiritual faculties, but that it engages us in the entirety of our existence, of our narrative. It speaks to the daily routines, rituals, and realities; it informs our perspectives on community and locality. Above all, it is transformative.

This transformation, however, is a mystery. It is not bound to simply a clearer propositional understanding of faith (which, comes from our place of knowing), rather, its stirs within the hidden parts of us, and transforms us from a place of our unknowing.

What we hope to do is to initiate a discussion. This discussion may be limited to a dialogue between the two of us and God, but it also may involve you and whoever else is drawn to this dialogue. This is dialogue may contain more questions than answers. It is not wrong to be confused about what the Bible has to say. It is not wrong to be confused with how the Bible engages us. That is part of the great mystery! Our uncertainty concerning parts of scripture do not reveal a lack of faith, rather, our willingness to participate in this dialogue despite our uncertainty is an act of faith.

So let us be faithful and engage scripture from the beginning. Let us check our preconceived notions at the door. Who knows what better things we may find!