There are several clues in the story that indicate God’s faithfulness to the covenant promise is the appropriate context for understanding his command. It is important to recognize that this was not an arbitrary demand, but rather, a test of faith: Would Abraham trust God to keep his promise? The following three clues are the main indicators that point us to the covenant behind the command.
First, God’s command to Abraham in chapter 22, “Take your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go (lek-leka) to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I shall tell you” is very similar to God’s call to him in chapter 12, “Go (lek-leka) from your country and your kindred and your father’s house to the land that I will show you.” In other words, God was reminding Abraham of his promise to bless him and make him a great nation at the very moment he was instructing him to carry out an act that seemed completely contrary to that promise. In the first instance, he was asked to give up his past; in the second instance, he was asked to relinquish his future. In both cases, Abraham was challenged to surrender everything and to trust God alone for his provision.
Second, by referring to Isaac as Abraham’s “only son . . . whom he loved,” God was again reminding Abraham that the promise was supposed to come through Isaac. Abraham was assured that God was well aware of the fact that the fulfillment of the promise depended upon Isaac carrying on the family line.
Third, the land that God sends Abraham to is called Moriah, which is derived from the Hebrew word ra’ah meaning “provide, see, show.” God was giving Abraham another subtle hint that he would somehow provide a way for his promise to be fulfilled.
Before you dismiss these divine clues to Abraham as being so concealed they are undetectable, notice how the story lets us know that Abraham picked up on them. Indeed, he understood that God would somehow provide the means for the promise to be fulfilled through Isaac in spite of the required sacrifice. For, Abraham told his servants that “I and the boy will go over there and worship and come again to you” (22:5). He believed that, if necessary, God would even raise Isaac from the dead in order to fulfill the promise (see Hebrews 11:17, 19).
So how does recognizing the specific covenant context of the story help us rightly understand the divine command to sacrifice Isaac? A couple things can be said. First, it is important to see that God did not ask Abraham to sacrifice something he was unwilling to surrender himself. In fact, Abraham’s willingness to sacrifice his only son Isaac foreshadows the Triune God’s own self-sacrifice in Christ (Romans 8:32). Recall that in the act of cutting the covenant with Abraham, God is the one who passed through the pieces (Genesis 15). God is the one who initiates, cuts, and keeps the covenant at great sacrifice to himself. Abraham was obviously being asked to fully trust God’s faithfulness; but, perhaps, more importantly, he was allowed to sense the depth of the self-giving love of God. Or to covey this another way, How else could God have communicated to his friend Abraham the immense cost he was willing to bear in order to maintain the covenant? Second, the point is the provision. God is the one who provides the sacrifice. Again, the test was whether or not Abraham would trust God to provide the means for his promise to be fulfilled.
For further reading see chapter 5 in Paul Copan, Is God a Moral Monster? Making Sense of the Old Testament God (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2011).
August 31, 2011
August 28, 2011
Taste of Gables!
Taste of Gables – Sept 11th
Looking for ways to serve at Southern Gables? New and simply curious what there is around the church to help you get plugged in? Want some breakfast when you get here on a Sunday morning? Then Taste of Gables is for you!Our annual church fair offers you a snapshot of the ministries and opportunities available at Southern Gables, including Children’s Ministry, Life Groups (small groups), Adult Communities (Sunday school), Student Ministries, and MUCH, MUCH MORE! Come a little early on the 11th, hang out in the Welcome Center between services, grab some food and some information and get to know your church a little bit better.
August 8, 2011
Who Were the Nephilim?
In case you were curious about Genesis 6:1-4. Here are my notes on the matter:
1 When man began to multiply on the land, and when daughters were born to them, 2 the sons of the gods saw that the daughters of man were good and they took wives for themselves from any they chose. 3 Then the LORD said: ‘My spirit shall not remain in man for ever, because he is flesh: his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.’ 4 The Nephilim were in the earth in those days, and also afterwards: whenever the sons of the gods went into the daughters of man, they bore them children. They are the warriors from olden times, the famous men. [translation by Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis, WBC]
Nephilim (fallen ones)
Septuagint (LXX) translated it in Greek as gigantes (giants).
The gigantes in Greek mythology were giants who were the product of the union of earth and heaven. They were subsequently defeated and imprisoned in the earth.
the act of falling (nāpal) is often used in the context of punishment for sin.
the sons of God/the sons of the gods (ʾelōhîm) seems to refer to angels (e.g., Job 1:6, 2:1, 38:7; esp. Ps 29:1; 89:7 make the latter translation possible)
The alleged descendents of the Nephilim are mentioned in Numbers 13:32-33 as the great men who were in the land of Canaan at the time of the Exodus: 32 So they brought to the people of Israel a bad report of the land that they had spied out, saying, ‘The land, through which we have gone to spy it out, is a land that devours its inhabitants, and all the people that we saw in it are of great height. 33 And there we saw the Nephilim (the sons of Anak, who come from the Nephilim), and we seemed to ourselves like grasshoppers, and so we seemed to them.’(ESV)
Three views on the Nephilim:
1) “Angel” Interpretation
The Nephilim are understood to be the offspring of fallen angels (demons) who had immoral sexual unions with human women. They are described as mighty men or warriors with heroic reputations. They contributed to the violence on the earth.
The hero of the flood story in the Gilgamesh Epic, Utnapishtim, was the descendant of a union between a god and a human. As a result he had incredible energy, but lacked immortality (the story relates how the gods granted him and his wife immortality in a unique, unrepeatable way).
It seems that these demonic-human unions were intentionally sought in order to obtain eternal life apart from God (see Gen 3:22). This fits well with the limit God then sets on the human lifespan.
The sequence of “saw . . . good . . . took” parallels the terms in the account of the Fall in Genesis 3:6 and suggests that like Eve the sons of the gods were transgressing a boundary set by God. Everything was supposed to reproduce accourding to its kind (Gen 1:11-12, 21, 24-25).
Ezekiel 32:20-28 may be alluding to Genesis 6:1-4. The prophet seems to connect the Nephilim with the those fallen in war or slain by the sword who go down to the pit, the grave, or Sheol: 27 And they do not lie with the mighty, the fallen from among the uncircumcised, who went down to Sheol with their weapons of war, whose swords were laid under their heads, and whose iniquities are upon their bones; for the terror of the mighty men was in the land of the living.(ESV)
Ps 82; Jude 6, 14, 15 (cites 1 Enoch); and 2 Peter 2:4-10 also lend support to this view.
However, this seems to contradict Mt 22:30 about people being like the angels in heave who neither marry nor are given in marriage (on the other hand, one can make a distinction and argue that Jesus is speaking about angels in heaven vs. fallen angels).
2) Royal Interpretation
The sons of God are understood to be rulers, princes, or judges who unjustly took the daughters of helpless common people against their will. These kings were guilty of compelling women to join their harems.
The problem with this view is that the text does not explicitly mention rape or coerced unions. The terms can refer to proper marriages. Also, this interpretation does not really explain the extraordinary size and might of the Nephilim.
3) Sethite Interpretation
The “sons of God” were the chosen line of Seth who intermarried with the “daughters of men” from the corrupt line of Cain.
There is little support for taking the “daughters of men” as a negative designation referring to the line of Cain rather than simply a general reference to female human beings. In the passage, “man” also seems to be distinct from “the sons of God.”
Having just listed the descendants of Cain and then Adam through Seth, it is odd that the writer didn’t just say the Sethites were intermarrying with the daughters of Cain.
Again, this interpretation does not explain the extraordinary size and might of the Nephilim.
1 When man began to multiply on the land, and when daughters were born to them, 2 the sons of the gods saw that the daughters of man were good and they took wives for themselves from any they chose. 3 Then the LORD said: ‘My spirit shall not remain in man for ever, because he is flesh: his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.’ 4 The Nephilim were in the earth in those days, and also afterwards: whenever the sons of the gods went into the daughters of man, they bore them children. They are the warriors from olden times, the famous men. [translation by Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis, WBC]
Nephilim (fallen ones)
Septuagint (LXX) translated it in Greek as gigantes (giants).
The gigantes in Greek mythology were giants who were the product of the union of earth and heaven. They were subsequently defeated and imprisoned in the earth.
the act of falling (nāpal) is often used in the context of punishment for sin.
the sons of God/the sons of the gods (ʾelōhîm) seems to refer to angels (e.g., Job 1:6, 2:1, 38:7; esp. Ps 29:1; 89:7 make the latter translation possible)
The alleged descendents of the Nephilim are mentioned in Numbers 13:32-33 as the great men who were in the land of Canaan at the time of the Exodus: 32 So they brought to the people of Israel a bad report of the land that they had spied out, saying, ‘The land, through which we have gone to spy it out, is a land that devours its inhabitants, and all the people that we saw in it are of great height. 33 And there we saw the Nephilim (the sons of Anak, who come from the Nephilim), and we seemed to ourselves like grasshoppers, and so we seemed to them.’(ESV)
Three views on the Nephilim:
1) “Angel” Interpretation
The Nephilim are understood to be the offspring of fallen angels (demons) who had immoral sexual unions with human women. They are described as mighty men or warriors with heroic reputations. They contributed to the violence on the earth.
The hero of the flood story in the Gilgamesh Epic, Utnapishtim, was the descendant of a union between a god and a human. As a result he had incredible energy, but lacked immortality (the story relates how the gods granted him and his wife immortality in a unique, unrepeatable way).
It seems that these demonic-human unions were intentionally sought in order to obtain eternal life apart from God (see Gen 3:22). This fits well with the limit God then sets on the human lifespan.
The sequence of “saw . . . good . . . took” parallels the terms in the account of the Fall in Genesis 3:6 and suggests that like Eve the sons of the gods were transgressing a boundary set by God. Everything was supposed to reproduce accourding to its kind (Gen 1:11-12, 21, 24-25).
Ezekiel 32:20-28 may be alluding to Genesis 6:1-4. The prophet seems to connect the Nephilim with the those fallen in war or slain by the sword who go down to the pit, the grave, or Sheol: 27 And they do not lie with the mighty, the fallen from among the uncircumcised, who went down to Sheol with their weapons of war, whose swords were laid under their heads, and whose iniquities are upon their bones; for the terror of the mighty men was in the land of the living.(ESV)
Ps 82; Jude 6, 14, 15 (cites 1 Enoch); and 2 Peter 2:4-10 also lend support to this view.
However, this seems to contradict Mt 22:30 about people being like the angels in heave who neither marry nor are given in marriage (on the other hand, one can make a distinction and argue that Jesus is speaking about angels in heaven vs. fallen angels).
2) Royal Interpretation
The sons of God are understood to be rulers, princes, or judges who unjustly took the daughters of helpless common people against their will. These kings were guilty of compelling women to join their harems.
The problem with this view is that the text does not explicitly mention rape or coerced unions. The terms can refer to proper marriages. Also, this interpretation does not really explain the extraordinary size and might of the Nephilim.
3) Sethite Interpretation
The “sons of God” were the chosen line of Seth who intermarried with the “daughters of men” from the corrupt line of Cain.
There is little support for taking the “daughters of men” as a negative designation referring to the line of Cain rather than simply a general reference to female human beings. In the passage, “man” also seems to be distinct from “the sons of God.”
Having just listed the descendants of Cain and then Adam through Seth, it is odd that the writer didn’t just say the Sethites were intermarrying with the daughters of Cain.
Again, this interpretation does not explain the extraordinary size and might of the Nephilim.
August 4, 2011
August 2, 2011
OT Stories
Some of the OT Stories we will be considering cover several chapters. Since this is more material than we can read aloud in class, please take some time to read ahead on your own so that you are prepared for discussion. Here are the stories we will be considering:
The Flood (Genesis 6:9-9:19): August 7
Babel (Genesis 11:1-9): August 14
Abraham (Genesis 12-25): August 21
Isaac (Genesis 21-35): August 28 (Isaac & Rebekah 24)
Jacob September 4
Joseph September 11
Moses September 18 (Exodus 33)
Exodus September 25
I've listed chapters for the first two stories so you can get started. I will try to narrow the scope a bit for the remaining stories and update this post. If you are ambitious, all of the stories can be found in context by reading the entire book of Genesis and up to chapter 15 in Exodus.
The Flood (Genesis 6:9-9:19): August 7
Babel (Genesis 11:1-9): August 14
Abraham (Genesis 12-25): August 21
Isaac (Genesis 21-35): August 28 (Isaac & Rebekah 24)
Jacob September 4
Joseph September 11
Moses September 18 (Exodus 33)
Exodus September 25
I've listed chapters for the first two stories so you can get started. I will try to narrow the scope a bit for the remaining stories and update this post. If you are ambitious, all of the stories can be found in context by reading the entire book of Genesis and up to chapter 15 in Exodus.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)