Notes and thoughts over Ch. 14 - 27 (end of chapter):
Some interesting personal discharge and hygiene rules come into play in chapter 15. A commentary from my NIV student bible:
"Some of the rules regarding sex and bodily discharges mystify modern readers, but the Israelites took for granted that God had dominion over the most private aspects of their lives. The Bible does not provide a detailed rationale for these regulations. Some relate to health and hygiene: following the rules would help the Israelites avoid the venereal diseases that plagued their neighbors. Also, pagan religions commonly employed temple prostitutes, and God clearly intended for the Israelites to keep worship and sex separate."
I'm still personally confused about why women had to sacrifice doves or pigeons to "make atonement" after every period they had. I guess I get why people would be considered "unclean" during some of these different bodily discharges, but it seems implied that these unclean times are considered sinful. I'm not sure, but since they are having to make sacrifices for these times, it makes me wonder if that is indeed what is implied. At least it's not just about women, less you think Leviticus is being sexist, it seems that when men had bodily discharges they had to make atonement with sacrifice as well. I'm just envisioning a lot of poor pigeons and doves dying...
So, maybe some of the washing instructions and things like that make sense, but perhaps I am not meant to fully understand the reason for additionally making the sacrifices. Was it perhaps a way to be a regular reminder of their feeble humanity and cause them to be humble in the presence of God living among them? Perhaps. Otherwise, I'm not sure.
In chapter 19, there seems to be a solid list of good rules, such as do not steal, do not pervert justice, do not seek revenge, etc. But, then it's immediately followed by do not plant your field with two kinds of seed and do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material. So, some of the levitical laws seem to just make common sense while some are seen as curious to us now. But, it's interesting. A part of me even wonders if there is a deeper meaning behind some of of these, like the two kinds of material or two kinds of seeds instead of just the literal. But, I am not sure what.
Chapter 23:22 - "When you reap the harvest of your land, do not reap to the very edges of your field or gather the gleanings of your harvest. Leave them for the poor and the alien. I am the Lord your God."
I think this is important because it is reminding us to be diligent in providing for those in need. It's also mentioned in chapter 19:9 - "When you reap the harvest of your land, do not reap to the very edges of your field or gather the gleanings of your harvest. Do not go over your vineyard an second time or pick up the grapes that have fallen. Leave them for the poor and the alien. I am the Lord your God."
A note on chapter 24:20's "eye for an eye" - In Matthew 5:38 Jesus explains about "turning the other cheek" instead. The NIV student bible's note says that "apparently people had been taking "eye for eye" as a basis for private vengeance - as some do today. The law's original intent, however, was to set a standard for punishment in court. It limited vengeance and made certain that both rich and poor, native and foreigner, would pay the same price for their crimes". This wasn't necessarily the norm in surrounding cultures of the day, so at the time it was somewhat of an advancement because it was an equalizer. Later though, as Jesus pointed out, it shouldn't have been abused and you should strive for forgiveness instead of any sort of vengeance. I believe, ultimately, that forgiveness can prove more healing than vengeance anyway.
I may take a break before jumping into Numbers so that I can read through some commentary books with notes regarding Genesis, Job, Exodus, and Leviticus. My friend Wendy loaned me these two books:
Halley's Bible Handbook by Henry H. Halley and The MacArthur Bible Handbook: A Book-by-Book Exploration of God's Word by John MacArthur. I'll let you know what I think.
So, are you caught up in your reading? I hope to see you when I discuss Numbers.
Tuesday, April 17, 2012
Wednesday, February 29, 2012
Leviticus Part 1
I read through chapters 1-13 and here is my take away:
Leviticus is full of laws and rules. Today, because of Jesus, we don't live in the world of Leviticus. For example, His self-sacrifice made the sacrifice of animals unnecessary. He replaced the high priest as our representative before God. Also, I'm starting to wonder if some of the laws in Leviticus ever did apply to us if we were not originally Israelites. The Gentiles, with different eating habits and customs, didn't have to change these things to become followers of Christ later on. In fact, it is pointed out that even if you don't eat pork and someone else does, it doesn't mean you can't both be followers of Christ. Acts 10 is where God shows there is nothing intrinsically wrong with the animals labeled "unclean" in Leviticus.
This got me thinking about when people like to use Leviticus to discredit the Bible, like Ch. 11:9-12 where it talks about not eating shrimp and stuff. It doesn't make sense to me to try to use one crazy rule from Leviticus in this way. Let's face it, the whole point of this time frame of laws was that God was trying to set a nation/people group apart for the first time. For the reason of forming a nation that was notably different from any other, couldn't it be plausible that God was purposefully being arbitrary when it came to these rules? These rules applied at that time for the Iraelites. Jesus fulfilled the law, and as I said earlier, some of these rules didn't seem to apply to none Iraelites that were believers.
Additional reasons for these rules could also have been health related for that place and time. Foot note from my student Bible:
"Scholars point out that many clean and unclean rules have good health habits behind them, such as the rule to quarantine a person with an infectious disease or the rule against eating pork (which carries many parasites). Others say that dietary laws were meant to keep the Israelites apart from their neighbors. Pigs were prominent in Canaanite worship; therefore the Israelites were not to eat pigs...The uncleanness rules of Leviticus are outmoded because of Jesus' declaration that all things are clean (Mark 7:19; see also Acts 10:9-16). But the lessons behind these rules remain valid. God still may not be approached carelessly. Each person must examine his or her life, to be certain that God's purity is not violated."
So as I was saying, trying to use one example from Levitical law as a reason to discredit the Bible as a whole seems baseless to me. People use it to point out that "there are lots of crazy rules in the Bible that are outdated and no longer apply to us so how can we trust anything in the Bible?". I don't feel this is fair. The Bible explains, so I'm not sure how it can even be used as an argument. You have to read the entire Bible and take it in context. It tells us when rules no longer apply and when they do. Also, if you see other examples where a rule still applies, and it's clear through out the Bible it's what God intended for us and applies to both Jews and Gentiles, Old Testament and New, before Jesus and after, then no, that's not the same as the one rule about shrimp that only shows up in Levitical law in the Old Testament. And, just because there is a rule that we no longer follow, because we do not have to, it does not mean we are advocating for picking and choosing parts of the Bible to accept. As Jesus said, unclean was made clean. We do accept that at that time, for the Iraelites, it was a way to set them apart from other nations. You have to read it to get it, and it aggravates me when people try to talk bad about the Bible based on things they clearly do not understand. Obviously I do not claim to be all knowing either, but help me out here, what do you think? Do people reference verses like this negatively just to justify their own picking and choosing?
Leviticus is full of laws and rules. Today, because of Jesus, we don't live in the world of Leviticus. For example, His self-sacrifice made the sacrifice of animals unnecessary. He replaced the high priest as our representative before God. Also, I'm starting to wonder if some of the laws in Leviticus ever did apply to us if we were not originally Israelites. The Gentiles, with different eating habits and customs, didn't have to change these things to become followers of Christ later on. In fact, it is pointed out that even if you don't eat pork and someone else does, it doesn't mean you can't both be followers of Christ. Acts 10 is where God shows there is nothing intrinsically wrong with the animals labeled "unclean" in Leviticus.
This got me thinking about when people like to use Leviticus to discredit the Bible, like Ch. 11:9-12 where it talks about not eating shrimp and stuff. It doesn't make sense to me to try to use one crazy rule from Leviticus in this way. Let's face it, the whole point of this time frame of laws was that God was trying to set a nation/people group apart for the first time. For the reason of forming a nation that was notably different from any other, couldn't it be plausible that God was purposefully being arbitrary when it came to these rules? These rules applied at that time for the Iraelites. Jesus fulfilled the law, and as I said earlier, some of these rules didn't seem to apply to none Iraelites that were believers.
Additional reasons for these rules could also have been health related for that place and time. Foot note from my student Bible:
"Scholars point out that many clean and unclean rules have good health habits behind them, such as the rule to quarantine a person with an infectious disease or the rule against eating pork (which carries many parasites). Others say that dietary laws were meant to keep the Israelites apart from their neighbors. Pigs were prominent in Canaanite worship; therefore the Israelites were not to eat pigs...The uncleanness rules of Leviticus are outmoded because of Jesus' declaration that all things are clean (Mark 7:19; see also Acts 10:9-16). But the lessons behind these rules remain valid. God still may not be approached carelessly. Each person must examine his or her life, to be certain that God's purity is not violated."
So as I was saying, trying to use one example from Levitical law as a reason to discredit the Bible as a whole seems baseless to me. People use it to point out that "there are lots of crazy rules in the Bible that are outdated and no longer apply to us so how can we trust anything in the Bible?". I don't feel this is fair. The Bible explains, so I'm not sure how it can even be used as an argument. You have to read the entire Bible and take it in context. It tells us when rules no longer apply and when they do. Also, if you see other examples where a rule still applies, and it's clear through out the Bible it's what God intended for us and applies to both Jews and Gentiles, Old Testament and New, before Jesus and after, then no, that's not the same as the one rule about shrimp that only shows up in Levitical law in the Old Testament. And, just because there is a rule that we no longer follow, because we do not have to, it does not mean we are advocating for picking and choosing parts of the Bible to accept. As Jesus said, unclean was made clean. We do accept that at that time, for the Iraelites, it was a way to set them apart from other nations. You have to read it to get it, and it aggravates me when people try to talk bad about the Bible based on things they clearly do not understand. Obviously I do not claim to be all knowing either, but help me out here, what do you think? Do people reference verses like this negatively just to justify their own picking and choosing?
Thursday, January 12, 2012
I'm back!
Wow. Obviously I failed on this blogging thing. Does that mean I should just throw in the towel? No. I started with the best of intentions, but my original idea of blogging AND reading all in just one year proved too much for me so I dropped the blogging part in favor of keeping afloat on the reading part. Well, I finished it! I read the whole Bible! I know this wasn't the way I had wanted the blog to get going (I feel like I just jumped in with a spoiler here), but now that I've completed the reading, I need to start blogging again. I feel it still holds value. So, I have a new goal. Now my goal will be to blog on the notes and thoughts that I took from this experience. I will probably end up reading it through a second time while doing this. But, with it spread over time, I hope the blogging part will be a little less daunting. Since I already did some posts here I don't want to just start over either. You, dear reader, can be privy to all my flaws. I'm not here to mask my mistakes and pretend I have it all figured out. Thank goodness I have Jesus. Let's try again, shall we?
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
Exodus (Part 2)
Now where was I? It's been too long, what with school starting up, showers and weddings, and trying to pack to move, etc...sorry. Since I'm still keeping up with the reading plan I'm ahead of Exodus now, but I will try to play catch up here when I can and remember what all I wanted to say. Oh yes, Ch. 13...well, scratch that, my notes don't really pick back up until Ch. 22. I like how it talks about being able to work out a dispute or issue by coming before God, who is actually physically there with them, and God tells them what to do, as in actually speaks to them. It's like the "that was easy" button. It sometimes is hard to believe these people still had issues with following the Lord and being faithful when they are actually His chosen people that He actually travels with. He is so present with them at this point. They had God first hand. That had to be awe inspiring, terrifying, and wonderful all at the same time.
Ch. 24 is when it seems to start referring to God's words and laws as "the book of the covenant" I believe. Then the following chapters seem to go into great detail about the building of the tabernacle and tabernacle accessories. Ch. 30:15 I highlighted, "When this offering is given to the Lord to purify your lives, making you right with him, the rich much not give more than the specified amount, and the poor must not give less". IDK why but I had to read this several times and had to think on it. I wonder why this was the plan set in place. To me it seems that this means the poor are the ones really making a sacrifice. So, is the offering equal? I just found it somewhat thought provoking. Ch.32 is the whole golden calf fiasco. It truly is a sign of God's grace that He stays with His people, for it's not because of their impressiveness or faithfulness by any means.
Ch. 33's wow moment comes in verse 11, "The Lord would speak to Moses face to face, as a man speaks with his friend..." How freaking cool. For the most part though, even though God is very present with them and intervened on their behalf, at this point in time before Jesus, there is still a barrier between humanity and God. I mean, there's even a whole curtain thing separating the Holy Place from the Most Holy Place in the tabernacle and anyone besides a priest that went in would die, and even the priest only went in on the day of atonement once a year (Yom Kippur). Later on in Matthew and Hebrews we see the curtain tearing in two at Jesus' crucifixion symbolizing what Christ had accomplished (the break down of the separation between God and humanity) but we will read that when we get there. What a priest was able to do only once a year on the day of atonement, Christ did once and for all and now all of us, not just a purified priest can be in the "Most Holy Place" and, I guess it seems to say, we don't really need a middle man. Now I'm just filled with more thoughts! At the beginning of this I was thinking the Israelites experienced God more closely than anyone. He was actually helping them run things and know what to do and giving rules through Moses...and saving their butts every time you turned around, despite the fact that they sometimes acted like ungrateful children. But, now I wonder if it is possible that we, today, are able to closely experience the Lord in a way never imagined? Even though it doesn't always seem like it, because we aren't constantly seeing His miraculous works as they did, is it possible to obtain a closeness with the Lord that these Israelites could only dream of? After Jesus, and now that we have the Holy Spirit, and the barriers between us and God are broken...idk, I think too much...and write to much. Well, that's Exodus.
Ch. 24 is when it seems to start referring to God's words and laws as "the book of the covenant" I believe. Then the following chapters seem to go into great detail about the building of the tabernacle and tabernacle accessories. Ch. 30:15 I highlighted, "When this offering is given to the Lord to purify your lives, making you right with him, the rich much not give more than the specified amount, and the poor must not give less". IDK why but I had to read this several times and had to think on it. I wonder why this was the plan set in place. To me it seems that this means the poor are the ones really making a sacrifice. So, is the offering equal? I just found it somewhat thought provoking. Ch.32 is the whole golden calf fiasco. It truly is a sign of God's grace that He stays with His people, for it's not because of their impressiveness or faithfulness by any means.
Ch. 33's wow moment comes in verse 11, "The Lord would speak to Moses face to face, as a man speaks with his friend..." How freaking cool. For the most part though, even though God is very present with them and intervened on their behalf, at this point in time before Jesus, there is still a barrier between humanity and God. I mean, there's even a whole curtain thing separating the Holy Place from the Most Holy Place in the tabernacle and anyone besides a priest that went in would die, and even the priest only went in on the day of atonement once a year (Yom Kippur). Later on in Matthew and Hebrews we see the curtain tearing in two at Jesus' crucifixion symbolizing what Christ had accomplished (the break down of the separation between God and humanity) but we will read that when we get there. What a priest was able to do only once a year on the day of atonement, Christ did once and for all and now all of us, not just a purified priest can be in the "Most Holy Place" and, I guess it seems to say, we don't really need a middle man. Now I'm just filled with more thoughts! At the beginning of this I was thinking the Israelites experienced God more closely than anyone. He was actually helping them run things and know what to do and giving rules through Moses...and saving their butts every time you turned around, despite the fact that they sometimes acted like ungrateful children. But, now I wonder if it is possible that we, today, are able to closely experience the Lord in a way never imagined? Even though it doesn't always seem like it, because we aren't constantly seeing His miraculous works as they did, is it possible to obtain a closeness with the Lord that these Israelites could only dream of? After Jesus, and now that we have the Holy Spirit, and the barriers between us and God are broken...idk, I think too much...and write to much. Well, that's Exodus.
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Exodus (Part 1)
Oh my gosh, I can't believe it's been so long since I last posted. I'm already done with Exodus; it went by fast. If you are following the plan we are now into Leviticus. This post will discuss Exodus as a whole. Since I'm covering an entire book I will only focus on the passages I bookmarked while reading. The first thing I bookmarked was 4:24, "One the way to Egypt, at a place where Moses and his family had stopped for the night, the Lord confronted him and was about to kill him." The next verse basically points out that it was because his son was not yet circumcised, but then his wife hurriedly did the job with a flint knife so God decided to leave them alone. I just wanted to know if there was any warning before this, because it didn't really seem like it. Though, I guess I was also somewhat surprised his kid wasn't already circumcised, so idk. Still, it seemed to come out of nowhere in the reading. I just found it interesting because here God has Moses going to Egypt to free His people, and He almost thwarted His own plan by killing Moses. Intense.
Footnote on the plagues here; I just read something introducing an idea I had not thought of before. Apparently some scholars see the plagues as a form of warfare against the gods of Egypt. Each plague confronting a different Egyptian idol. For example, the plague on the Nile River opposed the Egyptians' river god, the plague of darkness attacked Ra, the sun god, the plague on livestock countered the sacred bull, etc. I think this is a pretty neat observation and makes the individual plagues much more significant.
Ch. 12 seemed to get a lot of bookmarks, so I shall discuss that now. 12:23, "For the Lord will pass through the land to strike down the Egyptians. But when he sees the blood on the top and sides of the door frame, the Lord will pass over your home. He will not permit his death angel to enter your house and strike you down." NLT. Death angel (NLT), the destroyer (NIV, ESV, KJV). This death angel/destroyer interests me. Is this God controlling a grim/the grim reaper figure? Is death an actual angel that works for God? Death, as an actual being...forgive me, now I'm just thinking about the TV show Dead Like Me... But, it does seem to be an actual being that God has control over. Is it morbid if I think this is cool? I guess it makes sense. Something/someone actually bringing about death instead of it just happening; it's an interesting concept. And is this always the case with death, or just when God wants to bring about death on His new time table such as in Exodus? Hmm, must not think too much on this.
To finish with Ch.12, I can't help but wonder if we are suppose to continue the celebration of Passover as Christians. Most Christians do not, and it is reserved for Jews, but why don't we? In 12:17 It talks about it being a permanent law for us, and that we are to celebrate the day from generation to generation. In 12:24 it says, "Remember, these instructions are a permanent law that you and your descendants much observe forever". Rob likes to say it is because we are not Israelites. But, there are other references that state foreigners that join the Israelites are to adopt their customs. Which leads to a whole new set of questions on what we are to follow today and what no longer applies. Oy vey! Now, my student bible has some insight into the passover bit it seems, with some commentary. I think I will quote it and let you take from it what you will.
"Much later, Passover night would take on an even broader significance. During one particular Passover feast, as thousands of Jews were bringing their choice lambs to Jerusalem, one man was selected as the Passover lamb for all humanity (1 Corinthians 5:7). The words "When I see the blood, I will pass over you" (12:13) came to convey a whole new meaning. Today, though Jewish people still celebrate Passover, most Christians do not. Rather, that ceremony has been incorporated into a new one called the Eucharist, or the Lord's Supper, with Christ representing the Passover lamb. Although much of the ceremony's content has changed, one thing has not. The Lord's Supper, too, memorializes a time of pain and of bloodshed, a time of freedom and deliverance. It, too, was God's act alone. He gets the credit." (The Student Bible NIV, Zondervan).
I tried to indent this quote since it was so long, but blogger doesn't seem to let me format very well, sorry. We aren't fancy here. Okay, so maybe for the Passover, we have turned it into the Lord's Supper being the focus. But, then I wonder about the seemingly obsessive nature of God insisting the bread not have yeast. Not just here with the Passover, but many other parts of Exodus and Leviticus talk about yeast being bad. So then I start wondering about that! I guess I just want to make sure I'm doing the right thing, but sometimes it's hard to figure out what that is.
Okay, you know what. No one is going to read this because I always write wayyyy too much. I have decided to stop here at Ch. 12 and make this a two parter. What was I thinking covering a whole book in one post? Maybe one day I will get my blog caught back up with where I am in the reading lol. Love you all!
Footnote on the plagues here; I just read something introducing an idea I had not thought of before. Apparently some scholars see the plagues as a form of warfare against the gods of Egypt. Each plague confronting a different Egyptian idol. For example, the plague on the Nile River opposed the Egyptians' river god, the plague of darkness attacked Ra, the sun god, the plague on livestock countered the sacred bull, etc. I think this is a pretty neat observation and makes the individual plagues much more significant.
Ch. 12 seemed to get a lot of bookmarks, so I shall discuss that now. 12:23, "For the Lord will pass through the land to strike down the Egyptians. But when he sees the blood on the top and sides of the door frame, the Lord will pass over your home. He will not permit his death angel to enter your house and strike you down." NLT. Death angel (NLT), the destroyer (NIV, ESV, KJV). This death angel/destroyer interests me. Is this God controlling a grim/the grim reaper figure? Is death an actual angel that works for God? Death, as an actual being...forgive me, now I'm just thinking about the TV show Dead Like Me... But, it does seem to be an actual being that God has control over. Is it morbid if I think this is cool? I guess it makes sense. Something/someone actually bringing about death instead of it just happening; it's an interesting concept. And is this always the case with death, or just when God wants to bring about death on His new time table such as in Exodus? Hmm, must not think too much on this.
To finish with Ch.12, I can't help but wonder if we are suppose to continue the celebration of Passover as Christians. Most Christians do not, and it is reserved for Jews, but why don't we? In 12:17 It talks about it being a permanent law for us, and that we are to celebrate the day from generation to generation. In 12:24 it says, "Remember, these instructions are a permanent law that you and your descendants much observe forever". Rob likes to say it is because we are not Israelites. But, there are other references that state foreigners that join the Israelites are to adopt their customs. Which leads to a whole new set of questions on what we are to follow today and what no longer applies. Oy vey! Now, my student bible has some insight into the passover bit it seems, with some commentary. I think I will quote it and let you take from it what you will.
"Much later, Passover night would take on an even broader significance. During one particular Passover feast, as thousands of Jews were bringing their choice lambs to Jerusalem, one man was selected as the Passover lamb for all humanity (1 Corinthians 5:7). The words "When I see the blood, I will pass over you" (12:13) came to convey a whole new meaning. Today, though Jewish people still celebrate Passover, most Christians do not. Rather, that ceremony has been incorporated into a new one called the Eucharist, or the Lord's Supper, with Christ representing the Passover lamb. Although much of the ceremony's content has changed, one thing has not. The Lord's Supper, too, memorializes a time of pain and of bloodshed, a time of freedom and deliverance. It, too, was God's act alone. He gets the credit." (The Student Bible NIV, Zondervan).
I tried to indent this quote since it was so long, but blogger doesn't seem to let me format very well, sorry. We aren't fancy here. Okay, so maybe for the Passover, we have turned it into the Lord's Supper being the focus. But, then I wonder about the seemingly obsessive nature of God insisting the bread not have yeast. Not just here with the Passover, but many other parts of Exodus and Leviticus talk about yeast being bad. So then I start wondering about that! I guess I just want to make sure I'm doing the right thing, but sometimes it's hard to figure out what that is.
Okay, you know what. No one is going to read this because I always write wayyyy too much. I have decided to stop here at Ch. 12 and make this a two parter. What was I thinking covering a whole book in one post? Maybe one day I will get my blog caught back up with where I am in the reading lol. Love you all!
Thursday, July 1, 2010
Finishing Genesis
Hopefully if you are reading the Bible along with me you are following the YouVersion site for the daily assignments. I have been doing great about keeping up with the actual reading, but when it comes to blogging consistently enough to give you a proper heads up on what to read when, I somewhat produce nothing but fail sauce. Apologies.
Now, with all that being said, since I do keep up with the actual reading bit, I am going to write about everything I was going to write about on Sat, but add in Mon, Tues, and Wed (so I will finish up Genesis). Sorry if you have to play catch up. Hence forth you will know that I am hopelessly flawed and mayhaps that will invite an element of flexibility into our relationship. If you follow the YouVersion schedule and just read my posts as they are posted, we should be just fine.
Genesis 30 in today's day and age would be straight up insane. Two wives, sisters, fighting over the time and love of one man. Also, they both decide to offer up their servants as pawns in the "I'll make more babies than my sister" game. It's crazy. It's crazy that Jacob seems to just add fuel to the fire too. But, as we will see, Jacob tends to play favorites. He gives more love to Rachel (granted that IS the girl he wanted to begin with and the aforementioned jerk face father-in-law basically suckered him into taking her sister Leah first) and this causes the animosity between the sisters. He later favors Joseph over his other sons, causing jealously here too, so much so that the other sons sell Joseph into slavery just to be rid of him.
Okay, back to the feuding sisters for one moment. I can't resist, I have to type out one of the verses to give you a taste of what I'm talking about..."But Leah angrily replied, 'Wasn't it enough that you stole my husband? Now will you steal my son's mandrakes, too?' Rachel answered, 'I will let Jacob sleep with you tonight if you give me some of the mandrakes' (Gen30:15) LOL! Oh my 30 was a fun read.
Gen 31 was interesting when Rachel sat on the idols her father was looking for and refused to get up to reveal them, using the excuse of being on her period. Not too terribly important, but I found it interesting so it goes into my blog lol.
Gen 32, I now see where the terms Israel and Israelites come from. Gen 32:28 - "Your name will no longer be Jacob," the man told him. "From now on your name will be called Israel, because you have fought with God and with men and have won."
Now, I want to talk about Reuben a bit. This is encompassing different chapters. I want to look at something here. First Reuben actually decides to sleep with one of his father's women. Nothing is done about it at the time really, but later when his father is about to die he is told he no longer will get to have the benefits of being the first born. Basically his father had remembered this sin and decided to punish him for it. Then another time Reuben is among his brothers that are plotting Joseph's death, but if it hadn't been for Reuben who suggested putting him down in a cistern alive instead, the other brothers very well might have killed Joseph. A different brother then later decided to sell him (without Reuben knowing this). Reuben had intended all along to come back and get Joseph out of the cistern and not let him die, but when he came back and found he was gone he was struck with grief. Here we see Reuben as a decent brother, perhaps the only friend Joseph had at the time.
Later when he sees Joseph in Egypt, he seems to be the one who really "gets it". He is torn up over it and takes on responsibility for Benjamin too, so really I kinda felt like Reuben was an overall good guy. Esau seemed like a good guy too. But, like Esau, Reuben's blessings go to a younger brother. I'm seeing a pattern. Idk why Joseph was surprised when his dad gave Joseph's younger son the better blessing over the older...hello, that's just what this family does. Issac was picked over Ishmael too if you recall. Lots of firstborns getting the shaft. If I were male, and part of this family line at the time, I would be extremely worried.
Okay wow, I'm writing too much and I'm trying to cover way too much material. This is why I need to blog more often (note to self, learn lesson). I will end it for now. Go read some for yourself. There was too much good stuff in there to write about it all. See you in Exodus.
Now, with all that being said, since I do keep up with the actual reading bit, I am going to write about everything I was going to write about on Sat, but add in Mon, Tues, and Wed (so I will finish up Genesis). Sorry if you have to play catch up. Hence forth you will know that I am hopelessly flawed and mayhaps that will invite an element of flexibility into our relationship. If you follow the YouVersion schedule and just read my posts as they are posted, we should be just fine.
Genesis 30 in today's day and age would be straight up insane. Two wives, sisters, fighting over the time and love of one man. Also, they both decide to offer up their servants as pawns in the "I'll make more babies than my sister" game. It's crazy. It's crazy that Jacob seems to just add fuel to the fire too. But, as we will see, Jacob tends to play favorites. He gives more love to Rachel (granted that IS the girl he wanted to begin with and the aforementioned jerk face father-in-law basically suckered him into taking her sister Leah first) and this causes the animosity between the sisters. He later favors Joseph over his other sons, causing jealously here too, so much so that the other sons sell Joseph into slavery just to be rid of him.
Okay, back to the feuding sisters for one moment. I can't resist, I have to type out one of the verses to give you a taste of what I'm talking about..."But Leah angrily replied, 'Wasn't it enough that you stole my husband? Now will you steal my son's mandrakes, too?' Rachel answered, 'I will let Jacob sleep with you tonight if you give me some of the mandrakes' (Gen30:15) LOL! Oh my 30 was a fun read.
Gen 31 was interesting when Rachel sat on the idols her father was looking for and refused to get up to reveal them, using the excuse of being on her period. Not too terribly important, but I found it interesting so it goes into my blog lol.
Gen 32, I now see where the terms Israel and Israelites come from. Gen 32:28 - "Your name will no longer be Jacob," the man told him. "From now on your name will be called Israel, because you have fought with God and with men and have won."
Now, I want to talk about Reuben a bit. This is encompassing different chapters. I want to look at something here. First Reuben actually decides to sleep with one of his father's women. Nothing is done about it at the time really, but later when his father is about to die he is told he no longer will get to have the benefits of being the first born. Basically his father had remembered this sin and decided to punish him for it. Then another time Reuben is among his brothers that are plotting Joseph's death, but if it hadn't been for Reuben who suggested putting him down in a cistern alive instead, the other brothers very well might have killed Joseph. A different brother then later decided to sell him (without Reuben knowing this). Reuben had intended all along to come back and get Joseph out of the cistern and not let him die, but when he came back and found he was gone he was struck with grief. Here we see Reuben as a decent brother, perhaps the only friend Joseph had at the time.
Later when he sees Joseph in Egypt, he seems to be the one who really "gets it". He is torn up over it and takes on responsibility for Benjamin too, so really I kinda felt like Reuben was an overall good guy. Esau seemed like a good guy too. But, like Esau, Reuben's blessings go to a younger brother. I'm seeing a pattern. Idk why Joseph was surprised when his dad gave Joseph's younger son the better blessing over the older...hello, that's just what this family does. Issac was picked over Ishmael too if you recall. Lots of firstborns getting the shaft. If I were male, and part of this family line at the time, I would be extremely worried.
Okay wow, I'm writing too much and I'm trying to cover way too much material. This is why I need to blog more often (note to self, learn lesson). I will end it for now. Go read some for yourself. There was too much good stuff in there to write about it all. See you in Exodus.
Thursday, June 24, 2010
Genesis 19 through 29
Okay, a lot of information is covered in 19 through 29, very shocking and page turning stuff actually.
In Ch. 19 we see the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, which we knew was coming. The city of Sodom saw the arrival of new visitors as an opportunity for homosexual gang rape. Wow, nice welcoming party Sodom. Sexual violence was just one of many of the town's problems it would seem. God had said he would spare the place if even 10 righteous people could be found. Apparently they didn't exist, so he gets Lot and his family out of there. This is the chapter where Lot's wife looks back and she turns into a pillar of salt. They were warned not to look back, but we kinda see that Lot and his family were having a hard time leaving their adopted home of Sodom, despite its immorality. Then the very sick and wrong part happens when Lot gets really drunk in a cave and both of his daughters sleep with him. SAY WHAT? Crazy. God saves you and you repay Him by having drunken incest? I mean, wow. Idk. His daughters then have children from this and it's all very soap operaish.
Something else interesting in Ch. 20 would be that, guess what, Abraham plays the "my wife is my sister" card, AGAIN!
Ch. 21 Is the promised child of Abraham and Sarah (the one Sarah laughed about earlier). Isaac is born :)
Ch. 22 Is the classic story of Abraham being tested by God. This is when God tells Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac and at the last minute stops Abraham and provides a ram instead.
Ch. 23 Sarah dies at the age of 127. I am starting to see how the ages do get closer and closer to the 120 that was mentioned earlier. So, it does seem like my question was answered later in the reading because it does seem to be just a gradual occurrence.
Ch. 24 I bookmarked the part talking about oaths being made by putting your hand under another man's thigh. I found that slightly intriguing. There isn't much said about it. It must have just been the custom at the time. This is also the chapter that a wife for Isaac is found (Rebekah).
Ch. 25 Abraham dies.
Ch. 26-29 Just have to point out that Issac follows in the footsteps of his father Abraham in this reading by CALLING HIS WIFE HIS SISTER. I told you this reading was interesting. Continuing in the reading we see Issac and Rebekah have two sons, Jacob and Esau. First Jacob cons Esau out of his birthright and then later Jacob and his mother work together to deceive Esau AND Issac so that Jacob is the one to receive his father's blessing, not Esau. Really Esau always seems to get robbed. He does what he should, and he tries to please. He even marries one woman specifically to make his father happier it would seem. I think the only "crime" here is that he was so concerned with his feelings of hunger that he was willing to give up his birthright, letting his hunger trump things of lasting value. But still, it all seems rather unfair. Jacob was quite the con man and liar it looks like. But, I guess he does have to suffer a little of that soap opera drama that is going around. He gets tricked as well, and has to put up with a very jerkface father-in-law. Long and short of it though, I think both Jacob and Esau end up pretty good. Sometimes it doesn't make sense to us why someone is chosen, they just are. God often uses flawed people to accomplish His work.
Okay, Wednesday's reading was Genesis 30 through 31
Tonight, Genesis 32 through 34
Tomorrow (Friday) Genesis 35 through 37
And since I probably won't get to blog on Friday, Sat will be reading Genesis 38 through 40
Night Night.
EDIT: Additional notes 8/7/12:
Halley's Bible Handbook had some commentary about Ch 21-22 where Isaac is to be offered up. Here is what they had to say, "The offering of Isaac was a foreshadowing of the death of Christ. A father offering his only son (Isaac was the "only son" of the promise 21:12). The son dead for three days (in Abraham's mind, v. 4). A substitution. An actual sacrifice. And this took place on Mount Moriah, the very same place where 2000 years later God's own Son was offered. Thus it was a foreshadowing, here at the birth of the Hebrew nation, of the grand event the nation was born to bring about."
MIND BLOWN. Jesus is also like the ram, taking the place of the death that is to be ours. It was goose bump inducing when I found out both events took place at the same location. I'm not sure why I had not known that before, but it was a cool little discovery. Just another example where the old testament points to Jesus.
Also, when Jacob has the ladder dream, the book mentions: "The ladder is a hint that the promises will culminate in something that would bridge heaven and earth. Jesus said that He was that Ladder (John 1:51) and the only Mediator between God and men (1 Timothy 2:5)." Freakin' cool.
EDIT: Additional notes 8/7/12:
Halley's Bible Handbook had some commentary about Ch 21-22 where Isaac is to be offered up. Here is what they had to say, "The offering of Isaac was a foreshadowing of the death of Christ. A father offering his only son (Isaac was the "only son" of the promise 21:12). The son dead for three days (in Abraham's mind, v. 4). A substitution. An actual sacrifice. And this took place on Mount Moriah, the very same place where 2000 years later God's own Son was offered. Thus it was a foreshadowing, here at the birth of the Hebrew nation, of the grand event the nation was born to bring about."
MIND BLOWN. Jesus is also like the ram, taking the place of the death that is to be ours. It was goose bump inducing when I found out both events took place at the same location. I'm not sure why I had not known that before, but it was a cool little discovery. Just another example where the old testament points to Jesus.
Also, when Jacob has the ladder dream, the book mentions: "The ladder is a hint that the promises will culminate in something that would bridge heaven and earth. Jesus said that He was that Ladder (John 1:51) and the only Mediator between God and men (1 Timothy 2:5)." Freakin' cool.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)