Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,808 Year: 3,065/9,624 Month: 910/1,588 Week: 93/223 Day: 4/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Bible Study Cover to Cover
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 76 of 117 (509235)
05-19-2009 2:28 PM
Reply to: Message 73 by jaywill
05-19-2009 1:25 PM


Re: Abraham
You don't see that using one line to imply all that you did is going beyond the text?
Famines happen and the text didn't present it as a test.
quote:
I am considering the whole big picture of Abram experience and all that is taught about him in the entire Bible.
Why not look at the whole story and what the author was saying, instead of making a story out of one line?
When we read a story, we don't read the end first. Whatever is written later is irrelevant to what this author wrote in his time.
Those two lines don't tell us anything other than he was thankful for the land and then he had to go to Egypt due to a famine.
I don't wish to divide and conquer. I want people to read the whole story as the author wrote it or at least the best translation of what the author wrote. What can we learn from the story, not how can we make one line work for us.
Abraham is considered the "father" of Judaism.
God contacted Abram and said if Abram would leave his home and his family, then God would make him a great nation and bless him. Abram accepted this offer, and established a covenant with God.
Now if you want to look at the ten trials of Abraham and discuss whether the text presents a test from God or just difficult times, we can. The Ten Trials of Abraham
The famine is listed as a test, but the text doesn't really present it as such, nor does Abraham seem distressed by it. Abraham seems to have made out pretty good in Egypt.

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by jaywill, posted 05-19-2009 1:25 PM jaywill has not replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 77 of 117 (509237)
05-19-2009 2:54 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by Modulous
02-28-2009 11:51 AM


Leviticus
I wrote this back in February but neglected to post it here. I now rectify that fault. Oh, and if you are offended by bad language, capital punishment, horrible diseases, animal sacrifice or misogyny - you probably shouldn't be reading this. With the exception of a few edits and clarifications - these are the notes I wrote as I read through it.
skip to the verse 18
Leviticus 1: Starts with explicit(!) instructions on how to sacrifice an animal
Bull: sprinkle its blood around and upon the altar, flay it, and after some more ritual, burn it: "a sweet savour unto YHWH"
Sheep/Goat: Same as above, but also: "kill it on the side of the altar northward "
Fowl: wring off its head wring the blood out of it by the side of the altar, pluck it (casting the feathers on the east side with the ashes), tear off its wings and then burn it.
Leviticus 2: How to give grain offerings (fruits, flour etc) to YHWH. "thou season with salt; neither shalt thou suffer the salt of the covenant of thy God to be lacking from thy...offering"
Leviticus 3: How to give 'peace offering'. Seems to be some kind of 'thanksgiving' offering. It implies that you can eat some of the offering: "that ye eat neither fat nor blood."
Leviticus 4: How to give a sacrifice of repentance: The bias of the translators shows through a little here. In KJV it says "If a soul shall sin through ignorance against any of the commandments of the LORD...{then do this sacrifice}". As far as I can tell, 'souls' are something of a Hellenistic concept that seems to be largely alien to the Israelites. Jewish Bibles translate this as "person" or "any one" or some such (though they do sometimes use 'soul' as well). A sin offering is kind of like a scapegoat (that comes later).
Leviticus 5: Seems to be a sacrifice made for 'trespassing' though not in the "going somewhere you shouldn't" sense, it seems to be more moral or sacred trespass or something.. From the JPS:
If any one commit a trespass, and sin through error, in the holy things of YHWH, then he shall bring his forfeit unto YHWH, a ram without blemish out of the flock, according to thy valuation in silver by shekels, after the shekel of the sanctuary, for a guilt-offering.
(The JPS has HaShem (meaning The Name) instead of YHWH but you get the picture).
Leviticus 6: "The fire shall ever be burning upon the altar; it shall never go out.", as for the Burnt offering, says YHWH to Moses, tell Aaron that the sons of Aaron (the priests) that they can eat some of the sacrifices for themselves after some of them have been burned (but not the blood!)
Leviticus 7: We're still on the ins and outs of sacrifices, this is the last detailed part. I didn't realize there was so much about sacrificing stuff in Leviticus. It's really anally detailed (I guess it wasn't really meant for consumption 'by the people' but to provide a framework for the Priests on how to do their job.
Do not eat blood or fat or you will be cut off from your people.
Leviticus 8: Moses tells the people about the last 7 Chapters pertaining to sacrifice. Moses then dresses his brother in the priestly garments: "He placed the breastpiece on him and put the Urim and Thummim in the breastpiece. Then he placed the turban on Aaron's head and set the gold plate, the sacred diadem, on the front of it, as the Lord commanded Moses.", then he annointed Aaron before sacrificing a bull and some rams.
Moses also brought Aaron's sons forward and put some of the blood on the lobes of their right ears, on the thumbs of their right hands and on the big toes of their right feet. Then he sprinkled blood against the altar on all sides.
Moses then told/commanded Aaron to stay in the Tabernacle for a week.
Leviticus 9: After the week has passed, they sacrifice more animals. Weird-ass rituals galore.
Aaron waved the breasts and the right thigh before the Lord as a wave offering, as Moses commanded.
Then YHWH goes pyrotechnic and "when all the people saw it, they shouted, and fell on their faces. "
Leviticus 10: So Nadab and Abihu (who had a bit part in Exodus 24) are very naughty boys and God strikes them dead using Awesome powers.
And Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, took either of them his censer, and put fire therein, and put incense thereon, and offered strange fire before the LORD, which he commanded them not. And there went out fire from the LORD, and devoured them, and they died before the LORD.
And YHWH said: No 'strange fires' and don't get drunk in the tabernacle for my sake!
And then Moses gets all pissed off with the two remaining sons of Aaron for not following the last few chapters of instructions to the letter
Leviticus 11: Hurray! Dietary laws. Don't you love 'em?







YayNay
any animal that has a split hoof completely divided and that chews the cud.only chew the cud (eg rabbits and camels) or only have a split hoof (eg pigs)
marine animals (rivers or sea) that have fins/scalesmarine animals that...well...that aren't fish.
the eagle, the vulture, the black vulture,the red kite, any kind of black kite,any kind of raven,the horned owl, the screech owl, the gull, any kind of hawk, the little owl, the cormorant, the great owl,the white owl, the desert owl, the osprey,the stork, any kind of heron, the hoopoe and the bat.
locust, katydid, cricket or grasshopper.any other flying insects that walk on all fours
those that walk on their paws (eg the weasel, the rat, any kind of great lizard, the gecko, the monitor lizard, the wall lizard, the skink and the chameleon.
any creature that moves about on the ground, whether it moves on its belly or walks on all fours or on many feet;
(this list is from NIV, different translations give different species names.)
The chapter gives various means for dealing with what happens if objects are 'defiled' by 'unclean' animals. It generally involves washing it with water...though cooking pots should be destroyed. All rather sensible really.
Levitcus 12: A woman that becomes pregnant and gives birth to a son, is unclean for seven days just like she is during menstruation. The boy should be circumcised on the eighth day. The woman cannot touch anything sacred until 40 days after the birth.
Giving birth to a daughter renders her unclean for two weeks and she won't be able to touch anything sacred for eighty days. Misogynistic fuckheads.
Once she becomes clean she needs to make a sin sacrifice.
Leviticus 13: Quarantine practices for skin infections. Its almost sixty verses of instructions for priests to examine sores,boils, scales, and so on. Nice
If the body develops a boil in the skin, and it is healed, and in the place of the boil there comes a white swelling or a bright spot, reddish-white, then it shall be shown to the priest; and [if], when the priest sees it, it indeed [appears] deeper than the skin, and its hair has turned white, the priest shall pronounce him unclean. It [is] a leprous sore which has broken out of the boil.
I confess, I only skimmed through all of them.
Leviticus 14: You think the diseases had been covered? Nope. Instructions for ritually cleansing a leper follow (it involves dipping live birds in the blood of dead birds shaving hair/beard/eyebrows...everything...washing clothes...then making 'trespass offerings' of lamb, take the blood and annoint the victim on the right ear, and big toe on his right foot etc etc)
It goes on to describe how priests should check to see if a house is infected with the plague (YHWH quickly points out that this will only apply once they get somewhere with houses..."When you have come into the land of Canaan") and what to do if it is (tear it down perform sacrifices etc etc).
Leviticus 15: Moving on from gross diseases...oh wait what's that?
When any man has a discharge from his body, his discharge is unclean.
Oh, I can tell this is going to be another one for the kids...
Every bed on which the one with the discharge lies shall be unclean, and everything on which he sits shall be unclean.
Dozens of examples of what is unclean (just about everything basically) in this case (it even tells us that if he spits at someone they are unclean). Water or destruction seem to be the only solutions....with the associated sacrifices obviously.
If a man has an emission of semen, he shall bathe his whole body in water and be unclean until the evening....If a man lies with a woman and has an emission of semen, both of them shall bathe themselves in water and be unclean until the evening...When a woman has a discharge, and the discharge in her body is blood,she shall be in her menstrual impurity for seven days, and whoever touches her shall be unclean until the evening.
And of course - the solution involves sacrifices. Being unclean isn't morally bad, incidentally. Just to clear that up. Unclean literally just means that they cannot get involved in cultic practices lest they profane something that is holy/sacred. They are just 'earthy' or 'human' things which the 'sacred' is to be seperated from (the Hebrew for 'sacred' stems from 'seperate').
Leviticus 16 Actual scapegoat time. One goat should be killed, another goat should be let go into the wilderness. Bull should be sacrificed too - don't forget the bulls.
And he {Aaron} shall make an atonement for the holy tabernacle, because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel, and because of their transgressions in all their sins: and so shall he do for the tabernacle of the congregation, that remaineth among them in the midst of their uncleanness...
And Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat, and confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting them upon the head ofthe goat, and shall send [him] away by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness:
You must do this atonement once a year, says יהוה, and it shall be called "NOM! Kipper" Yom Kippur, יוֹם כִּפּוּר.
Leviticus 17: The start of 'The Holiness Code'. Don't sacrifice animals to other entities, don't eat blood.
Leviticus 18: Dear Children of Israel, (Lev 18:2)
DO NOT WALK LIKE AN EGYPTIAN (Leviticus 18:3)
All the bazaar men by the Nile
They got the money on a bet
Gold crocodiles (oh whey oh)
They snap their teeth on your cigarette
(Or a Canaanite)
Follow my laws, don't look at your naked: sister (or half sister, or sister-in-law), mum, dad, mother in law, grand daughter, aunt or uncle (and your uncle's wife counts as an aunt btw before you pervs get any ideas), the daughter of a woman you have previously looked at naked (or her grand daughter), an unclean woman.
Don't marry your wife's sister. Do not shag your neighbour's/freind's wife. Do not sacrifice your child to Molech/Ba'al, and guys - don't shag other men,
Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it [is] abomination.
don't shag animals: these are the crimes committed by your enemies whose land I'm going to give you.
Therefore shall ye keep mine ordinance, that [ye] commit not [any one]of these abominable customs, which were committed before you, and thatye defile not yourselves therein: I [am] the LORD your God.

back to the top
skip to the end
Leviticus 19: The Covenant reiterated. (One might get the impression that it was important). Respect your parents, observe the Sabbath, dont' worship idols, some more sacrifice laws (don't eat sacrifices past the third day) do not go back and get the gleanings. The gleaning system could be seen as an early form of the welfare system.
Do not go over your vineyard a second time or pick up the grapes that have fallen. Leave them for the poor and the foriegner. I am the Lord your God.
Don't steal/lie/defraud/say bad things about the deaf/place obstacles in front of the blind/commit slander/pervert justice
'You shall not crossbreed different kinds of animals. 'you shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed; 'neither shall there come upon on you a garment made of two kinds of material.
If you have sex with a slave who is pledge to be married then you should be punished - but not killed (its' not like the slave was free after all)
Don't eat blood, don't do sorcery, don't cut the sides of your head or the edges of your beard
Don't make your daughter a prostitute, respect the elderly, treat foreigners well as you yourselves were foreigners in Egypt, be honest with your weights and measures.
Leviticus 20: The covenant reiteration continues. Don't sacrifice your children to Moloch, don't go to mediums or shamans (instead: kill them), don't have sex with a woman on her period. Other things which can get you the death penalty include: adultery, gay sex, having a daughter-mother love fest, bestiality and incest. Also: don't take on foreign customs. And stick to the dietary laws.
And my side of the bargain, says YHWH? I'll give you the land of those that do these things.
Leviticus 21: The priests should not make themseleves unclean unnecessarily, don't take YHWH's name in vain, don't marry a prostitute, kill your daughter if she becomes a prostitute, only marry a virgin. The disfigured, the lame, the blind, those with a squashed nose, hunchbacks, dwarves, scabby people or people with twisted nuts...can not engage in the priestly side of sacrifice for YHWH.
Leviticus 22: That previous chapter? It includes lepers, or any priest who is unclean as per earlier in Leviticus, basically they cannot eat the offerings. Your slaves can. If a daughter of a priest marries a foreigner...she cannot eat the offerings (unless she gets divorce/widowed AND is childless AND returns to her father).
And no deformed animal sacrifices!
Leviticus 23: List of religious feasts and days and how to do them. It's quite dull to read through
So on the fifteenth day of the seventh month, when you have gathered in the fruits of the land, you shall keep the feast of the LORD seven days: on the first day shall be a solemn rest, and on the eighth day shall be a solemn rest.
Leviticus 24: So a halfbreed Israelite and Egyptian lad blasphemes and is imprisoned. Then the Lord said to Moses, "Take the blasphemer outside the camp. All those who heard him are tolay their hands on his head, and the entire assembly is to stone him... If anyone takes the life of a human being, he must be put to death....what irony?..eye for eye tooth for tooth"
Actually it should be noted that although 'eye for an eye' seems barbaric, if we look at it in context - we see that the statement being made is morally revolutionary. Now - I've heard people try and excuse the barbarism that is still inherent in the system for decades and almost all of them are bad (though there are some potentially good arguments too) - I am not doing that.
It's just that in other areas of the ancient near east, other 'nations' had laws that differentiated between classes (aristocracy/normal/slave) - so for example if a slave took out the eye of an aristocrat he's have to pay with his life and if an aristocrat took out the eye of a slave, he'd just pay a fine.
For example:
Code of Hammurabi writes:
If a man put out the eye of another man, his eye shall be put out.
If he put out the eye of a freed man, or break the bone of a freed man, he shall pay one gold mina.
If he put out the eye of a man's slave, or break the bone of a man's slave, he shall pay one-half of its value.
So Leviticus' 'eye for an eye' is an equal opportunities punishment, at least in principal. By omission, it ends up being morally superior to its neighbours.
Leviticus 25: reaping/sowing laws. Helping others (don't charge interest of any kind from your country man when he needs help (and don't sell food for profit to the poor countrymen). I am going to give you the land of Canaan. Do not make slaves of your countrymen). There follows some stuff about redeeming kinsmen: If a person becomes poor and is sold into slavery, a blood relative can redeem him.
The Jubilee:
You shall count seven weeks of years, seven times seven years, so that the time of the seven weeks of years shall give you forty-nine years. Then you shall sound the loud trumpet on the tenth day of the seventh month. On Yom Kippur you shall sound the trumpet throughout all your land. And you shall consecrate the fiftieth year, and proclaim liberty throughout the land to all its inhabitants.
Either every 49 or 50 years, everything is reset, all property is returned to its original owners (thus property is only ever leased and not sold), indentured servants are returned to their clans etc etc.
The English word Jubilee, comes from yobhel, referring to a 'ram'. The ram's horn being the loud trumpet used to sound the Jubiilee.
Leviticus 26: And now YHWH really sets out his side of the covenant:
If you follow my decrees and are careful to obey my commands,
I will send you rain in its season, and the ground will yield its crops and the trees of the field their fruit.
Your threshing will continue until grape harvest and the grape harvest will continue until planting, and you will eat all the food you want and live in safety in your land.
'I will grant peace in the land, and you will lie down and no one will make you afraid. I will remove savage beasts from the land, and the sword will not pass through your country.
You will pursue your enemies, and they will fall by the sword before you.
If you don't:
I will bring upon you sudden terror, wasting diseases and fever that will destroy your sight and drain away your life. You will plant seed in vain, because your enemies will eat it.
If that doesn't work,
I will punish you for your sins seven times over...And I will bring the sword upon you to avenge the breaking of the covenant. When you withdraw into your cities, I will send a plague among you, and you will be given into enemy hands.
If that still doesn't work.
I will destroy your high places, cut down your incense altars and pile your dead bodies on the lifeless forms of your idols, and I will abhor you. I will turn your cities into ruins and lay waste your sanctuaries, and I will take no delight in the pleasing aroma of your offerings...I will scatter you among the nations
But, says YHWH, I will still keep my side of the bargain. I will not destroy them completely.
Leviticus 27: Seems to be about dedication rituals and tithing.
Holiness, purity and YHWH
Although this Venn diagram probably murders thousands of years of mystic debate, here is an approximate way of looking at the relationships between pure and holy.
In Leviticus (and Exodus and presumably further on too), YHWH would quite literally be present in the sacred Holy of Holies in the Tabernacle (in glowing cloud form). The closer you were, the holier you were (so the Venn diagram kind of serves as almost a birds eye view spatial diagram...see the final quote in this post). You could be pure without being Holy, but priests were encouraged to keep Holy. As they approached the inner sanctum, they would be getting closer to God in a very literal sense. You could not approach YHWH if you were impure.
I didn't want to confuse the diagram any more but profane things can be pure or impure. One could sanctify a knife (knives are normal mundane items and so are 'common' or 'profane'). It is easy to mix them up because of some of the secondary meanings that have been injected into these thigns - scholars and Rabbis have debated amongst themselves on this one since the ideas were introduced.
I'll finish with a lengthy quote from someone who knows much better if you want a more complete explanation:
the Hebrew word "holy" has a root meaning of separate. Separate. That which is holy is separate. It's withdrawn from common, everyday use. In the Priestly view, only God is intrinsically holy; intrinsically holy. God can impart holiness to, he can sanctify, persons and places and things when they're brought into a specific kind of relationship with him, a relationship that's best described as a relationship of ownership. What is holy is what is in God's realm, something that's separated to him. That which is outside God's realm is common. The Hebrew word for "common" is sometimes translated by the English word "profane." That has a negative connotation in English, but in fact it really doesn't bear that negative connotation. Profane simply means not holy; not sacred. We use it differently now. But the fact is that the common or profane state is the natural default state of most objects and things. This table is just profane. It's common. It's available for everyday use. It's not separated or marked off for special kind of treatment because it's holy. For a common object to become holy, you need a special act of dedication to God, an act of sanctification to transfer the thing to God or God's realm or God's service.
So holiness entails necessarily separation in both its positive and negative aspects. It entails separation of an object to that which sanctifies it, which is God; and it involves separation from, in the form of safeguards against, anything that would threaten to remove its sanctity. So separation from that which threatens its sanctity. Holy things are holy because they are removed from the realm of the common by means of rules or safeguards that demarcate them as different and separate and determine that we use them differently. The preservation of holy status therefore depends on those rules and safeguards. Their observance protects the holy object from profanation, from being profaned, reverting from holy status back to common status.
Now, it's evident from the schematic representation or the way I've described the sanctuary that holiness increases as you move deeper into the sanctuary. And the principle here that holiness increases as proximity to God increases. The principle is graphically demonstrated in spatial terms. So in the biblical view, the area or the land outside the Israelite camp is just common, profane land. The Israelite camp bears a certain degree of holiness. Then as you move in, the outer courtyard, the outer enclosure of the sanctuary, bears a slightly higher degree of holiness. It's accessible to Israelites who are pure. The sanctuary proper, which is in closer proximity to God, bears a still higher degree of holiness: it's accessible only to the priests, who are said to be the holy ones within Israel. And then the inner shrine is the holiest area: it's accessible only to the holiest member of the nation, the high priest.

back to verse 19

Leviticus is done! Hurray!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by Modulous, posted 02-28-2009 11:51 AM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by John 10:10, posted 05-21-2009 8:45 PM Modulous has replied
 Message 111 by Modulous, posted 09-16-2009 5:16 PM Modulous has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 78 of 117 (509238)
05-19-2009 3:02 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by jaywill
05-19-2009 1:55 PM


quote:
That is arbitrary of you to say that. It is the same book. How are you so sure that all that goes before is concluded and has nothing to do with this new section ?
The altar ended that sequence. Now there was a famine in the land. Very nonspecific. As I said it doesn't imply any immediate relation to the altar. We have no idea how much time has passed. The text does not imply that the famine was immediate.
quote:
Plus the fact that when Abram has his unfortunate experience in Egypt, where does he go ? He goes BACK to where he was before.
What unfortunate experience in Egypt? Abram made out well. He (Pharoh) treated Abram well for her sake, and Abram acquired sheep and cattle, male and female donkeys, menservants and maidservants, and camels. Pharoh got the raw end of the deal there. Abram didn't seem distressed that he was back in Negev. So Abram went up from Egypt to the Negev, with his wife and everything he had, and Lot went with him. Abram had become very wealthy in livestock and in silver and gold. How exactly is Abram doing bad, other than he hasn't reached the end destination yet?
quote:
You see the place of the first altar is the connection. The place where he first called on the name of the Lord Jehovah. The place between the "heap of ruins" (Ai) and "the house of God" (Bethel).
So the stories are indeed connected. They are related. Abram arrives at a place where he fellowships with God. He moves away and descends down into Egypt in doubt and ubnbelief. Yet God is FAITHFUL and brings him out of there with all that he needs. Abram realizes that he needs to go BACK to the beginning. This beginning is where he made his first altar and called on God.
And you call me arbitrary?
What doubt and unbelief does he suffer in Egypt?
I didn't say the stories were unrelated, I said your statement that the famine was immediately following the altar is not supported by the text.

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by jaywill, posted 05-19-2009 1:55 PM jaywill has not replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 79 of 117 (509257)
05-19-2009 7:31 PM


The gist of Purpledawn's objection is "How do you know the Egypt experience signified any misfortune for Abram?" Well, it turns out by God's sovereignty that the tables were turned and it all became a blessing.
But what were the things Abram was faced with which were adverse to him? I think we should contrast the promise of God with the actions of Abram. Here again is a God's promise.
"And I will bless those who bless you, and him who curses you I will curse ... " (Gen 12:3)
Yet Abram wavers and expresses this concern about the Egyptians.
" ... I know indeed that you are a beautiful woman to look at; And when the Egyptians see you, they will say, This is his wife, and they will kill me; but they will keep you alive. Now say you are my sister, that it may be well with me on account of you and I may live because of you." (Gen. 12:12,13)
Abram fears for his life in going down to Egypt. Rather than expecting any potential harmers to be cursed he rather is concerned that he himself will be killed and robbed of his wife. So Abram schemes to escape murder at the hands of the Egyptians through the half-lie.
Of course if Abram is killed in Egypt he will never see the fulfillment of God's promise of the good land. And God has also promised Abram's seed to inherit the good land.
"And JEhovah appeared to Abram and said, To your seed I will give this land ..." (Gen. 12:7a)
But there is reason for Abram to doubt. He is not only in danger of being killed but he and Sarai have not had any child yet. She was barren (Gen. 11:30). And there is a possibility in Abram's mind that any children born to Sarai may be those of an Egyptian.
You have to sympathize with the prophet somewhat because when he entered Egypt it says:
"And it came to pass that when Abram came to Egypt, the Egyptians saw that the woman was very beautiful. And Pharoah's officals saw her and praised her before Pharoah, and the woman was taken into Pharoah's house." (Gen. 12:14,15)
We may assume not to have tea.
Now it does say that Pharoah treated Abram well on a account of Sarai. He thought that Sarai was Abram's sister. But think how Abram must have felt. Now what is going to happen to his seed? What is going to happen to God's promise of a the good land and the multiplied seed of Abram?
A monkey wrench of the famine has disrupted everything. The prophet of God is in danger of his life. He has to lie (prophets weren't suppose to do things like that). And he may lose his wife forever. It is hard for me to imagine that Abram felt peaceful about this situation as if all was going "according to plan".
It is a situation which Abram cannot solve. God Almighty comes in to solve the problem by striking Pharioah's household with a plague. And God signals to Pharoah that Abram is His prophet and that he best relinquish the prophet's wife.
"And Jehovah struck Pharoah and his house with great plagues because of Sarai, Abram's wife. And Pharoah called Abram and said, What is this you have done to me? Why did you not tell me that she was your wife? Why did you say, She is my sister, so that I took her to be my wife?
Now then here is your wife; take her and go." (Gen.12:17-19)
Thank God for the faithfulness of God to rescue the situation of his fearful prophet. Purpledawn before mentioned Abram's thanksgiving revealed in the building of the altar. You can believe that Abram really was thankful here too.
He also must have been very humbled. He almost gave his wife away. I think he may have found it difficult to look into her face right away.
"Oh, you're reading too much into the story. We only care for what the text says and not all this dogma and conjecture." Some may say. Well, Abram is called the father of faith. And as a leading example those who follow him in the way of faith in God glean many important lessons from his experience.
God is faithful. Taking care of the prophet is the concern of God for the sake of God's purpose. He will intervene in these tight situations for His sake of keeping His word and securing His interests. I believe that this was a big lesson that Abram learned.
In chapter 14 I believe we see how Abram's faith in God encreased because of the lesson he had in Egypt.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 80 of 117 (509263)
05-19-2009 8:20 PM


I want to repeat that it is a good idea to grasp the conclusion of the Bible in the last two chapters, and use that scene as a calibration. Remind yourself that all things that happen represent God working towards this ultimate goal of the New Jerusalem.
This keeps us from getting sidetracked and distracted because there are so many things in the Bible. The sight of the final destination should be the goal we ever keep in mind.
Now I will relate this to Abram's tent. New Jerusalem in Revelation 21 and 22 brings God down to the earth to fellowship with man for eternity. It is the city of God's and man's mutual participation. There in the final New Jerusalem the temple of God is for man to worship God and the tabernacle of God is for God to dwell. It is His house. It is also the Bride of Christ as His wife.
This is where everything in the Bible ends up. This is the culmination of the eternal purpose of God.
Now Abram built an altar and pitched his tent (12:7-8). The first thing Abram cared for in the place between Ai and Bethel, was to worship God. So he erected and altar. He took care of God's worship up front.
Abram first pitched his tent at the place between Ai (the heap of ruins) and Bethel (the house of God) (12:8; 13:3) His altar and his tent were a testimony to the world that he lived unto God and for God.
His tent was a miniature of the tabernacle of God built by his descendents in the wilderness. That tabernacle was called [b]the "tabernacle of testimony" (Exo. 38:21). And in that taberbacle God's glory came down and dwelt there. God came down to the earth so to speak and dwelt among the Israelites in the tabernacle of testimony.
Remember that in New Jerusalem, the taberbacle of God also contains the God of glory who comes down to earth to be one with His people forever. Abram's tent in Genesis, the taberbacle of Israel in Exodus, and the tabernacle city New Jerusalem in Revelation all speak to this one matter. That is the testimony of God dwelling with man on the earth.
Now I said that Abram's tent was a minature of the tabernacle in Exodus. We will see that in Genesis 18 God comes to Abraham and fellowships with him. Abraham's tent becomes the place where God and man have a fellowship together.
In Genesis 13:18 Abram removed his tent to Hebron. That word Hebron means fellowship. Abraham's tent was a testimony to the world firstly and secondly a center for his fellowship with God.
By Abraham pitching his tent God had a place on the earth to come down and fellowship with man. We should see the connection between Abraham's tent of fellowship with God and the tent tabernacle built by the Israelites in Exodus.
God commanded the Israelites to build a taberbacle tent with an altar in (Exodus 26:1; 27:1). This may help some of us to be calibrated to the central lane of the Bible.
God's eternal purpose is to come down to the earth and have fellowship, communion, with man. Eventually I will try to show that this really means that God will come into man and man and God will be united.
Of Jesus Christ the Gospel of John says "And the word became flesh and tabernacled among us (and we beheld His glory, glory as of the only Begotten from the Father, full of grace and reality." (John 1:14)
The purpose of God is very profound. Pictures are needed to uunveil it gradually. The tent of Abraham where God came to earth and fellowshipped with his prophet is a precusor a symbol of the ultimate union of divinity and humanity. God is seeking to join Himself to man and join man to Himself.
We should remember that this was His original purpose in placing man before the tree of life in Genesis. He has not changed His plan. He is ever working to dispense Himself into man to be the eternal life to man. But I jump ahead a little.
Please consider the tent of Abraham, the tent of the Israelites and the New Jerusalem as related. The testimony of God is with these tents. And the glory of God is for these tents. And these tents are for God coming down from heaven to earth to be one with man for His eternal purpose.

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by Bailey, posted 05-20-2009 9:55 AM jaywill has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 81 of 117 (509281)
05-20-2009 6:25 AM


The Tent is Just a Tent
In the story of Abram, the tent is just a tent. It is the shelter of choice for shepherds on the move. Abram made a choice to forgo worshiping idols to following a living God that contacted him.
I don't understand the need to create symbols out of the mundane. Just because we can make everything symbolize something, doesn't mean we should. People can suffer a spiritual crisis when they actually read the text and find that their clergy or teachers have been creating a meaning out of one sentence that has nothing to do with the story. This can cause mistrust in their clergy and by association doubt or mistrust in God.
If one loves and trusts God, then there should be no need to make more out of the ancient writings than they really are. They are tales of the past. The storytellers were talking to the people of their time, not trying to blend into some futuristic doctrine of a different religion.
If we can't respect the stories in their own right, how can we learn from them?

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by Bailey, posted 05-20-2009 10:17 AM purpledawn has not replied
 Message 86 by jaywill, posted 05-20-2009 11:38 AM purpledawn has replied

  
Bailey
Member (Idle past 4369 days)
Posts: 574
From: Earth
Joined: 08-24-2003


Message 82 of 117 (509299)
05-20-2009 9:55 AM
Reply to: Message 80 by jaywill
05-19-2009 8:20 PM


We should remember that this was His original purpose in placing man before the tree of life in Genesis.
Jaywill, we have been over this numerous times.
The couple in Eden were not 'placed before the Tree of Life', nor were they ever informed of its existence.
Please, in the name of Yeshua, be honest in your creative interpretations.
One Love

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by jaywill, posted 05-19-2009 8:20 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by jaywill, posted 05-20-2009 10:58 AM Bailey has not replied

  
Bailey
Member (Idle past 4369 days)
Posts: 574
From: Earth
Joined: 08-24-2003


Message 83 of 117 (509301)
05-20-2009 10:17 AM
Reply to: Message 81 by purpledawn
05-20-2009 6:25 AM


When a tent is more than a tent ...
I don't understand the need to create symbols out of the mundane.
lol - don't play coy purpledawn ... you have displayed enough honesty in your posts to indicate you maintain an understanding of why fundamentalists devise and employ creative symbolism. There is, seemingly, no other way for the words of scripture to be shoehorned into fitting the Roman Catholic Church's interpretation of the Grace, the Law, the Prophets, the Anointed One and the God.
Fluidity of definition gives way to, first, creative interpretation which often leads to confusion and eventually, perhaps, dishonesty.
Creative symbolism gives way to fluidity of definition.
Your humility is admirable at times ...
One Love
Edited by Bailey, : sp.
Edited by Bailey, : grammar

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by purpledawn, posted 05-20-2009 6:25 AM purpledawn has not replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 84 of 117 (509307)
05-20-2009 10:58 AM
Reply to: Message 82 by Bailey
05-20-2009 9:55 AM


Jaywill, we have been over this numerous times.
The couple in Eden were not 'placed before the Tree of Life', nor were they ever informed of its existence.
Please, in the name of Yeshua, be honest in your creative interpretations.
We will have to agree to disagree on this point.
If it is not clear that the Tree of Life was central to the Paradise that God placed man into in Genesis, it should be clear by the end of the Bible that the Tree of Life is central.
If it seems a bit ambiguous to anyone the importance of the Tree of Life at the beginning of the Bible, by the time you reach the end, I think you should realize its centrality.
"To him who overcomes, to him I will give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the Paradise of God." (Rev. 2:7)
This promise of Christ to the overcoming and victorious believers in the church in Ephesus indicates the centrality of the tree of life to the Paradise of God. It is the best thing going there. It is the most important feature of the Paradise of God. So I believe that the created man was placed before the tree of life which was in the midst of the Edenic garden.
Then there is the final scenes of the redeemed man in eternity in the New Jerusalem:
"And he showed me a river of water of life, bright as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb in the middle of its street.
And on this side and on that side of the street was the tree of life, producing twelve fruits, yeilding its fruit each month, and the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations." (Rev. 22:1,2)
Here again we see the centrality of the tree of life. When man walks on the golden street which goes along the river of the water of life, on either side there is the tree of life.
This is a sign revealing the Triune God dispensing His life into man. This is a symbolic picture of the Trinity flowing divine life out of Himself into His people. And this is what God intended from the very beginning at man's creation.
If you cannot appreciate the tree of life in Genesis this lack of appreciation should be remedied by the time one reaches the final climax of the Bible. So I do stand by saying that the tree of life was the center of the Edenic garden and man was placed before it.
Lastly, we have God's promise for the forgiven sinners in eternity, to wash their robes and eat of the tree of life, entering into the city of life, New Jerusalem:
"Blesed are those who wash their robes that they might have right to the tree of life and may enter by the gates into the city.
Outside are the dogs and the sorcerers and the fornicators and the murderers and the idolaters and everyone who loves and makes a lie."
(Rev.22:14,15)
In Genesis Adam and Eve as the parents of all mankind, were excluded from partaking of the tree of life (Gen.3:22-24). The plan of redemption was to bring man back to the tree of life. That is to bring man back to God Himself as the eternal life. The barrier went up in Genesis chapter 3. And the barrier comes down in the redemptive death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
God brings those who believe in Christ back to the life of God, back to the tree of life.
So I must stand by repeating that God created man and placed man before the tree of life.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by Bailey, posted 05-20-2009 9:55 AM Bailey has not replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 85 of 117 (509312)
05-20-2009 11:33 AM


I am glad Baily rought up the matter of the tree of life because there is a real connection to it and God's promise o Abram.
God told Abram that through Abraham God would bless all the families of the earth.
"And in you all the families of the earth will be blessed." (Gen. 12:3)
At the end of the Bible we see this tree of life. The fruit is for food for eating. And the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations.
"And on this side and that side of the river was the tree of life, producing twelve fruits, yielding its fruit each month, and the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations." (Rev.22:2)
This is symbolic. I think the meaning is something like this:
Christ as the embodiment of God and the Redeemer will be for His indwelling the redeemed to be their eternal life. He will be the one the sons of God in New Jerusalem will "eat". That means constantly taking into their beings this Christ, this divine life of God, this Divine Person to dwell within them.
The behavior and life of these people will be for the healing of the nations which live on the earth in the eternal age. These nations are not the sons of God. These nations have been saved and brought through the great tribulation and through the millennial kingdom to be the inhabitants of the new heaven and new earth.
Revelation says that the sons of God will reign for ever and ever (Rev. 22:5).
I do not think this means that the saved will reign over each other. There must be some peoples for them to reign over. The people they will reign over are the nations which live around the New Jerusalem. The city of God is the tabernacle come down to be in their midst.
"And I heard a loud voice out of the throne, saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and He will taberncale with them, and they will be His peoples, and God Himself will be with them and be their God.
And He will wipe away every tear from their eyes; and death will be no more, nor will there be sorrow or crying or pain anymore; for the former things have passed away." (Rev. 21:3,4)
I believe that there is a distinction between those who live IN the New Jerusalem and those nations which live around her, in her light. The nations living around the New Jerusalem are healed by the leaves of the tree of life.
The actions and life of the sons of God in the city will be both a light to the nations and a healing to the nations to maintain them for eternity. All the families of the earth are therefore blessed through Abraham and his seed - the saved Jews and the saved Gentiles who are the constituents of the New Jerusalem.
Ezekiel also made a distinction between the function of the fruit of the tree of life and the leaves. One was for taking in as food. The other was apparently for healing by outward touch.
" ... And their fruit shall be for food and their leaves for healing." (See Ezek. 47:12)
He is talking about the marvelous trees growing on either side of the river pouring out of the house of God.
Christ is the blessing on all the nations. Christ and His people are the blessing to all the families of the earth. Christ as life, the Holy Spirit as life, and the transformed sons of God as their model and healers are the blessing to the families of the earth.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by Bailey, posted 05-20-2009 11:41 PM jaywill has replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 86 of 117 (509313)
05-20-2009 11:38 AM
Reply to: Message 81 by purpledawn
05-20-2009 6:25 AM


Re: The Tent is Just a Tent
If one loves and trusts God, then there should be no need to make more out of the ancient writings than they really are. They are tales of the past. The storytellers were talking to the people of their time, not trying to blend into some futuristic doctrine of a different religion.
There may be no need. But it also does not hurt if the things symbolized are not contrary to plain teaching.
Take what is useful and don't worry about what you do not find useful. The Bible is profoundly rich. We can never exhaust its wisdom.
YOu do not have to take interpretations as the word of God itself. Neither should you oppose interpretations unless you have some meaningful grounds to do so.
What I share in the way of symbolism is not shared unless I have clear and plain teaching to confirm the symbolism. You may test me on that.
But a picture is worth 1,000 words. Or at leat 873 words or so. So there is no real need to forbid me teaching the Bible with some symbolism.
I am not too rigid. I suggest that Keeping one's eyes on the climax of the Bible helps to keep you on track.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by purpledawn, posted 05-20-2009 6:25 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by purpledawn, posted 05-20-2009 1:55 PM jaywill has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 87 of 117 (509331)
05-20-2009 1:55 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by jaywill
05-20-2009 11:38 AM


Re: The Tent is Just a Tent
quote:
There may be no need. But it also does not hurt if the things symbolized are not contrary to plain teaching.
Yes it does hurt some people. People should be able trust that their religious leaders and teachers are teaching them what God needs them to know about how he wants his people to behave towards each other. Good to know, though, that you do know you are full of D'rash.
Out of curiosity, why present d'rash (sermon) when people are discussing p'shat (plain reading)?
How does that help in a debate since you can pretty much make up what you want?
How does that show people what the words in the Bible really say, when you've admitted that you create alternate meanings or interpretations that may or may not agree with the plain text.
d'rash
For instance, Biblical writers may take two or more unrelated verses and combine them to create a verse(s) with a third meaning.
There are three rules to consider when utilizing the d'rash interpretation of a text:
1. A drash understanding can not be used to strip a passage of its p'shat meaning, nor may any such understanding contradict the p'shat meaning of any other scripture passage. As the Talmud states, "No passage loses its p'shat."
2. Let scripture interpret scripture. Look for the scriptures themselves to define the components of an allegory.
3. The primary components of an allegory represent specific realities. We should limit ourselves to these primary components when understanding the text.
That's why we call your posts sermons. I have no problem with sermons, but in a debate it is useless since you can say anything you want in a sermon. D'rash has its place, but not in a debate.
quote:
But a picture is worth 1,000 words. Or at leat 873 words or so. So there is no real need to forbid me teaching the Bible with some symbolism.
That doesn't mean they are the correct words? People can make up what they want to about a picture.
quote:
By Abraham pitching his tent God had a place on the earth to come down and fellowship with man. We should see the connection between Abraham's tent of fellowship with God and the tent tabernacle built by the Israelites in Exodus.
You're teaching that God needed a tent to be able to fellowship with man. God didn't even go into the tent, if you talking about Genesis 18.
No tent was needed for A&E. No tent was needed for Moses. No tent was needed for Gideon. No tent was needed for Mary or Joseph.
What practical application in life are you trying to teach? How does any of what you're presenting help people in their day to day lives to treat each other well or understand what the writers were telling their audience?
Edited by purpledawn, : Added thoughts

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by jaywill, posted 05-20-2009 11:38 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by jaywill, posted 05-20-2009 10:05 PM purpledawn has not replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 88 of 117 (509368)
05-20-2009 10:05 PM
Reply to: Message 87 by purpledawn
05-20-2009 1:55 PM


Re: The Tent is Just a Tent
"Preaching," "Sermonizing," "Pontificating," etc. etc. whatever.
You have your style of writing. I have mine. Its probably the content that bothers you and not so much the delivery. Sermonizing on the principles of higher criticism I am sure would be met with favor and enthusiasm by you.
You're teaching that God needed a tent to be able to fellowship with man. God didn't even go into the tent, if you talking about Genesis 18.
I think you are short sighted a little. You seem to only be concerned with individual spirituality. When we get a little deeper into the Bible we see that there is something more to it than simply producing individual spiritual people.
Being an individual spiritual person may meet yours or my need on some individualistic level. But to ascertain the larger purpose of God we should see how individual edification of seekers relates to the eternal purpose of God.
Now you may say that there is no explicit command of God concerning Abraham's tent. However, in Exodus the divine instructions concerning the tabernacle are from God and very detailed. On some level God needed the tent. At least His will was to HAVE the tent - the tabernacle. For it was there that He met with Moses in the Holy of holies. In the tent that is.
Now think about what is going on here. Before the Jews were divinely instructed to have the "tent of meeting" or the "tabernacle of the testimony", their forefather Abraham had something like that. He had the tent where God appeared to him and he fellowshipped with God.
It is the fellowship which is important. And the place of that fellowship with the forefather Abrahamn was at his tent, especially in Genesis 18 where God came to him and had lunch with him.
No tent was needed for A&E. No tent was needed for Moses. No tent was needed for Gideon. No tent was needed for Mary or Joseph.
With Mary and Joseph the "tent" is really the physical body of the man Jesus Christ. By that time God dwelt in a man - Jesus of Nazareth.
This why:
1.) John writes "And the Word became flesh and TABERNACLED among us, (and we beheld His glory; glory as an only Begotten from a Father), full of grace and reality." (John 1:14)
The man Jesus was the living tabernacle of God among men. We are progressing now in the New Testament. The glory of God is no longer in the tabernacle of goats skin and porpoise skin etc. The glory of God in the Gospels is shining out of the MAN - the incarnate Son of God. He came to TABERNACLE among us.
2.) Jesus points to Himself as the living Bethel the house of God. The temple was the continuation of the tabernacle. The tabernacle was movable. The temple was stationary and more solid. But these were types. The anti-type in the Gospels is the Son of God.
And the Son of God, refering in picture to the Bethel in Genesis 28 in Jacob's dream, says:
"And He [Jesus] said to him, Truly, truly, I say to you, You will see heaven opened and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man." (John 1:51)
The Jews knee that Jesus was refering to the dream of Jacob of the House of God - Behel. There the angels of God were going up from the earth and coming down from heaven at that location on the earth.
If it sounds like a construction sight to anyone, it is. There is serious business going on. God is building Bethel in Jacob's dream. That is the house of God on the earth. There a ladder is set up to join earth to heaven and heaven to earth.
The angels are said to being going up and then down. That is not down first and then up but up first and then down. - "you shall see ... the angels of God ASCENDING and DESCENDING on the Son of Man"
Compare to Genesis 28:
"And he [Jacob] dreamed: There was a ladder set up on the earth, and its top reached to heaven; and the angels of God were ascending and descending on it." (Gen. 28:12)
It seems that the main activity is on the earth. God has a purpose on the earth. That purpose is not simply the individual comfort and edification of people so that they may be good spiritual people. No He is after a house. He is after something corporate - something collective to contain Him, to be His rest, and where He may have His glory, and that on the earth.
So I think to follow my exposition you should enlarge you capacity a little. You should come up to the high peak of the mountain of God's revelation to see the bigger picture.
It is not all about you and I being individual nice spiritual people. Comfort in trials of course is very good. But God has an eternal purpose larger than just comforting my in my trials.
I am doing a study of Abraham and Genesis with a view to the larger eternal purpose of God. So I have to mention the development of the tent and the tabernacle, the temple, the incarnation of Christ, the church, the New Jerusalem.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by purpledawn, posted 05-20-2009 1:55 PM purpledawn has not replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 89 of 117 (509370)
05-20-2009 10:24 PM


What practical application in life are you trying to teach? How does any of what you're presenting help people in their day to day lives to treat each other well or understand what the writers were telling their audience?
The practical lessons of seeing God's eternal purpose for man in the revelation of the Bible.
Proverbs did say "Without a vision the people run wild."
I hope that through my expounding some readers will see something more of a vision of God's plan in the Bible.
There is nothing wrong with helping people in their day to day spiritual lives. But some of us want to know what is it all for. That is how does my spiritual life fit into the purpose of God. Why am I here. Why DID Jesus Come?
Why did God create man? Why did God have a nation of Israel or a New Testament church?
There is more there than individual blessing and individual spirituality that I may be happy. There is the eternal purpose of God to see and to live for.

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 90 of 117 (509374)
05-20-2009 10:37 PM


No tent was needed for A&E. No tent was needed for Moses. No tent was needed for Gideon. No tent was needed for Mary or Joseph.
The importance of the tent does not dictate that in EVERY story we must see the tent.
This is true also of the law or of the prophethood or the kingship or other important biblical themes.
No particular mention of the tent with Gideon's story only means that other matters are being revealed there.
I am surprised though that you would under evaluate the tabernacle with Moses. There was quite space given in Exodus and Leviticus to the tabernacle and its utinsils and furnishings. It was obviosly important for Moses to go on and on about it.
He as to see that he made all things according to the pattern shown him on the mount. It was important to God. It was important to God's servant Moses.
The century of the twelve tribes was the tabernacle. It was around it that they camped. And the service of it was quite serious. Asks the Levitical priests.
When they got into the good land, eventually the tabenacle was replaced with a temple. That land had a center - a city. That city had a center - the temple. That temple contained God so to speak. And it was there that God put His name.
So throughout the Old Testament the tabernacle and the temple are a big deal. There God comes to the earth. There God has a place where His name is and where they were to worship.
The whole matter of a dwelling place for God is central to the Divine revelation of the Bible. Ultimately we see that this dwelling place is .... PEOPLE. He wants to live IN PEOPLE.
The one who makes this possible is the human Bethel, the one Who said "Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up."
God ever wants to live in man. God created man that He might live in man, in oneness with man, in union with man, in a blended and united manner in man making God and man one.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024