Theology in the Raw - Old Testament in the Raw Week 3: Genesis 2-3

Episode Date: February 6, 2020

This week in Old Testament in the Raw (formerly known as OT Dive), Preston and his class dive into Genesis 2-3. We begin by looking at all the ways that Genesis 2 emphasizing the intimacy or imminence of God. Then we discuss the location and theological significance of the garden of Eden. Finally, we look at the Fall of Adam and Even and some relevant aspects of their sin that we can use to consider our own “fall into sin” that happens all the time. Support Preston Support Preston by going to patreon.com Connect with Preston Follow him on Twitter @PrestonSprinkle Check out his website prestonsprinkle.com If you enjoy the podcast, be sure to leave a review.

Hello, friends. Welcome back to another episode of Old Testament in the Raw. This is week three of the Sunday school class that I've been teaching. And in this lecture slash lesson slash discussion, whatever you want to call it, I feel weird calling it a lecture. It's more than a discussion because it's mostly me talking. So it is sort of a teaching time. Anyway, this week we dug into Genesis 2 and Genesis 3. I began by summarizing some key things that we talked about last Sunday in Genesis 1, namely how Genesis 1 emphasizes the transcendence of God while also elevating the high status of humanity in the declaration in Genesis 1, 26 to 28, that humanity is created in God's image. So we began this Sunday teasing that out a little bit, talking about the idol background to the concept of being created in

God's image, that it's sort of playing off of the well-known theme in the Old Testament that humans are not supposed to worship idols. And yet the very word image of God, image of God, plays off of that theme of idolatry. And also only kings in Egypt are created in God's image, according to the ancient Near East mindset. And so we teased that out a little bit as well. Then we dug into Genesis 2 and emphasized, or at least drew out different ways in which Genesis 2 emphasizes the personalness or the imminence of God. And we looked at several things there in Genesis 2. We looked at a map where the possible location was for the Garden of Eden. We also looked at a major theological point in the connection between the Garden of Eden and the later tabernacle, temple,

even the person of Jesus and also the church. And then finally, we looked at Genesis 3 and the nature of the fall and Adam and Eve's rebellion against God. So I hope you enjoy this lecture, this Old Testament in the raw episode. It did, so the recording, again, is, you know, I recorded on a little $10 lapel mic. It's not a high quality microphone. And I am exploring getting a more high quality mic in the near future for this class. But until then, we're stuck with kind of some low level, low quality sound. But it comes out okay.

There's some background noise and stuff, but you can understand things fairly well. It's there's some background noise and stuff, but it's you can you can understand things fairly well. It did cut out about a minute before I actually finished. So this at the end of this episode, it does kind of it just cuts out. But you didn't miss much. It was basically the end of class. We're kind of bantering around over a couple of different things. And then it just cut out. I don't know why it cut out. But yeah, you didn't miss.

You missed basically a minute of the final discussion, which isn't much. So without further ado, welcome to Old Testament in the Raw, week three, where we dig into Genesis chapters two and three. okay welcome to class is it weird to say class i feel feel like I need to take roll or something. But welcome to OT Dive, which I might actually change the name to Old Testament in the Raw. Why don't I just call it Old Testament in the Raw, right? So anyway, Old Testament in the Raw. We are going to be in Genesis 2 and 3 today. So let me click out of this and just make sure the recording is happening. It's still going. Okay, so I should be good. Just by way of review. So last week we looked at, we didn't get out of Genesis one. We're looking at

the main theological message of Genesis one was to proclaim the transcendence of God. Now, I touched on this, but even this morning when I was kind of going over things, I was like, I don't know if this was really that clear, but I think it'll be clear today. And that is the fact that, you know, let me put a different color here, that the Elohim is used of God over and over and over and over and over in Genesis 1, but we're going to see something change in Genesis 2. Now, does anybody know the difference between Elohim and Yahweh? How would you describe the difference between Elohim as a reference to God and Yahweh as a reference to God? We're actually going to get into this in more detail in a few minutes, so I could just delay it.

But there's a difference here. They're not just like synonyms. Yeah. Is Elohim like the created creator, God, as they are, you know, and a little bit of love? they are, you know, and a little bit of love. Oh, okay. That might be, that's not, that might be part of what Yahweh is, but that might, I think that would probably fall more under Elohim. Oh, Elohim, yes, yes, yes, yes. The bigness, the transcendence of God. Well, so Yahweh is like a personal name. Elohim is describing, like, what God is. Yahweh is who God is. Elohim is what God is.

Or to make an analogy, you know, my name is Preston and I am, I don't know, let's see. Right now, let's just say I'm a teacher. Okay. So this is kind of like what I am, what I am doing. But Preston is my personal name. And throughout Scripture, there's actually many, many different descriptions of God. There's Jehovah Jireh. There's, you know, and that's actually, it should be like Yahweh Yerah, the God who I think sees. Is that the, oh no, that's a different one. Anyway, there's lots of little descriptions of God throughout scripture. The most common ones

are Elohim, which is just a generic word for God. It's the same as our English G-O-D, just a divine being. Whereas Yahweh is his personal name. But I want to, I want to come back to that because that's really, it's really important that Yahweh is used throughout Genesis 2, while Elohim is used throughout Genesis 1. I think that's on purpose. And then I'm just kind of reviewing some of what we talked about last week. We looked at the debate of the meaning of day in Genesis 1, the age of the earth, and I purposely didn't want to get too deep there, because I think, first of all, I'm not, you know, the most well-equipped one to navigate that conversation, and secondly, it's just

the one thing we can all agree on, it's not the main point of the original, the original point of Genesis 1 and 2 is not to give us, like, the age of the earth. That is more of a modern question we have about the text, which doesn't mean it's not significant. It just means it's not, if we're trying to understand what is the original author trying to tell us here, it's not to give us clarity on the age of the earth. And then I looked at these four points that emphasize the transcendence of God in Genesis 1, and then we

ended by talking about the creation of humanity in the image of God, and then we explored a little bit what that means, the image of God. I mean, that really is, it's one of the most remarkable statements in all of Scripture, that humans are created in God's image. And so I don't want to get too bogged down here, but I mean, I really could. We're only spending a few minutes talking about what it means to be created in God's image, and I don't want you to think that just because we're spending a few minutes,

that reflects the importance of this term or concept. We're only in one chapter. We've got a lot of chapters left in the Old Testament. So, so I don't want to be here until I'm like 84, necessarily. So, so that, that's why I'm kind of like giving a few thoughts on the image of God. But man, I would just highly encourage all of us really just to kind of just on in your own time, reading, meditation, study to, to really dig into this concept well you know what's interesting is the same word used of image here that mankind is created in god's image it's the same word used to describe idols throughout the rest of the the old testament we are god's idols and it's like whoa whoa is that okay? Like, this just sounds

kind of heretical. Like, what does that mean? Well, think about it. What's the function of an idol? Like a statue. You know, when people would worship an idol, they didn't actually think that that idol was a divine being. It's that that idol was a physical, visible representation of an invisible divine being. Does that make sense? So, like, if they were worshiping an idol that represented, say, Baal, or Marduk, or Molech, or some of these gods, you know, these fake gods that we read about in the Old Testament,

the physical statue, they didn't think that that was the god. They just worshiped that statue as a representation of the God. So the function of an idol is to give us a visible representation, a visible picture of a divine being. So in that sense, humans are Yahweh's idols on earth. It's one of the reasons why we shouldn't worship other gods or other idols, because we are God's, in a sense, idols. We are the visible manifestation of Yahweh on earth.

Here's another thing. We talked last week about tribal deities, that in the ancient mindset, in the ancient mindset, in the ancient mindset, you had, you know, certain gods that people worshipped were believed to have jurisdiction over certain parts of the land, you know, Baal kind of in the north, Marduk in the east, in Mesopotamia, Babylon area, and then Egypt had their own gods. And so the idols sometimes would be set up in just that part of the land. Okay. So think about this. God creates humans as his sort of idols, the physical representations of God on earth. And

then what he tells us to be fruitful, multiply, and fill the earth. He wants humans to spread all around the earth so that people know that Yahweh has jurisdiction over the whole creation. And then this is one thing, one reason why when humans gather together in Genesis 11 and build the Tower of Babel, God wants them to spread over the earth, and then they hunker down and gather in one place.

And it's like that's going against God's command to spread over the whole earth, because God wants the whole earth to be filled with His idols, His visible representations, so that people know He rules over the whole thing. Also, idols, or the whole phrase image of God. So, it's kind of playing off of this theme of idolatry. And again, I say, every time I say idolatry, it just sounds negative. Like, how can a human be so, but again, we are

the visible representations of God on earth. Also, especially in Egypt, the pharaohs and the kings of Egypt, they were sometimes described as bearing God's image. So in the ancient world, the only kind of human figure outside the Bible that was described as bearing God's image was a male king, like the highest of the highest, the one on the top of the pyramid, I guess almost literally, because we're talking about Egypt, but you know, the one on the top of the social hierarchy, this male king, sometimes they would be described as bearing God's image, but nobody else. I mean, there's no way the lower people, you know, would be described as bearing God's image, but nobody else. I mean, there's no way the lower people, you know, would be described as bearing God's image. So the fact that Genesis 1 says that all

humans, male and female, bear God's image, it's almost like giving us, well, this is why, you know, this is why, this is all leading up to why I said that, you know, when we talk about the image of God, it means that humankind has an exalted status, a kingly-like status. Especially, you know, when we talk about the image of God, it means that humankind has an exalted status, a kingly-like status. Especially, I mean, Israel's hearing these words, and they just come out of Egypt, where the Pharaohs for 400 years were called God's image bearers, you know, and then now they're told that, no, your God sees all of you. You've been slaves for 400 years, and even though you've been slaves, you bear God's image. It's a profound, profoundly elevating concept. So, and then at the end of

Genesis 1, and if you have your Bibles, it'd be good to maybe just have them open to Genesis 1, Genesis 2 area, because we're going to be pointing out some things in the text. At the end of Genesis 1, yeah, 126, So let us make man in our image according to our likeness, and they will rule, or some translations say,

let them rule over the fish of the sea, the birds of the sky, the livestock, and all the earth. Let these humans who bear God's image rule over creation. Now, again, this doesn't't mean that, you know, we, that we are kings independently, that we rule over creation, you know, under our own authority or power, but we are mediating God's rule over the earth. So this is, this is like fundamental to why God creates us. He wants us to represent Him on the earth, and he wants us to mediate his rule over the earth. So there's two different ways in which people can take this in wrong directions.

Some people want to emphasize humanity's lowliness. We're just worms. We're dust. We're nobody. We're, you know, woe is me. And it's like, okay, that's that can be a healthy aspect of our relationship with God. We are not God. We are created. He is our king. But we still have a very elevated status, okay? So we don't want to make an error in viewing humanity as just nothing down here. We're worth nothing. We're worthless, you know. Well, wait a minute. No, we're creating God's image. Like, we're worth a ton, because, you know, if we're worthless, then what does that say about the price that God paid

to purchase us? Like, He spent a lot to redeem us, which means we do have an inherent worth. Now the other mistake is to elevate us too high, to forget that we are mediating God's rule over the earth, to think that we, you know, we can do whatever we want with creation, however we want, in whatever ways we want. Like, no, we are still submissive to the Creator and how He wants us to rule over the earth. Okay, any questions so far? So all that's

just kind of like review, just getting us kind of warmed up, letting other people show up and everything. Yeah? I missed last week, so I'm sorry. Okay, yeah, yeah. Verse 26 here, he says, let us be made. Yeah. No, no, yeah. Verse 26 here, God says, let us be made. Yeah.

Did you go to... No, no, I didn't. No, thank you for asking that. Yeah, us, the plural of God here. Now, the quick and easy answer to this would be, well, this is referring to the Trinity, Father, Son, Holy Spirit. God is not, you know, he's one God, but three persons within that one God. That would be an easy

direction here. And, you know, I would probably say that I think that's probably what's going on, but I always want to just, I don't want to read into the text something that's easy, you know, based on my presuppositions. I want to just truly say, well, because the biggest question here is like, well, wait a minute, what do the Jews say about this? I mean, this is in the Old Testament, not the New. Like, do we have really a clear Trinity statement right here in Genesis 1? So there, I mean, there are, so some people say, well, this is God and the angels, the us is the angels. But the problem with that is we're not, nowhere does it say the angels bear God's image and they're not on par with God as, as a creating deity. Other people say it's just more of a plural, like a plural of majesty, meaning sometimes, you do this in writing, right? In writing, sometimes you'll say like, today we're going to

get into this topic, whatever. And sometimes we use we to refer to ourselves in a singular sense. So some people say it's that. But no, yeah, I mean, I think it is a rather subtle, but not so subtle reference to, and let's not be so specific, because Trinity, do we really know Trinity from Genesis 1 alone? Well, not really. But what this does show is there's some kind of plurality

within this divine being. Yeah, yeah. Yes? So I was wondering, like Elohim and Yahweh, in the Bible, they'll have like capitalized T and lowercase T.

Is Elohim lowercase because it's not a pronoun? No. Oh, that's a good question. Honestly, the uppercase, lowercase, you know, some translations will refer to God with he, some will just say he. That's nothing more than just a decision by the English translators. L-O-R-D, that English all uppercase is translated in the Hebrew word Yahweh. Yes, yes,

yes. But some translations like, I think mine, yeah, mine capitalizes pronouns referring to God, He, us, other. I think the ESV, Barclay, do you have an ESV? The English standard version I think the ESV, Barclay, do you have an ESV? The English Standard Version, I think, uses lowercase for God.

And that doesn't mean that they're diminishing God's glory. Quite the opposite. The translators are not. They have a very high view of God. But sometimes using uppercase pronouns can be really kind of clunky just in how often you have to do it. So, um, yeah. Hey, okay. So, um, I want to, so again, transcendence of God, Genesis one. Now I said, Genesis two emphasizes the personalness of God, the, the eminence of God. And let's, um, the the imminence of God and let's let's talk about that for a second if you go to I'm glad you brought that up because this is exactly where I wanted to go

next look at Genesis 2 4 and even them I'm just gonna kind of glance back at Genesis 1 28 and following. It says, God blessed him. And God said, in verse 29, God also said, and verse 31, God saw that he had made it all and it was good. And then chapter 2, verse 2, by the seventh day, God completed. Verse 3, God blessed. This is just Elohim, Elohim, Elohim.

Look at Genesis 2, verse 4. Remember Remember 2-4 is a transition verse. What stands out here in Genesis 2-4? In terms of God. Yes. Now you see capital L-O-R-D then G-O-D so this is in the Hebrew would be Yahweh Elohim made the earth and heavens now just glance through your text

every single reference to Elohim now is prefaced with Yahweh every single time it's 20 times actually in Genesis 2 single time. It's 20 times actually in Genesis 2. You do not see Elohim by itself in Genesis 2. You only see Elohim

by itself in Genesis 1. You don't see this L-O-R-D, Yahweh, never occurs in Genesis 1. You think this is intentional? Of course it is. Statistically, it's not like it just, you know, he happened to, you know, only use Yahweh. But if you, I mean, over and over and over,

God never stands alone. The word God never stands alone in Genesis 2. It's always prefaced by Yahweh. Now, again, Yahweh is God's personal name. And in the ancient world, And in the ancient world, and if you've read the Old Testament or even New Testament, you see that names kind of mean, are a big deal. When somebody reveals their name to, their personal name, like that is a bridge to relationship. Or, I mean, it can signal all kinds of things like Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. It's kind of odd that we refer to him as Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, because those are the Babylonian names given to, oh gosh, Azariah, help me out, anybody, Daniel, huh? Yeah, yeah, that.

See, I forgot the Hebrew, that's horrible. Like like they have these beautiful hebrew yahweh worshiping names and then they're taken to exile then they're changed to babylonian names and now we only know them but well i mean that's what's in the text over and over shadrach meshach and abednego but um i mean there's all throughout scripture you know peter's changed from cephas to peter and and um gosh throughout the Old Testament there's just uh Abram has changed to Abraham uh father of many nations it's there's just such a deep deep significance to names in the biblical world I mean in the Bible but also just in the ancient world as a whole your name really means something Isaac means laughter because because Sarah laughed in the tent when, in her old age, she was

told that she was going to have a child. And Jacob actually means cheater, or one who, you know, grasps at something that's not his own. He grabbed onto the heel of his brother. So the names mean, our names are significant. The fact here god this elohim this transcendent being is now being referred to over and over by his personal name that is one way in which the personalness of god is being emphasized in genesis 1 also look at the way God acts in Genesis 2 compared to how he acts in Genesis 1. In Genesis 1, God is just speaking the universe into existence. He's a very transcendent being who's just kind of out there, and he's just hurling the universe into existence. But now, I mean, we see him playing in the dirt.

I mean, this whole idea of being formed, he formed Adam from the dust. This word formed is often used of an artist, like a sculptor. Oh, gosh, sculpt. Is that how you spell sculptor anyway? Like somebody who's like a potter, who's intimately involved with his clay, and I've got stories of the old movie Ghost in my mind, but I got, it's a very, it's a very, it's a, literally, a hands-on picture of what God is doing here. He's forming. He didn't speak Adam into existence.

He's crafting him into his masterpiece. It's almost like he grabs his face and breathes into his nostrils. That's a very face-to-face, intimate thing to do. Next time you're in the elevator, turn to your person in there and just breathe into their nostrils, right? He looked and he sees the man, Adam, and he sees that he's in need. He needs a, some translations will say helper. And so he provided somebody to come alongside Adam. and so he provided somebody to come alongside Adam.

This word helper, I got to clarify that one too. In Genesis 2.18, my translation says, it is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper as his complement. The Hebrew word helper, I forgot what it is, but this is, yeah, this is a fact. The Hebrew word for helper is used all throughout the Old Testament to refer to God helping Israel through military intervention, okay? So, like, Israel's, like, going into battle, Israel's like going into battle and they're

getting beat and they're like, ah, run away. You know, they're, they're running away. And then it says that God intervenes to help Israel. Okay. So, so all my whole point is the word helper, helpmate is not a derogatory term for women. If anything, if anything, it's the opposite. It's like God looks down at Adam and says, oh my gosh, you really need some help. I'm going to create a woman to come alongside you. Because again, our leading statement is in 127, male and female created in God's image. But again, the point here is that God, this transcendent divine

being is intimately involved in his creation. This verse really blows me away. In 2.19, it says that the Lord God, Yahweh God, Yahweh Elohim formed out of the ground every wild animal, which again, this shows that this is the same phrase. He formed Adam from the dust. He also formed the animals he was intimately involved in creating the animals as well and every bird of the sky and he and then

it says that this Yahweh God this transcendent being Yahweh brought each one to the man to see what he would call it. That, I mean, this would almost, well, apart from, if all we had was Genesis 2, we could err on the side of having almost a low view of God, because he's so intimately involved in his creation. He's bringing these animals to Adam, and then he's standing back, and he's like waiting to see what Adam's going to call the animals. What are you going to name this? You know, he's bringing these animals, sitting in front of Adam and Adam's like, you know, you know, cat. And then the thing goes, you know, God's like, well, we can go with cat if you want. Maybe dog. Yeah, let's go with dog, you know. So even here, and this plays off of Adam and Eve mediating God's creation, like mediating God's rule over creation.

So God here, he's creating the animals, but then he's letting Adam name the animals. So Adam is almost like involved with the whole kind of ongoing work of of creation so again uh i just so genesis one transcendence of god genesis two intimacy personalness of god these two umbrella categories of who god is i think makes sense of the rest of scripture of who God is, I think, makes sense of the rest of Scripture. Our view of God needs to be in this interplay between, needs to honor both aspects of God, the greatness, the kingship, the sovereignty of God, but also that closeness, that intimacy, that friendship of God.

In my experience, and maybe, I don't know, maybe it will resonate with this, I feel like all of us typically gravitate towards one aspect of God more than the other. Some of us, when it comes to God's sovereignty, His kingship, it's like, that makes sense. That comes easy. And maybe understanding God as a close friend, being intimate with us is really harder for us. Other people, maybe it's vice versa.

They can talk with God or walk with God, commune with God, but thinking that God is this sovereign, otherworldly creator being is a bit harder. Me personally, for me, it's the intimacy, the closeness of God that I have a harder time with. When I first became a Christian 25 years ago, like, you know, to me, I was like, if I'm going to, if there's a God, then he must be king over everything. And I just need to keep my head down and just not make him mad. You know, it's kind of kind of my my default posture, which, again, that that's an error, maybe on the side of elevating the transcendence of God, but not seeing him as a close friend. side of elevating the transcendence of God, but not seeing him as a close friend. And maybe some people would have the opposite struggle of seeing God as king. Make sure I didn't forget anything here. Any thoughts, questions while I check my phone and

see if this recording is still going? Yes, it's still going. One of the things that I had read was the things that God named, he has dominion over. And the things that man named, he had dominion over. And I wonder if it also plays into the relationships. So when we see nature, stars, and it's easy to see how big God is. Yes. But when we are relating to things that man names,

animals and people, that's where that relationship stuff comes in. So maybe where you gravitate to is where those things where you connect with God most. Yeah. I've never thought about it like that. It is true that the one who names something has the authority over that.

That is true. But your kind of application of that, I've never thought about that. No, it's interesting. I have to think about that more. I don't want to say yes or no. And, well, I will say, just on that note, on the naming thing, yeah, because God names kind of the universe, the stars, the moon, like, He's authority over that, but then He delegates the naming to Adam to name the animals, which shows that he has authority over there.

Here's where it gets a little tricky. Okay, you ready for this? Let me get in some controversial. He, in Genesis 3, 20, Adam names his wife. So does that mean that Adam has some kind of like God-like authority over his wife? Don't answer, don't answer, just wrestle. So some people say yes, absolutely,

this solidifies kind of male headship, men rule over women. But then other people want to point out, well this is in Genesis 3, this is part of the curse. So that maybe Adam's response here is he's kind of like throwing his weight around it in more of a negative way, because everything here is kind of in the wake of his sin. And I don't, Scott's got something. Scott, help us out here.

And we're getting a little bit down the road. No, I'm just listening to different commentaries that everybody has. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Oh, okay. over it, you know, ignore the environment. Yeah. Disasters, and I've heard that applied during that same verse.

Oh, okay. Really, like, to steward our wives. So it's not rule with a heavy hand. It is to, well, like what Ephesians 5 says, husbands, love your wives as Christ loved the church. It's a sacrificial giving up kind of. It's just another commentary. Yeah, yeah, no another commentary yeah no that's

yeah I don't see yeah no that's good so in the same way that God that Adam's called to steward and care for creation that maybe that's what is being emphasized here yeah well he names woman he names Eve in Genesis 3 but in Genesis 2

he names her woman in 23 at last men exclaim Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Well, the only thing there, though, is that, you know, she shall be called woman. it's hard like is he kind of calling her that or is he just declaring that she will be you know like is he coming up with that name or is it yeah she shall be yeah um yeah no but this one will be called i think there's so in three in

320 it's more it's it's explicit, like he named his wife this, whereas the other one is just kind of more of a declaration that this is what she is. So yeah, it could be. I mean, I think some people, I would have to go back and check. Some people may point to this saying, no, this is a pre-fall naming of the woman. And there, yeah, in Genesis 2.23, it's a play off of, so the Hebrew word for man is ish, and for woman it's ishah.

He, you know, so it's kind of a play on words almost to show that they're both, they share common humanity, but they are different as well. humanity, but they are different as well. Just a couple things about the Garden of Eden. We don't really know exactly where the Garden of Eden was. Also, when you're dealing with a pre-flood geography, we're kind of in unknown territory here. Because the flood wasn't just a bunch of rain.

It also says the fountains from the deep opened up. And some people think that all the land was kind of in one area and then according to some theories it was slowly drifts apart and you can even see how South America and Africa fit together and I'm not a geologist but some people say during the flood what what science has shown to be a slow drift in the part during the flood was kind of a cataclysmic like just rearranging of the whole earth, you know. And again, this is going above my knowledge here, but what I would say is any kind of pre-flood

search for anything, you know, where was the Garden of Eden? What was east of Eden where, you know, Cain got banished to and everything? We have to hold this with an open hand, but we do have reference to the Tigris and Euphrates in the Garden of Eden, which is interesting, because these are the same rivers, okay, so this is, let's go to, I'll go to red here, so here is the Tigris River, okay, and here is the Euphrates River, and just so, just so you have your geography, some people say that Eden was down here. This would be modern-day Kuwait, actually.

Other people put it up here where the Tigris and Euphrates are coming together again. And just so you know what we're looking at here, so this is the land of Canaan. This would be modern-day Israel. And I think it goes something like, like this or whatever. So you have Lebanon up here. Syria is kind of over here. Okay. And

then over here is Babylon is around this region. And then Assyria. I don't like to abbreviate Assyria for obvious reasons. Assyria is up here, just kind of north of Babylon. And Ur of the Chaldees is down, oh, where is Ur? Ur is kind of almost where, this is where Abraham's from, Ur. It's more kind of in where Eden might have been. But just to give you kind of like, you know, because the Tigris and Euphrates are mentioned, it's got to be somewhere in this region, you know. Mount Ararat is where the ark ended up landing after the floods. It landed on

Mount Ararat, up in modern-day Armenia area. So I've got a little bit of Armenian blood in me, and so we're all proud of being the place where the ark might have landed. Theologically, okay, here is, again, so remember our historical, moral, and theological lenses. We're reading scripture. It's, I think it's good and missed the theological point of this flood story, I think that would be insufficient.

I think it'd be fascinating. It'd be cool to have a little piece of Noah's Ark, but we have not found the remains of Noah's Ark. So with the Garden of Eden, here's what's fascinating is, and I think I have this written out in some of your notes, if you had it from last week, but if not, I'm going to try to make the, here's what I'm going to try to do for future, is maybe just post the notes on my website, that you all can go and take them and download them, whatever,

and catch up on old ones and get new ones rather than me kind of printing out notes every week. So there are clear connections between the way the Garden of Eden is described and how later the later tabernacle and temple is described. I mentioned this last week, kind of in passing a little bit, or maybe it was a week before. Might have been the very first week. So there's, and I've got evidence here, but I don't, it's kind of boring to kind of like read all of this. But let me just mention a couple things. So like the gold and onyx, these jewels kind of mentioned in Genesis 2,

verses 11 to 12, these are the very same stones used to decorate the tabernacle and the priestly garments. Later on when the, has like garments made, they are given clothing that reflects the garden of Eden. In both Eden and the tabernacle are entered from the east and both are guarded by the cherubim. We see cherubim here in Genesis 3 to keep Adam from coming back in the garden, lest he eat from the tree of life and live forever. We also see cherubim later on in the tabernacle, these statues of these angelic beings kind of guarding God's presence again.

Cherubim guard God's presence in Eden. The same creatures, or at least representations of the creatures, guard God's presence in the tabernacle. And there's lots of other pieces of evidence here, but this is something you see a lot in the Bible. When two events or places or even people are kind of associated, then these people, events, or people, people, events, or places kind of mutually interpret each other. So we know, again, that, well, let me put this up on here real quick. Yeah, so Eden, the place where God and humans perfectly commune with each other, enjoy each other's presence, this becomes almost like the prototype,

the forerunner, a foreshadow of God later meeting with his people in the tabernacle and then later in the temple. And so when Jesus calls himself, you know, he refers to himself on several occasions as the temple. You know, destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it again. He refers to himself as the temple. And then after Jesus ascends to the Father and now we have the church, the body of his followers. And they're referred to in 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians as the temple of the living God.

We even refer to ourselves as you know our bodies are the temple you know so don't eat too much bacon right take care of yourself um but it's more than just a a random a connection it's actually saying that in the same way that god wanted to commune with his people in the garden of eden you know the tabernacle the temple jesus and now the church is kind of that place where the creator Yahweh wants to commune with His people. It's all about relationships. Relationship between God and humans.

Oops. No, no, no, no. I had more to say here. Let's see. Huh, it's not popping up. Anyway. Does that make sense? I know that might be a little bit like, I need to get my mind around that, but any questions about that? Eden? Eden stuff?

All right, let's talk about the fall. In Genesis 3. Let me just read the first... I'll read the first seven verses, okay? So, now the serpent... Oh, there's so many just interesting things here. Now the serpent was the most cunning of all the wild animals that Yahweh God, the serpent was the most cunning of all the wild animals

that Yahweh God, the Lord God, had made. Who is the serpent? The devil. Okay, that's true, but you know what? We don't actually know that until, we don't, the Bible never actually says that until the very last book of the Bible, Revelation. In Revelation, I think it might be chapter 12, talks about the serpent that was in the garden, and that was the devil. It actually explicitly says that. But nowhere in Genesis 3, or in Genesis,

or in the Old Testament, does it explicitly make that connection. Now, again, I think it's true, this is Satan, but it's interesting that the original readers of this wouldn't necessarily have made that connection.

Was it Satan as a snake, or was it just a random snake that was like indwelt by Satan? I mean, we just, there's a lot of unknowns here. We just don't know. It's also interesting that when it says, he said to the woman, did God really say, you can't eat from any tree of the garden, the woman doesn't say, oh my goodness, I got a snake talking

to me. She just responds, well, we may eat from the tree. That's kind of funny. You got a talking snake. And she just starts talking with him. And does this mean, I'm just going to throw out questions. I'm not going to answer them. It might be frustrating, but I don't, I just, there's certain things I don't have the answer.

Does this kind of give the impression that animals talked before the fall? I don't know. It's just kind of odd that you have a snake that's talking, and she just carries on the conversation with this Hebrew-speaking snake. It wasn't Hebrew. Probably, I don't know what they spoke back then. So, did God really say you can't eat from any tree in the garden? The woman said to the serpent, we may eat from the eat from any tree in the garden? The woman said to the serpent, we may eat from the fruit from the trees in the garden,

but about the fruit of the tree in the middle of the garden, God said you must not eat it or touch it or you will die. Did God actually say don't touch it? No. So she's, I don't know. And I don't know what to do. You know, she's, she's adding a little bit here to God's word, maybe making them sound like more of a, you know, mean, you know, God than, than he really is. Like, don't even touch it. She's adding to that original command. No, you will not die. the serpent said to the woman.

In fact, God knows that when you eat it, your eyes will be opened and you will be like God, knowing good and evil. Wouldn't that be a good thing to know good and evil? Well, we'll come back to that phrase, knowing good and evil. Then the woman saw that the tree was good for food and delightful to look at, and that it was desirable for obtaining wisdom.

So she took some of its fruit, ate it, and she also gave some to her husband. Where is her husband, by the way, when this talking snake came slithering in the garden? Who was with her, and he ate it. And the eyes of both of them were opened and they knew they were naked so they sewed fig leaves together and made loincloths for themselves so you have this uh shame that comes over them because in the last verse in genesis 2 it says um both the man and his wife were naked and they felt no shame. But now the second they sin, they feel overwhelming shame. Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the Lord God walking in the garden at the time of the evening breeze.

And they hid themselves from the Lord God among the trees of the garden. So now instead of having this beautiful, shameless relationship with God, now they're scared of God, that they're scared of God. They're hiding from Him. And He called out to the man and said to him, where are you? Did God not know where they were? I mean, of course He did, right? But it's all throughout Scripture you'll see God kind of meeting us where we're at, right? Relating to us almost on our level. Even all the images here of God,

you know, breathing into Adam's face and walking in the garden and wondering, where are they? You know, it almost portrays God in very almost like human-like ways. The technical word for this is anthropomorphism. God or human-like characteristics that are often ascribed to God. Why? Because from my perspective, I think, you know, God is so wholly other, so different than anything we can even imagine that we we can't even conceive of what god's like unless he describes himself in more human-like characteristics yeah if there was a jewish rabbi in here and they were going to interpret you know god walking through the garden like what how did they i mean i've only heard it spoke of as God as this grand, Yeah. walking, like we would reference Jesus' aspect of God.

Yeah. Except for my brain does. What would they? Oh, yeah. I think they would say what I just said, the anthropomorphism. All throughout Scripture, you have human-like descriptions of God that aren't literal.

It's just the only way we could. So I think they would say God wasn't literally walking. It's just... What's that? Like it was a spirit? Yeah. God is spirit, and the Jews would agree with that. So I think they would say, you know,

somehow he was communing with Adam, but the only way we can conceive of that is thinking of it in kind of human-like terms. I mean, does it reference the cool of the evening and all that stuff in the original Jewish Hebrew? Does it go that deep into it? I mean, that's what the Hebrew says originally. Now, some Jews might have extensive commentaries.

It just sounds like a physical. Yeah, yeah. Well, we see that a lot throughout the Old Testament, though. A lot of really physical descriptions of God. Just off the top of my head, like when Moses sees God's glory,

God says, well, you can't see my whole glory, but I'm going to stuff you in the crevice of this rock, and I'm going to have my glory pass by you. it says that adam or sorry moses saw like god's back like he can't see the face the front of god's too much glory so he saw his back what's like what does that even mean it's does he have a back and a front and skin you know um so throughout scripture god's often described that way but i think that the jew would, I think they would say the same thing, that they obviously wouldn't say this could be

like a Jesus. They would just say it's just a metaphor. It's not a real thing happening. Now, and again, I don't want to throw out too many questions, but I mean, is this just like, you know, God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, was he literally walking,

or is it just a metaphor? Or did he actually manifest himself in more human-like forms? As a Christian, we know he kind of is okay with doing that, right? And there's other times in the Old Testament when God manifests himself in human-like forms, obviously, ultimately, in Jesus. So I would be okay with this being not just a metaphor, but God actually did take on a human-like form and literally walk in the garden. Yeah.

I'm not saying that's the only way to read the passage. I'm just saying that it's because of Jesus, we should be okay with that being the garden. Yeah. I'm not saying that's the only way to read the passage. I'm just saying that it's because of Jesus, we should be okay with that being a possibility. Yeah. In Genesis 3.8, it's given in a negative context because they had already sinned by that time. But what I've, I mean, I've always read this verse

and it's always impressed upon me. I don't think this is the first time God appeared to Adam in the garden and in the cool of the day, and I've just got this imagery when I read this verse, that God appeared to them regularly in the Garden of Eden, and they had intimacy with Him on a level that hasn't occurred since, because they were unfollowed creatures at that time. Yeah, yeah. Yeah. of the evening when we typically think of working a long day or being tired or being hot, you know, which they probably weren't, but it just still speaks to me is God

coming at the end of the day says, put your arm around Adam and says, hey, tell me about your day, bud. Yeah, yeah, that's good. You know, and just that he's so intimately involved in every aspect of our life, and wants that in the relationship.

Right, that's good. Yeah, you have like just a naturalness of this, almost like this is what he did every evening. Yeah, yeah. It was a first-time thing. Yeah, no, that's good. That's great, yeah. Yeah, definitely wasn't the first time he's hanging out in Eden,

because, I mean, this is the whole picture in Genesis 2, is God communing with Adam and being intimate with Adam and Eve. That's good. I got a question. Yes. What scriptures are there that reference who Satan is? So, yeah, that's a great question. We don't see a lot about satan in the old testament um there's a reference well let me say this there's a possible reference in job chapter one

um there seems to be a rather clear reference in second chronicles i forget which one i think at the end of 2 Chronicles. There's a reference to, like, later in Job or in the Psalms, to, like, a beast of the sea or a dragon of the sea, which might be referencing Satan. But there's...

So, in the Old Testament, there's not a lot of details about Satan. Ezekiel 28 might reference the fall of Satan. Even that's a little... So is that where we get when it was like a bad angel and he wanted to be just like God? Yeah. Our knowledge of the fall of Satan comes from two passages. Both are not very clear, quite honestly.

Isaiah 14, 12 to 14. And then Ezekiel is a bit clearer, but not still to my mind, not crystal clear. Ezekiel 28. Oh, I think it's like, I think it's actually 12 to, who knows, maybe 14 or 15. It depends on. And I say it's not clear because Isaiah is talking about the king of, I forget. Ezekiel is talking about the king of Tyre. Isaiah is talking about another human king.

But then it's almost like he drifts into a description of these human kings it's like whoa whoa are you talking about the king or are you talking about the thing empowering the king you know um so it is a little ambiguous but yes our i think here's here's my uh little hobby horse but i think yeah think we Christians grew up with a real ironed out story of how Satan fell. It's not that clear in scripture. I think this one, if you read this passage, it's like, yeah, OK, this seems to fit that kind of description of, you know, Satan being a lofty, angelic being,

and he got jealous and fell, but the word Satan never occurs here. This passage uses a phrase, the star of the morning, the morning star. And do you know what their Latin translation of morning star is? You do know it, but you don't know it. Lucifer. So the very term Lucifer that we say is another term for Satan comes from a later Latin translation

of this passage, which people assumed is talking about Satan. Now, many really good, well-established theologians don't think these passages are talking about Satan. John Calvin, famous John Calvin, big theologian from the Reformation, he said this isn't talking about Satan. And then, you know, he wrote commentaries on the whole Bible,

and he was halfway through with Ezekiel, then he died. So he got to chapter 20, so we don't know what he would have said about Ezekiel 28. That's way more than you were asking. It's not really accurate to actually say,

oh, Satan was a colony. I wouldn't say accurate. I wouldn't say it's not accurate. I would say there's more ambiguity on Satan's pre-fall existence than we know. He had to have been created, okay? Because God's the only one that's not created.

He is some kind of angelic spiritual being. At some point, I don't think he was created evil, right? So at some point, he had to have gone from good to evil. So just logically, I think it makes sense. A fallen spiritual being, you know. Was he jealous of God and all that? I think some of the details where it gets a little bit fuzzy. We have to at least

hold those with an open hand. Yeah. So then it's making me think. So, I mean, it starts with the creation. So before creation, there was a lot of things created that was right? I mean, the angels had to be created. Like, there was a lot of things created that was, right? I mean, the angels had to be created.

There probably was the whole angelic stuff with God that we don't even see. But there's no references of it? There's subtle allusions. For instance, in Job, you're really pushing me here. So Job 38, I think it's verse 6. It says, the sons of God, which is another reference to angelic beings. Sometimes angelic beings are called sons of God in the Old Testament. When God laid the foundation of creation, the sons of God sang for joy, meaning

they were already there. They were there when God was creating this, the universe, and they were celebrating and rejoicing when he was creating it, which says, oh, so maybe sometime before Genesis 1, you know, is when God did all that. We just don't know. Maybe it was in Genesis 1.1, in the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. Maybe that's when he made the spiritual beings. Because then he doesn't really get into the details of creation until verse 3.

We just don't know. There's just not a lot of details on it. Yeah. John. Yeah. So, part of the Old Testament, Zachariah. Oh, yeah. Who Satan stated against. Yes, Zachariah is another passage. Yeah, yeah. Yes, Zechariah is another passage, yeah.

And then what's interesting in the New Testament is there's like this obscure verse about Michael the archangel disputing with Satan over the body of Moses. You can see that he's somehow hearing that in the New Testament. We have a lot more details somehow appearing in that Old Testament. We have a lot more details on Satan in the New Testament. Lots of talk about Satan, the devil, and there's just a few. But I mean, there's a lot more details. The New Testament's way more descriptive of the spiritual realm than the Old Testament. The Old Testament typically doesn't really go there too often. The book of

Daniel does. It starts to really go into details, and you have references like the one you referenced in Zechariah about Satan accusing Joshua, the high priest. I can keep going on questions if you want. This is opening up more and more. Usually this

conversation doesn't come up until I get to Ezekiel, but that might not happen until 2022 or something. All right, let me just finish up a few things here. What does Satan attack? I mean, he attacks the Word of God. He attacks the Word of God, what God has said, God's promise, God's command, God's declaration of who he is.

And I just point that out because you do see kind of fundamental things about sin and rebellion and shame and our disconnect with God now. connect with God now. And oftentimes it comes down to our not believing God's Word, not trusting God's Word, adding to God's Word, you know, don't eat from the tree or don't even touch it. Questioning God's Word. I mean, you got to think like, what's wrong with eating a piece of fruit? And you got to think like, what's wrong with eating a piece of fruit? Why? We start to justify it, right? Like, well, I don't know.

Like, that can't be that bad. Looks good. It's a great piece of fruit. It's going to bring me pleasure when I eat it. Doesn't God want me to be happy? So instead of just believe, when God says, don't eat from this tree, period, we start to kind of rationalize our decisions away. And I just see that pattern, just be real with yourself and your own sinful moments. You know, oftentimes it's us kind of rationalizing things away. And even, you know, thinking if this brings me pleasure, if this

looks good and it's probably going to make me happy. It probably looks like a healthy piece of fruit. And yet Satan gets in and causes us to question God's Word. We don't know. Oftentimes the fruit is portrayed as an apple. It never says what kind of fruit it is. What's interesting is in the Middle Ages, the Latin... Oh, shoot, I'm going to, I think the Latin word for evil sounds like apple. I think, don't quote me on that. But there was a kind of a joke in the Middle Ages where people would say, you know, oh, they ate the evil or whatever.

And it kind of sounded like apples. So they kind of formed in the Middle Ages that they ate from the evil or whatever, and it kind of sounded like apples, so it kind of formed in the Middle Ages that they ate from the apple, whatever. But there's no reference to an apple in the actual text. One more thing, and I'll let you go, because I kind of raised this question earlier. What's wrong with knowing good and evil? The Hebrew word know can be used in many different ways in the

Old Testament, or even in the New Testament. I mean, in Genesis 4 verse 1, the literal translation was, Adam knew his wife and she became pregnant. So he didn't just, you know, interview her, right? I mean, there's, there's the word no is, is can, can be used of even something like sexual intimacy or other things. The word no can also be used in the sense of almost like knowing better than, or I mean, I say, you know, determining.

And I think that's the sense here is that just knowing right from wrong, knowing good from evil, that's not, there's nothing wrong with that. That's what we want. But we want to trust God to determine what is good and what is evil. And if God says, do this and don't do that and stay away from this. And we're like, well, why not? He's like, you know what? Just trust me on this one. from this and we're like well why not he's like you know what just trust me on this one we need to follow his his word we need to not go against what he says is good and evil so this is what um seems to be going on here is by going against god's command and knowing good and evil they are becoming um their own authorities moral autonomy um the word autonomy literally means self-law, from autos and namas. Namas, law. Autos, self. Self, law. You're a law unto yourself. You determine right and wrong. You are your own authority, which is incredibly relevant for 2020, for just our modern Western world

where this is the default. We determine who we are. We determine what is right and wrong. If something looks good, it brings us pleasure. It's not hurting anybody. Like we have this natural bent to form our own kind of ethical system of right and wrong.

And this goes all the way back to our wonderful ancestors in the garden who kind of established that pattern in the garden. Yes? I don't know if I'm even going to ask this the right way or if it's going to make sense. But the whole determining, how do we

reconcile or I guess divorce in the Old Testament where it seems like that wasn't part of God's plan, but he let them do it. So it's almost like it was real-time determining.

Does that make sense? With the divorce command or allowance? So Moses allowed it. God comes back and says, no, that's not what I meant. I gave that to you because of twice the argument. That might be, I don't know if that would be related to what's going on here. Or even plurality.

Yeah. I mean, there were certain things that were written in Scripture, but it didn't mean... Does that make sense? I'm a little fuzzy on it. To respond to that, I mean, by the time God meets Israel in Egypt and gives them the law in the book of Exodus, He's kind of meeting them where they're at,

but not revealing to them a perfect kind of ultimate ethical system there. So maybe to connect to your point they were kind of absorbing their own view of right and wrong when God... That their system of right and wrong when God... Yeah.

That their system of right and wrong was kind of evolving through time, kind of evolving this way, and then God meets them where they're at. And yeah. We'll get into that more when we get to Exodus and the law, because that can get really complicated and complex.

A couple more questions? One more question? Clarification? Oh, before I forget. Oh, hold that thought, just because it just came to my mind. I'm not going to be here for the next two weeks, right? Two weeks.

Oh, I thought it was going to be one week. I was trying to get on a later flight, and I just couldn't get there in time because I wanted to be here for the next two weeks, right? Two weeks. Oh, I thought it was going to be one week. I was trying to get on a later flight. I just couldn't get there in time because I wanted to be here next week. So I'm gone next week and the following week. So pass the word to anybody else who wasn't here. Yes, your question. No, it's more kind of a comment. But when children don't know evil because they're just innocent, it's nice. So if they're walking in the garden and there's been no fall, Yeah.

Yeah. That kind of age of innocence where they, yeah, that's, you know, the Catholic Church has this age of innocence that, you know, was it seven years old? Prior to seven, you're kind of totally that, you know, was it seven years old? Prior to seven, you're kind of totally innocent. You know, it's like you don't, you're not old enough to know when you're rebelling or not.

So you're, but once you turn seven, then now you're responsible, which I think is a little arbitrary. But there is that idea that I think, well, even the Bible talks about intentional and unintentional sins. Sometimes we can sin, and we're almost not even realizing it. And that, we're still sinning, but it's the gravity of that, I think, is different.

And we see that in the Old Testament because there's degrees of punishment, even. Or, you know, there's this phrase throughout the Old Testament of so-and-so sinned with a high hand. It's kind of high-handed rebellion. Like, they know right and wrong and they say, I'm going to do what I'm

going to do and deal with it, Yahweh, kind of posture. And that's about where we ended. It kind of trailed off there at the end. Sorry about that, but we pretty much closed in prayer about 60 seconds after that final statement that we're wrestling with. So, yeah, I'm going to be out of town for the next two Sundays.

So if you are a part of this class, then please don't come to class this Sunday or the following Sunday, whatever this Sunday is. So this is today's Thursday, if you're listening to this when it was released. So this coming Sunday, I don't know what that is. It's going to be the second Sunday. I think it's, what is it? It's the ninth, right? February 9th. I'm not going to be doing Old Testament in the raw. And then also the 16th of February. See, all it took was a little math on my part. So yeah, for the next two Sundays, I'm not going to be here. So if you are listening from afar, which is probably 99.5% of you, it's going to be a couple of weeks before I release another Old Testament in the raw, but I hope you've enjoyed

these Sunday school conversations. I know Sunday school for many churches is a thing of the past, but I'm trying to bring it back. I'm trying to go old school and just say, why not just spend an hour and 15 minutes every Sunday digging into the text of scripture? Why not? It's not going to hurt you. It's not going to hurt. I think a lot of people might actually enjoy it. So let's, let's do this thing. Let's, let's get it back. Let's, let's, let's get back to studying the Bible in in-depth ways and asking really thoughtful questions about the text of Scripture so that we can have a more informed and comprehensive and biblically based understanding of our Creator whom we worship. So if you want to support the show, you can go to theology.

Sorry, theology. You can go to patreon.com forward slash theology in the raw. That's patreon.com forward slash theology in the raw. Support the show for as little as five bucks a month. And if you can't support the show, that's totally cool too. I'll keep cranking these out and making this class available for free. So until next time, I hope you keep studying the Bible, keep reading the Old Testament, and keep engaging God in intimate and profound ways. He is our transcendent creator, and He is our intimate friend. Let's hold those both in a healthy tension this week. We'll see you next time on Theology in a Row.

Take care.