or Matthew’s Literary Artistry 2.

Sabbath (Genesis) – Light
After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week,

…..Passover (Exodus) – Firmament
…..Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb.

…..…..Firstfruits (Leviticus) – Land (Altar)
…..…..There was a violent earthquake,

…..…..…..Pentecost (Numbers) – Lights
…..…..…..for an angel of the Lord came down from heaven

…..…..Trumpets (Deuteronomy) – Hosts
…..…..and, going to the tomb, rolled back the stone and sat on it.

…..Atonement (Joshua) – Mediators
…..His appearance was like lightning, and his clothes were white as snow.

Booths (Judges) – Rest
The guards were so afraid of him that they shook and became like dead men.

Notes:

Day 1 is obvious. Day 2 has women in veils (Ezekiel 13:17-21 aligns women’s veils with the veil of the Temple as well).

An earthquake is literally a land-quake. The Altar-mountain is split in two as the old worship dies to bring life to the new. Olivet was symbolically split in two as Ebal and Gerizim, or Zion and Gerizim, the blessed and the cursed. Jesus’ resurrection body was new grain and fruit sprouting up out of the Land on Day 3, the Firstfruits.

The angel came down, just as the Spirit would come down at Pentecost. The new Lampstand Law was being tipped out, and the old stars were beginning to fall.

My Lord, what a morning!
My Lord, what a morning!
Oh, my Lord, what a morning
when the stars begin to fall.

Oh, you will hear the trumpet sound
to wake the nations underground,
Looking to my Lord’s right hand
when the stars begin to fall.

Peter Leithart mentioned recently that Gilgal means “wheel.” [1] Just as Jacob rolled back the stone from the well to bring new life, and God “rolled back” the flesh through circumcision, rolled back sin through the wilderness wandering, and rolled back time for Hezekiah [2], so now the stone was rolled back. He was restoring the years eaten by the locust. Smooth, round stones, angelic hosts and resurrection are always at step 5. [3]

What is even more interesting is that the angel sits on the stone at the same point in the structure as Moses sat on the stone between priest and king when Joshua fought against Amalek.

The angel is robed as a priest, a mediator. The tomb was “whitewashed” in an integrated way: it was clean on the inside and the out. And the stone was a “white stone” from the ephod, which signified that the atonement by the High Priest had been accepted. Also, we have the appearance of the head (lightning) and the covering of his body (snow), the singular and the plural (collective) Mediator.

At ingathering, the armies sent by the Jews are scattered, as all Babels are. The Ark was now in the field, but now the field was the world. The Jewish “succession,” their Covenant continuity (Land), was coming to an end, eclipsed by a greater commission.

In the greater structure, these dead men match chiastically the “falling down dead” of the soldiers who came to arrest Jesus in the Garden. Then, He was “passed over” with the sword. But now, now, He was passing through their midst unmolested as a blazing torch. [4]

_________________________________
[1] See Peter J. Leithart, (I’ll add this link when I can find it. The search mech on his blog isn’t the best.)
[2] See If I Could Turn Back Time.
[3] At Step 3, we have unhewn, rough altar stones. At Step 4 they are hurled at the Bride caught in adultery and she dies under the Law. At Step 5, she is resurrected, picks up hewn, smooth Temple stones from the brook and hurls them back at her accuser, Goliath, the serpent. Time is rolled back as a smooth tombstone. He is exiled at Step 6.
[4] See Pass-over and Pass-through.

A Christmas sequel to Joseph Gets Passed Over.

The subject matter of this article was corrected, revised, and expanded in December 2018 and published here: Matthew 2: Jerusalem as Egypt.

“Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken from you
and given to a nation bearing the fruits of it.” Matthew 21:43

We unpacked the “face of the deep” of Day 1 and the “flat universe” created on Day 2. Time to analyse Day 3!

Land of Promise

The third day has two parts, Land and raw food. The raw food has two parts: grain and fruit, the foundation for the Two Trees at the centre of the Garden, nourishment and taste, life and wisdom, priest and king, bread and wine.

Then God said,
…..“Let the waters under the heavens be
…..gathered together into one place,
……….and let the dry [land] appear”;
……………and it was so.
……….And God called the dry land Earth,
…..and the gathering together of the waters He called Seas.
And God saw that it was good.

Notice:

1. the first half of the structure is “Word” (Covenant Head) and the second is “Flesh,” a physical Covenant body for the Word. God speaks to the void and it becomes full. The “and it was so” is the Covenant obedience of the natural order to God’s Law. God speaks, and only then does nature have Laws;
2. the Land is called at Ascension (the Bronze Altar) and named at Maturity (the Incense Altar). Being called lifts the Land into existence; but being names lifts it higher again, to a Covenant significance written in heaven. The most obvious application would be Israel’s bloody Land before the exile and the “resurrected” Israel of elder-priests after the Law-curses were applied.
3. The waters at Division are a firmament hiding the Land. The dry ground is commanded, literally, to “be seen.” But when the reader “sees” it, it is still naked. It is formed, but not filled. It is an Adam waiting for a glorious bride, a Land awaiting Covenant “generations” that, despite gaining further glory through variation, will remain faithful to the original kind.

Kingdom Fruits

Man has a budget; but God has abundance. For obedience, He promises fruitfulness in every area of life. Again, Adam is ordinary. “…as a root out of dry ground. He has no form or comeliness; And when we see Him, There is no beauty that we should desire Him.” But the plunder of His faithfulness unto death is everlasting life, an entire people, a New Jerusalem founded on His obedience. These crops come out of the Land as fruitful Eve would come out of dusty Adam.

Then God said,
…..“Let the Land bring forth grass,
…..the herb that yields seed,
…..and the fruit tree that yields fruit according to its kind,
…..whose seed is in itself, on the Land”;
……………and it was so.
…..And the Land brought forth grass,
…..the herb that yields seed according to its kind,
…..and the tree that yields fruit,
…..whose seed is in itself according to its kind.
And God saw that it was good.

Notice:

1. this only seems to divide into the 5 point Covenant pattern. This means it is a “Word,” a dark saying, yet to be opened. The commandment to grass, grain and fruit is the delegation (Hierarchy) and the fulfilment of that Word is the Deuteronomic response of the Land (Sanctions).
   …..God says
   ……….Delegation
   ……………Obedience
   ……….Results
   …..God judges results
2. Notice that “on the Land” ends the commandment. The grain and fruit are a promise of bread and wine on the Table (of Showbread). They are the Firstfruits of the Land offered to God on the Land-Altar. Yet the fulfilment doesn’t mention the Land, but only God’s assessment. I can only guess that this means the fruits are the harvest God expected, trees instead of thorns, etc. He desires godly offspring (seed) and godly-ness (fruits). Obviously, in this first case there were no thorns. The Land was obedient to the gospel.
   “You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles?” Matthew 7:16
3. Grass, Grain and Fruit seem to be World/Land/Garden, listed in order of height from the bottom up – an ascending order, and also an order of delight. Day 3 corresponds to Ascension and Leviticus. It is the building of God’s microcosmic 3-level house within His macrocosmic 3-level world. It is the founding of an Israelite “world,” a centralised priesthood as Covenant Head, mediating above, and for, the lower Gentile Sea of nations (that grow as quickly as grass and wither even more quickly) with a ministry of innocent blood.
4. In the Tabernacle, the Land is the Bronze, and the crops are the Table. Yet, as one reader pointed out, the Table is not outside the tent with the Altar, but inside the Holy Place. This is because the crop is the bread-and-wine Man Who ascends to stand before God as Mediator for His brothers. Yet the Hebrew Word for Land is feminine. This grain and fruit Man bows to the Father – in submission – as a Holy Warrior, a “virgin.” This table is only a betrothal, a promise of a better one to come on Day 7, a true feast, if Adam is faithful to enter into God’s rest.

So the evening and the morning were the third day.

Then, perhaps we can see that Day 3 as a whole follows the matrix:

Waters gathered [Creation]
…..Land and Sea separated [Division]
……….Land and Sea named (Covenant) [Ascension]
……………Fruit commanded [Testing]
……….Fruit delivered [Maturity]
…..Evening and morning (Sanctions) [Conquest]
Day 3 [Glorification]

From James Jordan, The Framework Hypothesis: A Gnostic Heresy, Biblical Horizons No. 107

…I submit that the entire Christian faith stands or falls on how Genesis 1 is interpreted, and that the guardians of the Church must take an unequivocal stance on this matter.

The issue is hermeneutics and religion. Since these “contradictions” in Genesis 1 serve to indicate that this passage is not to be taken historically, the only alternative is to take the passage as giving some kind of archetype for creation by God. It is a foundational “myth,” expressing in “human language” matters that cannot be expressed any other way. It is a true myth in that the ideas taught in Genesis 1 are true.

And this is where the shift from true religion to gnosticism comes in. History has been replaced by ideas.Now, with the arbitrariness of a man selecting a meal from a smorgasbord, evangelicals who reject the historicity of Genesis 1 insist on the historicity of later passages in the Bible. In this happy inconsistency they rest, never inspecting their intellectual sloppiness.

But let us turn to two other seemingly historical events in the Bible and apply the hermeneutical principles of these gnosticizing brethren. The first to which we turn is the ten plagues visited on Egypt.

First of all, we note that 20th century historians of the ancient world cannot find any evidence of a vast host of people leaving Egypt at the time the Bible says it happened. Moreover, according to the text of Exodus, all the Egyptian crops and cattle were destroyed, along with the Egyptian army and a large number of Egypt’s sons. Modern “scientific” archaeology and history finds no such event. Therefore, we have to look at the text of Exodus anew. Maybe these events never really happened. Maybe they are just a “true myth,” providing archetypical “ideas” that undergirded God’s relationship with Israel.

Well, do we find any indications in the text that the ten plagues are only a story, that they never really happened? Yes, we do, it seems. According to Exodus 9:6, all the livestock of Egypt died in the fifth plague, but according to 9:19, there were still more livestock to be killed in the seventh plague. Also, according to Exodus 8:22, the insects destroyed all of Egypt, clearly including the plants, while in 9:31, the flax and barley were destroyed later on in the seventh plague, and then in 10:15, the locusts ate all the remaining plants. These are much clearer “contradictions” than anything found in Genesis 1. And to these we may add that repeatedly Pharaoh says he will let the people go, and then changes his mind. How likely is this?

Well, since we have found such clear indications that these plagues are not to be taken as real history, do we find a literary framework to posit as some kind of alternative? Certainly. There are three groups of three plagues, and then a tenth. The first plague in each cycle begins with a command to go to Pharaoh in the morning. The second in each cycle begins with a command simply to go to Pharaoh. The third in each cycle is not announced to Pharaoh at all. The first three plagues are brought by Aaron’s staff, while the last three are brought by Moses’ hand. And so forth. So, we have a clear literary structure.

Of course, traditional expositors have suggested ways around the “contradictions” in the historical narrative of the ten plagues, but if we are going to let the interpretation of Genesis 1 be our guide, we may not try to get around these “contradictions.” Rather, we must let them be indicators that these events never really happened. The plagues on Egypt were not historical events, but are a foundational and archetypal myth for the nation of Israel, just as the six days of Genesis are a foundational and archetypal myth for the whole universe.

Now let us turn to the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Repeating our Genesis 1 procedure, we note first of all that “scientific” historians can find no evidence that Jesus rose from the dead. Josephus says nothing about it, and neither does any other “unbiased” source. So, maybe it never happened. We must inspect the text anew.

Do we find contradictions that indicate that the resurrection never happened? Of course we do! The four gospels are in obvious conflict with one other regarding the events of Easter morning. Of course, traditional expositors try to harmonize these four accounts, as John Wenham does in his book Easter Enigma: Are the Resurrection Accounts in Conflict? (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984; highly recommended). But no, we should let the contradictions stand as they are, for they indicate to us that we are not dealing with what we think of as history at all.

So, seeing that there are contradictions in the text, do we find literary structures that indicate the real meaning of the text? Certainly. In John, for instance, Jesus’ tomb is presented as a holy of holies with the slab on which He lay as an Ark-cover ith two angels at either end. Moreover, Jesus appears as Gardener in a new Edenic garden in John. Thus, John is giving us theology, ideas, not history.

…If we approach the Bible the way the ahistorical interpreters of Genesis 1 want us to, the Christian religion disappears into gnosticism. By the same token, if we take other passages of the Bible in their obvious historical sense, and resolve seeming contradictions in the way the Church has always done, then we must do the same with Genesis 1.

Tabernacles was the final annual feast, a Godfest to be thrown by Jews as a ministry to Gentiles. At the Feast of Clouds [1], every household temporarily became a new house of God, a “local branch” of the Tabernacle, a “priesthood of all believers.” Of course, we see this fulfilled in the book of Acts. Just as we see Paul exhort the Ephesians (Gentiles!) to put on the mediatorial body-armour of the High Priest, [2] his final exhortation to the Roman Christians alludes to not only Israel’s feasts but Israel’s priesthood. Pretty much every church he established was a “booth” made of natural Jewish branches and ingrafted Gentile branches. [3] At Pentecost, the same cloud that received Jesus filled the house. [4] Now every household of faith was a Tabernacle, a glorious cloud with a government of human angel-elders. [5] In the Bible’s literary structure, a recurring motif at Tabernacles is good fruit, godly offspring. God wants more than just a covering of leaves. As in Eden, future generations hang upon wise government.

Creation/Ark… “Now I beseech you, brethren,

[The initiating word]

Division/Veil… mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.

Church discipline is a ‘Passover’ darkness dividing true and false households. Note that Paul is exhorting them to divide from those who cause division! Discerning godly division from ungodly division takes wisdom and love. Splitting a church over eschatological details, or over whether women should wear open-toed shoes, is faithless sin.

Ascension/Altar & Table; Covenant… For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly

ie. they eat the sacrifice instead of being the sacrifice.

Testing/Lampstand-Law… For your obedience is come abroad unto all men.

Maturity/Incense Altar… I am glad therefore on your behalf: but yet I would have you wise unto that which is good, and simple concerning evil.

Obedience brings wisdom, no matter how crazy the command of God seems at the time. The Tabernacle of David is always at Maturity. It is a resurrected “bridal” tent with music, singing and Gentile worshippers—a new body. It is the fruitfulness of an Eve led by a faithful Adam, hence the barrenness of Saul’s daughter Michal. This is the step at which Adam failed. He became wise concerning evil, and his disobedience came “abroad” to all men, a kind of reverse-Pentecost, estrangement instead of military unity. The ground and the womb became barren.

Conquest/Laver; Open Veil… And the God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly.

Reference to both Genesis 3 and Joshua’s men standing on the necks of the kings from the cave. Again, this is how the Lord should have found Adam, not hiding in the leaves like a creeping thing but standing, with his foot on the royal creep’s conspiratorial neck. Possibly also a reference to Solomon’s execution of David’s enemies, the old leaven, to usher in his kingdom of Shalom. The Conquering Mediator is a human Laver. He has clean feet and can stand on the crystal sea as God’s governor. [6]

Glorification/Shekinah… The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Amen” (Rom. 16:17-20).

Doug Wilson has some great thoughts on this exhortation here. I have some thoughts on the crushing of Satan here.

This also means that Rome’s later claim to being “the” Tabernacle on earth is false. One major reason for AD70′s end of Temple worship was the decentralisation of worship on earth so it was no longer corruptible at its heart, as the deluded Roman church later demonstrated. She forgot she wasn’t the tree but just the local branch. [7]

It also appears that this complete structure, as the second last cycle, concerns Conquest/Atonement. The overall subject is a godly, governmental division between the two “identical” goats. The difference between the altar of Baal and the Altar of God is not subtle. Both have a bloody division, but only one has the Pentecostal fire.

___________________________________________________
[1] See A Place Called Clouds.
[2] See Armour of God.
[3] See Seven Thousand Who Have Not Bowed to Baal – 2.
[4] See Not Just Any Old Cloud.
[5] See Big Government.
[6] See Walking on Water.
[7] See Revived, Not Arrived.

Full preterist Samuel Frost has kindly reviewed the book:

Mike Bull recently sent me a copy of his book, Bible Matrix: An Introduction to the DNA of Scriptures, 2010, Westbow Press. Peter Leithart, who I began reading when studying the book of Samuel, writes the introduction. Leithart, as many of you may know, is a close student of the works of James B. Jordan, who is perhaps closer to our view than most, but nonetheless stays within the “orthodox” limits.

I like patterns. I believe the Bible is built on patterns (tupos, or “types”), and that’s exactly what this book is about. “Genesis 1 is the Bible Matrix. As it matures throughout the Scriptures, the identification of this pattern unlocks the book of Moses, Israel’s history, the structure of Jesus’ ministry and the book of Revelation… It also has staggering implications concerning the identity, purpose and future of Christianity…” (15). Amen. God has taught us in the historical unfolding of the Bible (its stories) how He acts, why He acts, when He acts and how we are supposed to act as a result. For me, as a preterist, God doesn’t “cease” acting this way in A.D. 70.

Now, of course, Bull is an “orthodox preterist”. But, this should not deter one from buying the book. It has much to offer in the way it is laid out, and the structuring of the biblical feasts, types, patterns consistently run throughout the book. The contents takes their cue from Bible history, climaxing in the Church. The feasts, furniture of the temple, and many other “patterns” are applied throughout to the people of God. Bull is very much “dominion” oriented (read, postmillennial), and I think does a good job at showing that it is the purpose of His people to take dominion over creation. Through the continual appeals to the patterns, by the time one gets to the end of the book, it becomes clear what this purpose is, unless, of course, God changed everything in A.D. 70 and no longer acts in the way that he has repeatedly revealed; that is, according to His nature. Of what benefit would it be for God to reveal himself over thousands of years in the Bible, only to say, “okay, now I am going to change, but for the next several thousand years, I am not going to reveal anything else.” The point of having revelation “cease” is precisely because he has already revealed all that we need to know! And, as Bull has shown, all that we need to know (the Bible) is framed in terms of patterns (typology).

There are, according to Bull, three, seven-step patterns: creation, dominion and festivals. These three are divided into seven steps which are all formed in a chiastic structure. The organization of the material helps one to “see” the patterns in the Bible and to begin to read the Bible accordingly. I recommend, then, this book. Of course, in the bibliography, Bull cites Jordan’s Through New Eyes, which, when I first read it (when it originally came out), it changed everything for me. Theology was not something only intellectual, but also intellectually visual – a seeing in the mind’s eye. This allowed for the conceptualizing of a “covenantal world” within “the world”. The covenantal world (“the world above”) must be understood not so that we can escape the world below (creation), but so that we can have dominion over creation through the proper understanding of the purpose of creation (Gn 1). If these concepts are ever split apart so as to have no relationship together in the Redemption, then some form of Gnosticism or Escapism will result. Bull ever keeps our feet grounded while he soars the clouds of the spiritual. You will do well to get this book and read it. Cultivate its fruits in your own studies. There is much to glean from it.

bmxreview

Building the Iron Saint

Every plunge brings a tougher skin and a softer heart.

Jesus calls us deeper, so Satan manufactures false depths. There are the deep things of God and the deep things of Satan (Revelation 2:24). Doug Wilson points out that the deep things of God are depths of holiness, not depths of mystical knowledge:

“…the Holy Spirit does indeed search the deep things of God, but He does not do it the way carnal minds think it should be done. The deep things of God are depths of holiness. In the submarine service, we used to have a term for the limit past which a submarine cannot go—that depth was called “crush depth.” And when it comes to God’s holiness, since there is no surface, no empty place above that holiness, every depth is crush depth. And the only way to avoid destruction is to be found in Jesus Christ.

Only the Spirit can sound the depths of Christ, and only Christ can protect us in the Spirit. One of the things He protects us from is the sin of being too clever for our own good, being too clever by half. The Spirit works in us as He did the early Christians, creating in them gladness and simplicity of heart.”

I want to put a different spin on this, the biblical concept of Testing and Maturity, or death and resurrection. The Bible is full of those willing to be refined and those who think they have no need for it; those who willingly put their heads on the stone altar (like Jacob) and those who are willing to slaughter 70 brothers to avoid their own submission (like Abimelech).

“Eye has not seen, nor ear heard, Nor have entered into the heart of man the things which God has prepared for those who love Him. But God has revealed them to us through His Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, yes, the deep things of God…”

How does God give us depth? He plunges us into the depths. Joseph was betrayed by his brothers, by his slavemaster’s wife, and by a fellow prisoner. At every step he was plunged deeper into the abyss. Yet, at every step, he obeyed at a deeper level, with a deeper trust in God and a deeper level of holiness. Every plunge increased his crush depth. Finally, deep called unto deep. He was God’s perfected vassal, a metal man, a Tabernacle, like Jesus.

“But he who is spiritual judges all things, yet he himself is judged by no one.”

God’s discipline does bring gladness and simplicity of heart. These are deep things of which we are not naturally capable. It also brings greater glory, the glory of an Adam of dust transfigured into non-corroding precious metals. Every plunge brings plunder for God. Every plunge brings a tougher skin and a softer heart.

From Oswald Chambers:

I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me.

These words mean the breaking of my independence with my own hand and surrendering to the supremacy of the Lord Jesus. No one can do this for me. I must do it myself. God may bring me to the point three hundred and sixty-five times a year, but He cannot put me through it. It means breaking the husk of my individual independence of God, and the emancipation of my personality into oneness with Himself, not for my own ideas, but for absolute loyalty to Jesus. There is no possibility of dispute when once I am there. Very few of us know anything about loyalty to Christ—“For my sake.” It is that which makes the iron saint.

Has that break come? All the rest is pious fraud. The one point to decide is—Will I give up, will I surrender to Jesus Christ, and make no conditions whatever as to how the break comes? I must be broken from my self-realisation, and immediately that point is reached, the reality of the supernatural identification takes place at once, and the witness of the Spirit of God is unmistakable—“I have been crucified with Christ” (RV).

The passion of Christianity is that I deliberately sign away my own rights and become a bond-slave of Jesus Christ. Until I do that, I do not begin to be a saint.

or Playing Poison with Genesis 1

You know how it is when you read one of your favourite theologians and they come up with a real clanger? It’s yes, wow, yes, I’m with you, and then the train of thought jumps the tracks—at least as far as you, the reader, are concerned. It’s like me reading a good Presbyterian who without any warning flies off the wall and marries chalk and cheese to prove the Bible teaches infant baptism. Or it’s you reading this blog watching me fly off the wall every now and then (but it’s all completely logical in my mind—believe me! Bully is never wrong!)

Anyhow, J. L. Vaughan, a “Covenant Creationist” on the AV forum pointed out this article by Brian Godawa, who is both a theologian and a screenwriter. I have featured Brian’s articles on the Abrahamic Covenant, Matthew 24 and Daniel 9 on my old The Last Days page. He is logical and easy to understand. And he’s a preterist. But then he jumps the tracks (as far as I’m concerned) and goes and parrots this drivel:

The literary conventions employed in Genesis chapter 1 mark it out, not as a scientific document describing material origins, but as a literary polemic against surrounding ancient Near Eastern pagan religions. This interpretation divests the text from any obligation to communicate “accurate science” to the modern reader. Genesis 1 is a theological-political document that has nothing to do with science as the modern reader understands it. Creation language here and elsewhere in Scripture is not about establishing scientific origins of material substance and structure but about covenantal establishment and worldview. [1]

Where is the textual or historical evidence for Genesis being a polemic against anything? Is it addressed to the Hebrews in the wilderness? Or does it instead show signs that it was recorded generation by generation from the beginning?

I am not a scientist. I am a professional storyteller. My interests lie in understanding the literary genres and cultural contexts of the Bible as it existed within an ancient Near Eastern worldview that included common metaphors, images and concepts. As readers displaced from such an ancient world by time, space, and culture, we will misread the text through our own cultural prejudice if we do not seek to understand it through the eyes of its original writers and readers. Creation stories (cosmogonies) are particularly vulnerable to this kind of interpretive violence.

The literary conventions, the chiastic structures and the Covenant pattern, do not support this false dichotomy whatsoever. The Bible does not separate symbol and history. These factors actually demonstrate that the physical Creation itself is both Word and Covenant.

A literal reading is cultural prejudice? Basically, the readers of Genesis, until modern evolutionary fantasies, believed it recorded the Creation of the universe out of nothing. It’s the moderns who are guilty of the interpretive GBH. Their theories concerning the text’s origin and purpose have no support, either internal or external. Not a shred. They are just a convenient construction.

On the same site, Peter Enns shows where his faith lies when he lists reasons why Genesis can’t be taken literally, ie. he bows obediently to pop-science and pop-history, which are constantly in flux and based on a faulty paradigm manufactured to free science from Moses. [2]

The biblical depiction of human origins, if taken literally, presents Adam as the very first human being ever created. He was not the product of an evolutionary process, but a special creation of God a few thousand years before Jesus—roughly speaking, about 6000 years ago. Every single human being that has ever lived can trace his/her genetic history to that one person. This is a problem because it is at odds with everything else we know about the past from the natural sciences and cultural remains.

A strictly literal reading of the Adam story does not fit with what we know of the past. Some choose to ignore the data altogether. Others marginalize or interpret the data idiosyncratically to salvage some type of literal/historical reading. But, by and large, everyone—even including this latter group—has to do some creative thinking about how to handle the Adam story. A “just read it literally” mentality is not an available option. “What do I do with the Adam story?” is a real and pressing question for most people of faith. [3]

Perhaps these people should be taking a closer look at their faith? At least he’s honest about the text, and his reasons for misreading it. Enns goes on to discuss the problem of Paul’s extremely inconvenient belief in a literal Adam, and concludes, logically, that

The tensions between science and faith, specifically evolution and Christianity, center on the issue of Paul’s Adam. As such, I think this is where our theological energies need to be invested.

Yes, we must find a way to mix chalk and cheese. What he really means is that Paul disagrees with Peter Enns’ pitiable compromise on Genesis, and so we must now employ our capricious and schizophrenic hermeneutic to deconstruct Paul in the same manner. But then, according to Brian, God was just speaking through a man who was thoroughly “enculturated,” surely? Oh, sorry. We can’t apply the same criteria to the New Testament writers, can we.

James Jordan gets it right. He believes these gents have a twofold process to get to what they think Genesis is really about, since they refuse to acknowledge its actual clarity:

1. Filter the Bible through the baalism of modern science, which, very agreeably, dislodges it from history.
2. Filter it again through the “conflict with chaos” baalism of the ancients.

He concludes that this is just the same as 19th century liberalism. Not that we would want to call anyone names.

Godawa summarises his paper with a paragraph that can be boiled down thusly:

1. Genesis 1 follows a pattern that occurs later in Scripture.
2. The later patterns are not ex nihilo Creation, so neither is Genesis 1, ie. God is just moving stuff around that was already old, and giving it new Covenantal meaning by naming it.

This is the same logic one would use to prove that the real Mona Lisa is a forgery because it looks like the paintings in a room full of confiscated fake Mona Lisas. Mind-numbingly brilliant logic, I must say.

There’s also a video of N. T. Wright on the BioLogos website in which he states that Americans are wrong to link the fight over Creationism with social issues. [4] Now that is a real hall-of-fame, win-the-teddy clanger. It’s amazing how very bright people often overlook the obvious. I bet he baptizes babies, too.

____________________________________________________________
[1] Brian Godawa, Biblical Creation and Storytelling: Cosmogony, Combat and Covenant [PDF]  Brian quotes John Sailhamer a lot. See Jordan on Sailhamer beginning here.
[2] See Tas Walker’s review of The Dating Game for how the establishment of the earth’s age really was a game. Spin the wheel.
[3] Peter Enns, Paul’s Adam Part I
[4] See Tas Walker’s Peace with Evolution for some clear thinking on this.

or Being a Truly Impure Thinker

“If you love me, you will keep my commandments.” John 14:15

NOTE: THIS POST HAS BEEN REMIXED AND INCLUDED IN GOD’S KITCHEN.

You must be logged in to see the rest of this post.

Join now for a year for $15!

_____________________________________
[1] Available from www.wordmp3.com
[2] Eugene Rosenstock-Huessy, “Farewell to Descartes” in I Am an Impure Thinker [PDF]
[3] See Marriage as a Promise of Wine.
[4] See Eat Local and Die.
[5]  See Touch Not, Taste Not, Handle Not.
[6] See Knowledge and Wisdom.

The movie Superman Returns ends with some powerful iconography. Lex Luther has used a crystal stolen from Superman to create his own ‘new earth.’ Unlike Superman’s white-as-snow fortress of solitude, this is made of dark stone, Adamic earth. It rises up out of the sea and its growth threatens mankind.

Superman carries the weight of the entire sinful rock, and its growing kryptonite ‘spears’ pierce him. He ‘dies’ in the air and his fall to earth creates a ‘tomb.’ It’s worth a watch.

My point is, the idea of Christ being ‘lifted up’ is more than the bronze serpent, more than us ‘lifting Him up’ in our witness. [1]

Lifted up between heaven and earth, He was an open scroll. The bloodied lid of the Ark, the Word engraved (opened) on tablets of flesh. [2] In the sky, He was a new kapporet [3], a firmament covering to replace the old one that was ready to vanish away. He was a veil that was open, still protecting yet providing full access.

The Old Testament is full of mediators who are ‘lifted up.’ Revelation shows the Satanic new earth (Herod and Rome) thrown down from her mediatory position ‘in the air’, and the saints ascending to meet their Lord ‘in the air’ as a new mediatorial city.

a)  Christ was lifted up.
b)  Satan was thrown down.

a1)  The saints of the New Jerusalem ascended.
b1)  The compromised mediators were thrown down.

Satan is no longer the prince of the powers of the air.

__________________

[1]  A Herod also fulfilled the bronze serpent image, eaten alive by maggots on his throne ‘in the air’ after speaking ‘like a god.’ He prefigured the dirty scavenging birds feasting on the harlot in Revelation.

[2] The Tabernacle layout is a symbolic cruciform man. Notice that Christ on the cross was beneath ‘the Name’, an open scroll containing the disputed truth of His identity. The Lord’s Name was said to dwell above the lid of the Ark.

[3]  See Peter Leithart, The Footstool of His Feet.