Tag-Archive for » Genesis 12:1 «

Abraham’s Daughter

Tuesday, July 17th, 2012 | Author:

But Ruth replied, “Do not urge me to leave you, to turn back and not follow you.  For wherever you go, I will go; wherever you lodge, I will lodge; your people shall be my people, and your God my God.”  Ruth 1:16

I will go – “From a cultural perspective, Ruth has chosen death over life.  She has disavowed the solidarity of family; she has abandoned national security; and she has renounced religious affiliation.  In the entire epic of Israel, only Abraham matches this radicality, but then he had a call from God.”[1]

If Abraham had a daughter, it was Ruth.  The themes of hesed, faithful loyalty, personal sacrifice and action that reflect God’s character are vibrantly present in both people.  In fact, Ruth is more like Abraham than his own son, Isaac.  Furthermore, Ruth is a Gentile who decides to enter into fellowship with YHWH just as Abraham was a Gentile who decided to act upon God’s call.  Both leave behind lives of expected conformity and security to journey to “a land I will show you.”  But, as Trible notes, Abraham had a call from God.  Ruth makes a life-altering decision without God’s specific direction.  The power of hesed is her only motivation.

We should notice that Naomi holds up Orpah as the model of rational action.  “See, your sister-in-law has returned to her people and her gods” (v. 15).  Naomi’s motivation might be good.  She is concerned about the welfare of Orpah.  But she is willing to send Orpah back to Chemosh, the pagan god of Moab, in order to achieve security.  There is no emphasis on following the one true God at any cost.  In fact, when Ruth declares her conviction to go with Naomi, Naomi tells her that she is crazy.  Doesn’t Ruth know what this means?  Doesn’t she appreciate the potential difficulties, the obvious threat, the danger?  Naomi is focused on just one thing – security.  Worship of the true God takes a distant second place.

But Ruth decides.  It is her decision that propels the story forward.  Regardless of the warnings, regardless of the expected hardships, Ruth will not be deterred from the inner call on her life.  She establishes a new standard of obedience, even exceeding the obedience of her distant spiritual father, Abraham.

“I will go.”  Elek.  “Go out!”  Lek-leka.  Both from the same root, yalak.  Ruth follows in the footsteps of God’s chosen man, perhaps because, even without knowing it, she is God’s chosen woman.

Do you need a “calling” to go out?  Or are you like Ruth – committed because it is what you must do even if you don’t hear a word from the Lord?

Topical Index:  yalak, to go, Abraham, Genesis 12:1, Ruth 1:16, I will go, calling


[1] Phyllis Trible, God and the Rhetoric of Sexuality, p. 173.

Category: Today's Word  | Tags: , , , , , ,  | One Comment

Back to bara

Tuesday, June 12th, 2012 | Author:

o God created the great sea creatures and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarm, according to their kinds  . . .  Genesis 1:21 ESV

Created – There are demarcations in the Hebrew text that provide important insights about our relationship to God and to the rest of His cosmos.  Unfortunately, some of these significant markers are lost in translation.  The verb bara’, used in this text, is one of the victims of translation concealment.  Why?  Because this is the first time this particular verb is used after the opening verse of Scripture.  In other words, up to the events of the fifth day, God does not create in the way that Genesis 1:1 reports.  Until this day, God “forms” (‘asah) what He has already created.  But on this day, something new is added.*

Genesis 1:1 opens the Hebraic view of cosmogony with a statement that everything is created (bara’) by God.  But this doesn’t mean that on the first day God instantaneously made each and every piece and part of the cosmos.  In fact, what this verse implies (as we see from the subsequent report) is that God made the “stuff” out of which all the rest of creation up to day five is “formed.”  In other words, on Day 1 God makes all the necessary material.  On days 2 through 4 He shapes this raw material into the various objects that populate the cosmos, e.g. light; the sun, moon and stars; the waters and the earth, vegetation.  These He “forms” from the original “stuff.”

Why is this differentiation important?  Because the Genesis account is not a textbook in a physics or astronomy lab.  It is, among other things, a polemic against the competing mythologies of the cultures surrounding Israel in the 16th Century BC.  And common to those mythologies was the idea of other celestial entities who played a role in the creation saga.  Tanin, the dragon embodiment of chaos, fought a war with Marduk in Babylonian mythology.  Yam and Baal were Canaanite gods who battled over creation.  The sun, moon and stars were not objects fashioned by a Supreme God but were gods themselves, vying for power and holding mere mortals captive.  The briefest glance at a history of tribal cultures will convince you that the world is populated by all kinds of gods in all kinds of forms.  When the Hebrew view came on the scene, it set aside all of this pagan explanation, relegating everything to the forming design of the one true God.  That’s why Genesis 1:2-19 uses the verb ‘asah, not bara’.  Everything except God Himself is constructed from His original material.  None of it has any life or power on its own.

But something happens in verse 20.  Swarms of animate creatures are created, not fashioned.  These are described as having nephesh hayyah.  In other words, there is a significant, essential difference between the inanimate creation (which includes all plant life) and the animate creation.  Animate beings are not of the same order nor are they ontologically connected to inanimate beings.  In the biblical narrative, life does not evolve from non-life.  Life must be added to the equation by the action of God.  The “stuff” might be the same, but the result is entirely different because now God engages in the renewal of the original creative process.  Genesis 1:1 creates.  Genesis 1:2-19 forms.  Genesis 1:20-21 creates.

And now the stage is set for another linguistic demarcation in Genesis 2:7, for when Man comes on the scene, he is created (bara’), but there is yet another distinction.

Why should we care about these nuances?  Isn’t it all still God’s handiwork?  We care because in a world where men are reduced to higher rungs of the same molecular composition as carbon and mold, we must assert and demonstrate the uniqueness of our design.  Not only are we not related to primordial slime, we are designed in such a way that the awesome power of God’s image is expressed in our purpose.  To reduce that power to nothing more than random collections of DNA is to strip all men of their dignity, responsibility and destiny.  The Hebrew text will have nothing to do with such base paganism.  In this view it stands alone.  Apart.  Unique.  Just like its author.

Topical Index:  create, fashion, bara’, ‘asah, animate, Genesis 1:21

For a reminder of the unusual characteristics of Genesis 2:7, see May 15 and 16, 2011.

*NASB attempts to capture this difference by using “create” and “made,” but without the Hebrew original, I am afraid the point of differentiation might be lost to the English reader.

Category: Today's Word  | Tags: , , , , ,  | 25 Comments

Faith Without Words

Monday, October 27th, 2008 | Author:

Now the LORD said to Abram, “Go forth from your country,” Genesis 12:1

Said – Are you like Abram?  Think about the circumstances that surround Abram’s understanding of God.  Abram doesn’t have the written Word.  There were no Scriptures in Abram’s time.  Abram lives in a land of pagan worship and practices.  Abram has no detailed, documented history of God.  Abram’s extended family are polytheists, worshipping YHWH and a host of household gods.  Abram doesn’t know Jesus.  Abram is an example of the familiar question, “What about the little girl in Ethiopia who has never heard of Jesus?”

It’s amazing that Abram ever responded to God at all, especially since God asked Abram to leave all that was familiar and secure.  Certainly this implies that Abram was a man of incredible spiritual insight.  It also implies that Abram and perhaps Abram’s immediate family must have had some relationship with YHWH passed down from the days of Noah.  What other explanation provides justification for Abram’s actions?  There’s a reason that God chose Abram.

We get a bit of insight into the call of Abram when we see that the Hebrew verb is ‘amar.  You will remember that ‘amar is not just about speaking.  It carries with it the idea of actions that back up words.  YHWH calls Abram and Abram hears; but there must have been other signs that provided Abram with the evidence he needed.

Now put yourself in Abram’s place.  After all, you and I are his spiritual children.  Perhaps some of his spiritual commitment and insight needs to rub off on us.  If you didn’t have Scripture, if you didn’t have the “Christian” culture or the history of the Judeo-Christian world, if you didn’t have the familiar vocabulary of worship and salvation, what kind of relationship would you have with YHWH?  Would you be attuned to His voice?  Would you see the evidence of His direction?  Would you be ready to make life-changing commitments based on your personal involvement with Him?

I’m afraid that most of us would have stayed in Ur.  Our religion depends on our visual connection with written codes, commandments and conversion statements.  We are not auditory believers.  We are followers of the Book.  Our experience with God is directed by programs and pulpits rather than by listening and obeying.  We have a cerebral Christianity geared toward sight and word, not sound and experience.  We don’t practice listening because it is simpler and more efficient to practice proof-texting.

Abram knew God through direct conversation.  We know about God through written translations.  The difference is worth considering.  Do you suppose that God has stopped talking?  Do you think that the means by which Abram knew God’s voice and God’s desires has been supplanted by theological interpretation and historical analysis?  Would you know the sound of His voice if He did speak to you?  Progressive revelation does not mean replacement revelation.  It means that God adds to what He has already spoken, not that He stops speaking.  Are you practicing listening?  What do you hear?

Topical Index:  Voice

Category: Today's Word  | Tags: ,  | Comments off

Things Not Seen

Sunday, November 20th, 2005 | Author:

“Yahweh said to Abram, “Go forth from your country, from your homeland, and from your father’s house to a land which I will show you.”" Genesis 12:1

Show – The God of simple things.  “Go forth”.  The common verb for movement.  Walking.  God doesn’t ask the impossibly difficult from us.  He can accomplish the impossibly difficult when we respond to the incredibly simple.  Today we see another common verb: ra’ah - to see with the eyes.  When God acts, He accommodates His children.  He doesn’t say to Abram, “I’ll flood your mind with an impenetrable revelation of my glory.”  He says, “I’ll make you see with your own eyes.”  When God acts, the evidence of His handiwork is clear.

Of course, there is more to the story.  Abram saw the land with his own eyes, but it never became his while he lived.  He died owning no more land than his funeral plot.  So we might ask the question, “Why did God promise so much to Abram when Abram never really took possession?”  And the answer reveals a deep spiritual truth, written into the fabric of the universe.

The fulfillment of my destiny lies beyond the horizon of my mortal life.

God does not intend us to be complete in this world.  We were made for bigger things.  Our real inheritance won’t be realized until long after we have died.  The eternal cannot be compressed into this temporal realm.  Here we only get hints.

God did show Abram.  Abram saw with his own eyes the future that God had in mind.  He saw the land.  He heard the promise.  But Abram’s real purpose was not finished on the hills of Palestine.  His real purpose isn’t finished yet.  And neither is yours.

The culture of this world (things that Paul calls the “patterns” of this world) would seduce us into short-sighted destinies.  This world proclaims that my life must be fulfilling here and now.  The world pushes us toward the great lie:  “Life cannot be complete without a purpose I can accomplish”.  As a result, our focus shifts.  We become tape measure people.  We stop living for something beyond the limit of the tape.  We look for satisfaction here, between birth and death.  We never think about the legacy we are leaving for someone else to measure.

How would your goals change if you knew that you are only preparing for something on the other side?  How much frustration and anxiety could you release if you didn’t have to find all the fulfillment here?  How much simpler would your living be if you measured it from a perspective one thousand years from now?

God let Abram see with his own eyes.  What God showed him is still coming to be.  Is that what God is showing you too?

Category: Today's Word  | Tags:  | Comments off

Walking in the Dark

Saturday, November 19th, 2005 | Author:

“Yahweh said to Abram, “Go forth from your country, from your homeland, and from your father’s house to a land which I will show you.”" Genesis 12:1

Go forth – The first time that the Lord speaks to Abram, He gives a command to go.  More than one hundred years later, Abraham will hear that same command (Genesis 22:1).  Between the first and the last pronouncement of God, Abraham must learn to walk in the dark.  And as the story tells us, Abraham often bumps into things along the way.

The Hebrew verb here (from halak) is quite specific.  “You go for yourself!”  God’s call to Abram is unique.  It breaks the cultural expectations in much deeper ways than we think.  To really understand that impact of this command, we must examine how God’s call is attached to the three things Abram must leave behind.

Abram is asked to leave his country, his relatives and his father’s house.  We don’t think too much about this separation today, but in ancient Semitic culture, this was an incredible request.  To leave country, relatives and the father’s house was to leave all sense of identity, protection, community, continuity, inheritance and destiny.  In a tribal culture, this was the equivalent of voluntary excommunication.  God essentially asks Abram to remove himself from every connection to his old life and to attach himself to full commitment to the voice of God.  What’s even more astounding is that God does not even tell Abram where he is going.  He only says, “Go forth”.

How many of us would have been able to respond to such a call?  Wouldn’t we hear ourselves saying things like, “But God, at least tell me where we’re headed?” or “God, don’t you see how much more effective I can be right here where I have so many connections?”  I can hear myself complaining, “Lord, I’ve worked so hard to build up what I have” or “How can this be God’s voice?  He would never ask me to leave my family.”  We have dozens of reasons why we would rather have a future that we can control and understand.  But God doesn’t seem to work that way.

As we read about the story of Abram, we are impressed by two opposing behaviors.  The first is how often Abram made disastrous choices to try managing his own destiny.  That sounds a lot like me.  The second is how slowly Abram learned to trust the sovereign election of the God who chose him.  That gives me hope.  Because Abram went forth, I serve the God who called him.  Thanks to my spiritual father, Abram, I am one of the children of his tribe.  I pray only that God will find me faithful so that some day others will say, “Because of his choices, I am also a child of the King”.

Category: Today's Word  | Tags:  | Comments off