Being Human: Some thoughts on Genesis
This link will take you to a page where you can listen to two hours of discussion about what it means to be human in the context of Genesis as tribal identity.
This discussion is FREE for any who wish to listen or download.
Skip
Wonderful, insightful and so easy to grasp. A great help in being able to help others see.
Thanks, Skip, so much for putting these recordings on your site.
Many blessings to you!
Rich
Love this recording. So much to think about. I do have a question, and it could just be me, but weren’t these both covering the same ground? I was expecting to hear about women and the 7 verses and a couple other items that were mentioned in the first recording as going to be addressed the next day.
Thanks again for putting this up.
~Jill
Humm. Don’t know about this. I didn’t do the recording so if it covers the same stuff, I’m sorry. I know that not all the sessions were recorded. Quite often when I speak there is no recording. Usually because I can’t carry the equipment necessary to make good recording. I’ll have to find some lighter, smaller stuff.
The “not all of the sessions were recorded” explains why I didn’t find the information I thought would be there…Don’t need to apologize for the ground that was recovered, they were important concepts.
I found this website quite by accident (actually it was by God’s design). Thank you so much for sharing your insights into the Hebrew culture, the nuances of the Hebrew language and what it means to be a human being.
~Jill
As I was listening to Session 2, you mentioned the connection of the sacrifice(s) of Isaac and Yeshua. It occurred to me that each of them would be unmarried, adult sons. Would that be why their fathers had the authority to do as they wished with their lives? Perhaps that may not be the correct level of solemnity in my words, but it seems that if either had been married, that would not be possible, for other reasons. And the wife would have the right to be involved in the decision, rather than the father. Even though Yeshua said no one took his life, that he laid it down of his own accord, if Isaac was an adult, it would be the same thing.
Gayle,
Interesting and thought provoking post-thank you. I agree that Isaac must have been a willing participant, just as Messiah was. Consider alone the fact that Isaac was a young man and his father Abraham was well advanced in age-having been an hundred when he sired his “only begotten son” therefore he could have not physically bound him to the alter for sacrifice. It makes more sense that Isaac was an informed, consenting party to the plans of YHWH. To what degree we are not informed, but as you say just like Yeshua laid down his life in obedience and trust, so likewise did Isaac in a prophetic type.
I wonder though if you thought through the ramifications of your statement that “that if either had been married, that would not be possible, for other reasons. And the wife would have the right to be involved in the decision, rather than the father.” Maybe your statement only applies to those particular parties and not us. Because if not, does that mean once we are married that we can no longer submit to the Father, but only to or through the spouse? Or worse, that married couples lose their “capacity” to be of sacrificial service to the Father? I think the father/ son analogy of Ancient Near East culture breaks down at this point. While yes, there is the “leave and cleave” aspect of marriage in which both fathers lose their authority over their son and daughter, but spiritually speaking in the case of a covenant marriage the father of both parties is the same-YHWH, and instead of it being “my Father” to the two partners He now becomes “our Father” and we both submit to Him and then to each other. Or at least in theory.
Michael,
I really did not think it through that far, because I could not imagine that ANYONE would have a higher authority over us than YHWH. He can and does require things of us that our spouse may not appreciate, much less support. I think it may often take one person ‘obeying anyway’ so that the other can experience the order and peace that follows. I completely agree with your point of “our Father” for the married couple, and hopefully, more than in theory. 🙂
Hi Gayle
Interesting observation – and we know that the sons were both voluntarily willing. May be the authority that the fathers had, had something to to with understanding Ancient Eastern Covenant?
I once heard a teaching on covenant, I think by Rico Cortes. And since I know nothing about Ancient Eastern History, I stand corrected: Covenant was made for many reasons, including security and assurance (since there were no police force or insurance). If you did find a friend that you could trust enough to cut covenant with, it was normal practice to include, as part of the deal, land and sometimes a son. Therefore the reason why Abraham did not have a problem taking his son, when he was asked. And I guess the same goes for God – giving His Son as part of the covenant arrangement? TW 28 Dec 2011 – but I don’t know how this fits together with the fact that God cut covenant with Himself and Abraham only being the beneficiary?
– I guess an “ezer” would have or could have interfered with the plan!
Hi Luzette,
I do think that an ezer would have interfered with the plan. To me, though, one with an ezer would not qualify for the purpose intended.
Often times, Skip’s studies leave me with more questions than answers! 🙂
This one was really good.
Questions are good. How can you understand the answer if you don’t know the question?