Bloodbath

Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; . . . Genesis 1:26 NASB

Image – You know, sometimes I think that all we do is circulate around poor exegesis of the Genesis text and as a result all kinds of doctrinal and ecclesiastical stupidities result. So I hate to have to come back to this fundamental issue again and again, but just when I think we have finally settled the matter, someone else comes along with some novella about what this text means and away we go again with more nonsense. The latest is the claim that rests on Kabbalah plus voodoo science plus a misreading of the text without original audience context. Let me illustrate.[1]

1. “The concept [in this verse] is that of God speaking into existence the whole of creation. So what was God doing? He was placing certain letters together and then speaking them so that they became the creative force to produce whatever it was that He was creating.”
2. “God spoke ‘aleph, dalet, mem’ and the creative imagination and life-giving power of Elohim produced His creation, ‘aadaam’.”
3. “[from the Paleo-Hebrew idea that adam in the combination of aleph plus the word dam, meaning “blood”] the Spirit of Life which God breathed into ‘aadaam’ would also take up residence in the blood.”
4. when God created ‘aadaam’ and entered into his blood, He had perfect union with His creation and the blood of ‘aadaam’ was pure and uncorrupted. When mankind sinned through disobedience to the Word of God, something happened in the blood . . . and the blood of ‘aadaam’ was corrupted.”

Had enough? Oh, one more thing.

5. “And God, out of the minute particles of the totality of all that He is, formed a creature, an exact image, a duplicate copy of Himself, in space and time . . .”

The final thought leads the author to suggest that God is “both sexes” which is why Adam had to be divided since he was at first created an exact copy of the androgynous God! I wonder. Is God five foot nine or six foot three? Is He Jewish or maybe Mesopotamian? And both sexes? That must be a real problem for an exact duplicate. The conclusions reached by this spurious method are almost too ridiculous to reiterate.

Through a combination of Kabbalah, Paleo-Hebrew, anachronistic exegesis, extension of contextual meanings and logical inconsistency, the author concludes that we are all blood-corrupt since Adam’s sin but the blood of the Messiah corrects this DNA error so that we can have perfect fellowship again, which, by the way, includes no disease, no sinful actions and no possible disruption in the relationship because the Holy Spirit enters into our blood. What?

Bloodbath, indeed! Of course, all along the way the author denies the idea of original sin (by sexual transmission), replacement theology and atonement by any other means except blood offering. Apparently the logical fallacies in his arguments escape him.

What is the lesson here? You can read anything from the biblical text if you are willing to bend all the rules of exegesis. You can find evidence for any non sequitur, any spiritual theory, any claim at all if you just want to spin the words. But exegesis depends on the same old rules: 1) what did the words mean to the original audience, 2) what is the cultural meaning of the terms involved and 3) what was the purpose of the original communication.

There are a lot of “bloodbath” books out there. If you happen to pick up one, apply these three rules to the author’s method. If he comes up short, put him aside. You have better things to do. Exegesis is not speculation or “proof-text” corroboration.

One lesson we must learn. Be Berean. Examine carefully. Compare to the Torah standard. Not everything spiritual is led by the Spirit. Be discerning. Test it all!

Topical Index: blood, dam, adam, Genesis 1:26, Kabbalah

[1] All citations from Steward W. Diesel-Reynolds, Created in His Image . . . Kept by Covenant, Xulon Press, 2013.