Genesis

Are the Days of Genesis One 24 Hour Days of One Earth Week?

/in /by

A lot can happen in a day. My alarm buzzed at the break of day and I rolled out of bed. After some coffee and a devotional, I double checked the calendar to make certain that I had the date correct. Yep, the day of the meeting was September 19th. We gathered in a church near downtown Louisville and spent most of the day in prayer and fellowship. All of us communicated with emails and texting, but back in my day it would have been organized by written invitations and phone calls.

See what I did there? In the span of one paragraph, I used the word day in at least three different ways:

  • Day was used a block of time (day in contrast to night).
  • Day was used to convey a 24 hour span of time.
  • Day was used to cover a block of time in the 70’s and 80’s (i.e. “back in my day”).

Genesis one presents us with the same kind of interpretive challenge as my opening paragraph. One word can carry different meanings, depending on the immediate context. Like our English word day, the Hebrew word yom is multivalent:

The very first time yom is used, it carries two meanings in one verse:

“God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day” (Gen. 1:5).

Here the word yom is used to name the light in contrast to night time, followed by the phrase “evening and morning”, which I take to mean a 24 hour day of one earth week. Even if you’re a Christian that reads “one day” as an epoch or age, you still have two very different meanings in one verse.

Yom is also used to cover a block of time:

“This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made earth and heaven” (Gen. 2:4).

Here I am using the NASB because it preserves the English word day, but uses it to convey a block of time (i.e. the six days of creation). The NIV does some of the work for us by dropping the word day and simply using the English word “when.”

Lastly, many have noted the mysterious absence of the definite article on days 1-5:

Even though our English Bibles will use the word “the” when talking about days 1-5 (i.e. “the first day…” “…the second day”, etc.), the word “the” doesn’t appear in the Hebrew until the 6th and 7th day. What does the absense of the definite article mean? I don’t know. A clue might be found in that which makes the 6th and 7th days different from the 1st-5th days of creation. I’m open to your ideas.

What does all of us this mean? For me, it means that I’m going to hit the brakes and slow down. There’s a lot going on in Genesis chapter one. If you’re in a hurry to prove that yom means a 24 hour day of one earth week, then you’re likely to miss the variety of ways that God has inspired its use. As an Evangelical Christian, I hold to the verbal and plenary inspiration of Scripture. This means that I believe that God has inspired the very words of the Bible, not just the ideas. As such I want to treat every word as precious and meaningfully placed. This is why I pay attention to things like definite articles.

If you’re following this series and you’re a skeptic or a seeker, I want to encourage you to check out Lee Strobel’s The Case for Faith or Tim Keller’s The Reason for God. These publications will help you see that Christians have reasons to believe. More than that, I want you to know that putting your trust in Christ does not lock you into a straightjacket approach to Genesis one. You can be a Christian and believe that the earth is billions of years old and that the days are used in a non-literal way. Christians are all over the place on this passage, yet we are united in our conviction that the God of the Bible made everything and should be praised. I interpret the six days of creation as literal 24 hour days of one earth week, but other Christians see it differently. That’s okay. Before I tell you why I read the six days the way I do, let’s look at the challenges inherent to each of the main views.

The Six Days as a 24 Hour Day of One Earth Week:
If you believe the six uses of yom in Gen. 1:5, 8, 13, 19, 23, 31 all refer to a 24 hour day of one earth week, you have to explain how you can have light (Gen. 1:3) before the appearance of the sun in 1:14. Many will argue that the light here is non-solar, but the same word is used elsewhere for a sunrise (Gen. 44:3; Exod. 10:23; Neh. 8:3). So, how can you have solar light in vs. 5 before the appearance of the sun in vs. 14?

The Six Days as a Day-age or Epoch:
If you think that the six uses of yom are referring to an age or epoch in creation, you have to explain how the fruits trees in verse 11 get pollenated and bear fruit an epoch before bees and insects are created (v. 24). Beyond this, the face value refrain of “there was evening and there was morning” (vv. 5, 8, 13, 19, 23, 31) strongly argues for the 24 hour view.

The Six Days as Literary Framework & Temple Cosmology:
Careful readers of Genesis chapter one have identified a literary structure built around three days of forming and three days of filling. Most interpreters agree with this structure, but the framework view goes further by reading the days as non-literal and non-sequential. In this view, Moses is inspired to present God as a worker who goes about His activity for six days and rests on the seventh. The days are topical. Frameworker’s believe that God is using anthropomorphic language to accommodate Himself to people. Anthropomorphic is a ten dollar word for ascribing human characteristics to God so that can know Him better. Many Frameworker’s also see temple and priestly parallels to strengthen their view. Genesis 1:1-2:3 pick up temple language (i.e. the “lights” in Genesis 1 parallel the lights used in the temple: Exod. 25:6; 27:20, 35:8, 14, 28; 39:37) and the Garden in Eden parallels the holy of holies.

I see a two-fold challenge with this view. First, Moses uses the toledot formula in a consistent way. When he tells us about the toledot of Jacob, “These are the generations of Jacob” and then proceeds to tell us the story of Joseph, he expects us to read it as real people and real events from a God-centered point of view (Gen. 37:2 ff.). I see no compelling reason to read the toledot formula of Gen. 2:4 any different than its use elsewhere in Genesis. Secondly, while the writers of Sacred Scripture often ascribe human characteristics to God (i.e. “the eyes of the LORD move to and fro throughout the earth that He may strongly support those whose heart is completely His”), I do not think that He employs falsehoods in His effort to be understood.

Next Week: What on earth did God do in the six, 24 hour days of creation?

Genesis

Showing My Cards: Old Earth Creation or Young Earth Creation?

/in /by

Winning in the game of Poker is as much about acting as it is skill. A bad hand and a good bluff can lead to victory at the table. Skilled players are always on the lookout for the “tell.” This is a change in another player’s behavior or demeanor that gives away their hand. If you’re tracking with this series in Genesis, you may have picked up on my “tell”, even though I’ve tried to play my cards close to the chest. How old is it? Old earth creation or young earth creation?

When it comes to the age of the earth and the Bible, I am agnostic. I don’t believe that the Bible gives us enough information to make a definitive case. More than that, I’m not convinced that Scripture cares to answer the question. It has a different story to tell. My “agnosticism” is not based on doctrinal apathy, but on a careful reading of the verses and passages often used to support the Young Earth Creation or Old Earth Creation positions (hereafter YEC and OEC). This is why we spent so much time looking at Genesis 1:1 and the genealogies of the Bible.

When the Book of Scripture is silent on an issue like this, it frees me up to explore what the Book of Nature has to say on the subject. I hold to the position that science is the hand-maiden of Scripture (i.e. it lives to serve God’s Word). So, what does science say about the age of the earth? Once again, good Christians agree to disagree.

The YEC position is that the earth is a little over 6,000 years old. Apart from their Biblical arguments, which I’ ve weighed in the balance and found wanting, many Young Earther’s have scientific reasons for their view.

Scientific Evidence for YEC:
Answers in Genesis sits on the Young Earth side of the pew. I will summarize a few of their arguments and post a link for further reading.

  1. Very little sediment on the sea floor. If sediments really have been accumulating for billions of years, the sea bed should be choked with miles of sediment (https://answersingenesis.org/geology/sedimentation/1-very-little-sediment-on-the-seafloor/). The actual amount of sediment argues for a young earth.
  2. Soft tissue in fossils. If dinosaurs really did live millions and millions of years ago, why do some fossils still contain well-preserved soft tissue remains? https://answersingenesis.org/fossils/3-soft-tissue-in-fossils/.
  3. Very little salt in the sea. At the current rate of salinization and given an earth millions of years old, we would expect the ocean to be 70X more salty than we actually see. https://answersingenesis.org/evidence-for-creation/9-very-little-salt-in-the-sea/.

People opposed to YEC will often call it “pseudo-science”, but that sounds like junior high name calling to me. Many Young Earther’s are well read and doing their best to make sense of observational science. A good friend of mine is a godly woman with a degree in biology and she’s a YEC. When it comes to science, she could take me out to the deep end and drown me. Recently she’s put a rock in my shoe about the reliability of dating methods. According to her research, anything past 230,000 years of age is scientifically problematic. Radio Carbon 14 dating is accurate only from 6,000 to 50,000 years (a disputed upward range) and thermoluminescence dating (measuring the amount of light emitted from electrons trapped in crystals and minerals) is only accurate dating objects up to 10,000 years (with an upper and less accurate range of 230,000 years). She reminds me that both dating methods fall short of measuring millions and billions of years. Good point!

Scientific Evidence for OEC:
Reasons to Believe is an advocate for a Old Earth Creationism. They agree with mainstream science about the approximate age of the earth (4.5 billion years old), but as creationists who believe that man is a direct and immediate creation, they postulate that Adam and Eve were created sometime between 50 and 150,000 years ago (http://www.reasons.org/rtb-101/scientificevidenceforanoldearth). In other words, the earth is old, but humanity is young. They too are well read and have scientific reasons for their position:

  1. The existence of stars and planets would be impossible unless the universe has been expanding for billions of years. If the universe has only been expanding for thousands of years, all you would get is hydrogen gas; if trillions, then all you would get are black holes.
  2. The normative rate of erosion of the continents demands long periods of time. Erosion takes place over long periods of time. For example, using the normal rate of erosion, it would have taken anywhere from 6 million to 17 million years for the Grand Canyon to have formed.
  3. The measurement of sedimentary varves argues for rock formations that are millions of years old. Varves are laminated layers of sedimentary rock, often produced in glacial lakes. During the summer months, light layers of sedimentation are laid down, but in the winter months, fine dark silt is laid down producing darker layers. Together both light and dark layers show one year of sedimentation. This process, like measuring the rings of a tree, allows us to estimate the amount of years in a layer of rock. For instance, The Green River Formation is eastern Utah boasts an estimated total of 20 million varves, suggesting a time period of 20 million years.

Note that they too are doing their best to make sense of observational science. So, how old is it really? I say, let each person be fully convinced in their own mind and embrace one another in holy love. God has not given us truth, either from the book of Scripture or the book of nature, to make it ugly. At this point, I lean toward an old earth with a young humanity. That said, I do not subscribe to the day-age theory. Instead, I read the six days of creation as 24 hour days of one earth week. Stay tuned and I’ll show you how I get there.

Next Week: Are the days of Genesis chapter one 24 hour days of one earth week?

Genesis

Museums & Genealogies

/in /by

Museums are cool! My all time favorite is the Field Museum in Chicago. Many of its artifacts and specimens were originally collected for the 1893 Chicago World’s Fair. Today it houses the man-eating lions of Tsavo and other interesting things. Who doesn’t love man-eating lions? It made for a cool movie (The Ghost in the Darkness). So, it was with boyhood enthusiasm that I drove to the Creation Museum in Petersburg, KY. When people find out that I visited the Creation Museum, one of the first questions I get is, “What did you think of it?”

There’s a saying that I grew up with, “If you can’t say anything nice, don’t say anything at all.” So, let’s start with “nice.” The first thing that I noticed about the museum was its commitment to telling people about Jesus. I love that! The displays are set up to walk you through the Big Story, beginning with creation and ending at the cross. I also enjoyed the australopithecus exhibit with its casting of “Lucy’s” bones. Lucy was discovered in 1974 and its ability to walk upright has earned her a place in the family photo album of Darwinian Evolution.

Despite these commendations, it’s hard for me to give the museum a high-five. Their founding ministry, Answers in Genesis, uses “1:1” as its logo. If this ministry is committed to anything, it is committed to reading beginning (the Hebrew word reshit) as a point in time followed by 24 hour days of one earth week. If you disagree with them, you’re following “Man’s Word” instead of “God’s Word.” This “either/or” mentality drives an unnecessary wedge between Young Earth and Old Earth Christians. One could wish that their commitment to God’s Word would extend to a better interpretation of reshit.

In the last post we looked at the word beginning in Genesis 1:1. I argued that you CANNOT determine the age of the earth from this verse. You CAN determine that God made everything. You CAN determine that the universe is not eternal. You CAN determine that if the universe had a beginning it will also have an end, but you can’t determine whether or not the earth is young or old. If you want to calculate the age of the earth, you have to look elsewhere.

One possible approach to calculating the age of the earth is to add up the genealogies listed in the Bible. This approach was popularized by 17th Century Irish Bishop James Ussher. Bishop Ussher reached the conclusion that Adam was created in 4004 B.C. relying on Biblical genealogies and extra-biblical evidence. At the risk of oversimplification, can we really take out a calculator and come up with an approximate age of the earth?

I don’t think so. In the same way that the history recorded in the Bible is “theological history” (real people and real events told from a God-centered point of view), the genealogies of Scripture are “theological genealogy”. By “theological genealogy” I mean that God is telling us something through the names and structure of the list. They use artistic structure and do more than provide us with a list of “who’s who.” For instance, Adam’s genealogy lists ten people, but indicates that he had “other sons and daughters (Gen. 5:4). Why limit the list the ten? Well, in the Bible, ten often communicates “completeness”. Moses wanted to show us an unbroken familial line from Adam to Noah; he is not interested in listing each and every person in the line. But the list is saying even more. Many Bible teachers think the refrain “and he had other sons and daughters” is used to highlight God’s mercy on the line of Seth in a chapter where death seems to reign (note the sad repetition of “and he died). The repetition “other sons and daughters” tells us that God’s grace is greater than death (Gen. 5: 4, 10, 13, 16, 19, 22, 26, 30). Amen!

The New Testament genealogies display similar artistry and messaging. Luke’s genealogy of Jesus takes us from His step-dad Joseph all the way back to Adam, totaling 77 ancestors (Lk. 3:23-37). Once again, this is “theological genealogy” (a list of real, related people with a God-centered message). What’s the message? Luke places Jesus’ genealogy in between God’s declaration of Jesus’ divine Sonship and His testing. He wants us to know that Jesus is the right age for ministry (David also began his reign at the age of 30) and has the right messianic lineage. More than that, by linking Jesus back to Adam, this Gospel writer is telling us the tale of two sons: Adam was the disobedient son of God and ruined humanity, Jesus is the Obedient Son of God and the hope of humanity (Lk. 3:22, 37).

My point here is that we’re missing the message if we take out a calculator and add up the years. Moses and Luke do not seem very interested in calculating the age of the earth, they’ve got more important things to tell us about God’s grace! The genealogies of Scripture show selectivity in order to achieve theological ends. They are lists of real, related people with a God-centered message. Do we have ears to hear what they have to say?

Next Week: My position on the Young Earth verses Old Earth Creation debate.

“Miller time!” A ministry update from Adam and Renal Miller

/in /by

“It’s Miller time!” What do you think? I’m looking for a “hook” for our ministry updates here in Louisville. Jay Fast has “Fast Family Bite Sized Updates” and Mark and Kathy Kato have “African Shores” (or something equally cool). “Miller time” is a word of encouragement, voiced by George Kelly whenever I mounted the pulpit at Fox Valley Church. Knowing my commitment to bring the Word with clarity and without comprise, George would say, “It’s Miller time!” I realize that “Miller time!” is risky. Kind of like throwing a party labeled BYOB, but really meaning “Bring Your Own Bible.” “Miller Time!” is an update from Adam and Renal Miller about our disciple-making exploits here in Kentucky (beyond that, it’s a thumb in the eye to legalists). Maybe its a dumb idea. I don’t even like the taste of beer! Nasty stuff and definitely an acquired taste! Feel free to talk me down from the ledge.

Renal and I are settling into Louisville. Settling is an important word, because as we seek to make disciples here in Louisville, we are walking in the ways of Christ. Before Jesus called Peter to follow Him, “…leaving Nazareth, He settled in Capernaum” (Matt. 4:13). Settling involves a change in location and relationships. We are meeting new people, establishing new life rhythms and visiting local churches. Here in Louisville, we have BBQ in abundance, but great pizza is elusive. O the things we sacrifice for the Kingdom!

BTW, thanks for the fervent prayers for her credentialing. God answers prayer! I also want to thank Fox Valley Church for the generous financial support. It has helped us with moving expenses and given me money to hang out in coffee shops and meet people.

Speaking of church, in His sovereign pleasure, God has bestowed a unique beauty on every church. So, we don’t expect churches here to be Fox Valley—there’s only one FVC! Nobody hear preaches like Pastor Tom and nobody here sings, “Who can stop the Lord almighty? No one!” like Brad Lawson. There are many beautiful churches here, but we’re still looking for a good fit for us. In the process, I believe that God is showing us more of what He might uniquely do through us.

As we settle, our next phase of ministry begins. Disciple-making is not rocket science! Jesus has left us with a pattern to follow. He created a God-centered, relational environment for producing disciples. Before he called Peter and John to follow Him (a call for commitment), He invited them into his home and hung out with them (Jn. 1:35-39). Only after Jesus developed relationships with Peter and John did He say, “Follow Me.” First curiosity, then commitment. So, Renal and I are developing relationships and hoping to invest in a few people. I’m “tent-making” (Acts 18:1-4) at a local martial arts academy and Renal is…, well, drugging people. Lol!

Nothing significant happens in the Kingdom of God without prayer. So, as I have stated on my website pastoradam.org, “I don’t want this to be cliche, but please pray fervently for us. No significant work of God happens without prayer. Seriously! I’d rather have you on your knees than reaching into your pockets for me.” Please pray fervently that:

  • God would be pleased to introduce us to people that need Jesus;
  • God would bring a small group together that contains our core team for planting here in Louisville by January. I am meeting this Sunday with a group of believers from Jiu Jitsu that want to make disciples and go deeper into God’s Word; and
  • God would expand the ministry impact of pastoradam.org. I have had several people at my Jiu Jitsu academy tell me that they’re enjoying the Genesis series. Praise God!
Genesis

How Old is It? Young Earth or Old Earth Creation?

/in , , /by

When we are at our best, Christians display “unity in the essentials, liberty in the non-essentials and charity in all things.” Often attributed to St. Augustine, this motto actually comes from a Lutheran named Rupertus Meldenius, who wrote during the 30 Years’ War (1618-1648), a bloody conflict stoked with religious tensions (http://www.ligonier.org/learn/articles/essentials-unity-non-essentials-liberty-all-things/). I do not take Meldenius to mean that Christians cannot have strong convictions about secondary doctrines. Nor is this an excuse for doctrinal apathy or sloppy thinking. Rather, it champions deep church truths while fostering a spirit of humility.

I say all this because our questions about the age of the earth, the days of Genesis and whether or not there was animal predation before the Fall, all fall (no pun intended) into the category of non-essentials. Please hear me out! I am not saying that these issues lack substance—they can be weighty and substantial, but they are secondary. Good and thoughtful Christians come to the same text and walk away with different conclusions.

So, as we enter into these secondary but substantial doctrines, I’m challenging you to cultivate a hermeneutic of humility. Some of my favorite people disagree with my positions on the age of the earth and days of creation. That’s okay. There’s freedom to disagree and to do so without making the truth ugly. Regarding my secondary positions, it’s possible that I’m wrong. I’m humble enough to admit that, but I’m also confident enough in my position to put it forward for you to consider. It’s possible that I’m wrong, but I’m probably right.

THAT SAID (and repeated as often as necessary), what exactly does the Bible say about the age of the earth?

Evangelical Christians tend to fall into one of two camps: Young Earth Creation or Old Earth Creation (hereafter YEC or OEC). Young earthers believe that God created the universe and earth in six, 24 hour days of one earth week. The earth is no more than 10,000 years old and the apparent age of the planet is explained by God creating it with the appearance of age. Like YEC, Old earthers believe that God created everything, but that He did so a long time ago (around 8-15 billion years ago). Many OEC advocates hold to an old earth, but a young humanity (i.e. the earth is billions of years old, but humanity was created by an immediate act of God around 20-50,000 years ago).

I’ll tell you where I land on the issue later, but for now, let’s open our Bibles to Genesis 1:1. What does the first verse of the first book of the Bible tell us about the age of the earth?

In the Beginning: Point in Time or Period of Time?
“In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” (Gen. 1:1).

The word beginning is how our Bibles gloss the Hebrew reshit. The issue at hand is whether or not the word is used to convey a period of time or a point in time. If we read beginning as a point in time it pushes us toward YEC. In the beginning, God created everything in an instant and immediately got to work on forming and filling the earth. The time span between God speaking the universe into existence and the days of creation is short. Day one happens moments after the creation of matter, space and time in verse one, followed by day two, etc. But if we read beginning as a period of time, that block of time could be substantial, even billions of years. So, which is it, point in time or period of time?

The best way to approach this is to let Scripture interpret Scripture. Let’s look at how reshit/beginning is used elsewhere:

In the Pentateuch

“…a land for which the LORD your God cares; the eyes of the LORD your God are always on it, from the beginning even to the end of the year” (Deut. 11:12).

With the words beginning and end, we see another merism at work (i.e. two opposites that when put together communicate the totality). Moses’ point in Duet. 11:12 is that God’s care is always on the Promised Land. But note the word beginning. Here it used to indicate a specific period of time, not a point in time.

In the Book of Job

“Though your beginning was insignificant, Yet your end will increase greatly” (Job 8:7).

Once again we see a period or duration of time. Bildad, a friend of Job and not a Hobbit, is talking to Job as he sits in a pile of sores and ashes. He does not have Job’s specific day of birth in mind, but instead a block of time—Job’s early years.

In the Prophet Jeremiah

“Now in the same year, in the beginning of the reign of Zedekiah king of Judah…” (Jer. 28:1).

The word reshit as a period of time is also used to talk about the early months or years of a king’s reign (Jer. 28:1). The NASB glosses reshit with the word beginning, “Now in the same year, in the beginning of the reign of Zedekiah king of Judah…”, while the NIV simply uses the phrase “early in the reign of…” Once again we see reshit used as a period of time and not a point in time. By the way, this is similar to how you and I might use the word beginning:

“At the beginning of the year I’m going to rotate the tires on my car.” Do you mean January 1st or a block of time after the start of the new year?

“At the beginning of my marriage I made a lot of mistakes.” Do you mean day one or that period of time called the early years?

What’s my point? The Biblical evidence suggests that God created over an unspecified block of time, not a moment in time. How long was that block of time? We don’t know, because the word reshit doesn’t tell us. The earth could have sat in its uninhabitable watery condition for a week or billions of years. God’s word choice steers us away from “moment in time” thinking. Hebrew scholar John Sailhamer, in his book Genesis Unbound, suggests that had Moses wanted to tell us that God created in a moment of time, he could have chosen other Hebrew words to make his point (rishonah or techillah), but he did not.

Does this mean that the YEC view is wrong? Not so fast! There are other lines of Biblical evidence to consider and after that, Young Earthers have scientific reasons to embrace their point of view. All I’m saying is that you cannot determine the age of the earth from Genesis 1:1. If you want to calculate the age of the earth, you’re going to have to do the math somewhere else.

Next Week: What about the Genealogies?

Genesis

Genesis & the Big Story

/in , , /by

If you’re tracking with this series, this is part three of the question: “How should we read it?” In previous posts I have argued that Genesis should be read as theological history within the context of the Pentateuch. It is not a science text book, but when it speaks about matters of history and science, it is always true and never false. But there’s something even more obvious that can be said about approaching Genesis. How should we read it? We should read it (and enjoy it) as story:

  • It has a setting: I believe that the bulk of the story in chapters 1-3 takes place in the Promised Land/Garden in Eden. *I’ll tell you why I believe that in a later post.
  • It has tension: God tests Adam and Eve with a provision and one prohibition (2:16), but the Serpent tempts them to sin against God, setting death lose into God’s new creation. What will happen to the blessing of 1:26?
  • It has a resolution: God provides a substitute to cover Adam and Eve’s shame (3:15), but they are expelled from the Garden.
  • It has a “Good Guy” (i.e. protagonist): God is the hero of the story.
    It has a “Bad Guy” (i.e. antagonist): The Serpent is one of the bad guys in this story. The apostle John tells us his identity in Revelation 12:9, “The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray.”

God loves a good story! In fact, Genesis can be told as the story of four events (creation, fall, flood and Babel) and four people (Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Joseph). The story of Genesis spills over into the Exodus (note how Exod. 1:1 connects to Gen. 46:8) and that story expands through all 66 books of the Bible. The ten dollar word for this is meta-narrative, but we can save a few bucks and call it the Big Story. The Big Story of the Bible is told in four acts (here I am following Justin Buzzard’s outline) and all of it is foreshadowed in the first few chapters in Genesis):

Act #1: God & Jesus
“In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” (Gen. 1:1).

“Then God said, ‘Let us make man in our image, in our likeness’” (Gen. 1:26).

The Big Story is told by God and is ultimately about Him. Interestingly, the Bible never sets out to prove the existence of God, but instead always assumes it. Chapter one of Genesis reveals that God has a big heart for people. He prepares a good land for people to be in relationship with Him. The word good (Hebrew tob) is used 7X in the first chapter and the care and creativity that God puts into the land so that we can flourish says something about how He feels about us. He is especially fond of His imagers.

In Genesis 1:1 the generic name for God is used (Elohim), but who is this God? In Gen. 2:4 we learn that Elohim is none other than Yahweh, “When the LORD God made the earth and the heavens…” The word LORD in full caps is how our English Bibles translate God’s covenant name. By this Moses identifies the God of creation as the God of the Promise. The God who made everything is the God of the covenant. But as we get deeper into the Big Story, we learn that all the good we read about in Genesis was made through Jesus:

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through Him all things were made; without Him nothing was made that has been made. In Him was life and that life was the light of men” (John 1:1-4).

As Christians we believe in the Trinity (i.e. One God in Three Persons), the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. When we read Genesis within the context of the Big Story, we see all the members of the Trinity present and actively involved creation: The Father, the Word and the Spirit (1:1-3). The doctrine of the Trinity also goes a long way in explaining the mysterious “Us” in 1:26, “Then God said, ‘Let us make man in our image, in our likeness’” (Gen. 1:26).

A lot of ink has been spilled over the mysterious “Us” in 1:26. Some say that the “us” includes God and angels. But as my favorite Genesis scholar notes:

“The singulars in v. 27 (‘in his own image’ and ‘in the image of God’) rule out…that the plural refers to a heavenly court of angels, since in the immediate context man’s creation is said to be ‘in His image’ with no mention of man in the image of the angels’” (John Sailhamer, “Genesis”, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, p. 37).

A clue to the mystery of “Us” is found in the imagers God made. Sailhamer notes that “the singular man (adam) is created as a plurality, “male and female” (p. 38). If man is a unity and a plurality, could it be that God is also a unity with plurality? When we read Genesis 1:26 in the context of the Big Story, we gain insight into the passage about what God is like.

Act #2: Creation
“In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” (1:1).

“God saw all that He had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day” (1:31).

I’m a huge Star Wars fan. I love the story and the characters. I’m not Geeky enough to dress up in a costume, but I have pondered how the Death Star could explode so close in orbit over the moon of Endor without destroying it. Perhaps it was an implosion? I love the characters too, but the worldview behind the Star Wars story is riddled with error. It pictures a dualism where the light side and the dark side must co-exist in order for the galaxy to be in harmony. It also takes a dim view on matter. After Luke Skywalker fails to rescue his X-wing fighter from a swamp on Dagobah, Yoda chides, “My ally is the Force, and a powerful ally it is. Life creates it, makes it grow. Its energy surrounds us, binds us. Luminous beings are we, not this crude matter.”

Genesis tells a different story. God creates out of nothing and His creation is without sin. Matter is good. On the sixth day, God surveys His creative work and calls it “very good.” Even Satan was originally created without sin. Sin came about in his heart when he chose something good (himself) instead of God. This is how sin works. Sex is good and God’s wedding gift to a man and woman in marriage (1:28; 2:24), but it can be distorted and twisted by sin. Food is good, but sin comes in and produces gluttony and starvation. Wine and beer is good, it was made by God to make hearts glad (Ps. 104:15), but it’s good effects can be ruined through drunkenness.

We don’t know much about the angelic rebellion mounted by Satan against God. A later prophet sheds some light on this mystery. Speaking against the king of Babylon, an earthly king animated by the devil, we catch a glimpse of Satan’s fall, “You said in your heart…I will make myself like the Most High” (Isa. 14:13-14). Genesis is frugal with the details. We don’t know when the angelic rebellion happened. Was it before God created the earth? Some Christians believe that God’s original creation of the earth was good, but that it was ruined in the angelic rebellion. Genesis one is God cleaning up the mess and restoring it to His original design. Interestingly, the word made (1:6, 16 [2x], etc.) is used of putting something messy in right order (Deut. 21:12; 2 Sam. 19:24-25). Think of making your bed after a restless night. This could explain why the land was tohu wabohu (uninhabitable waste) in verse 2.

However we read Genesis 1:2, matter is redeemable. It matters to God. Sin tramples on God’s creation and death is unleashed in humanity, but God will redeem people and planet (Rom. 8:20-21). Moreover, our bodies are not crude. God will redeem them too in the resurrection. All of this comes at the end of the Big Story. So, take care of your bodies and creation. Make things beautiful, it’s one way to fight against entropy. If you’re old enough and sin has not ruined it, enjoy a cold one and if you’re married, enjoy the marriage bed and keep it holy. Creation is good and new creation will be even better!

 

Act #3: Rebellion
“The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden to work it and take care of it. And the LORD God commanded the man, ‘You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die’” (Gen. 2:15-17).

“When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate it. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves” (Gen. 3:6-7).

Doing lunch is doing theology. The simple act of eating is either worship or blasphemy. Eve took a single piece of fruit and ate it. Like the other fruit trees in the garden, it was “very good”, but unlike the rest of the trees, God had said, “…you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die’” (Gen. 2:17). Over and over again, God is the one who declares what is good for man (1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25, 31), but in a moment of temptation, Eve chooses to seek the good without God. This is high treason and death is unleashed on humanity.

There is a great deal of speculation over the forbidden fruit. An early Jewish source likened it to a grape (1 Enoch 31:4), but in the West the fruit has long been thought of as an apple. This is what happens when you sub out the Latin word for evil (malus) with the Greek word for apple (malum). This is also clearly a reach. Some people think it was a fig, because it’s leaves are mentioned next in the story (Gen. 3:7). We don’t know what the fruit was, but we do know what it resulted in, “Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves” (Gen. 3:6-7).

Christian theology has labeled this story “The Fall.” Creation is broken. In God’s plan, Adam and Eve were supposed to obey God and rule over the creatures (1:28), but now the creature/serpent sits over the man and God is thrown under the bus. It’s interesting that one of the first things God does it to right the order of creation. Adam is called to account first, then Eve and lastly the creature (3:9, 13, 14). God has a big reconciling heart, so what is broken must be fixed.

Nakedness is also broken. In 2:25 we read, “The man and his wife were both naked (arom) and unashamed,”, but here we see a different exposure, “…they realized they were naked (erom). This is a different kind of nakedness. This kind carries the nuance of punishment and sitting under God’s judgment, “therefore in hunger and thirst, in nakedness (erom) and dire poverty you will serve the enemies the LORD sends against you” (Deut. 28:48). After man’s rebellion, mankind could no longer come naked into God’s presence (Exod. 28:42-43).

In the choosing of the good without God, a dark exchange takes place. Instead or worshipping God, we make other things ultimate. Good things become “god-things” and in this act of blasphemy, what was good spoils and dies. This is what comes of idolatry. It is the nature of Biblical Narrative (i.e. story) to teach doctrine more by showing than telling. Where the apostle Paul describes man’s condition apart from God as “dead in transgressions and sins” and “by nature objects of God’s wrath” (Eph. 2:1, 3), Genesis shows us nakedness, self-atonement, and estrangement from God (3:7-8). More is shown than told, but it speaks a thousand words.

We are rebels by nature and choice. The total depravity of man is one the most empirically proven doctrines of Scripture. True, we are not as bad as we can be, but we are all bent in on ourselves. There is no part of us, in our flesh, that can resist the gravitational pull of selfishness. Parents know this. No one teaches their kids to lie. They do that all on their own. Instead we have to teach them to tell the truth. Spouses know this. How many arguments over sex, money and hobbies could be disarmed if we were only a little less selfish? Sin is less about breaking rules and more about breaking relationships. At our best and most religious, we can manage the rebellion, but we can’t stop it. Apart from God’s merciful intervention, we are all stock-piling judgment for the day of wrath.

Act #4: Rescue
“The LORD God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife and clothed them. And the LORD God said, ‘The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.’ So the LORD God banished him from the Garden of Eden to work the ground from which he had been taken” (3:21-23).

God has a big heart. Have I mentioned that? Adam and his wife stood naked in fig leaves, but the leafy green of the tree was not enough to cover their sins. Religion, with all its acts of self-atonement, will always leave you naked (erom) before a holy God. If man is to be rescued, it cannot come by his own hand.

In the act of making garments of skin to cover the man and his wife, God breaks His Sabbath rest. The work of rescue has begun! Theologians see this as prefiguring what God would do in Christ Jesus. He substitutes His life for ours and His death on the cross covers our sins. The theology of rescue is more shown than told, but when it does speak, it points to Jesus. Speaking to the serpent, God proclaims the first Gospel:

“And I will put enmity between you [the serpent] and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel” (3:15).

When we read Genesis within the context of the Big Story, we see the first announcement of the gospel. Satan will suffer total defeat. He is cursed to “eat dust” all the days of his life, but the seed of the woman will one day crush his head, but at the cost of his own life, “…you will strike his heel.”

Putting it all Together: How should we read Genesis 1-3?

  1. Read it like it’s history (real people and real events from a God-centered point of view).
  2. Read it as part of the Pentateuch (Genesis is book one of a five part series, not a science text book); and
  3. Read it as the beginning of the Big Story (the rebellion of mankind sets up the need for divine rescue).

If I were to sum up the overall message of Genesis chapters 1-3 it would go like this:

The God of the covenant (Yahweh) is the One who made everything and prepared a good land so that His people might flourish and be blessed (chap. 1). God created the first man to worship and obey him and put him in the perfect environment with the perfect partner (chap. 2). Man rebelled against God, but He is the compassionate judge of sinners, displaying His righteousness by punishing sin and His mercy by providing a substitute (chap. 3).

Next Week: How old is it? Young earth or old earth creation?

Genesis

Is it a Science Book?

/in , , /by

As a little boy I was fascinated by dinosaurs. I especially liked the T-Rex, muscle bound in haunches and tale and outfitted with a jagged maw. The sharp teeth of these predators cut into my imagination, so much so that I had to ask my mom if they were mentioned in the Bible. With so many fossils, it was impossible to deny the reality of these creatures, but because their bones threatened the faith of my mother, she answered, “the devil put those bones in the ground to keep you from believing.” I wasn’t satisfied with this answer and put the question in my back pocket for a later time. As for mom, she was doing the best she could with what she had.

I still like dinosaurs! While they may threaten characters in the Jurassic Park series, they need not threaten our faith. So, instead of attributing their bones to the devil, I see the creation of T-Rex and raptors in the first statement of the Bible, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” (1:1). The phrase “the heavens and the earth” is a figure of speech called a merism (i.e. two contrasting words that when put together refer to the whole). You could translate it this way, “In the beginning God created everything that began to exist.” Like everything else, dinosaurs were made by God, and like so much of creation after sin entered the world, they succumbed to death.

This childhood story illustrates the unnecessary friction that can come from a clumsy reading (or misreading) of the two books God has given to us: the Book of Nature and the Book of Scripture. The Book of Nature states that some things about God can be known through His creation. In the New Testament, Paul argues that the revelation God provides through creation is sufficient to hold people responsible for believing that God exists and should be worshipped (Romans 1:18-20). The Book of Scripture is God’s self-revelation to us about who He is and how we can be rescued from death through Jesus Christ. When all the facts are known and when properly interpreted, Scripture is always true and never false. This includes what it says about creation, human origins and history in general.

In the last episode I argued that Genesis should be read as theological history (i.e. real people and real events from a God-centered point of view). Most Evangelicals read it this way, but too many of us make the mistake of reading the book of Genesis (Scripture) like its a science text book (the book of nature). Instead of following the rules of good Bible study, which insists on discovering, as best we can, the original intent of the author and what it meant to his original audience, we race to our context with its questions about Darwinian evolution and dinosaur bones.

When God inspired Moses to write, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth”, Moses was not entering into a debate with Richard Dawkins. He was writing to Israelites who were likely preparing to enter into the Promised Land. When we remember that Genesis is book one of a five part series (the Pentateuch), we see that the big idea of the passage is that the God of the covenant (Yahweh) is the One who made everything and prepared a good land so that His people might flourish. That’s the message of chapter one. If we are overly quick to read our questions and concerns into the text, we risk missing its original meaning.

So, how should we read Genesis 1-3? We should read it with the grain of the Pentateuch. When we do that, all kinds of interesting truths leap from its pages:

  • “Now the earth was formless and empty…” (1:2). What earth is he talking about? We rush to read “planet earth” into the text, but what if the text is pointing us to a specific land? In some contexts the word for earth/land (eretz) can refer to earth in a global since (Gen. 18:25), but in Genesis one it refers to habitable space (i.e dry ground) in contrast to water world. However, in the Pentateuch eretz normally refers to the Promised Land and a good case can be made that the boundaries of Eden correspond to the boundary markers for the Promised Land. What would happen if we read the creation of the planet into verse one, but interpreted the days of creation in verses 1:2-31 as more or less interested in telling a people about ready to enter into the Promised Land how God prepared it for His original covenant people Adam and Eve?
  • “Now the earth was formless and empty…” (1:2). The phrase “formless and empty” seeks to capture the Hebrew “tohu wabohu” (lit. uninhabitable waste). Deuteronomy 32:10 translates it as “howling waste” and later prophets will use it to describe the Promised Land ruined by the disobedience of God’s people. Read within the context of the Pentateuch, tohu wabohu conveys not a cosmic void, but a waste land where man cannot live. Tohu is not tob (i.e. good). Read within the context of the Pentateuch, tohu wabohu warns readers what can happen to the good land if they break the covenant.
  • “…darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters” (Gen. 1:2). In the Pentateuch, water is often an obstacle to inhabiting the land. God must do something about the waters so that people can inhabit the land (Gen. 6-9; Exod. 14-15).
  • “The LORD took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden work it and take care of it” (2:15). The words work and take care of roughly translate the Hebrew words abad and shamar. When we read this within the context of the Pentateuch we see that something more than yard work is happening here (see Exod. 3:12; Deut. 30:15-18). To abad is to worship and to shamar is to keep His commands. The call to worship and obey God winks at us through a double-meaning.

Reading Genesis within the the context of the Pentateuch is critical if you want to spiral closer to its original meaning. As Gordan Fee reminds us, “The text cannot mean what it never meant.” Only after we have discovered what the text meant to the first readers can we talk about its significance to the questions of our day: How old is the universe? Did man evolve? Etc. This is just good Bible study.

Genesis

Creation, Rebellion and Rescue: Big Questions from Genesis 1-3

/in , , /by

The book of Genesis has long fascinated people of all ages. As a kid I remember opening the family Bible and staring at the artistic renditions of creation, Adam and Eve (fig leaves appropriately positioned to cover their privates) and the waters of the deluge. Genesis is foundational to the Bible’s big story and the good news about Jesus Christ. It explains where everything came from, why we were created, how things got so screwed up and it sets up the beginning of God’s rescue plan for people and planet. More than that, Genesis tells us that God has a big reconciling heart. First impressions matter. The first book of the Bible establishes our first impressions about God. The God who created everything out of nothing loves us and designed everything for His glory and our good. From the very first chapters we discover that He is especially fond of us and wants to bless us (1:28). Wow!

This new blog series is based on a class that I taught at Fox Valley Church earlier this year. Originally planned as a four week class, it quickly spilled over into two months. The Scripture was too good to skim over and the questions raised from the class were too interesting to skip past. The questions raised by the class participants will form the basis of this new series:

  1. How should we read Genesis 1-3? Is it history or mythology? (a three part answer)
  2. How old is the universe and the earth?
  3. Are the days of Genesis chapter one 24 hour days of one earth week?
  4. Where did we come from? Did we evolve from preexisting hominids, come from the stars or were we made by an immediate act of God?
  5. What does it mean to be made in the image of God?
  6. Where is the Garden in Eden located and what about the two trees?
  7. Could Adam have been eaten by a lion?
  8. What does Genesis tell us about God’s plan for marriage and family?
  9. What is our purpose in life?
  10. How did everything get so screwed up and what has God done to rescue us from death?

I’m trying to keep the list to ten questions, but please let me know if there’s a burning question that didn’t make it. I will try to thread the needle of provided “solid meat” for Bible study, while speaking with simplicity and clarity. You’ll get the most out of this series by praying, reading your Bible and drinking a good cup of coffee. Stay tuned!

Genesis

New Genesis Series: Is it History or Myth?

/in , , /by

Nearly every culture has a creation story. Most of them are myth-laden fairy tales, but they make good reading. In Greek mythology, there was nothing but chaos in the beginning, until somehow, the earth (Gaia) emerged and gave birth to the Sky. They made a bunch of babies (six male Titans and six female Titans). One of them was named Cronus and he fathered Zeus. Cronus had a bizarre habit of eating his children, but Zeus managed to escape his dad’s late night cravings. Most of us are familiar with the story from that point on. Meanwhile, the Cherokee nation believed that the earth existed as a floating island, held by four cords and surrounded by salt water. This island had been created by a water beetle, who scooped up enough mud from the ocean floor to form an island.

Modern day creation fairy tales are almost as interesting. In the 2012 film Prometheus, a crew of scientists, archeologists and adventurers travel to a distant planet to discover the origins of humanity, but encounter the threat of creatures from the Alien franchise. Ask any Sci-fi geek and they’ll tell you that these monsters are capable of bringing about a mass extinction event to the human race. Bad news for these adventurers, good news for Alien fans! Having discovered that human life on earth was created by advanced humanoids called the Engineers, David (an android) asks the lone survivor Elizabeth Shaw (possibly a Christian), if she continued to hold to her beliefs:

Shaw: Where’s my cross?

David: The pouch in my utility belt. Even after all this, you still believe, don’t you?

Shaw: (ignoring the question) You said you could understand the navigation. Use their maps.

David: Yes, of course. Once we get to one of their other ships, finding a path to Earth should be relatively straightforward.

Shaw: I don’t want to go back to where we came from. I want to go where they came from. You think you can do that David?

David: Yes, I believe I can. May I ask what you hope to achieve by going there?

Shaw: They created us, then tried to kill us. They changed their minds. I deserve to know why.

Prometheus teases with answers about our origins, but leaves the question of where the Engineers came from and why they should want to destroy us open for a sequel. Atheists and Agnostics need a story like Prometheus because science, by itself, does not have enough explanatory power to explain the origins of humanity and the universe. They need Engineers and science, in place of God, to explain how we got here. My best guess is that modern tales like Prometheus are popular because they put forward a creation story that makes no moral claims on our life. Remember the candor of Aldous Huxley, the author of a Brave New World, regarding his reasons for dismissing a theistic worldview (one with meaning):

I had motive for not wanting the world to have a meaning; consequently assumed that it had none,        and was able without any difficulty to find satisfying reasons for this assumption. The philosopher who finds no meaning in the world is not concerned exclusively with a problem in pure metaphysics, he is also concerned to prove that there is no valid reason why he personally should not do as he wants to do, or why his friends should not seize political power and govern in the way that they find most advantageous to themselves. … For myself, the philosophy of meaninglessness was essentially an instrument of liberation, sexual and political.

The problem for many non-Christians when it comes to believing the Genesis creation story is not that it lacks explanatory power, but that it posits a God who cares about what we do in the bedroom and with whom we do it. At least Huxley was honest. How brave of you, Aldous!

Enter Genesis. How should we read it? Like other creation stories, Genesis seeks to explain our origins and provides a foundational worldview, but unlike the ahistorical accounts of the Greeks and Cherokees, the author of Genesis expects us to read it as theological history (i.e. real events and real people from a God-centered point of view). A real God spoke the world into existence, created a real man and woman and these two were tricked into real cosmic treason, plunging the world into death and ruin. How do we know that the writer expects us to read these elements in Genesis in a historical context?

The best internal evidence for this is the frequent use of the Hebrew word toledot (lit. generations). It can be translated account or generations and appears 11X throughout the book. Here are a few examples:

  • The beginning of the book: “This is the account (toledot) of the heavens and the earth when they were created” (2:4)
  • Deeper into the book: “This is the account (toledot) of Terah (11:27)
  • Near the end of the book: “This is the account (toledot) of Jacob” (37:2)

What am I getting at here? The use of the word toledot to refer to real people and real events in the later parts of Genesis strongly suggests that the author expects us to read the early chapters as history as well. Moses intended for us to read the account of creation and the fall of Adam and Eve as history, not myth and not poetry (though, like any good story, it does has poetry in it). Any reading of Genesis that ignores this is reading against the grain.

A Few Implications: What is God’s Spirit Saying to Me?
The implications of reading Genesis 1-3 as theological history are weighty and many. We didn’t take the time to explore the text, but here are a few ideas that emerge:

Implication #1: The God who made everything out of nothing has a big heart for people. He formed and filled the land for man’s good (i.e. a place where we could flourish in relationship with Him). The word good (Hebrew tob) is used 7X in the first chapter, 5X in Genesis 2 and 3X in Genesis 3. The care and creativity that God puts into the land so that we can thrive says something about how God feels about us. He is especially fond of His imagers.

Implication #2: Only God can determine what is good for us. He made us and knows what is best for us. The great test in the garden was over this very issue: Would Adam and Eve trust that God knew what was good for them (i.e. not eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil) or could people have the good without God? Note the contrast in the story between “God saw all that He had made, and it was very good” (1:31) and “When the women saw that the tree was good for food…” (3:6). The lesson of the story is clear, you cannot be good and experience the good without God. If you want to experience the good life, you’re going to have to trust God.

Implication #3: God holds us responsible for our choices. Dostoyevsky is right, “If God does not exist, everything is permissible.” Genesis teaches us that we are more than mammals and that God expects us to behave as imagers and not animals. It tells us that morality is not a social-construct, but instead flows from the Word of God. Taken as a whole, chapters 1-3 tell us that God is the compassionate Judge of sinners who displays His righteousness by punishing sin and His mercy by covering our shame and providing a substitute for sin (3:21). If this all sounds familiar (i.e. the good news about Jesus Christ), then you’re reading the text with the grain of God’s Big Story.

In the next episode, we’ll wrestle with the importance of reading Genesis within its context, instead of treating it like a science text book. More could be said and argued. Some of my friends will need more convincing about the explanatory power of Genesis to explain human origins. If that’s you, please check out Lee Strobel’s The Case for Faith and The Case for the Creator. Others will want to plunge deeper into Genesis itself and there are a ton of great commentaries on the market for that. Please let me know if I can point you in the right direction. Stay tuned for more!

The Right to Stoop

The Right to Stoop

/in , , /by

The Right to Stoop 

Jesus knew that the Father had put all things under His power, and that he had come from God and was returning to God; so He got up from the meal, took off His outer clothing, and wrapped a towel around His waist.  After that, He poured water into a basin and began to wash His disciples’ feet, drying them with the towel that was wrapped around Him. He came to Simon Peter, who said to Him, “Lord, are you going to wash my feet?” (John 13:3-6).

It’s no secret, I love shoes! My three favorite letters in the English language are D-S-W (as in Designer Shoe Warehouse). Few things are as practical as a pair of shoes. They can dress up a pair of jeans or help you run a race, but they also hide your feet. Feet can be ugly and unattractive. I can prove this in three sentences:

We spend thousands of dollars decorating them (the average pedicure costs $32.25 and the average woman spends over a thousand dollars a year making their ten little piggies look pretty).
We think nothing of nibbling on the toes of our babies, but try this with your teenager (Gross!!!!); and
In some cultures, great care must be taken to avoid showing the bottom of your feet to others, as it can be taken as an insult.

Even in Jiu-Jitsu, where we always have bare feet, we do everything in our power to prevent our opponent from putting their feet on us. We have a warm-up called “dirty feet” where the guy on the bottom tries to put his “dirty feet” on your clean white uniform. Feet are the lowest part of the body and are often dirty. So, given the low status of the lowest member of your body, it’s interesting that one of Jesus’ last acts before the cross was to get up from the table, take off His outer garment, wrap a towel around His waist and wash feet! Feet!

In Jesus’ day, foot washing was the lowest form of servitude. It was left to the lowest servant in the household to stoop down, untie the thongs of the sandal and wash the dust and grime off of people’s digits. It was a demeaning duty in a culture saturated in status and face-saving. There’s even a famous story about the mother of an important Rabbi who wished to wash her son’s feet, but was refused because the chore was too degrading, so she took him to rabbinic court over the right to stoop.  In her mind, it was the ultimate act of honor and love, but in his mind it was an insult to her honor (The Mekhilta of Rabbi Ishmael).

John’s Gospel tells us that Jesus, the God-man, had a big servant’s heart. His act of stooping and washing symbolized the cleansing of our heavy, dirty souls. In fact, the verb for “took off” (lit. “laying down” [tithesin]) in verse 4 is the same verb Jesus used to talk about “laying down” His life for His sheep and friends (10:11, 15, 17-18; 15:13). The greatest lover in the greatest act of love stoops.

The way of Christ is confusing to us. We do power differently; we do status differently; we don’t stoop. In the story, Peter would have none of it, but Jesus’ challenge to Peter stands as a challenge to us:

If we will have none of Jesus’ stooping, then we can none of Jesus (vs. 8); and
If the Master stoops to serve, how much more should His servants? (vv. 12-14).

What is God’s Spirit saying to Me?

The Word of God does the work of God, provided that we become doers of the Word and not just hearers (or readers in this case). One of the best things that you can do after hearing a message or reading a Bible blog is to ask: 1) Lord, what are you saying to me?; and 2) What am I going to do about it?

May I suggest two implications from this passage? First, have you put your trust in Jesus’s stooping? His stooping on the cross cleanses us from our sins and makes us spiritually clean before a righteous and holy God. Only His act of stooping can wash away our sins. Secondly, you have the right to stoop! In fact, if you want to experience a blessing today, find someone to serve. Men, serve your wives. Instead of picking up the remote when you get home, pick up a broom or wash a dish. Students, serve your little brother or sister. I know, I know, you’re older than them, but if the God-man stoops to serve, how much more should you? Lastly, some of us find our identity and joy in serving others, it might even come easy to us. My challenge to you is to let yourself be served. Humbling yourself to receive help can serve as a reminder that rescue must come from outside of us, from the One who “made Himself nothing…and humbled Himself and became obedient to death—even death on a cross” (Phil. 2:7-8).