Splinter Therapy

Weird Verses - Genesis 3 - 6

GENESIS CHAPTER 3

1 Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God really say, 'You must not eat from any tree in the garden'?"

Talking serpent?  Interesting. 

8 Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the LORD God as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and they hid from the LORD God among the trees of the garden.

Sunscreen had not been invented yet.  God is no fool. 

14.      You will crawl on your belly
       and you will eat dust
       all the days of your life..

The flannel board Sunday School stories always show the serpent as a snake.  That doesn't fit the story to me.  God curses the serpent and tells him that he will crawl on his belly all the days of his life.  So, either it was a snake that had hopes of someday growing legs and walking; or, the serpent was some kind of creature with legs that were either broken permanently or removed somehow.  If the second explanation is more accurate, then our flannel board serpents needed to look more like iguanas or maybe even dragons - now wouldn't that be cool?  I think I will email our Children's ministry and request this change in the curriculum.

15  And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offsping and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel.

Reference to Jesus? 

16  I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing; with pain you will give birth to children.

One of the problems with taking this story literally is the implication that before they ate the fruit, there would not have been pain in childbirth.  I don't believe God snapped his fingers and poof Adam appeared.  I believe we evolved, but at some point God breathed the breath of life into humans and thus gave them self-consciousness and souls.  If this is true, then I am guessing there was pain in childbirth prior to this event.  This is one of the verse that encourages me not to take this story as historical.  I think the story is true, and I get the same "takeaways" as my more conservative friends, but I don't believe this story can be treated as historically accurate.

16b  Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.

You won't hear this verse preached from the pulpit.  This is one of those verses that provides problems for those who take the bible as the inerrant word of God.  I do think most evangelicals choose to ignore the verses that make them uncomfortable or those don't seem to fit exactly with what they have been taught.  In their hearts I would guess that most of my conservative friends would feel guilty "ruling" over their wives.  Today, if someone preached from this verse, I am sure they would say to read it in context of the whole bible - e.g. Paul tells wives to submit to their husbands which is a tamer (but not by much) version of this same principle.  My point is that when the author of Genesis wrote these words, in his mind he truly believed that husbands were to RULE over their wives; that was the culture that existed at the time.  What makes more sense:  that the author was simply writing what he understood from God as seen through his cultural lens or that God clearly spoke this words through the author?  I lean toward the former.

17b  Cursed is the ground because of you...  18.  It will produce thorns and thistles for you,...

Are we supposed to believe that prior to this event that Adam did not have to work for his food?  Thorns and thistles did not exist before then?  Most evangelicals believe that prior to the Fall (original sin - the eating of the fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil), that the earth was pristine and that earth will be returned to this state when Christ returns.  Our modern understanding of the age of the earth and how it has aged and evolved makes me reject the evangelical interpretation of these verses.  I have trouble accepting that the earth went into a fallen state after this event - implying that before the Fall the earth was pristine and perfect or that it will become pristine and perfect again at the second coming of Jesus.

21.  "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil."

This verse is so cool.  Who is God talking to here?  Jesus?  The Holy Spirit?  Very possible.  Verses like this make me hesitant to believe that Jesus was not preexistent.  Of course, you could say that God was talking to the angels.  Or, you could say that the author was possibly polytheistic.  In my gut, however, I have to admit I lean toward believing that God is somehow conversing with Himself.

21b.  "He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever".

I bet Adam is kicking himself for not eating of this tree before he disobeyed and ate from the other one!

24 After he drove the man out, he placed on the east side  of the Garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life.

Again, if you take this story literally then you have to believe that somewhere on this earth there is a garden with two very special trees in it, and that this garden is guarded by an angel with a flaming sword.  I choose to take the metaphorical truth from the story instead - "As humans live in a depraved state and we do not have access to eternal life from a default state of existence".  By the way, I think the next Indiana Jones movie should center around this - how cool would it be for Indiana found this garden?

GENESIS CHAPTER 4

6. ...If you do what is right, will you not be accepted?   

Despite all my wanderings I am still a "Grace Alone" kinda guy.  However, I don't think salvation comes through simply believing propositional truths.  We must "do what is right", and by that I believe that we must live a life of submission and surrender to God.  I think that is the message of this verse.  We don't earn our favor with God through works, but we are open to receiving grace when we live in submission to Him.

13c ..."I will be a restless wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me." - Cain to God

Who is Cain talking about - what others?  At this point I thought it was just Adam, Eve, and Cain (he had just killed Abel).

17.  Cain lay with his wife.

Wife?  Who is that?  Where did she come from?  Was she an unmentioned sister?  Did other humans exist other than Adam, Even and Cain?  If so, did they have the "breath of life" (see Gen 1: 7) - meaning did they have a soul/spirit?  If they did, then what makes the story of Adam special?  If not, then what happens when Cain reproduces with a being that is spiritless/soulless?  Hmmm.  Many puzzles if you want to believe this story is historically accurate.

17 Cain lay with his wife, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Enoch. Cain was then building a city, and he named it after his son Enoch. 18 To Enoch was born Irad, and Irad was the father of Mehujael, and Mehujael was the father of Methushael, and Methushael was the father of Lamech.

Then read,

Genesis 5: 18 When Jared had lived 162 years, he became the father of Enoch. 19 And after he became the father of Enoch, Jared lived 800 years and had other sons and daughters. 20 Altogether, Jared lived 962 years, and then he died.  .... 25 When Methuselah had lived 187 years, he became the father of Lamech..

Two Enochs?  If so, then there are some mighty strange coincidences in the names of their immediate descendents.  If only one Enoch, then how do you explain that in one place Enoch's father is Cain and then just one chapter later his father is listed as Jared.  Surely whoever wrote Genesis would have noticed such a conflict.  Many scholars believe that Genesis actually has several authors, but even if that is true wouldn't they notice the conflict as well.  What if the author(s) were not so much concerned with historical accuracy as our modern minds thought they were?  Who knows?  Regardless, these verses are interesting when read together.

GENESIS CHAPTER 5

v.3  When Adam lived 130 years, he had a son in his own likeness, in his own image..

130 years old before he had his first son?  Wow.

v. 5  Adam lived 930 years, and then he died.

He lived to be 930 years old?  In fact, all through Chapter 5, you find that everyone was living to some pretty unbelievable ages (Seth 912, Enosh 905, Kenan 910, Mahaliel 895 - he must have felt robbed!, Jared 962, Methuselah 969).  Our modern understanding of things makes this hard to believe - supposedly during this time in human history the average lifespan was closer to 30 - 40 years (If I am remembering my Discovery Channel shows correctly).  Can you imagine living this long?  Were they all experts at everything?  Did sex get boring for them?  Did each year go by faster as it does for us - if so, can you imagine how quickly time passed when they were 900 years old?  Whew.

Of course, Young Earth people will claim that the expanse of water above the earth (which was later released to create the Flood) provided a natural barrier that protected humans from the harmful UV rays of the sun.   That understanding of things creates a theological package:  If you want to believe in the historical accuracy of the bible (meaning you really believe humans at one time lived to be 969 years old), then you have to accept that at one time a water barrier existed in the sky that was sufficient enough to extremely slow down the aging process, and if you believe that then you must believe that the Flood was indeed a global flood.  Interestingly enough, after the story of Noah, the ages begin to dwindle exponentially.  It seems so crazy that I almost think it has to be true.  I mean why would the author of Genesis write this stuff down - I don't see any motive for doing so other than trying to write it as he understood it.  Craziness I tell you; the Old Testament is full of crazy things.

GENESIS CHAPTER 6

2 the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose. ...4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.

And here we are getting all worked up about gay marriage.  Imagine the James Dobson of that time; angels and humans marrying!! I bet there were some pretty long petitions going around back then.

Sons of God?  Angels?  Demons?  This verse makes me think that at some point there was some kind of superhuman walking around on the earth - half-angel, half-human.  Ladies and gentlemen, this is X-Files kind of material.  Man, those were weird times I bet.  Could they fly?  Were they superstrong - bend steel bars?, rip telephone books in half?  Superfast?  If so, how fast?  Enquiring minds want to know.  "Heroes of old.  Men of renown."  Obviously, there was something very different about them. 

Man, there is some weird and wild stuff in Genesis.  Crazy stuff.

7 So the LORD said, "I will wipe mankind, whom I have created, from the face of the earth—men and animals, and creatures that move along the ground, and birds of the air—for I am grieved that I have made them."

So, even if you believe that other humans existed at the time of Adam, Eve and Cain (see Genesis 4:14), then after the Global Flood, all humans came from Noah and his offspring.  Not only that, but we are supposed to believe (if taken literally) that every single land dwelling animal on the planet today is a direct descendent of an animal on the ark. 

Also, why is God grieved that he made the animals and creatures that move along the ground, and the birds of the air?  They didn't do anything wrong did they?  I bet they thought they were getting a raw deal.

The story of Noah is an interesting one to me.  It was one of the first ones that made me question the bible as a historical document.  In fact, not knowing that you could possibly see the bible as anything but historically true (how else could you trust it if it weren't historically accurate?), stories like Noah created a faith crisis for me.  The heart can not accept what the mind rejects.  Stories like this made me think the whole God thing might be my next "Santa Claus" experience.

The story  of Gilgamesh is also interesting to me.  It is obvious that one of these stories pulled from the other.  Assuming anyone read this is familiar with the Noah story, here are some of the parallels in the Gilgamesh story :

Link to Suite 101 - Their summary of the Gilgamesh story parallels to the Bible

-The God Enlil was disturbed so much by the noise of mankind that he decided to destroy them with a flood.  The goddess Ishtar had pity on them, however, and chose a family to be the sole survivors.

-Utnapishtim built an ark and brought in large numbers of animals.

-A bird is what was used to find dry land

-The ark comes to rest on a mountaintop.

Scholars assume that the biblical authors borrowed from the Epic of Gilgamesh.  I would guess that would be because that we have documents with the Gilgamesh story that are older than the documents we have of the story of Noah.  I really don't know.  Evangelicals would argue that The Epic of Gilgamesh borrowed from the story of Noah.  Who knows?  It is not important enough for me to go back and research it.  However, if anyone reading this has any insight, please share.

Genesis - Chapter 2

Verses 1 and 2:
Thus the heavens and the earth were completed in all their vast array. By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested from all his work.

I am curious as to why the people who created the chapter and verse reference points decided to include verses 1 and 2 in Chapter 2 instead of Chapter 1.  It looks like they are summary statements of Chapter 1.  Verse 3 immediately starts into the Adam and Eve story.   Just curious.

Verses 5 and 6:
5 and no shrub of the field had yet appeared on the earth and no plant of the field had yet sprung up, for the LORD God had not sent rain on the earth and there was no man to work the ground, 6 but streams came up from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground-

These are some interesting verses.  Verse 5 looks like it is referencing Day 2 - no vegetation yet (Day 3) and no rain at this point.  The fact that there was no rain affirms that the atmosphere was different at this point than it is today.  Again, this brings us back to the "water above" mentioned in Chapter 1 - Day 2. 

I remember in my church growing up that one of my Sunday School teachers taught us (don't know if it was his idea or part of the official Sunday School curriculum) that there was not any rain until God sent the flood.  I know it is just me, but I would love to know what the "water above" was - high humidity?  thick cloud cover?  if it was actually liquid water of some sort, it seems that it would be too heavy to remain suspended in the air.

Verse 7
the LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.

As a child I used to picture this in my mind as dust cloud forming and then somehow turning into a human being.  One second there is nothing, the next there is a man standing there.  In fact, if you don't believe in evolution, you have to believe that somehow God is snapping his fingers and magically creating things. 

I now believe that man evolved.  I look at the fossils that archaeologists have given us - Neanderthal, Cro-Magnon, any many others.  I watch the Discovery Channel specials and I truly believe that man has evolved over hundreds of thousands of years.  I think it possible, however, that at an exact moment in time, that man became a spiritual being - he received the breath of life. 

Also, I wanted to point out that there looks like a big jump between verses 6 and 7.  In verse 6, we are in Day 2.  Man was created at the end of Day 6.  So, in one verse, we skip over days 3, 4, 5, and most of day 6. 

Opie:  I wanted to clarify something.  Do you believe the Adam and Eve story or not?

Me:  It depends on what you mean by "believe".  Do I think the story of Adam and Eve are historically accurate events?  Are you asking that if I got into a time machine could I go back and videotape the following:
  -Adam magically created from the dust of the ground
  -Adam going to sleep; God magically opening him up, taking out one of his ribs and then magically creating another human - Eve
  -A talking serpent
  -A angel with a flaming sword guarding the entrance to the Garden of Eden
  -The two magical trees (Tree of Life; Tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil)
No.  I don't believe in the historical accuracy of the story - at least in its entirety.  I think it is a myth.  However, I must clarify.  When most people hear the word "myth" they think of things like the Greek Gods (mythology) or fairy tales.  For most people "myth" means "not true".  I no longer hear the word that way.  Myths and metaphors can be "more than literal" or "more than factual".  Metaphorical language is not inferior to factual language.  I can read the story of Adam and Eve and capture the deeper truths of the story without having to believe in their historical accuracy.

By the way, for those of you who believe in a "young earth", here is something I feel compelled to point out.  Notice that in Chapter 1, that on Day 6, it says God created them - male and female.  Well, in Chapter 2 we learn that before God created Eve that:
-Adam was created
-Adam named all the animals
-Adam realized he was lonely
-Adam went down for major surgery and had a rib removed
Ladies and Gentlemen, that is a LONG day!!!  Adam must have dipped into that silvery liquid that they show on the Comcast High Speed commercials!

I want to close today and talk about the two trees in the garden - The Tree of Life and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.  I think a lot about them. 

God made the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil forbidden.  In fact, he told them if they ate of this tree that they would die.  There are many times in my life I wonder if I am eating off the forbidden tree.  Is this journey of questions I am own, in essence taking bites of the fruit from this forbidden tree?  Does God prefer that we not ask questions.  Is the search for truth unhealthy for my soul?   I convince myself that God is with me on my quest - in fact, I believe he is the one spurring me on.  I could write about this internal struggle at great length, but I will leave that discussion for another day.

Genesis - Chapter 1

There are very few parts of the bible that have been more influential in my life than Genesis Chapter 1. 

Ironically, this one chapter help put me on my journey of asking questions while at the same time affirms my faith in an interactive creator.

Fuel for the Journey of Asking Questions
There are other things that prompted me to begin questioning everything spoon fed to my by my Baptist Church growing up, but I can very easily recall the moment I read Hugh Ross' book, Creation and Time.  You see, I was taught that the universe, the earth, and all living things were created in 6 24 hour time periods.  When I read Creation and Time, it opened my eyes to a new way of interpreting the creation story.  Never say never, but after reading that book, it is hard to imagine any scenario where I will ever go back to believing any "young earth" theory.  After reading this book and then going back and reading Genesis Chapter 1, I began to think, "So, what else have I been taught that is not correct?".  BTW, I highly recommend this book.

Affirming my faith in an interactive creator
Genesis Chapter 1 also helps affirm my faith in God and helps me trust the Bible.  I came across Joseph Campbell a few years.  Prior to his death, he was considered the greatest scholar on "myth" to have ever lived.  His interviews (especially with Bill Moyer in the mid 80's) along with his books, exposed me to the creation myths of several cultures.  Ladies and Gentlemen, there were some crazy ones out there.  Also, when I read the Dalai Lama's book, The Universe in a Single Atom, he talks about the creation story that many Buddhists learned growing up; it was very weird and full of crazy things - things that I think any thinking human would quickly dismiss as literally untrue.

The amazing thing about Genesis Chapter 1 is how someone writing between 2500 and 3000 years ago was able to put the pieces of creation together in almost the exact same order as the natural sciences have confirmed.    When compared to the creation myths of other cultures and religions, the bible, in my humble opinion, clearly outshines all others.  I am amazed by its beauty and symmetry with our modern understanding of physics and biology.  This pushes me toward believing that whoever wrote the biblical creation story was divinely inspired while doing so.

Do I believe in the Big Bang?  Yes

Do I believe in evolution?  Yes (at least it resonates as something that sounds true and makes sense)

Do I believe that there is an intelligent designer behind evolution?  Yes

Do I believe that the universe is billions of years old?  Yes

Do I believe the bible contradicts any of this?  No

Here is a quick summary of each creation day:
Day 1:  Created light - separates light from darkness
Day 2:  Separates the water - water above and water below.  Sky in between.
Day 3:  Land.  Vegetation / plants.
Day 4:  Sun.  Moon.  Stars.
Day 5:  Sea creatures.  Birds.
Day 6:  Land creatures.  Man.
Day 7:  Rest (are we in Day 7 right now?)

Opie:  But wait, I thought you said it affirmed your belief in the Big Bang and even evolution.  How do you explain Day 4 - doesn't that contradict your beliefs?  Those evil and misguided (love their little hearts)  scientists tell us that the sun and stars were created long before there was vegetation.

Me:  Yes.  Science does tell us that.  If you are a "young earth" subscriber, my question to you would be how in the world we had vegetation before there was a sun.  We now know that plant's make their own food from ultraviolet radiation (sunlight) - photosynthesis.   But I digress.  Here is how I answer your question:  You see, the creation story is written from the perspective of the earth.  The sun, stars, and moon were not visible from the earth due to the heavy water content in the atmosphere for billions of years (see Day 2).  Simply, the sun, moon, and stars were created well before there was vegetation on the earth, but they were just not completely visible from an earthly perspective until much later due to heavy water content in the atmosphere.

Day 2 and Noah.
Of all the days mentioned, day 2 is the most intriguing to me.  Water above.  Water below and sky in between.  Water above?  Are we just talking about humidity?  Clouds?  Or, was water in liquid form somehow suspended above the surface of the earth.  Many theologians subscribe to the latter.  They claim that the high water content in the air is why people lived over 1000 years in the early history of man - it protected them from the harmful effects of ultraviolet radiation.  Also, the "water" in the air explains how there could be a global flood as described in the story of Noah - I mean you really need a lot of water to completely cover the whole earth!

Of course, if you think there was a wall of water in the air at the time of Noah, then you have another problem.  How do you describe that the Bible says the sun, moon, and stars are not created until Day 4?  I see two possibilities:  either the wall of water became so thin that the sun, moon, and stars could be seen; or, you have to believe in the literal 24 hour creation days (of course, 24 hour days don't make any sense without the sun, but that is just a small detail).   I choose to believe that the sun, moon, and stars were created (evolved) before vegetation.

Originally Vegetarians?
I have never noticed it before, but it looks like God only gives Adam and Eve permission to eat plants.  If he took the time to tell them that they had permission to eat plants, why wouldn't he, at the same time, give them permission to eat animals as well?  See 1:29-30.  I think that is interesting.