Genesis 17:9-14

2007.Apr.28 00:26

Circumsion

Read Genesis 17:9-14 Full Chapter

God continued to Abraham, “And you: You will honor my covenant, you and your descendants, generation after generation. This is the covenant that you are to honor, the covenant that pulls in all your descendants: Circumcise every male. Circumcise by cutting off the foreskin of the penis; it will be the sign of the covenant between us. Every male baby will be circumcised when he is eight days old, generation after generation—this includes house-born slaves and slaves bought from outsiders who are not blood kin. Make sure you circumcise both your own children and anyone brought in from the outside. That way my covenant will be cut into your body, a permanent mark of my permanent covenant. An uncircumcised male, one who has not had the foreskin of his penis cut off, will be cut off from his people—he has broken my covenant.” (Genesis 17:9-14, MSG)

I’m not interested in discussing at this point the applicability of circumcision in the “New Covenant”–there’s plenty of discussion about this in the Bible itself. When I started this entry, I wasn’t particularly interested in exploring why Jehovah chose the particular action of circumcision as the sign of this covenant. As you will see, I changed my mind. However, I do so with caution, as such discussions can distract from the reality that Jehovah would ordain such a generational covenant affirming act at all.

Last entry, I looked at how, in Genesis 17:7-8, Jehovah explicitly extended his covenant with Abraham, formerly Abram, to his descendants. I am particularly struck by the wording in The Message version, when God refers to circumcision as “the covenant that pulls in all your descendants”. There is to be a physical reminder to all of Abraham’s descendants of this covenant, that this land is their’s not by the power of their flesh but by the decision and power of God.

Okay, I am going to explore a little why circumcision in particular. This is the only time that I know of that God calls for anything that might be considered self-mutilation. Significantly, this permanent change of the flesh is particularly apparent during sex. This means that circumcision does not have (intimate) consequences just for males, but also for most of the females of Abraham’s descendants. This point is important because there is nothing that implies to me that the covenant is with men only, but even the covenant act of circumcision includes women.

Additionally, this could be seen as a metaphor for Christ’s sacrifice. As God “gave His only begotten Son” (John 3:16, NASB, Abraham’s male descendants were called to give a part of themselves that…erm…participates in the begetting process. And as we are called to take up our cross (Matthew 16:24) and “present [our] bodies a living and holy sacrifice” (Romans 12:1), and so have an experience of Christ’s sacrifice in our covenant with him, the women descended from Abraham also are called to experience the circumcision of their husbands within the marriage covenant.

And now I must take a moment and acknowledge that Christians may sometimes go overboard in trying to find metaphors for Christ in the OT. If the previous paragraph so qualifies, please ignore.

I want then to reiterate and highlight that Jehovah has placed before this people a continual covenant, and has ordained a generational reminder for it, within the covenant act of circumcision. This covenant is extended to all levels of society, including foreign slaves, because God’s promise is not dependent on some social strata. Instead, it is a reminder that we all are dependent on him.

Genesis 20:14-16

2007.Nov.07 02:03

Sacrifice by numbers

Read Genesis 20:14-16 Full Chapter

Then Abimelech took sheep, oxen, and male and female servants, and gave them to Abraham; and he restored Sarah his wife to him. And Abimelech said, “See, my land is before you; dwell where it pleases you.” Then to Sarah he said, “Behold, I have given your brother a thousand pieces of silver; indeed this vindicates you before all who are with you and before everybody.” Thus she was rebuked. (Genesis 20:14-16, NKJV)

Yay. Abimelech obeys. Took longer than I thought it should, but he obeys! It is one thing to make a moral commitment. It is altogether another thing to pay a price with that commitment. As Jesus says in Matthew:

You cannot be my disciple unless you carry your own cross and come with me.

Suppose one of you wants to build a tower. What is the first thing you will do? Won’t you sit down and figure out how much it will cost and if you have enough money to pay for it? Otherwise, you will start building the tower, but not be able to finish. Then everyone who sees what is happening will laugh at you. They will say, “You started building, but could not finish the job.” (Luke 14:27-30, CEV)

And Abimelech does pay a price, in addition to releasing Sarah. He gives Abraham a thousand pieces of silver and invites the family to stay wherever they’d like in his lands. This was not specifically required by Jehovah in the dreams in which he instructed Abimelech; the king might have saved his life without this gesture, but it would have been dishonoring to Sarah and Abraham, because Abimelech had sinned against them.

Abimelech also does not give an insulting gift, but rather something of value. A small half-hearted sacrifice when seeking forgiveness, either from other humans or from Yahweh, is insulting. Better to just ask forgiveness and not offer anything. Remember that when offering something to a friend you have hurt that whatever you give symbolizes the value you place on that relationship. Abimelech is showing to Abraham and Sarah that he values their forgiveness, if “only” for the sake of his life and kingdom.

I suppose I’ll have plenty of opportunity to discuss sacrifices later, but when Jehovah dictates specifics in what a sacrifice should be, as in “Your lamb shall be an unblemished male a year old; you may take it from the sheep or from the goats,” (Exodus 12:5, NASB) I don’t believe its an implication of what he values but rather that we must give something we value. Even when accepting Christ’s sacrifice, we implicitly sacrifice at least a portion of our pride. Getting off point, a bit. Actually, I think I’ve made my point, so I’ll foray into another tangent and then finish without repeating my thesis (it’s like a treasure hunt; see if you can find it).

As it happens, I picked the NKJV to quote, which includes this fascinating line: “Thus she was rebuked.” It’s “reproved” in the King James (and 21st Century KJV) and largely absent from my random checks of other version; Young’s Literal goes, “and by all this she is reasoned with.” Anyway, I have no particular point to make about this line, but it was very unexpected. If I knew the history behind why this passage is included in some and not other versions, I might start in on some critical analyses.

Genesis 22:2

2007.Dec.18 03:32

Your Only Son

Read Genesis 22:2 Full Chapter

He said, “Take now your son, your only son, whom you love, Isaac, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I will tell you.” (Genesis 22:2, NASB)

According to Wikipedia, some Islamic traditions hold that it was Ishmael, not Isaac, that God asked Abraham to sacrifice. I mention this because Yahweh specifically calls Abraham to sacrifice his “only son”. Assuming this chapter is chronologically placed (which seems likely, since the son named is Isaac), Abraham has two sons at this point. This could be a translation issue, but every translation I checked has the “only son” language.

There are a couple of important points about the only son business as illustrative of God’s plan. It is perhaps cliche, but quite relevant, to remember that “God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son” (John 3:16, NASB), and that Yahweh, in addition to testing Abraham’s faith, may also have been giving the Israelites a reference story for better understanding Christ’s sacrifice later on. In that illustration, making a point of the only child (or, in these cases, son specifically) being sacrificed is relevant, even if not technically accurate.

Second, Yahweh’s intent was for Abraham to have only one son at this time. I suppose it may be that God permitted Abraham and Sarah to send away Hagar and Ishmael particularly to regain this intent. A more interesting possibility to me though is that Abraham had already–from Abraham’s point of view–had to sacrifice one son. Now, he has to sacrifice the second. So, maybe I should ponder the reflection of this story not only in the Messiah but also in humanity’s original murder. In that situation, Eve and Adam lost one of their two sons when Cain murdered Abel, and then lost Cain as well. “Sin pays off with death,” Paul reminds us (Romans 6:23, CEV). One aspect of death is separation. At this point, Ishmael was dead to Abraham as Cain was dead to Adam; they were separated indefinitely, and that separation directly followed sin.

Jumping to another point sans segue, God is aware of the sacrifice, in both the cases of Ishmael and Isaac. Sarah’s reaction to the anticipated sacrifice of Isaac–if she even knew–is not recorded, so I am focusing of Abraham’s reactions. When Sarah asked Abraham to send away Hagar and Ishmael, “The matter distressed [him] greatly” (Genesis 21:11, NASB). This should have been just as distressing, and Yahweh is aware of this reality. He knows that Isaac is now in many ways Abraham’s only child, and he acknowledges Abraham’s love of his son. God, in regards to both of Abraham’s sons is not unaware of what he is asking.

Genesis 22:11-12

2007.Dec.22 22:07

Test Passed

Read Genesis 22:11-12 Full Chapter

But the angel of the LORD called to him from heaven and said, “Abraham, Abraham!” And he said, “Here I am.” He said, “Do not stretch out your hand against the lad, and do nothing to him; for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from Me.” (Genesis 22:11-12, NASB)

Abraham passed the test. He showed by his actions that he had faith. This test, remember, was particular to Abraham, although Isaac showed a good deal of faith–either in Yahweh or in his father–as well, as I suppose did anyone else who knew, if there was anyone else. But what exactly was the test and how did Abraham pass?

In the simplest, the test was whether Abraham feared and honored Yahweh enough to be willing to sacrifice his own son to Yahweh. He passed the test because he actively showed that he was willing, should Yahweh ask that of him. Or, in a different sense, Yahweh was testing if Abraham was willing to obey when it would cost him an exceptionally extreme amount. And Abraham obeyed fully to the point that God told him to halt.

More abstractly, I think the test could be seen as whether Abraham was humble enough to deny his own son, his dreams for the future (remember, he’s over 100 years old), and his reasoning. Those are some pretty big things (I realize the last is not big for everyone, but for people like me who greatly value their ability to reason, accepting that God’s plan is just not going to make sense to me is a huge test of my humility). God then may be asking Abraham, “Are you willing to give me complete control?”

To an extent, most of the tests and such that we go through could be interpreted as God asking if we are willing to give him control, to acknowledge that he is God and I am not; indeed, to explicitly release my claim on godhood. Abraham does so twice in this test, first by acknowledging that Yahweh–not Abraham–can provide a solution to the contradictory notion that he is expected to sacrifice the son from which God has promised to build a nation; and then again by being willing to put down the knife and accept so clearly that he is giving a sacrifice to God that was not in any way provided by Abraham.

NB: In later books of the Bible (Leviticus 20, for example), God clarifies that human sacrifice is a sin punishable by stoning. This would have been a very different story if it had happened after Yahweh gave the Law to Israel. Even in this situation, God ultimately makes clear his position that humans should not be sacrificed, which sort of makes Christ’s sacrifice even more amazing (if that’s possible).