Dan Olinger

Part 1: Introduction | Part 2: Journey to Canaan | Part 3: Settlement | Part 4: Establishment | Part 5: Covenant | Part 6: Ishmael. Not.

I’ve suggested that Abraham has acted in good faith. But it turns out that he has not done the right thing. I suspect we’ve all experienced something like that.

God (here called YHWH, his personal, relational name), whose will is always done, acts to enlighten him, in the way he usually deals with him: direct revelation. And what a revelation it is.

God refers to himself as El Shaddai, “Almighty God.” He can do anything; he was not stymied by Sarai’s age, and he doesn’t need Abram’s help.

Commentator Gordon Wenham notes that this chapter is a chiasmus; God’s five speeches here are arranged in an ABCBA pattern:

A: Everlasting Covenant (Ge 17.1-2)
B: Renaming of Abram (Ge 17.4-8)
C: Sign of the Covenant: Circumcision (Ge 17.9-14)
B: Renaming of Sarai (Ge 17. 15-16)
A: Everlasting Covenant (Ge 17.19-21)

This is a thorough and artful restatement and implementation of the Covenant.

We’ve noted already that the Covenant is monergistic; God alone walks between the divided corpses. But he does expect something of Abram: “walk before me, and be perfect,” or blameless, spotless (Ge 17.1). How will he do this? By faith (He 11.8-10), as do we all. And he indicates that faith by worship (Ge 17.3).

To indicate Abrahm’s expanded role under the Covenant, God gives him a new name: Abraham, “father of a multitude” (Ge 17.5). And he reiterates the promises: many descendants (Ge 17.6), seed (singular!) (Ge 17.7; cf Ga 3.16), land (Ge 17.8).

Now God gives the sign of the Covenant: circumcision. This does seem odd to us, not to mention bringing up awkward questions in middle school Bible classes. Why circumcision?

The Bible speaks to this. I should note that circumcision was practiced across the Near East, but here God gives it a new significance. As circumcision is the cutting off and putting away of a piece of flesh, a visible part of the man’s generative organ, it serves as an external sign of an internal reality: the putting away of “the flesh,” our tendency to entertain what Paul calls “the old man,” our former selves, our fallen nature (Co 2.11). Note that the external type is not sufficient; if it doesn’t reflect an inner reality, it is meaningless. To an Israelite man it served as a daily reminder of his special standing before God and his responsibility to live it out.

Now God turns to Sarai and refreshes her name. Both “Sarai” and Sarah” (Ge 17.15) mean “princess,” but the latter is a newer form, by which God is reminding her of her standing in the Covenant and her role as the biological mother of the promised son (Ge 17.16).

Abram laughs. Most interpreters see this as a sign of astonishment and joy rather than the unbelief that we’ll soon see in Sarah. But I’m not so sure of that. Despite the repeated promise of Isaac, Abraham still wishes that the Covenant child could be Ishmael, whom he loves, of course, as his son (Ge 17.18).

But God’s plan is that Isaac will be the heir (Ge 17.19),. God makes a play on words here; remember the meaning of Ishmael’s name? “God hears.” And God says, “I have heard you” (Ge 17.20). Ishmael will prosper, having twelve princes (Ge 17.20; cf Ge 25.13-15). God knows Abraham’s fears, and he hears even misguided prayers.

This is now the fourth statement of the Covenant. What’s new here? Royal descendants (Ge 17.6, 16);Sarah as biological mother; and the land as an everlasting possession.

Next time, the story continues as the spotlight turns to Isaac.

Photo by Mick Haupt on Unsplash

Part 1: Introduction | Part 2: Journey to Canaan | Part 3: Settlement | Part 4: Establishment | Part 5: Covenant

Now established in the land, and thus largely at peace with the neighboring Canaanites, Abram, with the encouragement of his wife, decides to take this whole Covenant thing into his own hands. Genesis 16 is the next chapter in our saga.

The couple has their reasons (Ge 16.1-3). It’s been ten years, and Sarai Abram’s wife still has not had a child. She, too, feels the pressure of the relentlessly ticking clock. She notes that she has a young female servant, named Hagar, for whom bearing a child would be a natural function (Ge 16.1). She recommends that Abram have the promised son by her (Ge 16.2-3).

This strikes us as, well, odd. What wife would recommend that her husband sleep with an employee?

As it happens, this practice, too, is mentioned in the Nuzi texts, as well as in Hammurabi’s law code (145-46). Having children, a posterity, was viewed as a necessary thing. It was also viewed as the sole responsibility of the wife–their knowledge of biology being incomplete. If a wife could not bear a child, she was obligated–obligated–to find a woman who could bear in her place. That child would then be the wife’s legal offspring.

So Sarai does what’s expected, though, as we shall see, she’s not completely at peace with the idea. And Abram goes along with this culturally “normal” plan (Ge 16.4). After all, the Covenant had not specified that Sarai would be the mother of the child (Ge 12.2; 13.16; 15.18). This solution seems obvious.

Hagar conceives, and as an Egyptian, steeped in the culture of the Middle East, she “despises” Sarai, the culturally disgraced barren woman (Ge 16.4). Sarai, of course, finds that outcome doubly humiliating (Ge 16.5).

What happens next displays the inherent irrationality of polygamy. Of course the two women aren’t going to get along. Sarai mistreats Hagar, who takes off (Ge 16.6). She is found “on the way to Shur” (Ge 16.7), which indicates that she’s headed for her home in Egypt.

And here we have the first biblical mention of “the angel of the LORD” (Ge 16.7), a key figure in the theology of the Old Testament. He greets her by name and calls into question her decision to flee (Ge 16.8). In so doing he calls her “Sarai’s servant.” This is significant. Hammurabi’s code would have made her Abram’s primary wife, as the one with a child. The angel reverses that: “You’re still a servant. You have no right to leave.” Hagar admits as much by calling Sarai “my mistress.”

So the angel orders her to return (Ge 16.9). And then it becomes clear that this is no mere angel (“messenger”) of God. He now speaks as God: “I will multiply thy seed” (Ge 16.10). Yet he immediately speaks of God in the third person: “The LORD has heard your affliction” (Ge 16.11).

How can this person be God, yet distinct from God?

We’ll have to wait for the New Testament to give us the information we need to answer this question.

Note that the angel names the child: Ishmael (Ge 16.11): “God hears.” He will not be the promised child of the Covenant (Ge 16.12).

Hagar responds rightly, demonstrating that she is grateful for God’s seeing her quandary; she names the well “the well of the one who lives and sees me” (Ge 16.14). I find it interesting that the angel’s emphasis is on God’s “hearing,” while Hagar’s is on his “seeing.” In this case, they’re essentially the same thing.

Hagar clearly communicated the angel’s message to Abram when she returned; he names the boy as she was instructed by the angel (Ge 16.15).

Hagar has acted rightly in all this–other than “despising” Sarai after her conception.

Given what we’ve seen, I think it’s a mistake to see Abram’s action here as faithless. He is acting on what he knows–that he’s going to have a son (by whom is so far not specified). His ten-year wait indicates that he has reason to believe that his wife is not going to be the mother; perhaps the Lord is expecting him to take responsibility and act to bring the promise to pass.

He’s a wealthy man, with a large (mobile) estate to administer; it’s reasonable to assume that he’s a man who takes responsibility and acts to accomplish his ends.

So he does.

Next time: God corrects his thinking.

Photo by Mick Haupt on Unsplash

Part 1: Introduction | Part 2: Journey to Canaan | Part 3: Settlement | Part 4: Establishment

We are now in the central stage of Abraham’s life: the formal presentation and confirmation of the Covenant. This is the first of three major covenants executed in the Old Testament: the Abrahamic, the Mosaic (Ex 19.17ff), and the Davidic (2S 7.12ff). (A fourth, the New Covenant, is predicted in Jeremiah 31.31ff, but not executed until the Last Supper [Mt 26.28].)

As we’ve seen, the Abrahamic Covenant has been initially announced earlier, in Genesis 12, but we find the full statement and ratification here in Genesis 15. Commentator Kenneth Mathews (the New American Commentary) writes, “In its immediate context, the chapter depicts the patriarch as the recipient of a divine bequest, modeled on a royal gift, which follows on his encounter with the kings (chap. 14).”

The chapter introduces the Covenant topic with a conversation between Abram and God in which Abram reminds God that he still doesn’t have any offspring (Ge 15.1-6). In the first announcement of the Covenant, God told Abram that he would become a “great nation” (Ge 12.2), which certainly implies a large number of descendants, and the second announcement makes the idea more explicit with the “dust of the earth” analogy (Ge 13.16).

Now Abram observes that he still has no offspring (Ge 15.2-3). In fact, he has followed the cultural custom of legally adopting an adult male to provide care for the aging childless couple when they need it, in return for inheriting their estate (Ge 15.2-3). (This custom is attested in the Nuzi documents, which are dated in Abram’s time.) https://cojs.org/nuzi_archives/

I don’t see Abram’s question as unreasonable, or evidence of lack of faith; it’s been close to ten years since Genesis 12 (Ge 12.4; 16.3), and at age 85 Abram doesn’t know how much time he has left.

God responds by repeating his earlier promise and clarifying it: first, Abram’s offspring will indeed be biologically his (Ge 15.4), and second, God provides a second metaphor. He had said his seed would be like the dust of the earth (Ge 13.16); now he compares it to the stars (Ge 15.5). Keep in mind that there was no light pollution in those days; even without telescopes, Abram’s view of the heavens would present an astounding number. Any readers living in Death Valley, or North Korea, can confirm that.

What follows is one of the most important verses in the Bible for the doctrine of salvation: “And he believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness” (Ge 15.6). Paul cites this verse as evidence that salvation has always been by faith, since here the Mosaic Law didn’t even exist (Ro 4.3ff; Ga 3.6-14).

Now comes the formal enactment of the Covenant (Ge 15.7-21). (Note the parallel language between Ge 15.7, initiating the Abrahamic Covenant, and Ex 20.2, initiating the Mosaic.) In a ceremony that seems strange to us, following God’s instruction (Ge 15.9), Abram slaughters several animals and cuts them in half (Ge 15.10), and God, in the form of a smoking lamp, walks between the pieces (Ge 15.17). In that culture this was the form of a solemn covenant; the parties would walk between the halves of the animals, with the implication that this kind of death will come to one who breaks the covenant (Jer 34.18-19).

Note that Abram does not walk between the animal pieces; only God does. God places himself under the threatened death penalty if he breaks the covenant. The point is clear: God cannot die; the covenant cannot be broken. We call this a monergistic covenant; only one of the parties is bound by it.

During this ceremony God prophesies the future. “God’s timescale for the fulfilment of his promises was a long one. Abram was losing patience that little had happened in the ten years … that had elapsed since the promise was first made, but God was thinking in terms of 400 years (13)” (Gordon Wenham, The New Bible Commentary, 72). This is a round number; the actual length of Israel’s stay in Egypt was 430 years (Ex 12.40).

God’s prediction of the exile in Egypt shows that it was always his intent, and here he gives the reason: he is giving the pagan Canaanites, who are already under a curse (Ge 9.25), a full four additional centuries to repent, demonstrating that he is “slow to anger” (Ps 103.8) and ameliorating the charge of genocide when the eradication of the Canaanites finally came.

Next time, Abram tries to help God fulfill the covenant.

Photo by Mick Haupt on Unsplash

Part 1: Introduction | Part 2: Journey to Canaan | Part 3: Settlement

Once Abram had settled in the land of Canaan, the next step in God’s covenant with him was to establish him there–to make him a force to be reckoned with. Genesis 14 is where he does that.

The first part of the chapter (Ge 14.1-16) shows God establishing Abram as a military presence–though his family is not a country, has no army, and, so far as we know, has no combat experience. In the area of the Dead Sea were five Canaanite “cities of the plain”: Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Zeboiim, and Bela / Zoar (Ge 14.2). Four eastern kings established dominance over these cities (Ge 14.1), which almost certainly meant forcing them to pay tribute. The names of these kings are not known from secular historical records, but their regions are: Shinar is in northern Mesopotamia; Ellasar is in southern Mesopotamia; Elam is east of Mesopotamia, part of modern Iran; Goiim could be a place name or simply a reference to “Gentiles.” (Tidal is a Hittite name.)

After twelve years of paying tribute, the Canaanite cities refused to continue (Ge 14.4), and the eastern kings came looking to put a stop to their rebellion (Ge 14.5).

Apparently these kings planned a larger invasion, establishing control over the surrounding area and thus increasing their tribute revenue (Ge 14.5-7). As this invasion advanced, the five cities set out to repel it (Ge 14.8-9).

There are a lot of place names in these few verses. In summary, the eastern kings invaded through modern Jordan, crossed south of the Dead Sea, and then proceeded west, to Kadesh Barnea on the western side of the Sinai Peninsula (Ge 14.5-7). The “Valley of Siddim” is said to be full of tar pits (Ge 14.10). The south end of the Dead Sea covers a region with such tar; the Greeks and Romans later called the region “Asphaltites.”

As we might expect, the eastern kings overwhelmed the five “kings”–effectively mayors–of the cities of the plain and plundered their cities (Ge 14.10-11). In theory, Abram didn’t have a dog in this fight, so to speak, until they looted Sodom, where his nephew Lot was living (Ge 14.12).

Once Abram heard of this personal disaster (Ge 14.13), he was going to act. Almost certainly motivated by God’s gift of the land as well as by his family connection, Abram teamed up with regional “confederates” (Ge 14.13) as well as his 318 “trained servants” (Ge 14.14)–a number nowhere near enough to take on such an invading force under ordinary circumstances–and chased the invaders from the south end of Canaan (Kadesh Barnea) to the north end (Dan, which would have been called Laish [Judg 18.29] at the time)(Ge 14.14).

Now Abram had standing in the land; the neighboring regions were going to recognize his power and treat him with respect.

The second part of the chapter (Ge 14.17-24) gives us several more pieces of information to give further meaning to Abram’s victory.

We read that the king of Sodom, certainly out of gratitude for Abram’s help, met Abram “in the valley of Shaveh” (Ge 14.17). Nobody knows where this was, but since Melchizedek, “king of Salem [Jerusalem]” (Ge 14.18), was right there, it may be a valley near that city (the Kidron?).

This Melchizedek (“my king is righteous”) has considerable importance in the biblical record. He was a “priest of the Most High God.” (This is the first use of the name “El Elyon” in the Scripture.) Now, this man was clearly Canaanite, probably Jebusite. How did he become a priest of the true God? We’re not told. (There’s a theory, based on Hebrews 7.3, that he was the preincarnate Christ. I’m quite sure that he was not.)

But he was a true priest–of an order superior to Levi’s (He 7.4-11)–and he apparently introduced the patriarch to this new name for God and blessed him in the name of that God (Ge 14.19-20).

It was after that–providentially–that the king of Sodom offered Abram a hefty reward for his exploits (Ge 14.21). In light of his earlier oath, and probably in light of the much greater blessing bestowed by Melchizedek, Abram turned it down (Ge 14.22-24).

Abram had once taken money from Pharaoh. Now he was beyond that.

And he had assurance from God, by experience, confirmed by a priest, that his God would give him the land, by force if necessary. He knew, as do we, that it was not his military skill that had given him the victory.

Next time, a new stage, and a new focus: The Covenant.

Photo by Mick Haupt on Unsplash

Part 1: Introduction | Part 2: Journey to Canaan

With Abraham’s journey to Canaan and visit to Egypt now complete, we enter the second section of this first stage of his story—settlement in Canaan. This is the focus of Genesis 13.

There’s been speculation and allegorization in interpreting this passage: was Abraham’s bringing of Lot a violation of God’s command to leave his family? Does Abram’s trip to Egypt prefigure Mary and Joseph’s flight to Egypt? Did Abram hire Hagar while they were there?

We’re going to ignore all that and stick with what the passage says—since that’s what God has revealed and thus what he wants us to know.

The chapter begins by noting that Abram is now wealthy (Ge 13.2). This is, as we noted last time, evidence that God’s covenant promise of blessing has already begun. It also sets up the next step, providing a reason why Abram thought that he and Lot should go their separate ways.

The second observation about his return to Canaan is that he returned to his former altar near Bethel and worshiped (Ge 13.3-4). Despite his foolishness in Egypt, he has not left his desire to worship and obey the God who called him out of Ur. He’s in a good position to start his time in “the Promised Land.”

We all understand that Lot is very much a foil for Abram. He shows no spiritual interest; rather than counting himself a “stranger and pilgrim on the earth” (He 11.13), he is focused on where the opportunities and consequent prosperity are. “Lot headed for the good life” (NET Bible). Before the story is over, he’s going to be sitting in the gate of Sodom (implying that he’s on the city council) with apparent disregard for the danger the city is going to be to his family. Every member of his family will evidence the consequences of that danger.

The hired herdsmen of both Abram and Lot were quarreling (Ge 13.7), almost certainly over access to water and food for the animals.

And so he suggests to Lot that they divide the land between them (Ge 13.8). This too is an act of faith; there are Canaanites all around (Ge 13.7), and Abram sees the land as his.

There are areas of the land that compare to the Garden of Eden (Ge 13.10)! Lot grabs that, while the gettin’s good. The steady water of the Jordan will provide him with all he needs.

But there is ironic foreboding here. The text anticipates that Sodom and Gomorrah will be destroyed by fire (Ge 13.10).

Abram accedes to Lot’s choice–again, perhaps because he figures that all the land will eventually belong to him anyway–thereby demonstrating a very different spirit from the fear that drove him in Egypt.

The chapter ends with God restating his covenant with Abram. It’s tempting to think that he did this because he was pleased with the spiritual development Abram has just displayed. But the text gives no indication of that. In his first presentation of the covenant (Ge 12.1-3), there is no indication that it is conditional, unless we read verse 1, Abram’s leaving Ur, as the condition. Even if we assume that, Abram’s having obeyed means that the condition has been met, and the covenant is now fully in effect.

In short, God repeats the covenant not because of how Abram is behaving, but because God keeps his promises.

God begins by telling Abram to “lift up your eyes” (Ge 13.14)–what Lot had done earlier (Ge 13.10), but without Abram’s faith. As far as Abram can see in every direction–and farther, as the land was divided by Joshua–the land would be his, including the east, which Lot had just acquired.

In this second statement God expands what he had said in chapter 12. The land promise is now “forever” (Ge 13.15). Instead of a “great nation” (Ge 12.2), now his descendants will be innumerable (Ge 13.16).

Abram now settles in the land. He locates at the “oak of Mamre,” which scholars believe is about 20 miles south or southwest of Jerusalem. The passage mentions Hebron, which may not have existed as a city in Abram’s day (it did exist when Moses was writing this account), but which is where Abraham’s grave is today.

Next time: Abram becomes a force to be reckoned with.

Photo by Mick Haupt on Unsplash

Part 1: Introduction

As we’ve noted, the first stage of Abraham’s life as recorded in Genesis is the Call from God to leave his homeland and travel to a new land: Canaan (Ge 12-14). The first chapter of this account consists of that initial call and Abram’s immediate journey.

This account comes immediately on the heels of the Tower of Babel, a deliberate defiance of God’s command to scatter and populate the earth. Abram’s immediate obedience is in stark contrast.

God’s call to Abram is clear: he is to leave his relatives and his homeland and go to an unspecified place “that I will show you” (Ge 12.1). His next words are prophecy, not command; they describe the fruits of obedience: Abram will have many descendants, who will be blessed, and who will bless the whole world (Ge 12.2-3). This promise will be repeated and expanded in upcoming chapters; we call it the Abrahamic Covenant, which promises a homeland, a posterity, and a universal blessing. Commentator Harold Willmington has characterized this as “soil, a seed, and a Saviour.” This is literally a global promise, the extent of which Abram could not possibly have fathomed.

This promise sets up the theme of the rest of Scripture. In contrast to the builders of Babel, Abram obeys, and God will set in place a plan to rescue mankind from its own rebellion, destroy Babylon (Re 14.8; 18.2), and restore Eden (Re 21.1-22.5).

Global, indeed.

I should note that Abram’s family has been introduced a paragraph earlier, at the end of chapter 11. There we learn two important things: that Sarai is barren, and that Abram’s father had already moved them from Ur, their home, to Haran, enroute to Canaan. This confusion is cleared up by the fact that the next paragraph is a flashback; the KJV and NKJV, as well as a footnote in the ESV, read the verb in verse 1 as perfect: “God had [earlier] said.” Thus the call comes in Ur, and the family members start toward Canaan. Their journey is punctuated by a stop partway, in Haran, on the Fertile Crescent.

The New Testament says that when he left Ur, he went “not knowing whither he went” (He 11.8). The Lord led them along, first to Haran for a time, and then eventually to Canaan. This was a journey of faith.

If we look closely at the numbers, we note that Abram’s father, Terah, was 70 when Abram was born (Ge 11.26) and that he died when he was 205–when Abram would have been 135. But the account says that Abram left Haran for Canaan when he was 75 (Ge 12.4)–so he must have left 60 years before his father died. Did Terah refuse to go along? Why? We don’t know. But Abram is following the Lord’s leadership, not his father’s. He needs to go.

So he gathers his closest family–his wife, and his nephew Lot (Ge 12.5)–as well as his servants and his growing possessions. (The blessing has apparently already started.) And he heads for Canaan. When he arrives, he surveys the land, arriving at Shechem (Ge 12.6), where the Lord again promises him both the land and a progeny to dwell in it (Ge 12.7). He proceeds southward to the area of Bethel (actually given that name by his grandson Jacob years later; the author of this account, Moses, is writing from a later perspective, when his readers would be used to calling the place by its later name) (Ge 12.8). In both of these places he builds altars, worshiping the Lord who is guiding him, and likely indicating his faith in the promises by “planting his flag,” so to speak.

Famine arrives (Ge 12.10). In such times, looking to Egypt, with its reliable water source in the Nile, was common. God later told Isaac not to go to Egypt (Ge 26.2); yet Jacob took his family to Egypt at Joseph’s insistence and with God’s apparent blessing (Ge 45.16ff).

Should Abram have left the land where he had built the altars, or not?

In any case, we all know the story of Abram’s fear of Pharaoh and his nonsensical lie about his beautiful wife, thereby putting her at risk of joining Pharaoh’s harem. He does not appear to be acting in faith any longer.

But God protects him–blesses him–keeping his promises despite Abram’s apparent lack of faith.

God is like that.

Next time: back to Canaan, and settlement.

Photo by Mick Haupt on Unsplash

I’d like to spend the next few posts–maybe 10 or 12–on a theological look at the life of Abraham as recounted in Genesis 12-25. As we’ll see, he’s a foundational character in Scripture, and there’s a lot to learn from him–about history, about philosophy of life, about making and recovering from mistakes, and most of all about God.

I’ve begun by saying he’s a foundational character. Let’s demonstrate that.

He is, of course, an Old Testament character, whose entire life narrative is in the first book of the Bible; but as a measure of his long-term significance, I’d like to survey what the New Testament says about him.

He’s mentioned in all four Gospels, Acts, Paul, Peter, James, and Hebrews.

He’s identified as the start of God’s covenant with Israel (Lk 1.55; He 6.13-15); first-century Jews are called “sons” or “daughters’ of Abraham (Lk 13.16; 19.9; Ac 13.26; Ro 11.1; 2Co 11.22; He 2.16). He permeates Stephen’s sermonic history of the nation (Ac 7.2, 8, 16, 32). He is called the father of Israel’s great hope, the Messiah (Mt 1.1-2, 17; Lk 3.34), and he is said to point to that same Messiah; Jesus states that directly (Jn 8.52-58), and Peter emphasizes it as he introduces the New Covenant at Pentecost (Ac 3.13-25). He represents the Levitical priesthood, which of course is descended from his great-grandson, and which Christ, as a priest after the order of Melchizedek, supersedes (He 7.1-9).

His relationship with God is exemplary for all believers; he comes to God by faith, not works (Ro 4.1-16; Ga 3.6-18; He 11.8-17; Jam 2.21-23), thereby rendering physical descent relatively unimportant (Mt 3.9; Lk 3.8; Jn 8.33-40; Ro 9.7; Ga 4.22). Consequently, he represents all who come to God (Mt 8.11; Lk 13.28; Lk 16.23-30).

We can organize Abraham’s life into several stages. When we meet him, he is a Mesopotamian, apparently an idol worshiper (Jos 24.15), whom God calls to “a land that I will show you” (Gen 12.1). We might call this stage The Call (Ge 12-14).

The lengthiest stage begins with a divine covenant (ch 15), which Abram (as he’s called at the time) misguidedly tries to assist by having a son through his wife’s servant (ch 16). After a formal initiation through circumcision (ch 17), the covenant is fulfilled in the birth and preservation of Isaac (ch 18-22). We’ll call this stage, obviously, The Covenant.

Finally, there’s a denouement: he acquires a burial place (ch 23), acquires a wife for Isaac in Rebekah (ch 24), and sees his family tree greatly expanded (ch 25). All of this assures us that God’s covenant promises for him will be fulfilled.

He will show us a typical man, a sinner, inclined to fail despite his many strengths and advantages. But in the end he is characterized by a single simple trait: faith.

He believed. As can we, as human and messy as we are.

Next time: Call and Response.

Photo by Mick Haupt on Unsplash