Dan Olinger

"If the Bible is true, then none of our fears are legitimate, none of our frustrations are permanent, and none of our opposition is significant."

Dan Olinger

 

Retired Bible Professor,

Bob Jones University

home / about / archive 

Subscribe via Email

Abraham, Part 5: Covenant

September 3, 2026 by Dan Olinger Leave a Comment

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

Filed Under: Bible, Theology Tagged With: Abraham, biography, Genesis, Old Testament

Abraham, Part 4: Establishment

August 31, 2026 by Dan Olinger Leave a Comment

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

Filed Under: Bible, Theology Tagged With: Abraham, biography, Genesis, Old Testament

Abraham, Part 3: Settlement

August 27, 2026 by Dan Olinger Leave a Comment

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

Filed Under: Bible, Theology Tagged With: Abraham, biography, Genesis, Old Testament

Abraham, Part 2: Journey to Canaan

August 24, 2026 by Dan Olinger Leave a Comment

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

Filed Under: Bible, Theology Tagged With: Abraham, biography, Genesis, Old Testament

Abraham, Part 1: Introduction

August 20, 2026 by Dan Olinger Leave a Comment

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

Filed Under: Bible, Theology Tagged With: Abraham, biography, Genesis, Old Testament

Why Creation Matters, Part 3: The Flood 

March 9, 2026 by Dan Olinger Leave a Comment

Part 1: Introduction | Part 2: From the Beginning  

As Moses continues his narrative of beginnings, he comes quickly to an account of the Flood, God’s global judgment on human sin. Perhaps you’ve never noticed how thoroughly the flood account is imbued with Creation language. 

The account begins with the observation that “man began to multiply on the face of the earth” (Gen 6.1)—which is a direct response to God’s command to multiply in Genesis 1.28. A few verses later (Gen 6.6), Moses states that God “repented” that he had made man on the earth. Thus Moses introduces the Flood as, in effect, God’s reversal of the Creation event: his Uncreation, if you will. 

And so begins the account. God describes all the life he created in Genesis 1, using the same language: “man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air” (Gen 6.7)—“all flesh, wherein is the breath of life” (Gen 6.17). God orders Noah to preserve two of each of these life forms (Gen 6.20), specifying “male and female” (Gen 6.19). 

As he continues his instructions, he specifies not just two, but fourteen–seven pairs–of the clean animals, again including both male and female (Gen 7.2), and specifying both beasts and fowl (Gen 7.2-3). 

Sidebar: Some question why God specified 7 pairs of each clean beast—and some are completely unaware that this specification was even made. Why this command? Well, for starters, we’re told that upon exiting the ark, Noah made a large sacrifice (Gen 8.20), and after going to all that trouble to preserve breeding pairs, you don’t want to kill them. I also note that that dove eventually didn’t return to the ark (Gen 8.12).  Further, I speculate that Noah and his family might have eaten some meat on the ark, and further, they may have wanted some breeding insurance for clean animals as the repopulation proceeded. 

Back to our account. 

As Noah and his family enter the ark, the Creation language is repeated (Gen 7.8-9). And then they wait for seven days until the rain starts (Gen 7.10). Is this intentionally matching the Creation week? Maybe. 

Summarizing the entry into the ark, Moses recalls the Creation language of “after its / their kind” (Gen 7.14), “the breath of life” (Gen 7.15), and “male and female” (Gen 7.16). As the water rises and the death begins, Moses repeats the language: “of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man” (Gen 7.21, 23). He speaks further of “the face of the earth” (Gen 1.29) as the now-emptied home of animal life (Gen 7.23). 

As the rain continues, “the waters prevailed, and were increased greatly upon the earth” (Gen 7.18). This too recalls Creation language; in the beginning the Spirit was on the face of the waters (Gen 1.2), and on the 2nd day God separated the land from the water. This gracious provision for life in the Creation week is now reversed; the means for life among land animals is removed, and all flesh “in whom is the breath of life” dies (Gen 7.22). 

After the ark lands on dry ground, Noah waits for seven days (there’s that period again) to send out a dove (Gen 8.10), and another seven days (Gen 8.12) to sent it out (successfully) again. Is this an intentional doubling of the Creation week to imply the completeness of God’s restoration of his good Creation? I’m just suggesting this; we don’t have any way of being certain of the significance. 

So on “the first day of the first month the waters were dried up from off the earth” (Gen 8.13)—for the second time (Gen 1.9-10). And into this new world “every living thing that is with thee, of all flesh, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth” emerge to “be fruitful, and multiply upon the earth”  (Gen 8.17-18). 

And the account closes by recounting God’s words: “seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease” (Gen 8.22). 

Creation order is restored. 

So we find that Creation and the Flood are intimately linked in the plan of God. In response to man’s sin, God undoes his miraculous creation—miraculously—and then returns it to its original state, despite the presence of sin. He shows his mercy more spectacularly than he did by creating humans to begin with. And he can do this, obviously, because he was capable of creating the cosmos in the first place. 

Creation is the basis for mercy. It matters. 

Part 4: The Sabbath | Part 5: Deliverance | Part 6: Isaiah  | Part 7: Jeremiah | Part 8: Minor Prophets | Part 9: The Gospels | Part 10: Acts | Part 11: Pauline Epistles 1 | Part 12: Pauline Epistles 2 | Part 13: Hebrews | Part 14: General Epistles | Part 15: Revelation | Part 16: Job | Part 17: Psalms 1 | Part 18: Psalms 2 | Part 19: Psalms 3 | Part 20: Psalms 4 | Part 21: Psalms 5 | Part 22: Psalms 6 | Part 23: Proverbs | Part 24: Summary

Photo by Greg Rakozy on Unsplash

Filed Under: Bible, Theology Tagged With: creation, Genesis, Old Testament, theology proper, works of God

Why Creation Matters, Part 2: From the Beginning

March 5, 2026 by Dan Olinger Leave a Comment

Part 1: Introduction 

Moses himself, the author of the creation account, begins to interpret and apply it almost immediately. He finds his opportunity in two specific events: the initiation of the godly line, and the Great Flood. 

After the account of the Fall (Gen 3) and the birth of Cain and Abel and Cain’s murder of Abel (Gen 4), Moses begins to trace the line of “the seed of the woman” (Gen 3.15). That line is clearly not through Abel, since he is dead and without any named offspring, and it’s clearly not Cain, the murderer and outcast (Gen 4.12), as his offspring Lamech demonstrates (Gen 4.23-24). So Eve has a third son, Seth (Gen 4.25), whose name means “to appoint,” implying  that he is either “the seed of the woman” or the seed’s progenitor; indeed, shortly later “men began to call upon the name of the Lord” (Gen 4.26). 

Moses chooses to begin chapter 5 by announcing a formal genealogy: “This is the book of the generations of Adam” (Gen 5.1). But at the beginning he chooses to spend some column inches on the birth of Seth, more than is usual in a genealogy. He begins by referring back to his creation account—specifically the key fact that Adam and Eve were created “in the likeness of God” (Gen 5.1). Borrowing almost precisely from his earlier language, he emphasizes that both Adam and Eve, both of whom are essential in producing the godly line, are created directly by God and are in his image (Gen 5.2). He even says that God “called their name Adam” (Gen 5.2), which sounds odd to us until we realize that the name “Adam” simply means “person” or “human” (e.g. Gen 2.5). 

Now Moses applies that language to the birth of Seth: 

And Adam … begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth (Gen 5.3). 

Likeness. And image. Just as God, so to speak, created “after his kind” (Gen 1.11), so Adam and Eve did as well. And this language is more specific than “after his kind”; it’s a mirror image in certain ways. 

What’s the significance of this? It tells us that the image of God is not a “one-shot deal” effective for just a single generation or birth. It continues; Adam passes that image and likeness on to his offspring, who pass it on to theirs. We’re all, all of us, in that image and likeness. 

We find evidences of that in later Scripture. The New Testament repeatedly describes man, or all mankind, as in the image and/or likeness of God (1Co 11.7; 15.49). It describes Christ as particularly in that image (2Co 3.18; 4.4; Co 1.15; He 1.3), and believers, who are “in Christ” (2Co 5.17), as further conformed to that image (Ro 8.29; 1Co 15.49; 2Co 3.18; Co 3.10). 

I find it interesting that in the first reference to “image” in the New Testament, Jesus implies something further about its significance. In Matthew 22.20 and its Synoptic parallels (Mk 12.16; Lk 20.24), Jesus points out that since a coin bears the image of Caesar, it must belong to Caesar, and should be paid as a tax. What he does not say, but clearly has in mind, is that whatever bears the image of God—mankind—must then belong to God, and not to the state. We are his by right of creation, and he has marked us with his image—a brand, if you will—as visible evidence of that. 

The first significance of creation, then—established from the very beginning—is that God is our Owner and Lord, whether we acknowledge that or not. I suspect that a significant motive in the invention of other creation stories is the desire to circumvent, even to suppress (Ro 1.18), that fundamental fact.

Part 3: The Flood | Part 4: The Sabbath | Part 5: Deliverance | Part 6: Isaiah  | Part 7: Jeremiah | Part 8: Minor Prophets | Part 9: The Gospels | Part 10: Acts | Part 11: Pauline Epistles 1 | Part 12: Pauline Epistles 2 | Part 13: Hebrews | Part 14: General Epistles | Part 15: Revelation | Part 16: Job | Part 17: Psalms 1 | Part 18: Psalms 2 | Part 19: Psalms 3 | Part 20: Psalms 4 | Part 21: Psalms 5 | Part 22: Psalms 6 | Part 23: Proverbs | Part 24: Summary

Photo by Greg Rakozy on Unsplash

Filed Under: Bible, Theology Tagged With: creation, Genesis, Old Testament, theology proper, works of God

Immanuel, Part 1: Creation

December 5, 2024 by Dan Olinger 1 Comment

One of the key pursuits in Biblical Studies is discerning the central theme of the Bible. In Biblical Theology, which is essentially the study of the Bible as literature, this question is the end of the entire discipline, the goal toward which all the other work is pointing. In German scholarship it’s called the Mitte, or center. 

Over the years several candidates have been suggested. A popular one is “kingdom”: Thurman Wisdom and Thomas Schreiner have both recently favored this idea in one form or another. Another popular suggestion is “covenant,” suggested influentially a century ago by Walther Eichrodt. And recently Peter Gentry and Stephen Wellum have combined the two ideas. 

For a time I toyed with the idea of “Messiah” as the central theme. I noted that the Hebrew Canon has three parts—the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings—each of which introduces us to offices (priest, prophet, and king, respectively) that were filled by disappointing people, all anticipating the perfect Prophet, Priest, and King who would lead without disappointment. He was, of course, the Messiah, the Anointed One—and all of these offices typically involved anointing. 

I think that’s a defensible suggestion for a central, governing theme; it seems comprehensive, with good explanatory power for all the biblical contents. 

But lately I’ve been meditating on another possibility, a theme that has been observed and commented on by a number of other students of the Word. 

It’s the idea of God dwelling with, among, his people. 

I’d like to spend a few posts tracing that idea through the Scripture. 

__________ 

We begin, of course, in Genesis, in the primeval history. The first thing we learn is that God is the author of creation; he made all things (Ge 1.1). Later in that first chapter we see him creating the first humans and distinguishing them from the other living creatures: they are in the image of God (Ge 1.26-27). In fact, rather than just speaking them into existence, as he had other living things (Ge 1.11-12, 20-21, 24-25), he intervenes personally, seemingly physically, to form Adam from the dust of the ground (Ge 2.7) and then to form Eve from one of Adam’s ribs (Ge 2.21-22). This seems much more intimate, much more personal, than the way he created the animals. Along the way we hear God give Adam and Eve dominion over all the earth (Ge 1.28), intending them to use plant life for their sustenance. 

Now, I need to deal with a misconception. I suppose this misconception was most artfully rendered in James Weldon Johnson’s God’s Trombones: 

 And God stepped out on space, 
 And he looked around and said: 
 I’m lonely — 
 I’ll make me a world. 

Johnson’s work is worthwhile reading by every American for its cultural and historical significance, its lyricism, its artistry. It is a remarkable piece of literature. 

But God was not lonely. 

God is, and always has been, completely satisfied in himself. There is no lack, no need, no shortcoming in him. 

And thus he did not need to make us. 

And yet, he wanted to. 

Why? If he didn’t need us, why did he make us at all? 

We get a tiny, possible hint shortly later in the narrative. Adam and Eve have sinned (Ge 3.6) and then tried to cover their newfound shame (Ge 3.7), and 

they heard the voice of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day (Ge 3.8). 

Now, we’re not told that this had been a daily practice. Perhaps God, knowing that his creatures have sinned, is coming to announce their judgment (Ge 3.16-19)—and their eventual glorious deliverance (Ge 3.15). 

But this does speak of God desiring to be in company with Adam and Eve—perhaps even to walk with them in the beauty of the Garden, to point out its delights, to savor the wonder and joy in their faces as they realize what he has given them. 

Of course, sin has changed all that. 

But even so the fellowship continues. Just two scant chapters later, we find Enoch “walk[ing] with God” (Ge 5.22), and in the next chapter, Noah doing the same thing (Ge 6.9). 

God wants to fellowship with his people, to interact with them in loving and friendly and intimate ways. 

From the beginning it has always been so. 

And as the story continues, the evidence will continue to accumulate. 

Next time, from a family to a nation.

Part 2: Covenant | Part 3: Marriage | Part 4: Turning the Page | Part 5: Forever

Photo by NeONBRAND on Unsplash

Filed Under: Theology Tagged With: biblical theology, Genesis, immanence, Old Testament

On Beginning at Moses

October 25, 2018 by Dan Olinger 3 Comments

… with a nod to my former Greek teacher and colleague Dr. Mike Barrett.

One of my favorite experiences is gaining an insight into biblical material that has never occurred to me before.

That happens to me fairly frequently, and yesterday it happened right in the middle of class, thanks to a student question.

We know that the entire Scripture is about Christ. Jesus himself made that point in a conversation he had with two disciples on the road to Emmaus after his resurrection (Lk 24.13ff). (And that passage, Lk 24.27 precisely, is where Dr. Barrett got the title for his book.) Boy do we wish Luke had seen fit to include a transcript of that conversation in his Gospel!

I suspect it was pretty much like Paul’s standard synagogue sermon, recorded in Acts 13.14ff, but with a lot more prophecies included.

Those two disciples said that their hearts burned within them when they heard these things (Lk 24.32). It’s easy to see why. Here they were realizing that the Tanakh (the Old Testament)—a document they had studied all their lives and thought they knew well—was filled with meaning that they had completely missed. It was like the old book had become completely new again; they were starting over as neophytes, going over long-familiar words and seeing completely new things in them.

It’s also easy to see why the early church became really taken with the idea of finding Christ in the Old Testament, looking under every bush—burning or not—to see if he was there. They found a lot of good examples, but sometimes they found things that weren’t even there—for example, when they decided that Solomon’s personification of wisdom in Proverbs 8 was actually talking about Christ. The heretic Arius was able to turn that unfounded interpretation against them by citing Prov 8.22 as proof, then, that Jesus was created by God “in the beginning.”

Oopski.

Mistakes like that have made more recent interpreters, including yours truly, a little wary of suggesting that Christ is somewhere in the OT where he hasn’t been widely recognized before.

So it’s with some trepidation that I share my “insight.”

[Deep breath.] Here goes.

The New Testament tells us repeatedly that Jesus, the Son, is in fact the creator of all things (Jn 1.3; Col 1.16; Heb 1.2). I take that to mean that the Father is the visionary, the designer, in creation, while the Son is the active agent, actually doing the work of creating, while the Spirit hovers over and tends to what is created (Gen 1.2). (So far, that’s a fairly standard, common interpretation.)

And I take that to mean that Elohim (“God”) in Gen 1 and the first paragraph of Gen 2 is actually the person of the Son. (Many others would argue that the name refers to the united Godhead, the essence rather than any one of the persons. That’s not a hill I’m interested in dying on, but bear with me here.)

In Gen 2.4 the name changes from Elohim to Yahweh Elohim (“the LORD God”). Does that indicate a change of person, or is the protagonist still the Son? Well, if “God” created man in Gen 1.27, and in the theological retelling of the story “the LORD God” created man in Gen 2.7, then it seems reasonable to continue to see the Son as the protagonist in the account.

Now, “the LORD God” continues as the main character through the end of Gen 3; Gen 4 begins to use the name Yahweh (“the LORD”). (Eve uses that name in Gen 4.1, and the narrator—Moses—begins using it in Gen 4.3.)

All of this serves as a reasonable basis for seeing Jesus as the one acting in Genesis 3. An additional evidence of that is that “the LORD God” is described as “walking in the garden in the cool of the day” (Gen 3.8)—and the Son is the only person of the Godhead described as physically embodied in Scripture. (But is Rev 5.6-7 an exception? Hmm.)

So, finally, here’s the thought I had in class today.

Is it actually Jesus who utters the prophecy of Gen 3.15?

Is it Jesus who, perhaps with an animated glint in his eye, tells the serpent that one day, the seed of the woman will crush the serpent’s head?

Wouldn’t that put quite an edge on those words? Wouldn’t it be a lot like the time David gave Goliath a list of all the things he was going to do with Goliath’s various body parts (1Sa 17.45-47), but exponentially more fearsome, and exponentially more consequential?

The Son and the Serpent, standing in the Garden, face to face, making an appointment for a battle to the death, thousands of years into the future?

I’m going to have to think about that.

Photo by Aaron Burden on Unsplash

Filed Under: Bible Tagged With: Christology, creation, Genesis, Old Testament, systematic theology, theology proper

Billions of Years? Part 3: Genesis Data on the Age of the Earth

September 18, 2017 by Dan Olinger Leave a Comment

Why I’m Still a Young-Earth Creationist, Even Though It’s Getting Increasingly Lonely over Here

Part 1 Part 2

Last time we demonstrated that the Creation account in Genesis 1 is Hebrew narrative, which means that we should read it straightforwardly. We then demonstrated that it speaks of a personal agent who created the cosmos from nothing over a period described as 6 “days.” Before we begin to evaluate the claims of the old-earth position, however, we need to answer a second question from the text: how long ago did these 6 “days” occur?

The text reports that on the sixth “day” Elohim created a man, named Adam (“man”) (Gen 1.27; 2.19) and his wife, named Eve (“living”) (Gen 2.22; 3.20). Later in the narrative we’re given the same Adam as the starting point of a genealogy, including lifespans and progeny dates for everyone involved. Genesis 5 gives the data for every generation from Adam to Noah and his sons, and Genesis 11 gives the same data for every generation from Noah’s sons to Abraham. The lifespans and progeny dates from Abraham through David, whose life dates are generally agreed upon, appear throughout the biblical text up to the book of Samuel. 

Thus we have numbers that can be manipulated to yield a calendar year, or thereabouts, for the creation of Adam. There are variations in this date for several reasons, including some textual variants in the Hebrew manuscripts and some interpretational questions. (For a detailed analysis of the interpretative history of that question, see the dissertation of my former PhD student Ben Shaw [free registration required].) The most restrictive date would yield a creation somewhere around 4000 BC, as calculated by James Ussher in the 1600s, while textual variants might allow a date 1000 years or so earlier. 

Some have noted that it was traditional in ancient genealogies to omit generations that were considered unimportant; some interpreters have suggested, for example, that the genealogy of Jesus Christ in Matthew 1 has omitted some generations in order to yield 3 sets of 14 generations each (Mat 1.17), for easier memorization. It’s true that omitting generations did occur, but you’ll note that the Matthew list does not include the math; on the other hand, the Genesis genealogies include ages and sums that simply do not add up if generations are omitted. The omission suggestion introduces far more difficulties than it solves. 

And of course, to get from 4000 or 5000 BC to 4.5 billion BC, you’d be omitting 1 million generations for every generation you mention. Some suggestions are just silly on their face. 

So where does the text itself leave us? You have an earth and its contents created intentionally by a personal agent a few thousand years ago. 

Given earlier evidence that the Bible exhibits characteristics of extraordinary origin, you’re going to need an extremely high level of proof to set that obvious declaration aside. 

Does the old-earth view meet that level of evidence—something more substantial and logically compelling than “but everybody believes this!”? 

On to that question next time. 

Part 4 Part 5 Part 6 Part 7 Part 8 Part 9 Part 10

Photo by NASA on Unsplash

Filed Under: Bible Tagged With: apologetics, creation, evolution, Genesis

  • 1
  • 2
  • Next Page »