Generally in a literary-canonical approach we do not dive into questions of multiple authors but simply study the text as we have it. Usually such lines of inquiry have been laden with faulty presuppositions and with agendas to undermine the word of God as we have it (look no further than the bogus JEDP theory, which has torn apart Scripture without any benefit to the church and honest scholars today would admit that it is highly speculative and is the product of particular biases). But it is helpful for those who hold Scripture to be fully the word of God to note what lines in Deuteronomy are the product of a later human hand so that we can see what this finished product of the Spirit is teaching us today.

Aside from the additional poem and epilogue by the editor(s) [hereafter simply, 'editor'], there are few indications of a later hand in the text. The "these words" are not only faithful to Moses but are his very words (as noted in an earlier post, the vocabulary was updated later but this does not change the meaning). And the bulk of the book has this early origin. (As fitting with what I have said above, the whole book when completed is fully the word of God even in the choice of words). But there are a few places where we see the editor's hand.

In particular we see this in the remark "to this day" in Deut 2:22 and Deut 3:14. We already noted that this phrase points us to the editor in the second epilogue and it often does so in other places in the Torah as well. Most of the editorial comments explain geographical issues (people groups and places). These comments interrupt the flow of the passage so much that English translations usually put them in parentheses. For example Deut 3:9 and Deut 3:11 are editorial additions. In particular, verse 11 shows us the main interest of the editor -- King Og was one of the Rephaim (from the size description it is obvious that Og was one of the giants). McConville explains that Canaanite giants were called Anakim [sons of Anak from the Nephilim according to Num 13:33] (Deut 1:28, 9:2), Moabite giants were called Emim (Gen 14:5, Deut 2:10-11), Ammonite giants were called Zamzummim (Deut 2:20, perhaps also Zuzim in Gen 14:5), but Rephaim was the generic title for all such giant races (cf. Deut 2:11). One only needs to read the text in English to see all of these parentheses about giants. Interestingly, the editor also made comments about giants in the book of Joshua (Josh 14:15, 15:13, 21:11 all mentioning that Arba was the father of Anak).

As an aside, I think it is unhelpful to dismiss these editorial comments as less than Scriptural or to think of them as extrapolations and interpretations in later preaching. These additions are inspired of God -- they come from a later human hand -- but they tell us something God wants to teach us.

So why is the editor obsessed with these giants? For one thing, this is why the previous generation (save Joshua and Caleb) were not prepared to enter the land but here we see the next generation defeating a renowned giant even before entering the land and they defeated peoples who had defeated giants. This also helps us understand as well why the people of the land were so afraid when they heard that Israel had defeated King Og. It is also worth noting that we can trace the theme of giants in Scripture to Goliath and to Satan (maybe the reason for the word choice of Rephaim in as much as other texts use the term for those living in the underworld -- McConville cites Psa 88:11, Job 26:5, Isa 26:14 for this meaning but admits that we do not currently know if the two meanings of Rephaim are related). Are there any other reasons you think the editor would be so interested in giants? Aside from what I said above, perhaps they help the text preach to a new generation that is facing metaphorical giants? One of the major concerns of Deuteronomy, shared by the faithful editor, is the preaching of Torah to a new generation. So there may be something to this.

Labels: deuteronomy, giants, jedp, scripture

Genesis has much more to say about sex and marriage than the creation of woman out of man and the scene at Sodom. Sex and marriage is a theme that can be found throughout the book and the righteous make a lot of mistakes.

The book teaches that sex and marriage are to be enjoyed between one husband and one wife. This may come as a surprise to those who have not studied Genesis carefully because everyone remembers that the patriarchs had multiple wives. Abram not only married Sarai but Sarai gave her servant Hagar to Abram as a wife. Jacob married Leah and Rachel and each of them gave their servant to Jacob as a wife. Thus Jacob had four wives. But this was not God's original design and we can see why when we see the issues of jealousy between wives, competition for children between them, and so forth.

God's original design was for marriage between one man and one woman. And he blessed them, saying, "Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion over..." (Gen 1:28). The married couple was blessed to have children and be fruitful and was put in the Garden of Eden (meaning fertility). The first poem in the structure of Book One says, "This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man" (Gen 2:23). And the next verse after this says, "Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh" (Gen 2:24). So the original design was that of marriage between one man and one woman. This picture of exclusivity pointed to the relationship the husband and wife as one were to have with our jealous God.

The Book of Genesis on its own terms is very clear about the design of marriage and sex. The third poem in the structure of Book One is a song of revenge by the evil murderer Lamech proclaimed to his two wives. The third part of Book One means to demonstrate the escalation of sin among the seed of the serpent moving from the murderer Cain to the murderer Lamech. It is intentional that Lamech is the first one in Genesis said to have more than one wife. But this is only the beginning. In Book Two the demon possessed kings, the so-called "sons of God," take harems and breed champion giants. They have many more than two wives. It is instructive that the two situations calling for God's judgment in Genesis both have a sexual dimension: harems (answered by the flood) and homosexual rape (answered by the sulfur and fire coming down on Sodom & Gomorrah). This is not to say that there are not other issues involved. But the climax of sin includes harems or homosexual rape.

We saw that the first half of Book Six and all of Book Eight are chiasms. In Book Six there are parallel episodes of Abram/Abraham and his sister/wife Sarai/Sarah (Gen 12:10-20 and Gen 20). In the first story Pharaoh took Sarai as his wife, not knowing that she was Abram's wife. This brought down great plagues on the house of Pharaoh. In the second story Abimelech took Sarah as his wife, not knowing that she was Abraham's wife. God came to him in a dream and said, "Behold, you are a dead man because of the woman whom you have taken, for she is a man's wife" (Gen 20:3). God explains to Abimelech that he kept him from "sinning against me" (Gen 20:6) by having sexual relations with her because Abimelech was unaware she was married. That the Gentile Abimelech knew before this that it was wrong to take another man's wife as his own wife is clear because he tells Abraham, "You have done to me things that ought not to be done" (Gen 20:9).

In the similar story in Book Eight (Gen 26), Isaac told the men of Abimelech's city that his wife Rebekah was his sister. And Abimelech saw them laughing together and realized, 'like father, like son' and he rebuked Isaac saying, "What is this you have done to us? One of the people might have lain with your wife, and you would have brought guilt upon us" (Gen 26:10) and then told the men of the city that the death penalty would be the sentence for anyone who touches Isaac or Rebekah. The end of this section tells us that Esau took two Canaanite wives who "made life bitter for Isaac and Rebekah" (Gen 26:35). The parallel story in the structure of Book Eight is the rape of Jacob's daughter Dinah (Gen 34). After raping her like a prostitute, Shechem the Canaanite wanted to marry her. As the sons of Jacob said, "He had done an outrageous thing in Israel by lying with Jacob's daughter, for such a thing must not be done" (Gen 34:7). Interesting that such a similar phrase appears in Book Six and Eight.

The climax of Book Six (Gen 15:1-16:16 and 17:1-18:15) is complicated by the fact that Abram/Abraham took Hagar the Egyptian as a wife and she gave birth to Ishmael. Later in the book, righteous Lot's fall becomes complete when his two daughters got pregnant by him. They gave birth to Moab (father of the Moabites) and Ben-ammi (father of the Ammonites). He never should have gone into seclusion so that each could not marry a husband (Gen 19:30ff).

In Book Eight, when Jacob had gone to find a wife among his kinsmen, Esau took one of the daughters of Ishmael as a third wife. The text tells us, "When Esau saw that the Canaanite women did not please Isaac his father, Esau went to Ishmael and took as his wife, besides the wives he had, Mahalath the daughter of Ishmael, Abraham's son, the sister of Nebaioth" (Gen 28:8-9). The solution was not to add another wife: Esau should have never married two wives to begin with and most certainly not two Canaanites under the curse. The comment "besides the wives he had" accents this.

Also in Book Eight, Jacob married Leah and Rachel (Gen 29:1-30) and this caused all kinds of jealousy issues even to the extent that they each gave their servant to Jacob as additional wives. It is instructive that Isaac had sent Jacob to find in Laban's house "a wife from there" not wives (Gen 28:6). Of course, the stress is on the instruction not to take a wife from among the Canaanite women. In any case, the author of Genesis wants the reader to compare Abraham's servant who went to find Isaac a wife and Jacob when he went to find a wife. Jacob wanted Rachel because of her looks instead of praying to God for direction on whom to take as a wife. And as a result of this mess, Jacob ended up with two wives and then four.

The sex and marriage then continues in the epilogue of Book Eight. There we see Rachel die during childbirth and Reuben, Jacob's firstborn and the son of Leah, "went and lay with Bilhah his father's concubine" (Gen 35:22). Bilhah was Rachel's servant and this will keep Bilhah from replacing Rachel in the affection of Jacob. Reuben did this for his mother Leah (I am not implying that she knew anything about it ahead of time, nor am I implying that this excuses his sexual sin, I am simply explaining the situation).

Book Ten resumes this theme as Judah sleeps with his daughter-in-law thinking that she is a prostitute (Gen 38), Potiphar's wife tries to seduce Joseph (Gen 39:7) and even includes the theme in the concluding poem as Jacob cursed Reuben in the blessing, "unstable as water, you shall not have preeminence, because you went up to your father's bed; then you defiled it - he went up to my couch" (Gen 49:4). They have knowledge of sexual ethics (language of defiled). Also Joseph's response to Potiphar's wife shows this: "How then can I do this great wickedness and sin against God?" (39:9). But even though they know right and wrong the explicit episode with Judah shows they did not always do the right. In this story, Judah took a Canaanite wife and had three sons. Judah took Tamar as the wife of his first son. But his son was so wicked that God struck him down. So Tamar became the wife of Judah's second son who wasted his semen on the ground because he knew that if he had a child it would not be considered his own. And God struck him down. Judah, afraid the same would happen to the youngest son, sent Tamar away pretending to need to wait for him to grow up. Eventually Judah himself slept with her, not knowing it was her, and she gave birth to twins. She was accused of adultery until it was discovered that the father was Judah himself. The story has a number of similarities with the daughters of Lot narrative.

So the Book of Genesis teaches (through precept and example) that God intends for sex and marriage to be between one husband and one wife for all of humanity and that His people should only marry those not under the curse of Canaan. The consequences of the patriarch's failure to keep this design would last for the rest of the history of Israel. And a sign of sin reaching its height is harems or homosexual rape. Of course, people will try to excuse behavior that does not fit God's intention of sex and marriage between one husband and wife by arguing that the episode at Sodom does not have to do with homosexual behavior but homosexual rape. But such an argument has missed the overall message of Genesis on this theme that marriage should be between one man and one woman.

It is worth noting that marriage is a gift of God's common grace to all of humanity. God defines marriage for all peoples (not just His people) as between one man and one woman. Israel and the nations broke the covenant of creation whenever they allowed variations from this pattern. While this common grace institution was something Canaanites could enjoy, the people of God were prohibited from marrying Canaanites under the curse. Later laws in Scripture would build on this principle by prohibiting believers from marrying any unbeliever. For example, in the New Testament (though the regulation was much older) believers are told to marry in the Lord (1 Cor 7:39, i.e., only marry other believers). There are other laws that would be spelled out in the Torah including regulations about marrying close relatives (including prohibiting marriages between some relationships that are not blood relationships). In the New Testament, for example, Paul rebukes the fornication among the Corinthians not even found among the Gentiles - a son marrying his step-mother (1 Cor 5). The most serious violations of this creation ordinance, short of harems and homosexual rape, are things even the Gentiles know are wrong, and are called things which quite simply ought not to be done (cf. Gen 20:9, 34:7 and Rom 1:28) or things that are contrary to nature, which we have called the covenant of creation (cf. Rom 1:26). Such things include marrying your step-mother, all homosexual behavior, marrying another man's wife, and heterosexual rape. This is why it is so surprising that Christians are debating homosexual marriage, something that even the Gentiles should know is wrong.

Labels: Abimelech, creation ordinance, flood, Genesis, giants, gomorrah, harems, homosexual behavior, lamech's curse, marriage, polygamy, prostitution, rape, sex, sodom

The second book in Genesis begins with the title "This is the book of the generations of Adam" (Gen 5:1). Thus we will find out about the descendants of Adam.

We should identify the genre of the narrative and part of the epilogue as a royal genealogy. Up until now I have not spoken much about the similarities of Genesis and literature from the surrounding ANE world. But this genre identification is important because the tendency of some is to try to date the earth based on mathematically analyzing texts like this. Waltke's commentary mentions the Sumerian king list, which could skip over many generations. Likewise, in Scripture the father/son relationship could also be a grandfather/grandson (or any number of generations) relationship. The purpose of this text is not scientific. It is a royal genealogy pointing us to the legitimacy of Israel (and ultimately Jesus Christ) as the heir of the promise to the woman. And thus the genealogy conforms to a pattern we will analyze later.

Genealogies are one of the most skimmed things in Scripture, but the genealogies in Genesis are some of the most fascinating texts. One of the really interesting things is the ages of the Sethites. Waltke cites M. Barnouin (who wrote in French) who has observed that the ages of the Sethites are equal to particular astronomical periods known to the Babylonians. Enoch's 365 years are the same number of days of the year. Lamech's 777 years (not to be confused with the Lamech in the last book) are the same as the synodic periods of Jupiter plus Saturn (this just means how long it takes for the planet to get back around to the same place in the sky). And Jared's 962 years are the same as the synodic periods of Venus plus Saturn. Moreover, Waltke says,

"If the sum of the years at the time of fathering and of the total life spans from Adam to Lamech are each divided by sixty--based on the Babylonian sexagesimal system--the sum of the remainders is 365, again perhaps representing the perfect life span. The cycles of a man's years may match the cycles of the heavenly spheres to show that their lives follow a meaningful pattern and end with a completed cycle."

So even though 365 is short compared to the lifespans of the others in the genealogy, Enoch was a very important man.

This is confirmed when we observe the pattern of the text. The pattern is: When X had lived Y years, he fathered...Z, The days of X after he fathered Z were ZZ years; and had other sons and daughters. Thus all the days that X lived were ZZZ years, and he died. For Adam the pattern is more expansive than the rest. For example, for 'he fathered Z' it says, "he fathered a son in his own likeness, after his image, and named him Seth." This line is also expanded for Lamech, the text says, "he fathered a son and called his name Noah, saying..." Any major variations of the pattern should stop us in our tracks as we read the genealogy. When we get to number three (Adam, Seth, Enosh) we find the basic pattern. Same with number four, Kenan; five, Mahalalel; and six, Jared. But as we should have guessed from the symbolic significance of seven (not to mention the crafting of the genealogy we saw in the last book) the pattern is broken for Enoch who lives the perfect lifespan. Instead of saying, 'Enoch lived after he fathered Methuselah 300 years' it says, "Enoch walked with God after he fathered..." And where we would expect the text to tell us, "and he died" it says, "Enoch walked with God, and he was not, for God took him. Enoch's son has the longest recorded lifespan (according to Scripture) 969 years. And Enoch himself could have lived longer than his son, but it is far better to be with God.

The pattern resumes only to be broken again for number ten. Ten means fullness. Therefore, at the fullness of time, God sent forth his son Noah (cf. Galatians 4:4). Thus the longer form of he fathered: "he fathered a son and called his name Noah, saying, 'Out of the ground that YHWH has cursed this one shall bring us relief from our work and from the painful toil of our hands'" (Gen 5:29). Here we see the same overall pattern for most of these books applies to this second book as well (heading, narrative, poetry, epilogue). And remember that we said the poetry is what is most important. Noah gives rest and joy to the people of God through raising a vineyard. Of course, this points forward to Jesus Christ, the son of God born at the fullness of time, who gives us rest and joy everlasting.

The epilogue continues the royal genealogy and adds the plus one generation has three sons, Shem, Ham and Japheth. The next book will be about them and unlike most of the books it will also be about Noah as it does not tell us "and he died" quite yet. The epilogue continues to prepare us for the next book and to set the stage. Traditionally the problem has been explained as the sons of Seth intermarrying with the daughters of Cain. But, following Meredith Kline, it is much more plausible (for grammatical, contextual and other reasons) to read "sons of God" as a title of kingship. Since "sons of God" also sometimes refers to angels, it is not a stretch to say that these kings are demon-possessed. The text then is talking about demon-possessed kings (the sons of Cain) taking harems ("they took as their wives any they chose," Gen 6:2) and breeding champions for their army (the Nephilim). The Nephilim are giants sometimes called Anakim. Anak was a person who is the ancestor of many giants and Nephil is the place where giants lived. See Numbers 13:33. Without a doubt, all giants are then called Nephilim. Sin has continued to escalate to a climax demanding judgment. Now we see more than just polygamy and murder but harems and marauding armies. "But Noah found favor in the eyes of YHWH" (Gen 6:8).

It is also worth noting that before the flood "every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually" (Gen 8:5) and after the flood "the intention of man's heart is evil from his youth" (Gen 8:21). The circumcision of the heart has not yet taken place. God has started over but the problem of sin is not yet answered. This is the difference when God starts over with Jesus Christ and He pours out the Spirit.

Labels: enoch, Genesis, giants, harems, kline, noah, royal genealogy, ten