Genesis 25

Genesis 25:16

These are the sons of Ishmael and these are their names, by their villages, and by their camps; twelve princes according to their tribes.

God's promise to Ishmael to raise him up into a great nation happens sooner than Abraham's does. For Abraham, there was an extra generation before the twelve tribes of Israel come about.

Why is Ishmael made many sooner than Isaac? To get it over with? To show that it can happen for Isaac's descendants? Or is it a consolation for Ishmael, after having been driven away from his family as a child? It may not matter, but it may also give us a glimpse into the plans of God.

Geensis 24

Genesis 24:50

Then Laban and Bethuel replied, "The matter comes from the Lord; so we cannot speak to you bad or good.

They were asked to give their daughter/sister up to a man they didn't even know, who could have been lying through his teeth about who he was and where he came from, and how he'd asked for a sign. But when they are told that God caused this to happen, they don't even blink. They immediately accept it, and give her over.

Today, we're often taught to be skeptical when someone says they've received "a sign from God." Partly, that's because God doesn't appear to operate this way since the coming of the Holy Spirit. But also, Christianity is so well known that it can be faked easily, and con artists abound. It can be hard to determine who's being truthful and who's not, so we tend towards skepticism. Would that our belief in God were so pure that we would know, and not doubt.

Genesis 23

Genesis 23:13

He spoke to Ephron in the hearing of the people of the land, saying, "If you will only please listen to me; I will give the price of the field, accept it from me that I may bury my dead there."

Abraham does what many would not. He is considered great among these people, a prince, yet has not bought any place where he can bury those from his group who die. He is offered the field as a gift, but insists that he will pay for it properly.

Today, when offered a gift like this, most of us will refuse only long enough so that honor is satisfied, then quietly accept. Abraham wouldn't do that, even when encouraged to. He insists on not being given special treatment, and doing what any outlander would have to do. He pays for what he is given, and I take this as an example that we should also do everything possible to act fairly in our business and personal dealings.

Genesis 22

Genesis 22:12

He said, "Do not stretch out your hand against the lad, and do nothing to him; for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from Me."

OK, this is one of those statements from God that gets some people very confused. Here you're dealing with the all-powerful, all-knowing, all-everything God, but He said "now I know"? What does that mean? That He didn't know before? But that would mean He's not all-knowing, but He has to be, so He had to have known, but He didn't...

Yes, this is one of those things that can make your head hurt. One of my former teachers deals with this much like when Abraham bargains with God about saving Sodom. God knows he's going to "change his mind" and go lower, but Abraham has a lesson to learn in the bargaining. Here it's almost the opposite; Abraham doesn't try to bargain, and therefore learns from the experience. Also, this is proof that he has changed, and now trusts God completely to provide. In the previous chapter we saw the start of that change, and here is the completion of it.

Genesis 21

Genesis 21:12

But God said to Abraham, "Do not be distressed because of the lad and your maid; whatever Sarah tells you, listen to her, for through Isaac your descendants shall be named."

In today's modern Christian circles, this would probably shock a lot of readers. Here God is, telling Abraham to kick out his own son and the boy's mother, just because his wife wants him to. What kind of compassionate God would tell a father to abandon his own child? Yeah, he promises to make Ishmael a nation as well, but to make a father never see his teenage son again?

To me, this does make some sense, however much I dislike the practice. Isaac was the chosen of God to be His people. Ishmael was never really supposed to exist under God's plan. He was only conceived because Sarah and Abraham lost faith in God. If he'd stayed, he probably would have been entitled to half of Abraham's estate, which would have drastically changed the future of what became the Jewish people. With God's blessing to Sarah's decision, Abraham can let his son go with a clear conscience. I believe that Isaac's birth is the turning point for Abraham's faith. We know that he is willing to trust God now.

Genesis 20

Genesis 20:12

Besides, she actually is my sister, the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother, and she became my wife;

OK, here we finally get the truth. This is the second time that Abraham plays this ruse regarding Sarah, and now we know why he chose this. He was afraid to tell the truth, so he only kinda told the truth. They're really half-siblings, so it's not like he's lying. He's just neglecting to mention another, closer relationship.

How often do we make excuses like this? I know I do it far more often than I'd like, and half the time I don't even realize I'm doing it until after I've done it. I'm the kind of person who doesn't like to disappoint people, but sometimes that means not being entirely truthful. It's one of those things I really hate about myself, and I ask God frequently for help in fixing this problem. Would that God would smack me as hard on the head as he did Abimelech for unknowingly sinning.

Genesis 19

Genesis 19:14

Lot went out and spoke to his sons-in-law, who were to marry his daughters, and said "Up, get out of this place, for the Lord will destroy the city." But he appeared to his sons-in-law to be jesting.

These two young men were given the opportunity to save their lives, if they would just take a day trip out of town with the future family. However, they didn't believe that Lot was serious. The previous night several people are suddenly blinded in front of Lot's house, and that wasn't enough of an indication that something serious was going on.

One thing that interests me is that there is nothing said here about whether or not these men were good or bad. They obviously didn't think that God's coming destruction of their home was real, which points towards bad. However, they had been accepted as fiances for Lot's daughters, which may mean there was some hope for them after all. On the other hand, given what Lot's daughters do later in the chapter, they and the girls may have been made for each other, and would have all died if not for Lot's presence.

Genesis 18

Genesis 18:32

Then he said, "Oh may the Lord not be angry, and I shall speak only this once; suppose ten are found there?" And He said, "I will not destroy it on account of the ten."

We approach God in a much different manner than Abraham did. We will pray about anything and everything, sometimes treating God like a vending machine. From the beginning of this chapter, Abraham considered merely speaking to God to be something he was completely unworthy of. He was actually afraid of making God angry at him for opening his mouth! How often do we approach God with that amount of awe and reverence? How would our actions be different if we did?

Abraham saw God as the Almighty, someone who could do whatever he wished, but had looked upon Abraham with favor. That favor shows here, as well. Sodom has become so evil that it cries out to God, and he plans on destroying it. But if there are merely ten people who do what is right, who stand against the trend, God will spare the hundreds or thousands of evildoers from his wrath. Today, some people wonder why God doesn't come down and destroy the "sinful nations," sometimes including America in that group. Perhaps this passage gives a possible answer. If God would spare places of complete wickedness for the sake of ten, how many millions will He spare for the thousands of believers here? While Abraham sees God as being just, he also sees His mercy at work, as well.

Genesis 17

Genesis 17:17

Then Abraham fell on his face and laughed, and said in his heart, "Will a child be born to a man one hundred years old? And will Sarah, who is ninety years old, bear a child?"

I don't remember this from the last time I read this chapter. Obviously, Abraham believed that he and Sarah had done the right thing in having Abraham and Hagar have a child. Abraham had no more clue than Sarah about the likelihood of a child between them. Everyone remembers that Sarah laughed when she hears this prophecy, and that she is rebuked by God for it. Yet Abraham is remembered as the man of great faith in God, and Sarah as the doubter and skeptic.

Why is that? Abraham has messed up at just about every option, except for going to Canaan in the first place. He still has a way to go before he gains that amazing faith, but this is the start. From here, God has laid out the proper path, that his descendants will come through Sarah. Now Abram knows how things will go for his family, but that doesn't mean he believed.

Genesis 16

Sorry I didn't post anything yesterday. I went to a friend's wedding in Dallas, and got back very late.

Genesis 16:2

So Sarai said to Abram, "Now behold, the Lord has prevented me from bearing children. Please go in to my maid; perhaps I will obtain children through her." And Abram listened to the voice of Sarai.

At first glance, this doesn't seem to terrible. God has promised Abram descendents, but I don't recall that he's said anything about them coming from Sarai. She's in her seventies at this point, well past childbearing age. So if Abram's going to have kids, it would appear they're not going to be from her. Therefore, they have to come from someone else, so her servant is as good a choice as any.

Today we tend to use this passage as an example of not trying to take God's work into our own hands. And I'm not trying to argue the example. However, given that I think they only had "half" the prophecy at this point, I don't hold this against Sarai as much as some do. She had given up hope, and probably thought she was doing God's will by offering this alternative to the impossible. She learned later that "impossible" doesn't mean what she thought, though.

Genesis 15

Genesis 15:8

He said, "O Lord God, how may I know that I will possess it?"

From the context of the passage, it doesn't appear that Abraham doubts God This isn't the first time that God has told him he will inherit Canaan, and He just him that he will have a son to be his heir, and believes Him on that. So why does Abram ask for proof? Why does he need evidence, or a sign?

This type of question has always been one I've struggled with. There's faith, and there's asking for evidence to prove faith. At what point are we not trusting God when we ask for proof? Is it when we make plans, and ask God to bless them when they're not His? Is it all right to ask when we are not sure of God's plan, and need a pointer? Or should we only ask for him to give us a sign when we're going down the wrong path? How does having the Holy Spirit change the dynamic of the question?

Lots of questions, but I can't say I have any solid answers.

Genesis 14

Genesis 14:18

And Melchizedek king of Sales brought out bread and wine; now he was a priest of God Most High.

This man shows up in three verses, but is very important to Christians. I've honestly never really understood why, given that the book where he is repeatedly referenced is Hebrews. I understand why he would be important to Messianic Jews, since he shows that one does not have to be a Levite, or even a Jew, to be God's priest. But while the fact that a non-Jew can be God's priest is significant, I always thought that Melchizedek was held in much higher import than warranted.

However, what happens in this verse is significant. Abram is returning from battle, having saved his nephew and the property of four cities, with only 300 men. As he returns, Melchizedek meets him, and brings provisions. There was no real need for the food or wine; Abram just took all that he could need from the victory. Yet he later says that he would not take any of it, except what the troops had eaten. He doesn't include himself in that group; did he not eat? Did Melchizedek bring food at God's prompting so that Abram could be fed, and maintain his oath?

Genesis 13

Genesis 13:9

Is not the whole land before you? Please separate from me; if to the left, then I will go to the right; or if to the right, then I will go to the left."

Interesting that Abram let Lot choose the direction. Obviously, this gives Lot almost by default the best territory. Given the size of Abram's herd on its own, and the fact that the area is already inhabited, this could leave Abram in a difficult position to sustain his herds.

Also, by this point, God has already promised Abram that his descendants will be given Canaan. Does he offer Lot the choice knowing that it will leave him to go into Canaan, or is it just the kindness of a man toward his "brother" and accepting that God will provide?

Genesis 12

Genesis 12:2

And I will make you a great nation,
And I will bless you,
And make your name great;
And so you shall be a blessing;

Interesting contrast to Babel in the previous chapter. They wanted to make a name for themselves, and God thwarts them. But here, he chooses Abram, and says that He will make his name great. So what do you have to do to get God's attention? Stupid question, it would appear. We can't "get" God's attention, we already have it. However, most people tend to go through life trying to make everyone notice them, so that they can be considered important.

As a natural introvert, I have a bit of a war going inside me at many times. I like being in the spotlight sometimes, as long as its on my terms. But I think this is the first point in the Bible where God makes a point of Him being the one to point that spotlight. We don't know what Abram did to be favorable with God, but arrogance definitely wasn't on the list.

Genesis 11

Genesis 11:4

They said, "Come, let us build for ourselves a city, and a tower whose top will reach into heaven, and let us make for ourselves a name, otherwise we will be scattered abroad over the face of the whole earth."

We're back to the same problem, with man desiring to be famous. However, their motivations appear to be mixed in this case. Their first, and seemingly primary, reason is to be remembered. The first celebrity-wannabes, I guess. However, their second reason doesn't seem so bad? They want to come together rather than be scattered.

The text isn't clear whether this is to be able to do something that can be remembered, or if it's to avoid being isolated from one another. The first is quite possible, and in fact I think that's the truth. However, if the second is right, it doesn't seem so bad, does it? We were made to have community with one another, not to be alone. Without the ego involved, we might all still be living in Babel (or whatever they named the city instead), and not have to learn different languages.

Genesis 10

Genesis 10:32

These are the families of the sons of Noah, according to their genealogies, by their nations; and out of these the nations were separated on the earth after the flood.

This is one of those chapters that people hate to read. Person A was the father of person B, who was the father of persons C and D, etc. Given that this chapter doesn't even have any time lengths listed, it's not all that interesting reading. However, this verse caught my attention.

Out of all the people who lived before the Flood, we know almost nothing of them. Anything we do know is kinda useless, since all remnants of their civilization were wiped out. The human race was down to 3 brothers, their wives, and Noah and his wife (who apparently did not have any more kids). So out of 3 monogamous couples, enough people to be called nations came. Given all the fears today of genetic inbreeding being dangerous and such, that amount of stable procreation is amazing. Modern geneticists would say that's probably impossible, that there would be too high a probability of them being wiped out.

Genesis 9

Genesis 9:3

Every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you; I give all to you, as I gave the green plant.

This caught my eye because it appears that at this point, God did not require any dietary restrictions. So, did God later add the dietary restrictions for some specific reason? If so, why not have them here? Before the flood, God gave Noah instructions based on what animals were clean and unclean. Has that restriction been removed?

This verse reminds me of Peter's vision in Acts, where God says that nothing is unclean.

I wonder if Ham enjoyed a nice piece of bacon now and then. :-)

Genesis 8

Genesis 8:20

Then Noah built an alter to the Lord, and took of every clean animal and of every clean bird and offered burnt offerings on the altar.

I'd forgotten about this verse, so when I read in the previous chapter, I wondered why God told Noah to take seven of every clean animal. Now I know why: so he would have one to offer to God in thanks.

God didn't tell Noah to make this sacrifice. He could have let them all loose, but he didn't. He took of what God had spared, potentially risking what we now call the gene pool, and gave it back to the one who had spared him. As it "worked out", that left an even three pairs of the clean animals to breed. Even in tragedy, God's forethought is amazing.

Genesis 7

Genesis 7:4

For after seven more days, I will send rain on the earth forty days and forty nights; and I will blot out from the face of the land every living thing that I have made."

What interests me in this verse isn't really the verse itself, it's what precedes it. The chapter before this verse is the command to put the animals in the ark. Only at this point does God start the countdown. So Noah's spent who-knows-how-long to build a zoo, and here he's told he has a week to fill it.

Obviously, Noah and his family don't have time to go on safari, grab two or seven of every creature, and then drag them back to the ark. So God must have seen to it that the animals came to him. I have this crazy thought in my head like one of those commercials where someone's doing something, looks up, and they're surrounded by people staring at them for as far as the camera can see. Trade the onlooking people for animals, and I wonder if that's what happened to Noah.

Genesis 6

Genesis 6:4

The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men, and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.

OK, I'm not going to try to explain this one. Just go ahead and file it under "Things to ask God when I get to Heaven." So I'll just pose the questions that come to mind.

First, who are the Nephilim? Are they people of a certain background (like we would say German or Ismaelite or Bush? Are they heavenly beings, or demonic beings? Are they the men of renown, or are they the sons of God?

Second, what is meant by "sons of God"? Is this in the sense that Adam was a son of God, as in made by God? Or is it meant to also signify some kind of heavenly creature?

Who are these mighty men? At the time of this writing, and without looking it up, I believe that roughly a millennium has passed. Are they still known to Moses and the Israelites? If so, how? What did they do to be renowned?

Lots of questions, few answers.

Genesis 5

Genesis 5:24

"Enoch walked with God; and he was not, for God took him."

Two things of interest in this short verse. First, this is the only person in the genealogy, including Noah, who is said to have walked with God. Everyone else was born, had kids, lived a while longer, then died -- straight and simple. Enoch was special to God. Something about what he did set him apart from the rest.

Second, he is the only person whom "God took." Everyone else just dies. Some think this means that God took him directly to heaven, like he did Elijah. Also, there is disagreement on who the Two Witnesses in Revelation are; when I was growing up, I was taught they're Elijah and Moses. However, I think it makes more sense for them to be Elijah and Enoch, as the only two men who never died.

I still download the sermons from the church I went to in Indiana, though I'm a couple years behind in listening to them. I put one on while I was on my back from a get-together in Gilmer, and it turned out to be a memorial; one of the more prominent church members had died of a heart attack a few days before while jogging. I didn't get finished with the message, but the pastor said this verse was on his mind at the service. I only knew the man who died in passing, since I wasn't there long enough to connect with anybody, but I know he was a great help to the church body. He will be missed. O, that when the day comes, this could be said of us all.