01/08/08: Genesis 47-50
Chapter 48:
Why is Jacob referred to as both Jacob and Israel throughout the text?
Ted: His name originally was Jacob. When he wrestled with God, God renamed him Israel, which actually was more of a description of what the nation of Israel would do (struggle with God) from that point forward, until the end of the age when their Messiah, Jesus, finally will return. At that point, the nation will cease its struggle with God.
I look at Israel as simply an additional name and description of Jacob, not an absolute replacement of his name. Therefore he is referred to by both names after that point in the biblical text.
When Jacob says that Joseph's sons are his, what exactly does he mean? I thought his inheritance would already be passed to them through Joseph.
Ted: I understand your confusion here, because it is not completely understandable to me either. Joseph became the most blessed of all the sons, because he endured so much undeserved hardship (being sold by his brothers, spending time in prison when he had done nothing wrong, etc.) In all of this, Joseph never found fault with God for his immense anguish and suffering (just as we will read, later, that Job did not find fault with God).
Thus, Joseph was rewarded not only with vast greatness in Egypt (second in command only to Pharaoh) but also in Jacob's choosing Joseph's sons (as distinct from all of his other grandsons) to be as though they were equal with Jacob's own sons. Evidently, this was one of the highest honors that Jacob could have bestowed upon Joseph. Later in the Bible, we will find that the sub-tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh essentially are treated as equals among the other main tribes of Israel. So, yes, they already get Joseph's inheritance, but they get even more honor and recognition than any of their cousins.
Why does Jacob choose the second-born to be the greater?
Ted: That is a distinct pattern in God's overall plan: the second will be greater than the first. Jesus (the "second man") was greater than Adam (1 Corinthians 15:47). It was Abraham's second born (Isaac) who received the eternal covenant and inheritance from God, not the first born (Ishmael). Jacob, himself the second-born, was greater than Esau, the first-born. Judah's son Zerah thrust his hand out first, so technically he should have been first to be born. But he withdrew his hand, so Perez (technically the second son) came out before his brother, and all the blessings went to him.
I believe that all of these are "trees," which are indications of this principle in the overall forest. That is, the second (perfect, pristine) Creation will be greater than this first (imperfect, infected) creation. All of this will be destroyed and burned up and will pass away (1 Peter 3:7,10,12; Revelation 20:11), and it will be replaced by something brand new and infinitely better (1 Peter 3:13; Revelation 21:1,5). No sin or impurity ever will enter that realm (21:27). More details can be found in my Creation commentary, specifically in sections "the second greater than the first" through "'very good' vs. 'perfect'" beginning here:
Second Greater than the First
Why is Jacob referred to as both Jacob and Israel throughout the text?
Ted: His name originally was Jacob. When he wrestled with God, God renamed him Israel, which actually was more of a description of what the nation of Israel would do (struggle with God) from that point forward, until the end of the age when their Messiah, Jesus, finally will return. At that point, the nation will cease its struggle with God.
I look at Israel as simply an additional name and description of Jacob, not an absolute replacement of his name. Therefore he is referred to by both names after that point in the biblical text.
When Jacob says that Joseph's sons are his, what exactly does he mean? I thought his inheritance would already be passed to them through Joseph.
Ted: I understand your confusion here, because it is not completely understandable to me either. Joseph became the most blessed of all the sons, because he endured so much undeserved hardship (being sold by his brothers, spending time in prison when he had done nothing wrong, etc.) In all of this, Joseph never found fault with God for his immense anguish and suffering (just as we will read, later, that Job did not find fault with God).
Thus, Joseph was rewarded not only with vast greatness in Egypt (second in command only to Pharaoh) but also in Jacob's choosing Joseph's sons (as distinct from all of his other grandsons) to be as though they were equal with Jacob's own sons. Evidently, this was one of the highest honors that Jacob could have bestowed upon Joseph. Later in the Bible, we will find that the sub-tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh essentially are treated as equals among the other main tribes of Israel. So, yes, they already get Joseph's inheritance, but they get even more honor and recognition than any of their cousins.
Why does Jacob choose the second-born to be the greater?
Ted: That is a distinct pattern in God's overall plan: the second will be greater than the first. Jesus (the "second man") was greater than Adam (1 Corinthians 15:47). It was Abraham's second born (Isaac) who received the eternal covenant and inheritance from God, not the first born (Ishmael). Jacob, himself the second-born, was greater than Esau, the first-born. Judah's son Zerah thrust his hand out first, so technically he should have been first to be born. But he withdrew his hand, so Perez (technically the second son) came out before his brother, and all the blessings went to him.
I believe that all of these are "trees," which are indications of this principle in the overall forest. That is, the second (perfect, pristine) Creation will be greater than this first (imperfect, infected) creation. All of this will be destroyed and burned up and will pass away (1 Peter 3:7,10,12; Revelation 20:11), and it will be replaced by something brand new and infinitely better (1 Peter 3:13; Revelation 21:1,5). No sin or impurity ever will enter that realm (21:27). More details can be found in my Creation commentary, specifically in sections "the second greater than the first" through "'very good' vs. 'perfect'" beginning here:
Second Greater than the First
01/08/08: Genesis 43-46
I have a broad question scoping several chapters. Why is Joseph tricking his brothers? I remember what they did to him, but he has no ill intentions. It seems like he sends them on errands with no real purpose and with no personal motive.
Ted: I don't think there's anything specific in the text that enables us to read Joseph's mind. However, we can guess.
Joseph's brothers had sold him into slavery, even though he had done nothing wrong, other than to have a couple of dreams that his eleven brothers would bow down to him. They wronged Joseph not only because of his dreams but, also, because he was the favorite son of their father, Jacob/Israel. Some of them even wanted to kill him.
When the brothers came to Egypt (at which time they did bow down to him), he didn't know, for absolute certain, what their intentions were. For all he knew, they had heard of his great status--ruler of all Egypt, second only to Pharaoh--and were envious. Had they come to kill him? Were they only pretending not to recognize him? If so, he had to take the upper hand and demonstrate his absolute authority over them, if only to intimidate them into unconditional submission to him so that they would be much less likely to harm him.
Ted: I don't think there's anything specific in the text that enables us to read Joseph's mind. However, we can guess.
Joseph's brothers had sold him into slavery, even though he had done nothing wrong, other than to have a couple of dreams that his eleven brothers would bow down to him. They wronged Joseph not only because of his dreams but, also, because he was the favorite son of their father, Jacob/Israel. Some of them even wanted to kill him.
When the brothers came to Egypt (at which time they did bow down to him), he didn't know, for absolute certain, what their intentions were. For all he knew, they had heard of his great status--ruler of all Egypt, second only to Pharaoh--and were envious. Had they come to kill him? Were they only pretending not to recognize him? If so, he had to take the upper hand and demonstrate his absolute authority over them, if only to intimidate them into unconditional submission to him so that they would be much less likely to harm him.
01/07/08: Genesis 40-42
Chapter 41:
41:24--What is the meaning of magicians here? Are they like Egyptian priests/medicine men?
Ted: Basically, yet. Every civilization and people have those within them who deal with the supernatural or who were in charge of "fixing" things. That is who these men were for the Egyptians.
41:24--What is the meaning of magicians here? Are they like Egyptian priests/medicine men?
Ted: Basically, yet. Every civilization and people have those within them who deal with the supernatural or who were in charge of "fixing" things. That is who these men were for the Egyptians.
01/07/08: Genesis 37-39
Chapter 37:
Joseph refers to the eleven stars in his dream. What are those?
Ted: Jacob (whom God renamed "Israel") had 12 sons, one of whom was Joseph. Joseph dreamed that the sun, moon, and eleven stars would bow down to him. This meant that his father, mother, and 11 brothers would do this, at some point.
Interestingly, there is a reference in the last book of the Bible, Revelation, to the same sun, moon, and stars. In Revelation 12:1, it speaks of "a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head." The "woman" is a reference to Israel, a remnant of which will flee to the desert at the end of the age, and be protected by God for 1,260 days (Revelation 12:6).
Joseph refers to the eleven stars in his dream. What are those?
Ted: Jacob (whom God renamed "Israel") had 12 sons, one of whom was Joseph. Joseph dreamed that the sun, moon, and eleven stars would bow down to him. This meant that his father, mother, and 11 brothers would do this, at some point.
Interestingly, there is a reference in the last book of the Bible, Revelation, to the same sun, moon, and stars. In Revelation 12:1, it speaks of "a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head." The "woman" is a reference to Israel, a remnant of which will flee to the desert at the end of the age, and be protected by God for 1,260 days (Revelation 12:6).
01/07/08: Genesis 33-36
Chapter 33:
Why did Jacob lie to Esau and then go to Succoth instead of Seir?
Ted: I'm not sure, but it could have been that Jacob mistrusted Esau and might have thought that the reason he didn't attack him was because he planned to get him and all his people and livestock to Seir and then kill him and then have all of Jacob's people and animals as his possession.
Why did Jacob lie to Esau and then go to Succoth instead of Seir?
Ted: I'm not sure, but it could have been that Jacob mistrusted Esau and might have thought that the reason he didn't attack him was because he planned to get him and all his people and livestock to Seir and then kill him and then have all of Jacob's people and animals as his possession.
01/07/08: Genesis 30-32
Chapter 30:
What are mandrakes?
Ted: Definition here.
30:35-43 What's going on with the goats? Why is Jacob peeling birch trees...what does that have to do with goat coloration?
Ted: The best i can tell is that way back then, when God had more personal dealings with people, things that don't make any sense to us now DID happen. I got a little confused about what jacob's intent was by doing all of that (although, again, it did involve deception), but evidently God was behind it because of 31:11,12.
And the language was not clear to me, but was Jacob allowed to keep all of the goats that were spotted? And did Laban take away the spotted and streaked ones so that he could hopefully keep those genes out of the herd?
Ted: Frankly, I'm not sure. i remember that whole passage as being confusing to me every time I've read the bible. We need some preacher who has researched and understood it to explain it to us in simple language, but I've never heard one do it so far. But basically, again Jacob's deception got him ahead, and God allowed it.
01/07/08: Genesis 27-29
Chapter 27:
If Issac's blessing was for Esau, how can Jacob "steal" it just by being there and lying? The blessing was meant for Esau. God knows that.
Ted: That is a question that people have posed for centuries. First of all, i think it was predestined (by God) for Jacob to deceive his brother, because it was predestined for God's chosen nation of the world to be Israel. One might wonder how that can be, if God is not a deceiver. In a nutshell, this basically has to do with my believe that this entire universe and earth were made IMPERFECT, by God, on purpose, from the beginning. God knew that evil HAD to be a part of all of this, because only in that way could "the elect" (those who will go on into the new Creation after this one is destroyed) know that even the slightest bit of evil is bad and be willing to be rid of every last remnant of it.
But more to the point, I guess, is this: are the words of Issac's blessing more important than the intent?
Ted: Well, evidently, Isaacs words were of UTMOST importance. Once they were spoken, they could not be rescinded.
If Issac's blessing was for Esau, how can Jacob "steal" it just by being there and lying? The blessing was meant for Esau. God knows that.
Ted: That is a question that people have posed for centuries. First of all, i think it was predestined (by God) for Jacob to deceive his brother, because it was predestined for God's chosen nation of the world to be Israel. One might wonder how that can be, if God is not a deceiver. In a nutshell, this basically has to do with my believe that this entire universe and earth were made IMPERFECT, by God, on purpose, from the beginning. God knew that evil HAD to be a part of all of this, because only in that way could "the elect" (those who will go on into the new Creation after this one is destroyed) know that even the slightest bit of evil is bad and be willing to be rid of every last remnant of it.
But more to the point, I guess, is this: are the words of Issac's blessing more important than the intent?
Ted: Well, evidently, Isaacs words were of UTMOST importance. Once they were spoken, they could not be rescinded.
01/03/08: Genesis 23-26
Chapter 23:
What is going on in the exchange here? Are they trying to give Abraham the land, and he's insisting that he buys it?
Ted: I feel that Abraham BOUGHT the land, rather than have it given to him, and he did it in front of all the Hittites. He did this because, at some point in the future, if any of them or anyone else tried to lay claim to the land (saying, "well it was GIVEN to him, but it belongs to us), they couldn't legally take it.
Were they just trying to be nice, or did they have ulterior motives?
Ted: I'm not sure, but I kind of think that maybe Abraham had become rather famous and had a good name, so out of respect that Ephron guy just wanted to give him a gift of the land.
What is going on in the exchange here? Are they trying to give Abraham the land, and he's insisting that he buys it?
Ted: I feel that Abraham BOUGHT the land, rather than have it given to him, and he did it in front of all the Hittites. He did this because, at some point in the future, if any of them or anyone else tried to lay claim to the land (saying, "well it was GIVEN to him, but it belongs to us), they couldn't legally take it.
Were they just trying to be nice, or did they have ulterior motives?
Ted: I'm not sure, but I kind of think that maybe Abraham had become rather famous and had a good name, so out of respect that Ephron guy just wanted to give him a gift of the land.
01/02/08: Genesis 20-22
I had no questions in the reading today (I thought it read very easily with no obvious hidden meaning), but Ted discussed some general "Genesis info."
Ted: Many Christians, typically known as "young-earthers," believe that this universe and earth were made PERFECT. When Eve/Adam disobeyed (sinned), they brought sin into the universe, and as a result death entered also--meaning that there was no death of any kind, even in the plant and animal kingdom, before Eve/Adam ate the forbidden fruit (or so the "young-earthers" believe).
I disagree, adamantly, with both premises: that 1) this universe/earth were made perfect and that 2) there was no death before Eve/Adam sinned. Nowhere does God call His creation "perfect." The best that He ever calls it is "very good" (Genesis 1:31), and there are passages in the new testament indicating that death entered into humanity when Eve/Adam sinned, not into the entire plant and animal kingdoms.
Basically, the bottom line is I believe that God purposely made an IMPERFECT universe (that is, one which began decaying and degenerating from the very beginning), knowing that Eve/Adam eventually would sin. It was not, initially, a perfect universe, where "perfect" indicates that no deterioration was taking place. Moreover, God was not appalled and astonished when Eve/Adam disobeyed; the whole thing was planned out that way, by God, beforehand. God made a universe which was "very good" in helping Him reach His ultimate goal of a perfect creation to come, after this one passes away (Revelation 20:11, 21:1). You can read more in the "very good" vs. "perfect" section of my Creation commentary.
I disagree, adamantly, with both premises: that 1) this universe/earth were made perfect and that 2) there was no death before Eve/Adam sinned. Nowhere does God call His creation "perfect." The best that He ever calls it is "very good" (Genesis 1:31), and there are passages in the new testament indicating that death entered into humanity when Eve/Adam sinned, not into the entire plant and animal kingdoms.
Basically, the bottom line is I believe that God purposely made an IMPERFECT universe (that is, one which began decaying and degenerating from the very beginning), knowing that Eve/Adam eventually would sin. It was not, initially, a perfect universe, where "perfect" indicates that no deterioration was taking place. Moreover, God was not appalled and astonished when Eve/Adam disobeyed; the whole thing was planned out that way, by God, beforehand. God made a universe which was "very good" in helping Him reach His ultimate goal of a perfect creation to come, after this one passes away (Revelation 20:11, 21:1). You can read more in the "very good" vs. "perfect" section of my Creation commentary.
01/02/08: Genesis 16-19
Chapter 17:
"Including those bought with money from a foreigner." Does this mean slaves? Are these people then considered Jews?
Ted: Well yes, they can be considered servants or slaves (rarely any of whom were mistreated like the blacks in the southern USA in the 1800s, and all of whom were provided well for by those who "owned" them). For all intents and purposes, they were sort of like "grafted into" the Jews. Not blood-related, but having all of the rights and privileges of Jews, as long as they did what they were supposed to do.
Were they allowed to marry into the "true" Jews?
Ted: I know that they DID; however, I can't remember if God ordained it (told them that it was okay) or if they just did it anyway.
"Including those bought with money from a foreigner." Does this mean slaves? Are these people then considered Jews?
Ted: Well yes, they can be considered servants or slaves (rarely any of whom were mistreated like the blacks in the southern USA in the 1800s, and all of whom were provided well for by those who "owned" them). For all intents and purposes, they were sort of like "grafted into" the Jews. Not blood-related, but having all of the rights and privileges of Jews, as long as they did what they were supposed to do.
Were they allowed to marry into the "true" Jews?
Ted: I know that they DID; however, I can't remember if God ordained it (told them that it was okay) or if they just did it anyway.
01/02/08: Genesis 12-15
Chapter 12:
What does it mean when it says "the people they had acquired?"
Ted: Probably as servants: maids, menservants, herdsmen, etc. Workers.
Not slaves?
Ted: Well, I suppose you could use that word, but it might be a little strong.
What was the pharoah punished for? Did he sleep with Sarai? And how did he know the diseases had been brought on by God, and on Abram's behalf?
Ted: It is not implicitly clear, for certain, if pharoah slept with her, but evidently, nothing terrible had happened to pharaoh and his household until Abraham and Sarah came. Pharaoh must have associated their arrival with the bad stuff that happened, and the only thing he probably could figure is that it had something with his taking Sarah as his wife. I think it was fairly standard with any civilization of that day that bad crap would happen to you if you took another man's wife, although that is not explicitly explained in the bible up to that point. A similar thing happens in Chapter 20 except that God actually appears to the guy in the dream and tells him that he must give Sarah back to Abraham or else he's toast.
What does it mean when it says "the people they had acquired?"
Ted: Probably as servants: maids, menservants, herdsmen, etc. Workers.
Not slaves?
Ted: Well, I suppose you could use that word, but it might be a little strong.
What was the pharoah punished for? Did he sleep with Sarai? And how did he know the diseases had been brought on by God, and on Abram's behalf?
Ted: It is not implicitly clear, for certain, if pharoah slept with her, but evidently, nothing terrible had happened to pharaoh and his household until Abraham and Sarah came. Pharaoh must have associated their arrival with the bad stuff that happened, and the only thing he probably could figure is that it had something with his taking Sarah as his wife. I think it was fairly standard with any civilization of that day that bad crap would happen to you if you took another man's wife, although that is not explicitly explained in the bible up to that point. A similar thing happens in Chapter 20 except that God actually appears to the guy in the dream and tells him that he must give Sarah back to Abraham or else he's toast.
12/31/07: Genesis 10,11
Chapter 10:
The Bible called Nimrod a hunter, but he founded cities. Was that common practice for hunters of the time?
Ted: Good questions, and I don't really know the answer.
But hunter does describe him accurately, meaning hunter of...animals?
Ted: Yes, i would say so.
The Bible called Nimrod a hunter, but he founded cities. Was that common practice for hunters of the time?
Ted: Good questions, and I don't really know the answer.
But hunter does describe him accurately, meaning hunter of...animals?
Ted: Yes, i would say so.
12/31/07: Genesis 6-9
Chapter 6:
Ted: When it says that "the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful," what many (including myself) believe what that means is that some of the angels (which often are called "sons of God" in the Bible) went down and had sex with mortal women. Their offspring were the Nephilim, which were giants and which very well may have been the "half God/half man" beings in ancient Greek mythology.
12/28/07: Genesis 3-5
Reading: Genesis 3-5
Chapter 3:
What is a Cherubim?
Ted: Cherubim is the plural of cherub, and a cherub is a heavenly being, maybe a type of angel, that God created to serve and/or praise Him.
Chapter 3:
What is a Cherubim?
Ted: Cherubim is the plural of cherub, and a cherub is a heavenly being, maybe a type of angel, that God created to serve and/or praise Him.
12/28/07: Genesis 1,2
Reading available here: Gen 1,2
Unfortunately, I decided to do this project the day after Ted and I discussed this reading. That means while I can remember my questions and the answers, they unfortunately will not contain the poetic prose which could probably be used to describe Ted's writing. That, or, I won't sound as smart or be as thorough.
Anyway, on with the questions:
Unfortunately, I decided to do this project the day after Ted and I discussed this reading. That means while I can remember my questions and the answers, they unfortunately will not contain the poetic prose which could probably be used to describe Ted's writing. That, or, I won't sound as smart or be as thorough.
Anyway, on with the questions:
