Genesis 8 The Hebrew Calendars

A close look at this chapter can be fascinating. We all know the waters recede, the fountains of the deep were stopped, and the rain was restrained. Noah sent four birds to test for any appearance of land. The ark of Noah (rest) rests on the mountains of Ararat on the 17th day of the 7th month. Most of us have read the first eight chapters of Genesis many times. So, I will focus on one aspect of this account only. Scholars differ according to what I am about to write, but it is so phenomenal that surely there is a reason for this. Let me explain.

There are two Hebrew calendars; one is generally considered the civil calendar. It begins with the month of Tishrei and includes parts of September and October. The first of Tishrei is called Rosh Hashanah or the “Jewish New Year.” For those of you with Jewish friends, the next Jewish New Year begins on the night of Friday, September 22, 2006. This is closely followed by Yom Kippur “The Day of Atonement” on the 10th of Tishrei, which will next occur on October 1, 2006 by U.S. calendars. The Jewish calendar is, to a degree, lunar-based over a cycle of 19 years as well as a complex set of ritual rules, so it does not follow our calendar very closely. Rabbinical scholars consider this civil calendar as the older calendar because God finished His creation on Tishrei 1. You will not find that in the Bible, I do not think, but it is a Jewish tradition, and why Tishrei 1 is historically considered the New Year.

Then there is the Hebrew religious calendar. It deviates from the Jewish civil calendar by six Jewish months. This calendar begins with Nisan 1. It is generally used for determining religious feasts, days of remembrance, etc. Nisan includes parts of our March and April. The Biblical basis for this change is found in Exodus 12. From this chapter, we can clearly see that Passover occurs in the month of Nisan, and the beginning of the year then commemorates the coming Hebrew exodus from Egypt.

What’s this got to do with Noah and Genesis 8? Glad you asked. The ark rested on the mountains of Ararat on the 17th day of the 7th month by the older civil calendar. (before Exodus 12) Therefore, by the religious calendar given to Moses, the ark rested on Nisan 17 on the mountains of Ararat; Nisan being the seventh month on the civil calendar and the first month of the religious calendar.

Passover, as determined by Exodus 12, occurs on the 14th day of Nisan. Thus, Passover can occur on days of the week other than Saturday. It is still regarded as a Sabbath because it is holy and no work is to be done. Not all Sabbaths are Saturdays but Passover is always a Sabbath, and Saturdays are always Sabbaths as well. What we call Sunday was always considered the first day of the week just as it is on our common calendars today.
Nisan is associated with holy days as well. On the 10th of Nisan, unblemished lambs are set aside. On the 14th of Nisan, they are eaten hastily as the main part of a Passover meal. There is another holy day called the Feast of First Fruits, which occurs on the morning after the Sabbath (Saturday) after Passover. It occurs on a Sunday during the seven-day Feast of Unleavened Bread. Leviticus 23:5-16

Here, then, is another way that we can relate the Genesis account of Noah with the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus the Christ. Jesus was resurrected on the anniversary of the ark resting on the mountains of Ararat. Furthermore, He arose on the Feast of the First Fruits. Perhaps we can also see that the Hebrew holy days were not only commemorative in their purpose, but were prophetic as well.

In addition, this information lends support to the notion that Jesus was not crucified on Good Friday. Undoubtedly, the Gospels agree and are clear that He arose on Sunday, the first day of the week. But it also says that He would be in the heart of the earth for three days AND nights. Matthew 12:40

God said to Noah, “Come thou and all thy house into the ark.

Jesus says to us, “Come unto me all ye that labour and are heavy-laden and I will give you rest.” (noah)

John 1:29 The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, 'Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.'

Genesis 7:1 And the LORD said unto Noah, Come thou and all thy house into the ark; for thee have I seen righteous before me in this generation.

Matthew 11:28 Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.

It is troubling to think that from the whole world, God chose to save only eight humans in Noah’s day. Let us consider that if we count ourselves among a large group of people heading toward a wide gate on a broad path, then we are surely headed the wrong way.

Matthew 7:13-14 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

There was only one way for salvation in the days of Noah. Either you were in the ark or you were not. Those who had jeered Noah before began to scream for mercy, yet the door to the ark had been sealed by God’s hand. There is only one way to salvation now. Either you are in Christ and He is in you, or you stand in eternal peril. There was no other ark. There is no other Christ.

Acts 4:12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

Genesis 7

This chapter begins with an invitation from Yahweh. God invites our ancestor and his family into the ark. He says, “Come.” He draws them to Him. This was not a command, like, “Go.” Yahweh even explains why He invites them: “For thee I have seen righteous before me in this generation.” Noah was faithful and obedient. How can we rightly separate these two qualities?
Was this family perfect? Probably not, but they can be typified as a sort of “second Adam,” a new beginning for humanity and the living creation. People are saved, so Christ must be typified here as well. Christ is the means through which we are saved, so the ark can represent Christ here. 2 Timothy 1:7-11. Different instructions were given in 7:2-3 regarding the animals when compared with the parallel passage in chapter 6. Note that God, or Elohim, is used to refer to our heavenly Father in 6:9-22, while LORD, or Yahweh, is used in the verses immediately preceding and following.

We are not told how anyone might have known what a clean or unclean animal is. At least some of what we commonly consider “Mosaic Law” surely was known before the days of Moses. We know that under the law of Moses that unclean beasts could not be used for food or for sacrifice. Leviticus 11; Deuteronomy 14. Now some will claim that God had additional clean animals taken aboard only for the purpose of sacrifice. This may be true. God had already told Adam that humans and animals were to eat vegetation only. Genesis 1:29-30. But later, God changes this commandment, Genesis 9:2-3, so that if humans were to eat meat directly after the flood there will need to be more than a pair of each species to prevent immediate extinctions.

My daughter’s favorite video game (years ago) was based on this story. You moved the avatar around searching for animals in bushes and trees, carried them onto the ark, and put them in their pens. The animals were often not cooperative. Yet 7:15 shows the animals going into the ark without any human coaxing.

Was this a global flood? It sure seems that way from 7:18. Verse 7:20 can be a bit confusing. Were all the mountains less than 15 cubits (22-23 feet) tall, or were the highest mountains submerged more than 15 cubits? Well, one theory is that the ark was 30 cubits tall so that it may have needed 15 cubits of clearance to keep it from striking ground. 6:15 Others suggest that the great mountains were created during or after the flood.

Was the ark big enough to house and feed such a sampling of all the land animals and birds? Many profound miracles were obviously happening at once, so this question may not be a meaningful one. However, there have been estimations that the ark would have been, indeed, physically large enough with room to spare.

Is the ark account historically true, is it allegory demonstrating spiritual truth, or is it an old Babylonian fable that crept into our Holy Scriptures? Before you answer that question, first consider the cloud of witnesses.

Isaiah 54:9
Ezekiel 14:14,20
Hebrews 11:7
1 Peter 3:20
2 Peter 2:5

And the most persuasive testimony from Jesus the Christ

Matthew 24:37-39
Luke 17:26-27

So, what do you think? What do you wonder about? What would you like to share? May the Holy Spirit bring to us the faith and obedience that brings glory to God.

Genesis 6 Part III: Preparation for the Deluge

From the last installment we know that God had decided to destroy everything on the face of the earth because it was corrupt and the people were violent. Noah, however, found grace in the eyes of the LORD.

God tells Noah of His plan to flood the earth and tells him to build an ark. For some reason people like to mention that gopher wood was used in construction. I don’t know what gopher wood is. Modern translations will often indicate that cypress was used. In fact, if we research the ancient Hebrew word, rp,GO ,we find that its meaning has been lost to antiquity. We no longer know what kind of wood was used. The KJV says that Noah was to build rooms in the ark. A more accurate term might be more like “nests.” Neither of these issues seem important to the story, anyway.

Notice that Noah is never recorded as speaking during the entire flood account. We can only presume that he obeyed the divine instructions given to him. The ark would be over 150 yards long and over 25 yards wide. There is a little confusion over the precise length of a cubit. Still, it will be a very large watercraft, considerably longer than a football field, and about 45 feet tall with three floors.

Noah is then instructed to take a male and a female of each sort of beast onto the ark with him and his family along with sufficient food. Then we have another sentence commending Noah. Genesis 6:22 He was faithful, which seems to necessarily imply that he was obedient.
With a close read of chapters 6 and 7 we find many questions. Why are there two accounts of the animals to be taken aboard? Why do they differ? I currently believe that the “documentary hypothesis” has the best explanation for this. This was discussed in a previous installment, Genesis 1 & 2 Part IV. While I see no evidence to doubt the tradition that Moses was the original human author of the Pentateuch (Torah, first five books of the OT), perhaps it was handed down through different populations, which altered it inadvertently over time.

Then, when later redactors (800-500 B.C.) were faced with these differing accounts, rather than accept one as correct and another incorrect, they chose to include them all. It is just a hypothesis, but as we go through the OT, we will find many stories told two or even three times with subtle and not so subtle differences.

Moreover, what about the fish and the aquatic mammals? What about the barometric pressures at heights as high as Mount Ararat, or even Mount Everest? Where will all of this water come from and where will it go? Will the flood bring salt water or fresh water? How did the kangaroo get to Australia and the sloth to South America in the course of about 4000 years? Much is made of these questions. Yet if we have already accepted faith in a God, Yahweh, Who created everything out of nothing, then possible answers come pretty easily.

Those who wish to view each passage in the Bible with scientific precision and/or feel that God is bound to the physical laws that He, Himself, created will find several logical difficulties. Chapter 7 will elicit several interesting questions.

I still maintain beyond doubt that the Bible is the inerrant word of God. It was inerrant to its initial audience, and is inerrant for us in all that it intends to teach. We need to be careful not to acquire unintended knowledge through misinterpretation, or reading out of context.

So what do you think? What explanations have you heard? What logical difficulties arise in your mind? This can be an intellectual pursuit and yet have no affect on our faith. There are too many theories to enumerate in a blog entry but perhaps you would like to comment on some.

Truly, many humans and beasts will perish in the flood of chapter 7. But the focus is on salvation by God's grace through faith like that of Noah. May God bless us with His ever-increasing grace.

Genesis 6 Part II

The mysterious beginning of this chapter yields more questions and even some answers. Many have understood verse 3 to mean that men shall not live longer than 120 years. Yet, there are many people, after Noah, who are recorded to live extraordinary lifetimes. Verse 3 indicates that the flood will come in 120 years. This also appears to be the time within which Noah completed the building of the ark. Why did God bring the flood? Well, we probably can’t answer that completely, for who knows the purposes of the Infinite? Still, the Bible does say that God saw the wickedness of man was great, and that all of his imaginations, purposes, and desires, were evil continually.

Verse 6 is an early example of multitudes of Scriptural passages that suggest that God does not exhaustively know the future, nor does He choose to exhaustively control it. No true Christian, I believe, thinks that God’s power is limited in anyway, except as He may choose to limit it. Here, God repents, and is grieved. Calvinists will claim that this is an anthropomorphism; that God cannot grieve nor repent, as He knows the future exhaustively, and is in complete control.

This, of course, makes the role of humanity meaningless. It is my present opinion that God is so great as to be able to create humanity with free will who can disappoint Him and please Him, sometimes to His delight and sometimes to His grief. I believe that God has genuine expectations for us. That is not to say that God cannot control whenever He chooses. That is why we pray for one another. It is also, why we know that prophecy will be fulfilled and that Satan will be utterly defeated. In other words, I prefer to interpret verse 6 fairly literally.

Yahweh resolves to destroy man whom He had created. Surely, humans would argue that is well within His “right” and within His power. He repents of making the beasts and will destroy even them. While we know that God is love, we must also remember that He is infinite and multifaceted. He is not love in the sense that “love is God.” In various Scripture passages God also displays justice, anger, hate, grief, judgment, patience, and repentance. He is a provoker of wars, a hardener of hearts, etc. God, I contend, is infinite and complex beyond our ability to fathom.

We are here along with the beasts that perish, because of verse 8. “But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.” It seems critical then, to consider why, or how Noah found God’s grace. What part did Noah play, if any, and what part did God play?

Verse 9 tells us that Noah was perfect in his generations. This suggests that either his lineage was untainted by the “sons of God,” or perhaps the offspring of Cain. We are also told that he was a just man, blameless among the people of his time, and walked with God.

Hebrews 11:7 By faith Noah, when warned about things not yet seen, in holy fear built an ark to save his family. By his faith he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness that comes by faith.

1 Peter 3:18-22 For Christ died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive by the Spirit, through whom {Or alive in the spirit, through which} also he went and preached to the spirits in prison who disobeyed long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water, and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also-- not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge {Or response} of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who has gone into heaven and is at God's right hand-- with angels, authorities and powers in submission to him.

To compare Noah (rest) with Jesus (Yahweh is salvation) is not some far-fetched typology developed by “theological types.” It is right here in 1 Peter. Noah was not Jesus Christ but perhaps, Christ was working in Noah. The similarities seem irresistible to even a casual reader. One big difference, of course, is that Noah lived because of his obedience to God. Jesus died because of the same obedience. Noah’s obedience saved the earthly lives of some animals and humans on the ark, while Christ redeemed all humans for eternal communion with God if we will only accept His redemption.

Would you get on the ark by faith in the unseen, or drown in the water that you believe is not coming? Will you accept Christ as your Savior, your teacher, your friend, and your adopted brother, or will you refuse Christ's redemption and drown in your continual sin? Will the water bear you up, or snuff out your eternal life? So much to consider and so little time. If you will suspend your skepticism for a while, and accept God's grace, you will experience wonderful things so that you might never wish to deny Him. Try Jesus on the outside. He'll reach into your heart and dwell there, if you seek Him earnestly.

Genesis 6:1-4 The sons of God

Genesis 6 begins with a difficult passage. The message of the chapter seems clear enough. Humanity was evil continually. God’s heart was grieved that He had made humans. The sins of humans had corrupted (polluted?) the earth. Therefore, our Creator decides to destroy everything that has the breath of life, but Noah and his family were spared because he had found grace in God’s eyes and was obedient to build a large boat (ark) according to God’s plan.
Now, anyone who has been reading my posts will know that I can’t leave it there. So, here I will consider only verses 1-4. Please read it carefully and consider how mysterious it sounds. There are things here that we do not understand, yet ancient readers surely had some knowledge that the author is taking for granted.

This entry will be limited to considering, “Who are the sons of God?” There have been three primary theories among theologians. The honest Bible student should begin by saying, “I don’t know,” before proceeding to consider the theories.

Some promote the idea that “sons of God” refer to earthly kings and powerful men of the day. Personally, I think we can forget about that one, because their mating with the “daughters of men” is implied as being unnatural and that their children were Nephilim. The KJV translates Nephilim as “giants.” The ancient Hebrew roots suggest that it might mean, “fallen ones.” In any event, they were mighty men of renown, and were the offspring of the mating of the “sons of God” and the “daughters of men.

Others have suggested that the “sons of God” were the descendants of Seth, and the daughters of men were the descendants of Cain. Consequently, some figure, that believers were marrying unbelievers. The Bible does caution against that repeatedly. Still, it seems unreasonable to suspect that a marriage of an unbeliever and a believer should yield offspring of greater stature, renown, or might, than other matrimonial pairings. I’m not too crazy about this theory, either.
The most intriguing theory is that the “sons of God” were fallen angels. I am not claiming that this theory is correct, but it does fit better than the previous two theories. Let’s consider this more carefully.

“Sons of God” here is translated from the ancient Hebrew, ben elohiym. ~yhil{a/ !Be This title occurs five times in the Old Testament; twice here in Genesis 6 and three times in the book of Job. Each time it is used in Job, it is used to mean angels. Job 1:6, 2:1, and 38:25. Note also, that in the first two Job passages, Satan is mentioned as being among them. Then in Daniel 3:25 we have the Aramaic, bar ellah, Hl'a/ rB; translated in the KJV as “the Son of God.” Your KJV footnotes will likely say that Nebuchadnezzar described the fourth man in the fire as “like the Son of God” because he thought an angel was protecting Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. In the KJV, “the” is added along with the irregular capitalization of son. A better translation might be “a son of the god(s).” So, was this an angel, or was this Christ? I don’t know. This is only Nebuchadnezzar’s testimony and not the proclamation of the prophet, Daniel.
Therefore, for consistency, we should at least consider that in Genesis 6 “sons of God” refers to angels, cherubim, seraphim, or some mixture of these sorts of heavenly beings. But, aren’t angels supposed to be the good guys? Well, not all of them. Remember, Satan is an angel and he has angels in his camp.

2 Peter 2:4-10 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment; And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly; And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly; And delivered just Lot, vexed with the filthy conversation of the wicked: (For that righteous man dwelling among them, in seeing and hearing, vexed his righteous soul from day to day with their unlawful deeds;) The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished: But chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government. Presumptuous are they, selfwilled, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities.

Revelation 12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

Here, however, is a wrench that someone might throw into this theory.

Matthew 22:30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

Mark 12:25 For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels which are in heaven.

Jesus, though, may be speaking only of obedient angels of God in heaven. He does not say that angels cannot have sexual desires. This suggests that the “sons of God” in Genesis 6 are those angels that disobey God and follow Satan. Still, they were created by God.
Consider

Psalm 51:5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.
Two men were set upon this earth yet their existence was unrelated to sexual intercourse.

Luke 1:34-35 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

Luke 3:38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

So, what’s my point with this? Just that “sons of God” might refer to living beings that emanate directly from God without intervention by men, such as angels. It’s just a thought. What do you think?

Genesis 5 Adam to Noah

Should you wish to read the Scripture on-line in one of several translations while reading this entry, you can right-click on a link to open the passage in a new window. Here is another one of those chapters which might look like “boring genealogies.” It announces that this is the book of the generations of Adam, then reminds of of the 6th day of creation. We also might note that by verse 2 we learn that God called the two of them together, Adam (ground, or red), together, that He created both of them in His Own image, and that He blessed them.

We follow the line of Seth (appointed or compensation) as this leads to Noah (rest). We are told that there are many other people and they are mentioned as “other sons and daughters.” This most striking thing about this chapter for most readers, is the extremely long ages of the people mentioned. Many theories have been proposed regarding why people lived so long then compared to now. People speculate on theories regarding vapor canopies, genetic purity, spiritual purity, a desire of God to populate the earth quickly, etc. Pick your pet theory. No one knows. You will likely hear any of them taught and even proclaimed. These theories are interesting but far from conclusive. In any event, here is a partial record of births and deaths from the beginning of human history.

One interesting thought comes from 2 Peter 3:8. If this verse is applicable to Genesis, then we learn why no one lives over 1000 years. In this genealogy, it is interesting that so many live to be in their 900’s. Genesis 2:17 records God telling Adam that if he ate of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, that day he would surely die. Of all, recorded ages in the Bible, none exceed 1000 years. In Genesis 2, “day” is translated from “yowm,” which can mean day, or any indeterminate period. Here, it is not stipulated as evening and morning, as it is in Genesis 1.
The reader may also note a pattern, a rhythm, of the genealogy. The account of a person generally ends with, “and all the days of ______ were ____ years: and he died. This sets us up for a break in the rhythm with Enoch (dedicated).

Genesis 5:23-24 And all the days of Enoch were three hundred sixty and five years: And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him.

We can learn a bit more about Enoch from the “Hebrew Honor Roll” and from Jude.

Hebrews 11:5 By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God.

Jude 14-15 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, to execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.

It appears that Jude, here, is quoting from the “Book of Enoch.” This was an ancient book respected by Jews and Christians though never accepted as canonical. There are several other places in the Bible where noncanonical books are used, so do not be concerned about that. The divinely inspired portions of these noncanonical books have been saved for us in our Holy Bible. Still, there is some fascinating reading out there, beyond the Scriptures. Study the Scriptures thoroughly first, of course. We might be far more enlightened by studying ancient noncanonical books than by reading many of today’s common fictional works if we approach them with faith in God, Jesus, the Holy Spirit, and our Bible.

There is only one other person recorded in the Bible as having completed their time on earth without ever physically dying, and that was Elijah in 2 Kings 2:11. This has led to all manner of human speculation. Are Enoch and Elijah to be the two witnesses of Revelations 11:3? Consider Hebrews 9:27. Are these men typologies of a “rapture” to come? Are Enoch and Elijah the only two common people in heaven right now, waiting to meet us on the day of resurrection? I do not know. But, I digress.

Another notable thing in this chapter, is we have the longest lifespan recorded in Scripture. Methuselah lived 969 years and he died. His name appears to mean, “when he dies it shall be sent.” Some suggest his name means only, “man of the dart.” With my miniscule knowledge of ancient Hebrew, it seems that death is at least implied in the name. In fact, if you count up the years in this genealogy, you will discover that Methuselah died in the same year as the Great Flood began. Did he drown in the flood? I don’t think so. I believe, but cannot prove, that God was, in a sense, waiting for Methuselah to die, in order to bring the flood. Methuselah’s long lifespan is an indication to us, even now, of how long God’s patience is with us. No matter how old anyone may be, God is faithful to supply His justifying grace to those who accept His Son, Jesus the Christ, as their personal Savior. I believe that God gave Enoch, a prophet and Methuselah’s father, some indication of a coming cataclysmic judgment. God gave humanity 969 years to repent, (turn from sin.)

So, here is a riddle you might use in Sunday school just for fun. Who is recorded in Scripture as living the longest while also dying before his father did? The answer, of course, is Methuselah. He also outlived his son, Lamech, by five years.

This has certainly not been exhaustive of all the treasures that can be found through studiously mining this chapter. Maybe it’s a starting point for discussion, though. Please share your insights, questions, ponderings, or just other theories you have heard. May God bless us as we study, speak, and do His word.

Genesis 4 17-26

God had cursed Cain for killing his brother, Abel. The Bible does not reveal Cain showing any remorse. His only stated concerns were for himself. “My punishment is more than I can bear.” We now learn of Cain’s legacy. He knew his wife (a sister or niece) and she bare Enoch. (There is another Enoch in Seth’s lineage, so do not get confused.) Cain builds a city and names it for Enoch. This may imply that Cain chose to honor his son, his family, and thus himself, rather than God. Enoch means ‘dedicated’ some scholars also believe it is related to an ancient near-eastern word meaning ‘city’ in general. Enoch begat Irad, whose name has been translated ‘wild ass, dragon, or heap of empire.’

Irad begat Mehujael, whose name has been translated as ‘smitten of God, or God combats.’ Mehujael begat Methusael, whose name has been translated as ‘man of God.’ Did Cain’s line ever repent and return to worship God? We find two names ending in –el, which suggests that God was at least considered if not honored by their naming. El, of course, means God, and is the singular form of Elohim.

Methusael begat Lamech (powerful, or overthrower.) Here is the first mention in the Bible of polygamy. Lamech took two wives, Adah (ornament) and Zillah (shadow). By Adah, Lamech begat Jabal (stream) who was the father of such as dwell in tents and have cattle. Cattle, here, can refer to any herded animal like cows, sheep, or goats. Adah also bare Jubal (trumpet) the father of such as handle the harp and organ (reed-pipe or flute.) From Jubal we get words like jubilee and jubilation. By Zillah, Lamech begat Tubalcain (flowing from Cain), who was the instructor of artisans of brass and iron. They also had a daughter, Naamah (sweetness or loveliness.) To establish further the growing pride of humanity, a poem of Lamech to his wives is recorded in Genesis 4:23-24. Compare with Matthew 18:21-22.

Now, we turn back to Adam and Eve, who have another son named Seth (appointed) who Eve states was to replace Abel, whom Cain slew. And Seth begat Enos (man is his family.) Then men began to call upon the name of Yahweh, the LORD.

We know that Noah came from the line of Seth and that he was perfect in his generations. Genesis 5 and 6:9. Consequently, we know that all of Cain’s descendants perish either before or during the flood. Also, Noah was instructed to protect living souls with the ark, therefore much of the remnants of civilization was lost. So, what can we learn from all this information?
First, we see that humanity was beginning to advance in terms of what we call civilization and culture. Cain built the first city. Metallurgy and musical instruments were developed. Cain’s descendants were not primarily agrarian. It has been suggested that God did not yet intend for man to live in cities, but rather be more attached to the ground for subsistence. The accomplishments of man led to pride and self-reliance. This interpretation compares favorably with the tower of Babel account. Genesis 11:3-9.

Perhaps Cain’s city was “advancing” too quickly so that his descendants became prideful. Many centuries later, it was recorded that iron chariots were rather scarce Judges 1:19. Who can know how “advanced” civilization was prior to the flood? God intends for us all to live in a city one day, Revelations 21:2, however, we must first be made spiritually ready. The temptations brought by excess human ambition, prosperity, and entertainment are strong and can lead us to feel as if we are the source of triumph. Perhaps founders of Amish-type communities were on to something. God’s glory is everywhere, both in our doing and our undoing. Isaiah 45:5-10.

Genesis 4:1-16

Why Do People Hate?

Now the serpent and the ground has been cursed. Adam and Eve have been driven from Eden. Adam and Eve have their respective sorrows with which to deal. And the seed of the woman, a male, has been promised to bruise the head of the serpent Genesis 3:15.

In Genesis 4:1 we see that Adam knew Eve. (Knew in the OT frequently refers to sexual activity.) She conceived and bore Cain. Cain has been variously translated as begotten, possession, spear, “I have created,” or begotten. Eve proclaims, “I have gotten a man from the LORD” (Yahweh). Some have suggested that Eve believes that Cain is the promised seed of the woman that is to bruise the serpent’s head. Whether she believed this or not, it was proven not to be true. Then she bore Abel, variously translated as breath, or frail.

Cain was the first-born and was by birthright the leader of the offspring. He was a tiller of the ground. Abel was a shepherd. Each of them brought an offering to the LORD, from the fruit of their labors. The LORD had respect for Abel’s offering but not Cain’s. This is not explained. Some have said that Hebrews had more respect for shepherds than farmers. Others have said that a proper offering must involve death and blood. This, of course, is refuted by later Mosaic law which reveals offerings of both animals and plants. The text is not clear as to whether it was the offering itself or the way in which it was presented that was not respected. Perhaps Cain did not follow some unstated prescribed methods, or perhaps he made his offer without sufficient faith or reverence. It is clear that Abel acted properly and Cain did not in regards to this offering.

I don’t believe that shepherds are more honorable to God than farmers. Perhaps what we later learn as the Levitical laws or the Mosaic laws were made known to Cain and Abel and only later written in Leviticus. Or perhaps Cain was in some way less faithful in his offering than Abel. For whatever unstated reason, God had respect for Abel’s offering but not Cain’s. (See also Hebrews 11:4, 1John 3:12, Jude 1:11) I suspect that it was some lack of Cain’s faithfulness in his offering. For YHWH says, “If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? (se’eth, elevated, exalted) and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door." Here is a statement from God that suggests that sin comes from faithlessness, and faithfulness leads to righteousness and good works.

Cain is evidently not pleased. God explains to Cain that his birthright is to rule over Abel in Genesis 4:7 but only if he does well. Cain then apparently lures Abel into a field and kills him. This is the first sin recorded outside of Eden. There were surely others. I suspect both Abel and Cain had sinned at various times, yet Abel had made his offering to God in a way that God found favorable, while Cain had not. Perhaps, Cain was jealous, or feared that Abel might rule over him. Genesis 4:10 records that Abel’s blood cried to God from the ground. (Hebrews 11:4)
Now, Cain asks his famous question, “Am I my brother’s keeper?” YHWH does not answer him directly, but I suspect the answer would be a resounding, Yes!

God cursed Cain, who had been a farmer. The ground will no longer yield its strength to him. He will be a fugitive and a vagabond. He is drive from the face of the earth (Here earth is translated from adamah, which can mean earth, land, or a plot of land. Cain, still concerned for his own well-being, fears that others will kill him. YHWH, in His mercy gives Cain either a mark or a sign that will protect him from the wrath of other humans. Note, that the earth must already be well-populated. All humans and births are obviously not recorded in this account.
Cain went out from the presence of YHWH and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden. Nod may not be a place so much as a condition. Nod, nowd, means wandering. So, it can be interpreted that Cain became a nomad, at least for a time.

So, why do people hate and murder? (Matthew 5:21-24) It seems that pride, self-absorption, disregard for God’s authority, or generally, our sinful nature seems to be a sort of answer. Just like our original parents, we seek to be like God ourselves, to seek our own glory, and regard our own thoughts as most important. To do this, we must pretend that God does not know our hearts. Is it any wonder that so many people regard pride and vanity as the basis for most sin? In today’s language, the word self-absorption comes to mind. People place themselves in a position of greater importance than community or God. We are curved toward ourselves. We look out for number 1. God takes care of those who take care of themselves, and other such non-Biblical drivel that passes for wisdom.

Genesis 3 Part III: A Broader Picture

Genesis 3 is one of the most important chapters in the entire Bible. In this chapter, we find many of the major doctrinal themes of Scripture. Here, with little imagination, we find divine commandment, Satan, original sin, judgment, redemption, love, and prophecy of the coming Messiah. More peculiarly, many have suggested that there was human error before the fall, even adding to God’s word. Revelation 22:18. Adam is considered a likeness of Jesus before the fall. Romans 5:14; 1 Corinthians 15:22;

Another important aspect of this chapter, is this is the beginning of the account of the world as we, at least partially, know it. We have little knowledge and no experience regarding what the world was like before the fall. About all we can know with much Scriptural certainty about the world before the fall, is that it had fewer thorns and thistles, and that humans lived in a wonderful spot on it that we now call Eden. The world is changed again in the account of the flood, suggesting we may know only a little more about the world between the times of Adam and Noah.

Some preach that Adam’s sin was greater than Eve’s because she was deceived and Adam was not. Some preach that Adam is greater than Eve because she sinned first. Another interesting perspective is that their marital union represents the NT symbol of Christ’s relationship with the church. Ephesians 5:25-30. This view proposes that Eve sinned, and Adam loved her so much that he became sin for her so she would not be alone in her predicament. Sound familiar? 2 Corinthians 5:21. That view certainly does not absolve Adam of disobeying God, but it is something you might hear preached. It may give us, however, a hint of the depth of Christ’s love for us.

Lastly, I would like you to consider that Satan (either in the form of the serpent, or controlling the serpent) brought to Eve’s mind the thought of eating the forbidden fruit, this does not make Satan responsible for her eating it. Satan showed her the fruit, and twisted God’s word, but Eve showed that she clearly understood God’s commandment, albeit with an additional adulteration. Adam and Eve are responsible for their sin, not Satan and not God. Eve saw the fruit was “good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise.” 1 John 2:16. The same concepts hold true of our sins today. Satan, being a fallen angel, cannot separate us from the love of God. We are protected from many things, yet we are not protected from ourselves in our own selfishness. Romans 8:38.


Some interesting thoughts for your reflection:

The ground was cursed to bring forth thorns.
Christ wore a crown of thorns on the cross.

Consider Adam and Eve’s relationship before and after the fall.
Marriage is a symbol for the relationship between Christ and His bride (the community of saints.) Ephesians 5:13-33.

Christ loved us while we were yet sinners. Romans 5:8
God made coats of animal skin for Adam and Eve after they sinned.

A tree served as a vehicle that brought curses to humanity in Genesis 3.
Christ was made a curse for us by hanging on a tree. Galatians 3:13

Seed, to us and to ancient Hebrews, represent the male contribution to reproduction.
Genesis 3 refers to the seed of the woman, which may suggest the coming virgin birth of Jesus. See also Revelations 12:17.
What other evidence is there that Christ is the seed of the woman that the serpent is to bruise? Isaiah 53. especially v. 5.

As always, I am blessed by your comments, conjecture, proclamations, questions, and answers. May God bless us as we study and do His word. Thanks for reading.

Genesis 3 Part II: The Curses

In Genesis 2:17 we read that God commanded Adam not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil “for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.” KJV Eve essentially repeats this divine commandment to the serpent, so at some point, she was made entirely aware of the rule. 3:2-3. In 3:1 we might infer that the serpent was a subtil (crafty, wise?) “beast of the field” that Yahweh, Elohim made.

Now, why would Eve, or Adam for that matter, heed the serpent’s teachings over God’s commandment? This is God, Who provided them with so many good things. Personally, I find little beguiling in the serpent’s statements to Eve, 3:4-5. All we are given is a simple lie, unadorned with much “craftiness.” Perhaps, the secret lies, in the serpent calling Eve’s attention to the tree, and leading her to look at it and consider it. Then, temptation sets in. She sees the tree was good for food, pleasant to the eye, and to be desired to make one wise. 3:5-6. From this v. 6 it seems clearly implied that Adam was there when she first ate of the fruit. Was it not a sin, that Adam did not stop her or remind her of God’s prohibition? Still, each of the three characters were punished and we remain under these curses yet today. That each sex played a slightly different role, or that their excuses were different, or that their curses were different, and expounded on differently by Paul in the NT, says little about one sex being singularly responsible for the original sin and the curses. Nor does it readily identify what that first spiritual sin was.

OK, eating the forbidden fruit, and disobedience was a sin, but what preceded that made this even possible? One factor, of course, is that God gave us free will. He made us governors and protectors of creation. Through this free will, he gave us authority and power to create our own future, at least within the limits of His permissive will. I suspect that the first spiritual or heart sin was the pride of life; the desire to be like God; a selfish need for self-importance. Call it pride or selfishness, if you like. It is the source of multitudes of outward sins in our common experience, and we are being taught about it here.

Upon eating the forbidden fruit (probably not related to an apple) Adam and Eve’s eyes were spiritually opened so that they could determine good and evil. How peculiar. I’m not too crazy about much of the postmodern worldview, but this does give one pause to consider, that perhaps evil did not exist until Adam and Eve were able to perceive it. Some might argue that nothing is evil, until one views it as evil. Romans 14 Still, there are limits to this view, because we are given specific prohibitions and commandments in the NT, which are too clear to ignore.

Finally, to the curses. The first sort of curse, though not named, may be that Adam and Eve knew good and evil and were ashamed of their nakedness. 3:7. This is written to appear as a direct effect of eating the forbidden fruit, and not a special judgment placed upon them by God. They sewed fig leaves together. (Where did thread come from all of a sudden?) They felt a need to hide themselves from God’s presence (as if this might be in their power.)

Now, the blame game starts. Adam blames Eve, and Eve blames the serpent, saying she was beguiled. The previous conversation between Eve and the serpent does not suggest to me very effective beguilement. Adam and Eve both were introduced to the perceived beauty, fleshly desire, and self-aggrandizement that could be supplied by the fruit. They chose selfish desires over God’s fully expressed and understood will. They were absolutely responsible for their actions, and had no basis to blame each other, or the serpent. Nowadays, many liberal theologians prefer to blame God. “Well, He made me this way, so this is how He wants me to be,” sort of thinking. That seems as bad as or worse than older excuses like, “The devil made me do it.” Consider how low we fell at this point. Even the serpent did not try to blame anyone else. It reads as if he took his medicine quietly, unlike our original parents.

The serpent is cursed above all the beasts of the field and required to travel on its belly and eat dust. The serpent’s head will be crushed by the seed of woman. The woman, will bring forth children in sorrow (etseb, pain, labor, hardship; now you know why they are called labor rooms), her desire will be for her husband, and consequently, her husband will rule over her. The ground is cursed for Adam’s sake. (Remember adam and adamah?) Some make much of the idea that Adam is not directly cursed. You might ask Adam about that. The KJV does not specifically say that Adam or Eve is cursed. The only use of the word curse (‘arar) in this passage refers to the serpent and to the ground. Cursed is the ground, adamah, for Adam’s sake. Adam will toil and sweat and the earth will bring forth thorns and thistles. Like Eve, Adam is now burdened with with sorrow (etseb, pain, labor, hardship.) In his case, it relates to bringing food from the ground.

It is my opinion that 3:15 is a prophecy of the Messiah, Jesus Christ. This is in part due to my teachings, but also in part, because I cannot make any spiritual sense from it in any other context. Still, I am teachable. 1 Corinthians 15:45-58 suggests that we look at Jesus as the last Adam. One created without sin, yet one who endured throughout life entirely outside the dominion of sin, despite many temptations. Jesus, then, is the “Adam” (man, human) that we should follow as an example, and not our original earthly parents, who failed God and denied His authority for their perception of what was good for them.

1 Corinthians 15:58 Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye stedfast, unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labour is not in vain in the Lord.

Genesis 3

Genesis 3
In chapter 3, the second creation account gives way to important events that unfold as a result of Adam and Eve and the way they rule over the earth. This is a continuation of the (J) tradition that began in Genesis 2:4. The serpent (snake) is the first non-human creature that is mentioned by name in Genesis. There has been much conjecture about this serpent. Those of you not very familiar with chapter 3 may wish to read it again now. I will wait.

Welcome back. Several interesting things might be read into the story with relative ease. First, the serpent is more subtil, or crafty than any other beast of the field. This is from the Hebrew word, aruwm, which can mean sensible, sly, shrewd, wise, or even prudent depending on context. Note also that the serpent speaks to Eve and she is not startled. I don’t know about you, but if I heard an animal speaking to me, I would be a bit shocked. Perhaps they had spoken with the serpent before, or perhaps humans and animals could converse before the fall. Who knows?

It is widely believed that either the serpent was the devil, or that God allowed the serpent to be controlled by the devil. Based on later evidence, we might also assume at this point that the serpent had legs. The serpent impressed Eve that the fruit of the tree of knowledge and evil should be eaten, despite God’s clear prohibition. Eve perceived that the food was pleasant to the eyes, good for food, and that she could gain wisdom by eating the fruit. (Compare with 1 John 2:16) This serves as an example of things that John describes as “not of the Father.” We do not know how Eve caused Adam to hearken unto her, but the Bible does say that Adam was with her and he ate it also. It seems that both were involved in a conscious sin. They knew the rules, knew the consequences, and yielded to temptation anyway. Sin, therefore, represents a self-centered, voluntary defiance of God’s will for us.

Perhaps, you have heard stories of the mythological character, Lilith. Some see Lilith in the serpent figure, here. Remember, Adam inspected all the beasts of the field for a companion and none was found suitable. Some have conjectured that Lilith was one of the rejected beasts, though with a high degree or reason, which then was jealous of Eve, for being selected by Adam. This is outside the Bible, and mentioned only for those who might be curious. Actually, there is one obscure Biblical reference to a Lilith. Isaiah 34:14 in the KJV translates the Hebrew, liylyith, obscurely as screech owls, and the NIV almost as obscurely says, “night creatures.” The NRSV leaves it relatively untranslated as Lilith, and is a reference to an ancient feminine mythological demon of the night and dark things that some believed haunted the barren places of Edom.

Interestingly, a minority of Jewish scholars in ancient times, in an attempt to meld the two creation accounts into one, regarded Lilith, as that woman God created from dust along with man in Genesis 1. They then conjecture that Adam rejected her because she felt equal to him as they were both created by God from dust, in His image. So, with Lilith gone, God then creates Eve from Adam’s flesh as a helper. You can go a long way reading things into the Bible that are not there. Many Christians need to be aware of such beliefs because in the New Age we find ourselves, notions such as this spring up from time to time. Just as Satan practiced, you mix a little truth with your lie and it gets much more tempting to believe. Remember the all-female concert series through the late 90’s called Lilith Fair? Feel any differently about it now? What a bizarre idea to hold up as honorable! It would be strange indeed to read the Bible in context and consider either the serpent, or Lilith, as a good thing. Everywhere the concept appears in antiquity, it is evil.

Whether the serpent was the prince of this world (John 12:31), a creature controlled by the devil, or simply a jealous and rational beast, the serpent is associated with the first appearance of sin, disobedience in this world, and it spread like wildfire. As a result the serpent, Eve (Chavah meaning life or living), ground, and everything created from it (adamah) was cursed. All creation was cursed. (Romans 8:22) More about that later.

Genesis 1 & 2 Part IV

The first creation story seems to distinctly end with 2:3. Then a second creation story begins and continues to the end of chapter 2. Most curious. So, let’s look closer. Throughout 1-2:3, the Creator is consistently referred to as God or with a masculine pronoun. In this first account, God is translated from the ancient Hebrew word transliterated as Elohim. This reveals another curiosity. Elohim is plural for El which is singular. Some scholars in the past have taught that this was a “royal” plural and the plural form was used to suggest majesty. Other examples of this have not been found and this theory has gone by the wayside. Others have suggested that Elohim refers to God and the angels, but this has met with nothing but resistance as well. The reason that Elohim is plural in a monotheistic religious book has apparently been lost to antiquity. I like to think that it relates to God’s triune nature, and served as a vague portent of things to come, viz. the revelation of Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit. However, I just like to think that. No one knows for sure, why the plural, Elohim, is used to refer to the one God of Hebrew theology. Elohim, like God, is a title and not a personal name.

In the second creation account, God is consistently referred to as LORD God. This is translated from the ancient Hebrew words transliterated as Yahweh (or Yehovah) Elohim. This is another distinct difference in the creation accounts, suggesting that different traditions were involved in their literary evolution. It should be noted here that everywhere you see LORD in all capitals in the KJV and many other translations; it means that it was translated from Yahweh. This may spring from an ancient Jewish superstition that Yahweh’s name was too holy to be spoken. Substituting LORD for Yahweh remains as a stubborn tradition even in today’s translations.
Yahweh is generally considered to be the personal name of our Creator and not merely a title like Lord, Adonai, God, Father, Elohim, El Shaddai, etc. Yahweh is represented by the Hebrew letters in the image above and is known as the Tetragrammaton, meaning four letters. It roughly represents YHWH, from right to left. Vowels were not added to the Hebrew written language until sometime later. Yahweh was translated and transliterated from ancient Hebrew through Latin, German, and English into the form we often see, Jehovah. This change apparently is at least partly due to German influence. Hebrew and Aramaic had nothing corresponding to the English J. But, I digress.

Textual analysis of the Old Testament, in fact, suggests four literary traditions. The first creation account is felt to fall into what is known as the Elohim (E) tradition because God is consistently referred to as Elohim. The second creation account is felt to fall into the Jehovah (J) tradition because God is consistently referred to as Yahweh Elohim. Yet another literary pattern is seen later and is called the Priestly (P) tradition because it tends to deal a lot with priestly rules, that may (or may not) have been additions to Moses’ words. Then there is the Deuteronomic (D) tradition that pretty much includes the book of Deuteronomy. One strong support for this type of classification is the repetition of stories in styles consistent with different traditions, as we see in these first two accounts of creation, regarded as E and J respectively.

I am certainly open to different perspectives and reasons for them. This is based on scholarly work (not mine) but, of course, an element of speculation is always involved whenever we interpret or translate the Bible. It is my hope to learn as well as share. Thanks for reading. God bless us everyone.
ybiC, Nick †

Genesis 1 & 2 Part III

With all the fun and rhyme of late, I have neglected my topic of Genesis that I promised many weeks ago. As I carefully read Genesis 1-2:3 and Genesis 2:4-25, it seems that different people penned them. While I assume that the original, divinely inspired, human author of these ideas was Moses, it seems that they were handed down through at least two literary lineages and some things were changed. We can only look at the remaining messages. There is no way to tell which, if either, is scientifically accurate. It seems that the Holy Spirit was not at all interested to inspire a work on zoology, botany, geology, or astronomy, rather a work on the relationship between God and humanity, and between humans. There is too much to consider for one blog article. Therefore, I will divide Genesis 2:4-25 by topics that I find interesting.

Humanity was placed in a paradise that was entirely in tune with God. Throughout Genesis 1, we read repeatedly “God saw that it was good.” It is perhaps startling when we get to 2:18. Suddenly, God sees something that is NOT good!! Man should not be alone. What follows is a passage that may seem humorous to us today. God said that He would make a helper suitable for Adam. Therefore, directly He begins to make the beasts and the fowl, and brings them to Adam. Adam names them, and among all these animals, a helper was not found suitable (meet) for him. Adam had been formed from the dust of the ground. Ground in ancient Hebrew is transliterated adamah, so even Adam’s name suggests his origin. This ground is the origin of the beasts and fowl as well. It is woman alone that is created from flesh, in particular, Adam’s flesh (2:22) and Adam called her “bone of my bones, flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of man.” Women may take pride that they were named ishshah, meaning woman, wife, or female; while man was named adam for adamah, or dirt. So, gentlemen, when a lady refers to you as dirt, there is an element of spiritual truth behind it, but even dirt is a glorious creation of God.

We speak of God as our Father. This is how Jesus and the apostles addressed Him. It is an important tradition that should not change; however, we should remember that God is Spirit and has no need for genitalia or sex. God saw the lone male as “not good.” God is many things, but He is good. He is not a lone male despite centuries of artistic representation.

9/11/01 A Personal Recollection

It is the fifth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks by Islam fundamentalists. This message is not to incite hate, encourage war, or seek any kind of division or unity among people. It is only meant to be a recollection and a contemplation of one of the most significant events in United States history.
Five years ago at 8:46 AM, my wife and I were in a motel in Texas on our way to Mexico. We were lazily getting ready for the day and the TV was on CNN as was our habit at the time. The reports came streaming in rapidly. Not much was known but the North Tower of the WTC was obviously damaged and talking heads were reporting that a large plane had struck the tower. This caught our undivided attention immediately. The talking heads were speaking of this as some sort of accident. Little mention was made of a possible terrorist attack. As a pilot, I said to my wife, this was no accident. I even commented that Osama Bin Laden was a likely culprit.
Then, while the cameras were rolling on the towers, a second plane flew directly into the South Tower on live television. Only a few minutes had passed and reporters were being careful, but it was obvious to everyone at this point that this was an intentional and hostile act. More news streamed in about the Pentagon, a field in Pennsylvania, and the people aboard four commercial flights.
Thoughts were going through my head -- When would this stop? How long will this sort of news continue? How far had the pepetrators planned? Fortunately, this was the end of the physical devastation.
We have all read and seen much information about the events since 9/11/01. But I want to reflect in real time the events as I perceived them and reacted to them.
We reconsidered our thoughts of going to Mexico. We ate breakfast at a Waffle House and asked people about the WTC. It was not yet 10AM and no one there seemed to know anything about it. Strange how important TV "seems" to be. Silently I thought it was amazing that so many people would not know of such a significant event. Then I considered, it could easily be me who knew nothing about the event that morning. It was only a matter of habit that we knew of the tragedy at all. Immediately, a waitress turned on a television and a customer commented that Saddam Hussein surely was behind the act.
We went to a Diamond Shamrock gas station to get fuel. The line was very long but the price was normal. We waited. I spoke briefly with the guy at the register. He said that gas would be over $4/gallon tomorrow and the crowd was anticipating this. I remarked that this was obvious price-gouging and the man at the register quickly agreed with a knowing look. Apparently he was not a Diamond Shamrock stockholder.
We meandered for a while in Texas as my wife is interested in antique shops. (I call them ye olde junk shoppes.) The radio had reported that the Mexican border had been closed and all commercial and private air travel was suspended. We resolved to proceed toward Mexico figuring that the closure may lift soon and we were enjoying Texas.
Small-town Texas, in my experience, is a friendly, open, and patriotic place. On a typical day many state and national flags are waving at homes and offices. This activity seemed to jump substantially in the days immediately following 9/11/01. Conversations with strangers came easily in these rural areas especially after a national tragedy. While my wife perused the antique stores, I would converse with people who appeared to be loafing (perhaps while their spouses were shopping.) A sense of my childhood came over me. People loafing at the gas station, the grocery store, etc. A far more communal time. Perhaps this is the way in small town Texas but it was a heart-warming experience to see again and again what I had remembered of society in small-town Missouri in my childhood.
Everyone, and there were many, who offered an opinion on the culprit of the 9/11 events was firm that Saddam Hussein must have been responsible. I had not yet seen any news report, or editorial speculating that Hussein was responsible. It was a conclusion that was easily reached by American citizens so soon after the Gulf War.
As we prayed for the families of victims, America and its leaders, a quick resolution of the insanity, and a peaceful redress of grievances, we proceeded to Mexico where we took Spanish classes, visited missions, toured Mayan runes, and played CNN whereever it was available.
It was a shocking and horrible event but Jesus tarried. Life on this earth continues. Is there a point to this account? Not really. I'm just recollecting. Let us continue to pray for all the victims of 9/11 and for peace. A repeat of the Crusades with modern technology remains a real possibility.