CTP Bible Study Class – Genesis 4–5

This week, we will begin to cover Genesis 4–5. This is not a lot because you can skip chapter 5 after Genesis 5.1-2. Indeed, 5.1-2 seems to be real important. So, what happens in Genesis 4? Well, this is the first sacrifice. The first jealousy. The first anger. The first murder. The third baby boy. As you can imagine, there exists several millennia of commentary on these chapters. This is a summary of some Jewish commentary. Here is a singler, modern, source. This is from the Book of Jubilees. This is a set of stories that shows Cain and


CTP Class — Reactions to Eden (Genesis 3.8-24)

I want to do something a little different with our reading of Genesis. As I have said from the beginning, if we read Scripture as Christians we should do so at some point in that cycle (the ‘T’ in CTP) canonically. Because of this, I want to read Genesis 3.8–24 next to later understandings of the text from within Scripture. If you have just the books in the Protestant canon, you will miss the development of Adam and the Fall. Let’s define the Fall just a bit. This is the usual notion that Adam’s eating of the fruit brought death and


Genesis Rabbah 56.3 on Isaac’s wooden burden

This is from בְְּרֵאשִׁית רַבָּה: AND ABRAHAM TOOK THE WOOD OF THE BURNT-OFFERING (xii, 6) like one who carries his stake on his shoulder.  AND HE TOOK IN HIS HAND THE FIRE AND THE KNIFE (MA’AKELETH). R. Hanina said: Why is a knife called ma’akeleth? Because it makes food (oklim) fit to be eaten.  While the Rabbis said: All eating (akiloth) which Israel enjoy in this world, they enjoy only in the merit of that MA’AKELETH (KNIFE). AND THEY WENT BOTH OF THEM TOGETHER (ib.): one to bind and the other to be bound, one to slaughter and the other


CTP — Arummim and Arum (a Naked Genesis 2.25–3.8)

We have just had a vision of Adam’s vision of his Other Half. Now, we are ready to shift into another story. Genesis 2.25 is the beginning of the passage. This week, we will pick up here and discuss it up until the moment they take the bite out of the “apple.” As a reminder, try to forget the stories you’ve heard and read the text (Genesis 2.25—3.8) for yourself. Read it slowly, in at least two different translations (Genesis 2.25—3.8NIV). This may help to break up what you know from what you read. Naked. It’s a term that


The 6th day and Noah’s Rainbow Covenant

Genesis 1 contains a mystery. 1.26 reads, “Then God said, ‘Let us make humankind in our image, according to our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the wild animals of the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth.’” Who is this “we”? The answer(s) is simple, right? For Christians, it is the Trinity. God is speaking to the Son and the Holy Spirit, although we never see this replicated, even in the New Testament. For some, this


CTP Bible Study – HaAdam, Ish and Ishah (Genesis 2.18–24)

(there are questions at the bottom if you just want to skip to that point) Plato’s Symposium will  factor into our discussion this week – as I have warned you several times now. If this link opens up correctly, you should see a paragraph beginning with “Aristophanes professed to open another vein of discourse…” Read this and the following two paragraphs. Why? Because this week we are going to go deep into Adam and Eve, or Ish and Ishah. There are three words in the Hebrew. We miss them because of our English translations which are primarily based on usage

Genesis / Theology

Does God want us to be more than human?

2 Peter 2.14 is hardly the sum total of the doctrine of theosis, but it is what gives us a sound start and finish when we begin to explore it. St. Athanasius puts it like this, “God became human so that humans can become divine.” What if this was God’s plan all along? That we become partakers of the divine nature (2 Peter 2.14)? Indeed, if one starts in Genesis 2 and then goes to the last few chapters of Revelation, we see a great cosmic plan, The Great Code, that does not merely recapitulate itself, but has this