This is the account of Noah and his family. Noah was a righteous man, blameless among the people of his time, and he walked faithfully with God. – Genesis 6:9

Today's Scripture Reading (August 7, 2024): Genesis 6

In ancient times, it was very common for names to mean something. Later in the book of Genesis, we will meet a man named Abram; the name Abram means "Exalted Father." The name turns out to be a bit of a cruel joke because, for most of the story, Abram is not a father. As much as Abram and Sarai want children, their cradle is bare. A little later in the story, God seems to play an even crueler joke on Abram by renaming him Abraham, which means "Father of Multitudes," but even at the point of this name change, Abraham is still not a father to anyone. However, in the story of Abraham, the name is essential because it is part of a prophecy. The cradle might be empty in the home of Abraham and Sarah, but when they are long past childbearing years, Sarah will get pregnant. Abraham accepts by faith what the wise of his day would call foolishness. One day, Abraham would be not just be an "Exalted Father," but the "Father of Multitudes."

After the Exodus, the nation is led by a man named Joshua. Joshua and Caleb were the only two spies who believed they should possess the Promised Land forty years earlier. They both felt that, despite the opposition present in Canaan, God had a plan and that with God on the side of Israel, Israel could not be defeated. In this, Joshua lived up to his name; Joshua means "God is Salvation." God would save the people if they just trusted in him. The name Jesus is a variant of Joshua; Jesus also means "God is Salvation." Names were powerful, and to know someone's name was often thought to be able to exercise control over the person.

In the Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh, one of the early creation stories of the ancient world, the hero is named "Utnapishtim," which means "The attainer of everlasting life." And the significance is the same for Utnapishtim as it was for Abraham. It seems that as the gods are raging and plotting the downfall of the human race, the hero's name is nothing more than a cruel joke; Utnapishtim is a weak target of the gods. But as the story goes on, we find the hero's name is very appropriate.

So, a good question as we begin the story of Noah might be, what does this hero's name mean? Are you ready for the answer? We don't know. There does not seem to be any known meaning to the name Noah. It would be like me telling you a joke and starting the story with, "A guy walks into a bar." If you stopped me at this point and asked, "What is the guy's name?" I would probably reply, "Just a guy; it really doesn't matter to the joke who the guy was; he just walks into a bar." Noah is that guy. And as much as the story of Noah is about Noah, it is also not about Noah.

The story is about a God who, while bothered by the wickedness of people, is also a God of compassion and love. "So God said to Noah, "I am going to put an end to all people, for the earth is filled with violence because of them. I am surely going to destroy both them and the earth. So make yourself an ark of cypress wood; make rooms in it and coat it with pitch inside and out." (Genesis 6:13-14). The story begins with God telling a guy to build a massive boat. Noah becomes a placeholder, a cardboard cut-out. It could have been anybody willing to trust in the God of our Salvation and build the boat. It just happened that that trusting guy was Noah.

Tomorrow's Scripture Reading: Genesis 7

When Adam had lived 130 years, he had a son in his own likeness, in his own image; and he named him Seth. – Genesis 5:3

Today's Scripture Reading (August 6, 2024): Genesis 5

It is probably the most famous Bible verse of our society. Not long ago, the Bible reference could be seen on a placard at almost every sporting event in the English-speaking world. Often, these placards simply read "John 3:16." Eventually, it began to become the butt of jokes. What does the placard mean? Maybe someone wants to meet in Washroom #3, stall 16.

Inside the church, most of us have John 3:16 memorized. I first memorized the verse from the King James Translation of the Bible as a child. "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life" (John 3:16 KJV).

But I have a problem with our famous Bible verse. Maybe not the whole verse, but with one word in the verse; that word is "begotten." The New International Version rephrases it slightly better, omitting the word begotten. "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life" (John 3:16 NIV).

What is the problem with the word "begotten?" It indicated the beginning of an existence. It is a word that the King James Version uses in this and many of the following verses of Genesis 5. According to the King James Version, Genesis 5:3 reads, "And Adam lived a hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, and after his image; and called his name Seth" (Genesis 5:3 KJV). Seth represented a new life in the image and likeness of his father, just as his father had been created in the image and likeness of God. It is a condition of the species. We tend to be in the likeness of our parents. In some way, even today, we bear the image and likeness of God because we are the children of Adam. We are "begotten."

However, that does not include Jesus. Jesus was not "begotten." We believe that he is eternal, just like his Father. With anyone else, there is a point where we are begotten, where our existence begins. But that is not so with Jesus. My God is not begotten. He doesn't have a beginning or an end. Pastor David Guzik makes this argument regarding Genesis 5:3.

Even as Seth was in Adam's fallen image and likeness, so also is every one of us. We are all sons and daughters of Adam, born fallen even as Adam was fallen. It would be redundant to say it, but every other person has been born in Adam's image and likeness except Jesus (David Guzik).

Jesus was not begotten; he is eternal. He was not born into the fallen image of humanity as Seth was, but he took on our form in the incarnation and became what we were all intended to be before the human race's fall with the sins of Adam and Eve.

Tomorrow's Scripture Reading: Genesis 6

In the course of time Cain brought some of the fruits of the soil as an offering to the LORD. – Genesis 4:3

Today's Scripture Reading (August 5, 2024): Genesis 4

The story of Cain and Abel has sometimes been set as the beginning of the conflict between two farming lifestyles: the production of grains and the production of animals. The idea is misplaced. The conflict is not about the sacrifice itself but about the value that the participants placed on the sacrifice. Cain was the older of the two sons of Adam and Eve. The text says, "In the course of time, Cain brought some of the fruits of the soil" to be given as a sacrifice to God. We almost get the idea that Cain gave God some of the excesses he possessed. He gave out of his wealth.

And if we are honest, this is our story. We are like Cain; we give out of our wealth. If we have enough left over at the end of the month, we might give some to God. If we have something in our house that we don't want or is not good enough for our house anymore, maybe then the church could use it. Cain's offering is the idea of giving to God the leftovers. As a kid, I was involved in an argument that I am sure no one else has ever experienced. There were occasions when I didn't like the food that was placed in front of me. I would eat some of it, but, from my point of view, I was forcing it down my throat. At the end of the meal there was no "Can I have some more?" coming out of my mouth. In my house, these meals often caused some parent-child conflict. Eventually, my mom would bring up the starving children in Africa; does anyone recognize this conversation? The conversation was designed to produce enough guilt in me to get me to eat the food; after all, I was the lucky one; I was the one with food to eat.

But I didn't feel all that lucky. After a while, the conversation almost seemed to become scripted, and it ended with me, the child, arguing, "Take my meal and send it to them," because I DON'T WANT IT. If we are honest, our gifts to God too often may be made up of things we don't want. And this is precisely the idea that arises out of Cain's offering. He had too much, so he gave some of his excess to God.

God has never asked us for our excess; he wants us to place him higher on the priority list. Cain was doomed, partially because he had put God on the "If I have enough" list. If I have enough money, if I have enough time, if I have enough talent, then I will give it to you. However, Cain missed the truth that he would never have enough as long as God was waiting for Cain to have excess.

Jesus sat with his disciples, watching the offering box at the temple, and he saw a widow come to the box and place two small coins in it. They were coins like our penny; for most people, they would be deemed worthless. But that was not what Jesus saw in the offering. "Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put more into the treasury than all the others. They gave out of their wealth; but she, out of her poverty, put in everything – all she had to live on" (Mark 12:43-44). It wasn't out of the widow's excess that she gave; she gave everything she had. And in that offering, God was honored.

Tomorrow's Scripture Reading: Genesis 5

To Adam he said, "Because you listened to your wife and ate fruit from the tree about which I commanded you, 'You must not eat from it,' "Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat food from it all the days of your life. – Genesis 3:17

Today's Scripture Reading (August 4, 2024): Genesis 3

Adam and Eve sinned, and everything changed. Our contemporary culture is still struggling with that change. Many years ago, I read a report on a meeting at a major American university. According to the report, the meeting included a group of influential women who had gathered together to celebrate Eve, who they argued made the first independent action of the human race by choosing what God had forbidden. It's too bad the race's first action was one of rebellion against what was best for all of us.

Men have been echoing the same sentiment down through the generations. The male of the species has chosen to take the events of the Garden of Eden and shift the blame. It wasn't Adam, it was Eve. Every male human who believes that the man is the head of the house and that we should be the ones who set the pace should listen intently to the message of Genesis 3. Not only were we not the ones who set the pace, but we were willing to follow and then pass the blame on to someone else. Nothing has changed.

On that day, when Adam and Eve chose not to follow the commands of God, our world changed. We had to work to put food on the table. Pain became part of the human experience. And death entered the world in so many ways. All because of the sin of our first parents. However, death might be the most significant change.

The author of Hebrews tells us that we "are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment" (Hebrews 9:27). And I get what Hebrews is trying to tell us. But death is much more than just something that happens at the end of our existence on this earth. Ernest Hemingway, in "A Farewell to Arms," wrote that "Cowards die a thousand deaths, but the brave only die once" (Ernest Hemingway). The quote works well in the Hemingway novel but fails in real life. We all die multiple times throughout our lives. We die with every sin that we commit. We die because of the sins committed by others. Sometimes, our sins color the entire length of our lives, and we wish we could go back and choose to do something different. I am sure Adam and Eve wished they could have a do-over in the Garden.

We have learned how to handle the sin that is handed down from our first parents. We pass the buck and share the responsibility with others. It is not my fault; it is their fault. And even then, that attitude only furthers our sin and our death.

There is a "Big Bang Theory" episode where Leonard and Sheldon both receive a present from Penny; it is a Star Trek transporter toy featuring Mr. Spock. The toy is "Mint in Box." Penny wonders why they won't open it, but of course, if they open the toy, it wouldn't be "Mint in Box." One night, Mr. Spock cries out from the box, saying he wants Sheldon to play with the transporter. So, Sheldon plays with the transporter and ends up breaking it. Then he switches it with Leonard's; after all, he won't open his box, so he will never know that the toy is broken. However, Leonard opens his box and discovers the broken toy, and Sheldon has to admit the absolute truth: Mr. Spock made him do it. Even in our fiction, it is never our fault.

At the moment of the original sin, Adam and Eve couldn't stand there like adults, naked and ashamed of their actions. Instead, they wanted to hide and deny what they had done. They couldn't be adults and just say, "I did it. I don't need to point my finger at anyone else. I know who is to blame: me. I broke it. God created something very good, and I broke it." They passed the blame along to someone else.

Creation changed, but, in our opinion, we don't believe that it is our fault. We blame everyone else, including the giver of the gift that we call life, God. What we don't like about life is always someone else's fault; it is never because of me. And as long as that is our reality, we will continue to die. And we will continue to be haunted by a changed creation.

Tomorrow's Scripture Reading: Genesis 4

So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds in the sky and all the wild animals. But for Adam no suitable helper was found. – Genesis 2:20

Today's Scripture Reading (August 3, 2024): Genesis 2

Could God have been wrong? I know some of you are upset at me for even suggesting that this might be true, but don't leave now. I was listening to Erwin McManus speak on gratitude a while back, and he talked about the prostitute who sat at Jesus's feet at Simon the Pharisee's house. The story in Luke 7 is about this woman who comes to Jesus and falls at his feet, pouring oil out of an Alabaster jar onto Jesus's feet. The oil had probably cost the woman her life's savings, and there is every probability that it had been initially purchased for her eventual marriage. But she comes to Jesus, weeping, and pours out the oil on the Rabbi's feet. Her tears dripped onto his feet, and then she let her hair down, which in that day was very sexually suggestive, and wiped up the oil and the tears from Jesus's feet with her hair. We are told in the story that Simon the Pharisee was thinking that if Jesus knew the kind of sin that this woman was involved with, he would not let her touch him. Jesus answers Simon's thoughts with a story. The story was about two men who owed money; one owed a little bit while the other owed a massive amount. The debtor decides to forgive both debts. However, Jesus asks Simon which one loved him more. Simon replied that the one that had been forgiven the most would love the master more. Listen to Jesus's reply.

Then he turned toward the woman and said to Simon, "Do you see this woman? I came into your house. You did not give me any water for my feet, but she wet my feet with her tears and wiped them with her hair. You did not give me a kiss, but this woman, from the time I entered, has not stopped kissing my feet. You did not put oil on my head, but she has poured perfume on my feet. Therefore, I tell you, her many sins have been forgiven—as her great love has shown. But whoever has been forgiven little loves little." (Luke 7:44-47)

It seems like Jesus is telling Simon that he has not done enough wrong to love God enough. The solution to the problem would seem to be self-evident. Go and do wrong. Sin like you have never sinned before. If you want to love God more, go and sin; use the Ten Commandments as a guiding list. At this point, McManus wonders about that person who leaves the church and gets arrested. When asked about his crime spree, he says, "I just wanted to love God more."

Could God have been wrong? As far as Simon the Pharisee was concerned, that was the truth of the situation; Jesus was wrong. If he had only known who it was that was touching him, he would never have let her touch him. Jesus's response shows that he is not wrong but that Simon is without understanding.

As we read this story from the Garden, we find that God creates Adam and then sends him on a hunt for a mate. And we have a question: God, you had to know that there was no one and no animal that could have been a mate for Adam. I am sure he found a dog and became best friends with Rusty, carrying Rusty around in his pick-up truck, but regardless of how hard Rusty tried, he was not the match that Adam needed. Of course, the answer to our question is no, God is not wrong. But Adam needed some time to realize that. Adam needed to come to an understanding of his need for a real community.

I must admit that I see these pre-Adams all over our modern culture. They are the ones who do not believe that they need people, that their Rusty's are enough. If there is a truth in this passage, it is this: Adam had all the animals but was still lonely; he needed someone else. He needed to understand his deep need for community. It is what I like to call our essential community. We are created in the image of a God who exists in the essential community as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Adam needed the same type of community, one that needed to be found in someone created in God's image, just as he was.

Tomorrow's Scripture Reading: Genesis 3

Then God said, "Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground." – Genesis 1:26

Today's Scripture Reading (August 2, 2024): Genesis 1

We are created in the image of God. You bear the image or the stamp of God. By the way, people who often argue for the primacy of the male in church business frequently claim that man was created in the image of God, and that woman was created in the image of man. But that argument is ridiculous. Not only does this passage explicitly state that God made man male and female [literally, he made 'adam' male and female] (Genesis 1:27), but (and I don't want to put too much of an emphasis on this) this passage is written in the typical language of Hebrew Poetry – and that means there is a dualism here. The basic twoness of the human race is reflected in our life and how we see the world. And so, Adam and Eve were created in the image and likeness of God. The Hebrew Word used here for image is 'tselem,' which means 'to resemble.' The Hebrew Word translated as likeness is 'dĕmuwth,' which surprisingly also means 'to resemble.' And I really do not want to make more of this than it probably deserves (and can I say that I love that the Bible says that 'adam' was created male and female), but 'tselem' (image) is a male noun and 'dĕmuwth' (likeness) is a female noun.

So, Genesis clearly states that we are created in the image of God. But what does that exactly mean? I have said in other discussions that one of the most ridiculous arguments against the Theory of Evolution is that God doesn't look like a monkey. The statement fails on several levels, but maybe the most fundamental failure is that God somehow looks like us. He has two legs, arms, and hands; he looks like me and you. And to be honest, anthropomorphic passages found in the poetry of the Bible that talk about the world as being 'held in God's hands' don't help.

But I don't believe that we are created in the image of God quite in that way. There are two primary reasons for that belief. The first is that Jesus says something that clearly indicates this is untrue. The comment comes from Jesus's discussion with the woman at the well in John 4. Jesus says in that discussion that "God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth" (John 4:24). Jesus himself did not see God as being physical; he saw him as being a Spirit, which brings us to the second reason. Every year at Christmas, we celebrate the God of the incarnation. Incarnation is almost the reverse of Genesis 1. In Genesis 1, God creates man in his image and likeness. But in the incarnation, God becomes like us, taking on our image and likeness. Again, John writes this in the introduction to his Gospel.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it. The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth (John 1:1-5, 14).

If God were already flesh and blood existing in some sort of a heavenly palace, sitting on a gold throne, he would not have to become like us. However, following other biblical teachings, John describes God as decidedly 'other.'

If God is other, how are we created in his image, more than any other animals on the earth? I believe that we are created in the image of God in that we are designed with the ability to make moral choices. Other than us, that is an ability that belongs only to God. And it is given to us in the idea of free will. God has given us a gift that he has given to no one else. And it is up to us to use that gift wisely.

The idea of fate is an affront to the gift that God has given to us. Simply believing that things happen and are the will of God is an insult to God. The will of God is that we use the gift that he has given us, the image and stamp that God has placed inside of us, in a way that honors him. We are the only ones who can make decisions on a moral basis, on the idea of right and wrong.

Knowing the difference between right and wrong allows you to display God's image and stamp. And as you begin to make the right moral decisions, you start to display God's image and Christ's likeness.  

Tomorrow's Scripture Reading: Genesis 2

I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this scroll: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to that person the plagues described in this scroll. – Revelation 22:18

Today's Scripture Reading (August 1, 2024): Revelation 22

In the early days of ministry, I decided to take a Sunday and preach the "Sermon on the Mount." The sermon is found in Matthew 5-7, and the idea was that I would memorize those three chapters of the Bible and preach the words at the Sunday Worship experiences just as they are in the Bible, nothing added or removed. Because I wanted to sound a little different from the everyday words the people were reading from their Bibles, I decided against memorizing the sermon in either of the two most common translations in the church: the New International Version or the King James Version. Instead, I chose to preach the words from Eugene Peterson's "The Message." It would give the sermon a different, hopefully fresh, feel.

And so, I worked that week just memorizing the words. I worked on the inflection of my voice; I openly wondered what Jesus might have sounded like as he preached the words 2000 years ago. Then, I got up to speak that Sunday morning and asked the people to put their Bibles and notepads away and just listen to the words as if they were hearing them for the first time.

At the time, the church I attended had two morning worship experiences, and I remember watching people scrambling to find their notepads as I spoke in the first service. I admit I wanted to stop and tell them that all of this was in the Bible; I wasn't saying anything new.

After that first service, I was walking through the foyer when I heard the first of a few complaints about the service. The comment was, "I thought the Bible said that we weren't supposed to add or take away from what the Bible says." I admit I smiled and thought that maybe I needed to do some teaching on the difference between the various translations and adding or removing things from the Bible.

More than that, the comment in Revelation really does not apply to the whole Bible but rather just to the book of Revelation. The idea of adding and removing books of the Bible was an activity that the early church leaders routinely did as they tried to come up with what we know now as the New Testament and the Tanakh or Hebrew Bible. Faith leaders in the first three and half centuries after the death and resurrection of Jesus conversed on which books should be included and which should be excluded. And that conversation has never really stopped. Martin Luther (1483-1546) made a passionate argument for removing the "Letter of James," calling it an "Epistle of Straw." Today, biblical experts often discuss the books they may like or don't like or even their strength within our biblical Canon.

But Revelation needs to stand as it is. We will have disagreements about interpreting John's words, but we shouldn't add or take away from them. John saw the vision, and we learn from his experiences and even get to argue about what he saw and heard.

Tomorrow's Scripture Reading: Genesis 1