Genesis 4:7 timshol תִּמְשָׁל־ a choice?

User avatar
willowtree
Posts: 100
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2014 1:56 pm
Location: Sooke BC Canada

Re: Genesis 4:7 timshol תִּמְשָׁל־ a choice?

Post by willowtree » Thu Dec 18, 2014 11:27 am

dizerner wrote:
willowtree wrote:He has not yet done anything wrong, except to think about what he wants to do - kill his brother.
Doesn't the Sermon on the Mount teach us to visualize this thought is virtually to do it.
but struggle with the idea whether Cain really could stand against the temptation
I think it would be mockery for God to tell Cain to master it if he could not. God is not a deceiver.
Thanks for your response on this. On the first part, yes I agree. Perhaps what I wanted to say is that there is a lot less damage done if we repent of the thoughts before we do the deed. And perhaps this is why the caution is so important.

On the second quote, you have also helped me in your other responses showing the alternate readings from other translations. I had never put the 'sin-offering' concept alongside the 'sin', thinking that Cain was on a collision course that he could not avoid. The 'lamb slain from the foundation of the world' was there to cover Cain had he repented.

The big (bigger?) problem with Cain was his faulty worship (vegetable sacrifices) and the murderous thoughts follow from this. This is a whole new concept of this story that I had not seen before.

Thanks, Graeme
If you find yourself between a rock and a hard place, always head for the rock. Ps 62..

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: Genesis 4:7 timshol תִּמְשָׁל־ a choice?

Post by Paidion » Thu Dec 18, 2014 12:26 pm

This adds another thought to "if you do well," in that Cain was doing the right thing (bringing an offering) the wrong way (his vegetables). There is no "sin lying at the door" bit, which the LXX translators may have found too confusing, and it adds the command "be still," instead.
In my opinion, the above is not exogesis, but eisogesis, based on what the eisogesist already believes, namely substitutionary atonement.

There is no indication whatever in the passage that God is displeased with Cain's offering because it is vegetables rather than meat. Abel offered meat because he worked with animals. Cain offered vegetables because he grew vegetables. God's acceptance was based on their behaviour, not the type of offering they made. Actually both brothers were naiïve in thinking that they could give a gift to God. I cannot find it, but it's written somewhere in scripture something to the effect that "God is the owner of everything; who can give Him a gift?" But I did find this in Psalm 50:9-14

I will accept no bull from your house, nor he-goat from your folds, for every beast of the forest is mine, the cattle on a thousand hills. I know all the birds of the air, and all that moves in the field is mine. if I were hungry, I would not tell you; for the world and all that is in it is mine. Do I eat the flesh of bulls, or drink the blood of goats? Offer to God a sacrifice of thanksgiving, and pay your vows to the most high.

God accepted Abel's offering because He loved him. It's like a human father, who, when his little girl plucks a dandelion and brings it to him as a gift, or his little boy catches a toad and gives it to him. The father doesn't need or want a dandelion or a toad, but he accepts them from his beloved children and thanks them. However, he won't accept such a gift from a child who has been consistently naughty, and who won't change his or her ways even after the father's admonition.

So it was with Cain and Abel. God said to Cain, "If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin is couching at the door; its desire is for you, but you must master it." It was CAIN, that God did not accept because of his not behaving well, not because he offered vegetables. If Cain had done well, then he would have been accepted (as well as his vegetables).
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.

User avatar
robbyyoung
Posts: 811
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 2:23 am

Re: Genesis 4:7 timshol תִּמְשָׁל־ a choice?

Post by robbyyoung » Thu Dec 18, 2014 1:41 pm

Paidion wrote:
This adds another thought to "if you do well," in that Cain was doing the right thing (bringing an offering) the wrong way (his vegetables). There is no "sin lying at the door" bit, which the LXX translators may have found too confusing, and it adds the command "be still," instead.
In my opinion, the above is not exogesis, but eisogesis, based on what the eisogesist already believes, namely substitutionary atonement.

There is no indication whatever in the passage that God is displeased with Cain's offering because it is vegetables rather than meat. Abel offered meat because he worked with animals. Cain offered vegetables because he grew vegetables. God's acceptance was based on their behaviour, not the type of offering they made. Actually both brothers were naiïve in thinking that they could give a gift to God. I cannot find it, but it's written somewhere in scripture something to the effect that "God is the owner of everything; who can give Him a gift?" But I did find this in Psalm 50:9-14

I will accept no bull from your house, nor he-goat from your folds, for every beast of the forest is mine, the cattle on a thousand hills. I know all the birds of the air, and all that moves in the field is mine. if I were hungry, I would not tell you; for the world and all that is in it is mine. Do I eat the flesh of bulls, or drink the blood of goats? Offer to God a sacrifice of thanksgiving, and pay your vows to the most high.

God accepted Abel's offering because He loved him. It's like a human father, who, when his little girl plucks a dandelion and brings it to him as a gift, or his little boy catches a toad and gives it to him. The father doesn't need or want a dandelion or a toad, but he accepts them from his beloved children and thanks them. However, he won't accept such a gift from a child who has been consistently naughty, and who won't change his or her ways even after the father's admonition.

So it was with Cain and Abel. God said to Cain, "If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin is couching at the door; its desire is for you, but you must master it." It was CAIN, that God did not accept because of his not behaving well, not because he offered vegetables. If Cain had done well, then he would have been accepted (as well as his vegetables).
Hi Paidion,

Yes, I've heard this before and agree with your analysis. The scriptures do not disclose how Cain and Abel even knew how to give an offering. Were they taught this by Adam, who was taught of God? The scripture or passage says, "And in process of time it came to pass...(KJV)", indicating Cain probably had a history of disobedience towards God. God seemed to be in constant contact with the first family and apparently Cain was a problem child.

Nevertheless, good job Paidion ;) .

God bless.

dizerner

Re: Genesis 4:7 timshol תִּמְשָׁל־ a choice?

Post by dizerner » Thu Dec 18, 2014 1:54 pm

[user account removed]
Last edited by dizerner on Mon Feb 20, 2023 6:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: Genesis 4:7 timshol תִּמְשָׁל־ a choice?

Post by Paidion » Thu Dec 18, 2014 4:33 pm

A few years ago, I began to write a book called The Supreme Sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Chapter 3 is entitled "Offerings and Sacrifice". I would like to share this chapter with you.

The first offerings to God were those of Cain and Abel. Did God require these offerings? Did He ever ask for them, or suggest them? There is nothing in the Scriptures indicating that He did. Cain and Abel thought they might please God somehow by offering the best fruit of their labours. It wasn't that God needed these things. Can anyone give the Creator of the Universe a gift? The idea is preposterous to one who understands His Majesty! Those who serve lesser gods may try to give their gods something. For their gods did not create the things that were offered to them. But what does God Himself say about attempts to give Him a gift?

Job 41:11 Who has given to me, that I should repay him? Whatever is under the whole heaven is mine.

No doubt the apostle Paul had this passage in mind when he wrote:

Rom 11:35,36 Or who has given a gift to him that he might be repaid? For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory for ever. Amen.

Yet God will regard the offerings of man. Won’t any good father do the same when his little daughter brings him the gift of a dandelion or his little son, a toad? The father doesn't want or need either a dandelion or a toad. Nevertheless he will accept these gifts given in their childish innocence, and make some positive remark besides. In this way, he'll recognize the intent of his children to please him. God, in whose image we are created, will also graciously receive the gifts with which we try to please Him, although He doesn't need or want them. In Genesis 4:3-5, we read:

In the course of time Cain brought to Yahweh an offering of the fruit of the ground, and Abel brought of the firstlings of his flock and of their fat portions. And Yahweh had regard for Abel and his offering, but for Cain and his offering he had no regard. So Cain was very angry, and his countenance fell.

Why did God have no regard for Cain and his offering? You may have heard preachers say that God was displeased with the kind of offering that Cain brought. Many who consider atonement as a sacrifice to appease an angry God, tell us that Cain's offering was not accepted because it was not an animal offering. They quote, "Without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins." They say that Abel's offering was acceptable because it was an animal from his flock. But notice that this passage does not say that God did not have regard for Cain's offering, but rather that He did not have regard for Cain and his offering. When we read on, we find out why.

Genesis 4:6,7 Yahweh said to Cain, Why are you angry, and why has your countenance fallen? If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin is couching at the door; its desire is for you, but you must master it.

Now the truth of what God requires comes out! God would have accepted Cain and his offering if he had done well! It is not that God requires a certain kind of offering, that is, a bloody one. Indeed He doesn't require any offering! Rather God requires people to do well, and to master sin. God didn't say to Cain, "If you offer an animal sacrifice, will you not be accepted?" Rather he said, "If you do well, will you not be accepted?" and "If you do not do well, sin is couching at the door... but you must master it ."

God had regard for Abel and his offering. Was it because Abel offered the right kind of offering? No! It was because Abel did well. Cain's failure to master sin manifested itself soon afterward in that he committed the first murder — that of his brother.

Doing Well and How it is Possible
God requires us to do well. He requires us to master sin. But He understands our weaknesses, our inability to work righteousness. This is why He sent His Son to die for us. This is the reason for the means of mercy provided by Christ.

In no passage do we read that Christ died in order to forgive us our sins so that we could get to heaven. Rather, as the above Scriptures make clear, He died in order that we would no longer be self-serving sinners, but rather come under Lordship of Christ, overcome sin, become healed of our sin-sickness, and by His enabling grace actually become purified and righteous people who are eager to do good deeds, deeds that will help others to meet their needs. Proponents of the substitutionary theory of atonement believe that we are saved from hell. However, the angel announced, “You shall call His name “Jesus” for He will save His people from their sins.

Matt 1:20,21
But as he considered this, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, "Joseph, son of David, do not fear to take Mary your wife, for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit; she will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins."


The Enabling Grace of God
In examining the passage in Titus in its entirety, we find that Paul makes clear the true meaning of "grace". Paul first tells Timothy to instruct older men, older women, young women, and younger men how to live godly lives. Then he urges Timothy to be a model of good deeds himself. He asks Timothy to instruct slaves to show true fidelity to their masters. Then he writes the following to show that these instructions in righteous living cannot be carried out in the weakness of fallen man, but requires the enabling grace of God, made available to us through the death of Christ:

Titus 2: 11-15
For the grace of God appeared for the saving of all people, training us to renounce impiety and worldly desires, and to live sensibly, righteously, and piously in the present age, expecting the blessed hope and appearance of the glory of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ, who gave himself on our behalf to redeem us from all lawlessness, and to purify for himself a people of his own who are zealous for good works. Declare these things; encourage and correct with all authority. Let no one disregard you.


Notice that, in this passage, the grace of God is said to be the means by which we are trained to live righteous lives in this world. This is a far cry from the "unmerited favour" of God overlooking our sins because of Christ's "substitutionary death". Rather, in this passage Paul gives us the purpose of the death of Christ as he does so often elsewhere. Was it to "redeem us from hell"? No! It was to redeem us from all lawlessness! To purify for Himself a people of His own who are eager to do good deeds.

Righteousness Before the Time of Christ
The question may well be asked, “How could people be righteous and pleasing to God before the sacrifice of Christ?” There is plenty of Old Testament evidence that some were. Here are just a few references:

Gen 6:9 ... Noah was a righteous man, blameless in his generation.
De 16:19 You shall not pervert justice; you shall not show partiality; and you shall not take a bribe, for a bribe blinds the eyes of the wise and subverts the cause of the righteous.
Job 1:1 There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was blameless and upright, one who feared God, and turned away from evil.
Ps 33:1 Rejoice in Yahweh, O you righteous! Praise befits the upright.
Ps 34:19 Many are the afflictions of the righteous; but the Yahweh delivers him out of them all.


So there were plenty of righteous people before Jesus shed His precious blood. How, then, could they attain that righteousness without the enablement which came with Christ’s sacrifice? I can only guess that Christ’s death was efficacious also for all who would entrust themselves to God during the many centuries before He died. My understanding is that God from the beginning anticipated all possible choices that man could make, and had in his wise counsel, ways to respond to these choices. Thus it could be said that the lamb of God “was slain from the foundation of the cosmos”. Rev 13:8

What follows are several other quotes of what has been done from the foundation of the cosmos (universe), or even before:

Lu 11:50 that the blood of all the prophets, shed from the foundation of the cosmos, may be required of this generation,
Mt 25:34 Then the King will say to those at his right hand, ‘Come, O blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the cosmos;
Eph 1:4 even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the cosmos, that we should be holy and blameless before him.
Re 17:8 The beast that you saw was, and is not, and is to ascend from the bottomless pit and go to perdition; and the dwellers on earth whose names have not been written in the book of life from the foundation of the cosmos, will marvel to behold the beast, because it was and is not and is to come.


Such statements have suggested to many, that at or before the creation of the universe, all events have been determined by God to take place. The ramifications of such an idea are mind boggling. Fatalism of this kind negates free will, one of the ways in which man was created in the image of God. It is also inconsistent with accountability for man’s actions, whereas much if not most of the Bible makes clear that man is responsible for his actions, and will be rewarded or punished accordingly.

The context of the following verse concerns Peter’s statement that his readers were redeemed from the futile ways inherited from their fathers with the precious blood of Christ.

1Peter 1:20 He was foreknown before the foundation of the cosmos but was made manifest at the end of the times for your sake.

As I see it, God’s foreknowledge is his knowing all possibilities, every choice that man could make,, and thus having a way of responding to these choices. So, in anticipation of the sacrifice of Christ, this foreknowledge of the slaying of Christ could have allowed the enabling grace to become available to true followers of Yahweh before Christ died.

A Fuller Sacrifice
At first glance, the following passage seems inconsistent with the statements made concerning the sacrifices of Cain and Abel:

Heb 11:4 By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts: and by it he being dead yet speaketh. (KJV)

One who has been taught the substitutionary view might think that this passage is saying that the kind of offering is the important thing here, that a blood sacrifice was necessary. Thus Abel’s sacrifice was “more excellent”. But the more literal meaning of πλειων, is “more” or “greater”. This word indicates that the difference between their sacrifices was one of degree rather than one of kind. Also, notice this passage speaks of Abel’s sacrifice and also his gifts. These are two different entities! Abel’s sacrifice was not his gifts. In Genesis 4, his gifts, the firstlings of his flock, were called “an offering”, but not “a sacrifice”. One could conclude that Abel’s sacrifice was that of himself, and that he found the grace of God sufficient for mastery of sin. Perhaps Cain also sacrificed himself in some fashion, but it was incomplete and inferior. God did not accept Cain and his gifts. God explained why. "If you DO WELL, will you not be accepted?" and "If you do not do well, sin is couching at the door... but you must MASTER IT." If Cain had made some progress in doing well by mastering sin, God would have accepted him and his offering. By offering himself more completely to God and overcoming sin, Abel’s sacrifice was greater than that of Cain’s.

Another Offering
The next scriptural record of an offering made to God was that of Noah as the people and animals were leaving the ark.

Then Noah built an altar to Yahweh, and took of every clean animal and of every clean bird, and offered burnt offerings on the altar. And when Yahweh smelled the pleasing odour, Yahweh said in his heart, "I will never again curse the ground because of man, for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; neither will I ever again destroy every living creature as I have done. While the earth remains, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night, shall not cease."
(Gen 8: 20-22)


As in the case of Abel, Yahweh was pleased with Noah and his offering. For Noah has lived a life of obedience to God. He had "done well" in building the ark and preserving life on it in obedience to God's command. Did God require this offering from Noah? Nothing in the text suggests such an idea.

The origin of Sacrifices
From early times, the nations of the world tried to appease their gods through offering sacrifices to them. “The gods of the nations are demons.” The nations sacrificed animals and they sacrificed people. Of course the demons delighted in the worship they were receiving as well as the fact that their worshippers were helping to destroy people with their human sacrifices. The Hebrews learned to sacrifice from the nations. What follows includes some scriptures that tell of sacrifices made by God’s people to the demons The nations offered up even human sacrifices to their gods. And at one point in their history, some of the Israelites did the same!

The First Sacrifice Recorded in the Bible
The first sacrifice recorded in the Bible is that of Jacob. This is found in Genesis 31:54. This was offered by Jacob in connection with the covenant he made with Laban.

Then Laban said to Jacob, "See this heap and the pillar, which I have set between you and me. This heap is a witness, and the pillar is a witness, that I will not pass over this heap to you, and you will not pass over this heap and this pillar to me, for harm. The God of Abraham and the God of Nahor, the God of their father, judge between us." So Jacob swore by the Fear of his father Isaac, and Jacob offered a sacrifice on the mountain and called his kinsmen to eat bread; and they ate bread and tarried all night on the mountain.

Where did Jacob learn to offer sacrifice? Could he have learned it from Rebekah his mother, who was a Syrian? (Gen 25:20) Or could he have learned to sacrifice from Uncle Laban? Jacob had lived with Laban for many years, and must have observed Laban’s form of worship. Laban was a Syrian (Gen 31:20). The Syrians were worshippers of other gods. Evidence of this appears in the following passage from Judges:

Judges 10:6 And the people of Israel again did what was evil in the sight of Yahweh, and served the Baals and the Ashtaroth, the gods of Syria, the gods of Sidon, the gods of Moab, the gods of the Ammonites, and the gods of the Philistines; and they forsook Yahweh, and did not serve him.

One may also notice that it is not recorded as to whom Jacob offered the sacrifice. Jacob had heard from Yahweh and was obeying Him. But did he sometimes sacrifice to other gods as did his mother and uncle? Perhaps not. Perhaps he transferred the concept of sacrifice to his worship of Yahweh. One thing is certain. Yahweh, the God of his father Abraham did not ask Jacob to offer sacrifice.

Yahweh had asked Moses to lead the people out of Egypt. But He hadn’t said a word to Moses about sacrifices! Yet Moses and Aaron knew about sacrifices which were meant to appease. Did Moses learn about such sacrifices from the Egyptians by whom he was raised? He must have. For God has never asked anyone to offer to him an appeasing sacrifice! Moses and Aaron gave the following as a reason in asking Pharaoh to let them go into the wilderness.

Exodus 5:3 Then they said, "The God of the Hebrews has met with us; let us go, we pray, a three days’ journey into the wilderness, and sacrifice to Yahweh our God, lest he fall upon us with pestilence or with the sword."

Obviously they knew the meaning of an appeasing sacrifice. But God didn’t require it or desire it! Did Moses get the idea from the Egyptians and transfer it to his God Yahweh?
God Himself declared through Jeremiah that He had not said anything to the Hebrews about sacrifices or given them any commands about them when He brought them out of Egypt.

Jeremiah 7:22,23 For in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, I did not speak to your fathers or command them concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices. But this command I gave them, ‘Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and you shall be my people; and walk in all the way that I command you, that it may be well with you.’

As always, God’s main concern was obedience and righteous living. His instructions to those whom He brought out of Egypt was that they “walk in the way” that He commanded them. But he hadn’t spoken to them about burnt offerings and sacrifices!
The fact that God does not wish or require sacrifice is written in the book of Psalms:

Psalm 40:6 Sacrifice and offering you do not desire, but you have given me an open ear. Burnt offering and sin offering you have not required.

Literally, it is “you have dug ears for me”. God has cleaned out the wax from my ears, so that I can hear properly. It is not sacrifice that He wants. Rather He wants me to hear and to obey the words that I hear!

Was the feast of the Passover a sacrifice of appeasement to Yahweh? No. It was a memorial of the occasion in which Yahweh passed over the Israelites while destroying the first-born of every Egyptian household. Yahweh asked every Israelite household kill a lamb, and to eat the flesh of the lamb in haste, and then place blood on their door posts. The record of God’s instructions. is found in Ex 12:1-20., but makes no mention of sacrifice. He did ask that a feast of the passover be held annually as a memorial to what He would do. However, when Moses related the revelation of God to the Israelites (verses 21-28), he called it “the sacrifice of Yahweh’s passover”. Did Moses have in mind an appeasing sacrifice or propitiation such as he had learned from the Egyptians? Or did he have in mind, when he used the word “sacrifice” that the Israelites would have to give up their choice lambs in order to honour Yahweh in this remembrance feast? The close parallel with the development of the communion is striking. Jesus asked his disciples to “do this in remembrance of me”. But later, the Catholic Church called this remembrance by eating bread and drinking wine a “sacrifice”.

Yahweh Accepts Sacrifice as a Concession
Did Yahweh accept the sacrifices of the Israelites or even command them? Doubtless He did.He also commanded the Israelites to choose Saul as king.

When Samuel saw Saul, Yahweh told him, "Here is the man of whom I spoke to you! He it is who shall rule over my people." 1 Samuel 9:17

Does this fact imply that Yahweh wanted Saul to rule over His people? If this scripture were all the information we had about the matter, we might so conclude. But the account prior to this clearly shows that Yahweh did not want any king at all to rule over His people.

Then all the elders of Israel gathered together and came to Samuel at Ramah, and said to him, "Behold, you are old and your sons do not walk in your ways; now appoint for us a king to govern us like all the nations." But the thing displeased Samuel when they said, "Give us a king to govern us." And Samuel prayed to Yahweh. And Yahweh said to Samuel, "Hearken to the voice of the people in all that they say to you; for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected me from being king over them. (I Samuel 8:4-7)

Gideon understood that Yahweh is the one and only sovereign! This is what he said:

Then the men of Israel said to Gideon, "Rule over us, you and your son and your grandson also; for you have delivered us out of the hand of Midian."Gideon said to them, "I will not rule over you, and my son will not rule over you; Yahweh will rule over you." Judges 8:22,23

Yes, the Israelites wanted a king like the other nations. In a similar manner, the Israelites wanted to sacrifice to their God to appease Him just as the other nations did to theirs. So God said gave them specific instructions as to how to do it.

Even while Moses was up in the mountains, communing with Yahweh and receiving the ten commandments, the Israelites had constructed their own god to worship.

Exodus 20:22-26 And Yahweh said to Moses, "Thus you shall say to the people of Israel: ‘You have seen for yourselves that I have talked with you from heaven. You shall not make gods of silver to be with me, nor shall you make for yourselves gods of gold. An altar of earth you shall make for me and sacrifice on it your burnt offerings and your peace offerings, your sheep and your oxen; in every place where I cause my name to be remembered I will come to you and bless you. And if you make me an altar of stone, you shall not build it of hewn stones; for if you wield your tool upon it you profane it. And you shall not go up by steps to my altar, that your nakedness be not exposed on it.’

Sacrifice and offering you have not desired, but you have given me an open ear. Burnt offering and sin offering you have not required. (Psalms 40:6)


No, God did not require sacrifices; He required obedience. To have an open ear is to hear the commands of God.

Another Kind of Sacrifice
Yet there is a distinctly different kind of sacrifice with which our God is pleased! It is not an attempt to appease God. It is a willingness to give up something which we may want for our selves in order to fulfill the greater purposes of God for our lives as well as the lives of others.

There is, for example, the “sacrifice of praise” as mentioned in Hebrews:

Heb 13:15 Through him then let us continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of lips that acknowledge his name.

In what way is praise a sacrifice? In order to make room or to have time to offer to God oral praise (the fruit of our lips), we need to give up something else that we wish to do, or think that we need to do.

So the Passover too, might correctly be called a “sacrifice” in the sense that the Israelites had to give up their choice lambs in order to participate in the remembrance feast.
It is in this same sense that Jesus sacrificed Himself for the sin of the world, and in the same sense the Father sacrificed His Son on our behalf. The Father was well-pleased with the willingness of His Son to die that people might be enabled to be righteous. Righteousness, holiness, and yes ever perfection, is His chief desire for mankind. Many early Christians, as well as Anabaptists in the sixteenth century, were willing to die for their allegiance to Christ. These sacrifices, too, were well-pleasing to God.
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.

User avatar
Homer
Posts: 2995
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: Genesis 4:7 timshol תִּמְשָׁל־ a choice?

Post by Homer » Thu Dec 18, 2014 9:41 pm

Hi Paidion,

Strange, isn't it, that God, as you say, did not want the Israelites to offer a blood sacrifice, yet He gave them strict instructions on how sacrifices were to be done and imposed a swift death penalty for "strange fire". Makes no sense.

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: Genesis 4:7 timshol תִּמְשָׁל־ a choice?

Post by Paidion » Thu Dec 18, 2014 11:25 pm

Homer wrote:Strange, isn't it, that God, as you say, did not want the Israelites to offer a blood sacrifice, yet He gave them strict instructions on how sacrifices were to be done and imposed a swift death penalty for "strange fire". Makes no sense.
As I see it, Homer, it makes the same kind of sense that it makes for God to object to the Israelites having a king just like the other nations (even lamenting that they would not have Him to rule over them), and then tell them specifically to choose Saul to be their king.

In both cases, it was a concession to that which the Israelites insisted on having. Another way of saying this, I suppose, is that God "gave in" to their demands.
It's a bit like a human father who makes concessions to his son or daughter against his wishes, hoping that they will learn from experience.
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.

User avatar
Homer
Posts: 2995
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: Genesis 4:7 timshol תִּמְשָׁל־ a choice?

Post by Homer » Fri Dec 19, 2014 1:04 am

As I see it, Homer, it makes the same kind of sense that it makes for God to object to the Israelites having a king just like the other nations (even lamenting that they would not have Him to rule over them), and then tell them specifically to choose Saul to be their king.
It has long been my thought that God gave them Saul as king, not as a favor, but to teach them something. Saul was the epitome of what man would admire and look up to:

1 Samuel 9:2 (NASB)

2. He had a son whose name was Saul, a choice and handsome man, and there was not a more handsome person than he among the sons of Israel; from his shoulders and up he was taller than any of the people.


He would probably get elected for some important office today. And yet Saul was a spectacular failure.

The blood sacrifice was a type of Christ, and contrary to what man might expect, Jesus' ignominious death on a cross and resurrection was a great triumph over death, the wages of sin.

I don't think your analogy works in this case.

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: Genesis 4:7 timshol תִּמְשָׁל־ a choice?

Post by Paidion » Fri Dec 19, 2014 2:33 pm

I don't think your analogy works in this case.
I think it does. I think God was also trying to teach the Israelites something, by going along with their attempts to appease Him with sacrifices, as other nations tried to appease their gods with sacrifices (although God didn't want or need their bloody sacrifices). Yes, the blood sacrifice may have been a type of Messiah; yet the sacrifice of Messiah was of a different order. God may have wanted to teach them that their sacrifices had no efficacy in removing sin. But Messiah's sacrifice had the power to take away sins—I don't mean just to cover them over, but to enable every repentant sinner to overcome their sins so that they would be removed from him. On the other hand:

... it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins. (Heb 10:4 ESV)

Again God gave a concession to the Israelites. They thought that in appeasing God, He would overlook their sins, and so He did. BUT...

The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. (Acts 17:30)

Now I know Paul was talking to the Athenians when he said this. Nevertheless, I think it applies equally well to the ancient Israelites.

People who believe Messiah had to die in order that we might be forgiven our sins are always quoting "Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins". But in the context, we read:

And ACCORDING TO THE LAW, almost everything is cleansed by blood, and without bloodshedding no forgiveness comes. Therefore, on the one hand, it was necessary for the representations of the heavenly things to be cleansed with these things, but on the other hand, the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these, for Messiah entered, not into hand-made holy places, which are anti-types of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf. Nor was it that He should offer Himself often, even as the high priest enters into the holy places annually with blood of other [creatures], since it would have been necessary for Him to suffer from the establishment of the cosmos. But now, once, at the end of the ages, He has been manifested for the elimination of sin by the sacrifice of himself.
(Heb 9:22-26)
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.

dizerner

Re: Genesis 4:7 timshol תִּמְשָׁל־ a choice?

Post by dizerner » Fri Dec 19, 2014 5:28 pm

[user account removed]
Last edited by dizerner on Mon Feb 20, 2023 6:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Post Reply

Return to “Calvinism, Arminianism & Open Theism”