From the Master's Apprentices to the Animals

This is the third post of a series on Genesis 1-3 which started here, with part 2 here.

Another of Doug Green's thoughts on humanity is that if we were, as is fairly commonly held, that dominion and mastery is at least part of the divine image which we are to fulfill, then the first domain of dominion ought to be ourselves.

That is, if we are made to be Masters of the Universe (TM) under Yhwh, little gods representing the Big God, then the primary arena for that rule to be expressed ought to be our own person.

This, says Doug, is one of the most obvious features that marks us off from the animals. The mark of true humanity is that we exercise appropriate dominion and control over ourselves. And so, after the fall, we end up being humans who are less than human because we do not exercise dominion over ourselves.

He cites the story of Esau as paradigm of fallen humanity. Note how many things present Esau as animal-like. His body was like a hairy garment. He inhabited the open fields. He was a hunter. In order to be like an animal, like Esau, Jacob covers himself in the skins of animals.

Thus, we should not be surprised that Esau lives by instinct. He sells his birthright to satisfy hunger. This is the nature of fallen humanity.

Interestingly, 'beastly' is also how Peter describes a certain set of false teachers, while the ultimate judgement on Nebuchadnezzar for his pride was to become like a beast. (More on 'loss of reason' as a product of the fall in another post)

This is beautiful because it gives a positively glorious perspective on the Christian ethic of self-denial and restraint. Western capitalist culture sees nothing in this ethic other than repression (or oppression?) of natural instincts, the curbing of true humanity. Our age can see no positive virtue in deciding, for example, not to have sex before marriage. Why suppress yourself? Why not be who you are?

Yet Scripture holds the exercising of self-control as a mark of true humanity. We are not utterly beholden to our instincts. Nor should we be. Being re-made in the image of God (back to true humanity) by Holy Spirit includes the fruit of self control! Our age is pretty up on asceticism being stupid, but not so much on unbridled self-expression being stupid.

I'm very glad that Jesus that he did not obey his instincts but was truly human, and set his face towards the cross.

They were like us: part deux

Here's another angle on Doug Green's take on Genesis 3:22.

I've never really been too settled on the identification of the 'we' in Genesis 2 and 3. Who are they? Who are the 'us' that God makes us like? Who is the 'us' that Adam and Eve either became like or were once like?

Many people in my circles (Australian evangelicals) have taught in sermons that 'knowing good and evil' is the concept of usurping God's role. It means to determine good and evil, something that is not our place to do. This is because they take the more traditional translation that Adam and Eve 'have become like us' as opposed to Green's 'were like us'.

One exegetical consequence of this is that the identity of the 'us' is more limited. In 3:22, the 'us' are the 'knowers' of good and evil. If the phrase 'knowing good and evil' is understood to mean determining good and evil, then the 'us' can only include the divine. 'Us' cannot mean the heavenly court. (and, by the way, if you take Doug's take on 3:22, there's no exegetical problem with taking 'us' as the heavenly court anymore)

Thus, you're left with some kind of plurality within Yhwh being mentioned within the first couple of chapters of the Bible. A proto-trinitarian statement. It seems to me that God is not referred to in this way throughout the rest of the Old Testament, despite certain ambiguities later on in Zechariah, Malachi, etc. I personally would find it very strange were it to be the case here.

I can't see any evidence internal to Gen 2-3 that favours a 'determining good and evil' interpretation of that phrase. Can any of you? Things I've missed?

They were like us

It was suggested by Doug Green that a possible alternate translation to Genesis 3:22 was perhaps more correct than the traditional one. Traditionally, it reads something like:

Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil. Now, lest he reach out his hand and take also of the tree of life and eat, and live forever-- ESV

However, the Hebrew verb rendered there as 'has become' allows for a certain degree of ambiguity in terms of tense. It is simply Hebrew perfect tense of the verb 'to be'. Given the ambiguities of Hebrew, the verse could thus be read as:

Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man was like one of us in knowing good and evil. Now, lest he reach out his hand and take also of the tree of life and eat, and live forever--

On this reading, the original state of humanity is 'knowing good and evil' and it is only upon the eating of the fruit that their minds were 'scrambled' and that they could no longer distinguish the good from evil.

So, is there any possible way that this could be a good translation? Well, from my admittedly limited Hebrew knowledge, I'd say these two examples make it possible.

Firstly, in the immediate context, you have the same word being used in what appears to be a past tense.

"Now the serpent was more crafty than any other beast of the field (Gen 3:1 ESV)"

And yet, this isn't so satisfying because you could argue that it's a past-tense of narration, where the language is describing something that was true at the time of the events being described. So what we really need is an example where it occurs in direct speech, as it does in Gen 3:22, and is still rendered as a past state of being. Interestingly, there's one even in Genesis:

They said, "We see plainly that the LORD has been with you." (Gen 26:28 ESV)

The same verb, translated as a state of being that was true prior to the actual speaking of the words.

If Doug's thoughts are right, then the irony of the situation is that the serpent who deceived Eve in telling her that she would become 'like God, knowing good and evil' has in a sense deceived a lot of translators over a lot of years. :P As Doug pointed out, pehaps Eve's response should have been,

"But I'm already like God. I'm in His image. And I know good and evil, God told us what that is."

More thoughts to come...