Session 2 The Structure of the Bible

Q1 When was the new testament canon finally decided?

There is a lot of contradictory writing on this topic.

Evangelical literature seems to quote the Council of Carthage AD397 ¹ but Oesterley⁴ suggests that this council also approved the OT Apocryphal books, which I’m sure the Evangelicals would reject.

A synod at Rome was convened in the year 382 CE³ to discuss this matter but its outcome is lost - one possible outcome is the Decretum Gelasianum which omitsthe Revelation to John. Pope Innocent I, in 405 CE, reaffirmed the canon in a letter to Bishop Exsuperius of Toulouse^3, but it was not until the Council of Florence (1439-43) that the See of Rome delivered for the first time a categorical opinion on the Scriptural canon³

In response to Protestant expansion Rome convened Council of Trent in order to consider what, if any, moral and administrative reforms needed to be made within the Roman Catholic Church on April 8 1546³ And this confirmed the present NT canon.

Guthrie⁵ has studied available literature on the topic, and while in my book he does not enter specifically into canonicity he does touch on it in the discussion of each book, demonstrating that although theories casting doubt on the authorship and the acceptance of the books by the early church cannot be disproven, neither is the evidence strong enough to conclusively support the doubts and to exclude the traditional acceptance of these books as canonical and as written by the traditionally assumed authors. The doubts cannot be completely discounted, but there is no real reason to follow them.

Q2 How and why does the grouping of the OT differ from the Jewish Bible

Hebrew Canon² Law (Torah) The Pentateuch

The Prophets (Nebhiim) Former Joshua

Judges

Samuel

Kings

Latter Isaiah

Jeremiah

Ezekiel

The Twelve

The writings Poetical Psalms

Proverbs

Job

Five scrolls Songs

Ruth

Lamentations

Esther

Ecclesiastes

Historical Daniel

Ezra/Nehemiah

Chronicles


Christian Canon² Same OT canon, but topical order, and subdivision of some books .

Oesterley⁴ distinguishes the Eastern Greek OT canon and the Western Hebrew canon, supporting the use of the apocrypha in the Greek versions which he says formed the original basis of the Christian canon, but says that Pharisaic and Rabbinic influences later discouraged the use of the apocrypha with its Sadducee tendencies. This was carried into the church, but later it became a source of contention between Rome wishing to keep it in as per the original and the reformers wanting to keep it out. Oesterley has two thrusts - one is that the books would not meet Rabbinic criteria or were written after the canon was fixed. The other is that the books were used by Christians to refute Jewish views and it was therefore convenient for the Jews to discount them. Oesterley’s intention in this debate is to substantiate the inclusion of the apocrypha in the Bible, on the basis that the original Christians used the Septuagint rather than the Hebrew version. However, it seems likely to me that Jesus, an Aramaic speaker in Palestine with a mission firstly to the Jews, would have used and quoted from the Hebrew. And it is unlikely that the divine plan of Salvation would have had him using the duff version!

Q3 Origins of Chapters and Verses

Chapters Stephen Langton 1228¹

586BC - Pentateuch divided into 154 “Sedarim” to fit three year reading cycle²

536BC - further sectioning to 669 segments - one year cycle and to assist in locating refs²

250 AD - Greek divisions²

350 AD - Codex Vaticanus margins (first chapters)²

1227AD - Stephen Langton (Professor at University of Paris, later Archbishop of Canterbury)²

Verses Robert Stephanus 1560¹

First divisions were non standard spaces or numbers²

First standard verse divisions around 900AD²

Latin Vulgate first Bible to use both verse and chapter divisions in both OT and NT²

Q4 Does it matter which version we us

Theological perspective of translator. The NIV is very good, but does have an Evangelical bias. The Jerusalem Bible is a Catholic bible, with their interpretations. Differences can be very important, for example the division of verses in the 10 commandments is different, such that the command about not making graven images is merged into part of the first commandment in the Catholic Bible, but is a commandment in its own right in the Protestant versions. This is also part of the Islamic justification for NOT translating the Koran, and only interpreting it into other languages. The original Arabic is considered to be the only true version. For Christians, it is the intent of the message that is important.

Manuscripts available to translator. The KJV was extremely good for its time, but more recently older manuscripts have been found, giving rise to more accurate translations.

Language changes with time. “Thee” and “Thou” are seen by modern readers as being a reverent, submissive form of address to a might God. In fact they are the English equivalent of ‘Tu’ in Spanish and French - the familiar form, and the English ‘You’ is equivalent to the Spanish formal “Usted” or “Vos” and the French “Vous”. English has made the formal form of address the normal one, unlike Spanish and French. Back in the 80s I think, there was a series on TV about an English sailor trapped in medieval Japan - I think it was called Shogun. Of course, he fell in love with a local woman, and said to her “I love thee”, illustrating that the word is familiar not formal.

In summary, most versions have value, but it is important to select the right version for the task in hand and to know about its background and how this influences its accuracy.

Q5 Is the Bible written by God

2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness.¹

2 Peter 1:20-21 You must understand that no prophecy of scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origins in the will for man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. (cf Carried along by wind in Shipwreck Acts 27)¹

Compare with Islamic doctrines re Koran - eternal ‘word of God’ revealed by dictation to Mohamed

Having browsed through the various bits I found in my own books, I found that they were written from a fundamentalist Evangelical perspective, which usually suits me just fine but wasn’t independent enough for what I was looking for. I followed the links on the Readers website and found my way to ntcanon.org, which looks at historical evidence provided from the early church fathers. Many of these come from Roman Catholic sources, with which I would not normally be comfortable . However, it was notable that the documents are very, very old. (I hear that there is not such a volume of near original material for Homer’s Iliad or even for the works of Shakespeare). It was also notable that the books had been collected together by organised people at a very early stage, and also that while there were variations for example the Syrian Church having a slightly different list, on the whole there was broad agreement on the NT. The cross reference table on ntcanon.org is particular useful for showing that although not all the canonical NT books have definitive support from all the fathers, there are only James, II Peter and II and III John that have any reliable queries against them. In contrast the non-canonical NT books have virtually no support at all. It seems therefore that the bulk of the canon was already well established (even though not ‘officially’) at a very early stage.

I started the study expecting to find all manner of criticism of the canon, but this has not materialised and I come away more convinced than ever that the New Testament is an accurate record of God’s revealed will at the time.

Granted, the fact that some early Christians believed these things is not a guarantee of their truth, but this has been built upon by the experience of Christians down through the ages as they have felt the words come alive as they read them. Also, some of the ‘quotes’ used³ to show that So-and -so believed XYZ book was canonical because he quotes it in ABC letter seem very tenuous - sometimes just two words which could easily come together in the thinking of any Christian person. Also Oesterley⁴ suggests all the same church fathers supported the apocrypha in the same way. It seems to me that the Evangelical writers only look for stuff that supports their case, while Catholic writers are equally guilty in the same way. It becomes not so much a search for truth as a search for bits to prove “I am right”. And I am just as guilty!

We are also at risk of trying to prove an element of the faith, which is always bound to fail since in my experience God will not allow himself to be tied to proof.

I find the ‘proof texts’ often quoted to be a little unreliable on their own as they don‘t list which scriptures they consider to be scripture - yes its good to have internal verification, but to be truly acceptable external verification is required. Notwithstanding what I have just written in the previous paragraph, I feel that the testimony of the early fathers that A, B, and C are in but X, Y, and Z are out is sufficient for that external verification. On top of that, I find that when I apply the principles of the scriptures in my own life, miracles do happen.

In answer to the question, Yes I do believe that the Bible is written by God, as it is unique in its origination and transmission through the ages, and has a powerful positive effect on our lives. There is a tendency among Evangelicals to become so obsessed with the Bible that they make an idol out of it, believing things because ‘THE BIBLE SAYS’ rather than because God says. God’s real word is incarnated in the form of Jesus - an eternal revelation of God more similar to the Islamic concept of the Koran than the Bible. I have also been concerned that there is a circular reasoning in selecting books for canonicity - we choose the ones that reveal God’s plan of salvation, but then we say the Bible is remarkable because whatever book you look in it tells you about God’s plan for salvation. On the other hand, I would steer away from doubt of the received scriptures, because they have been substantiated by the changed lives of believers. And I find that much of the doubts sown have less to do with finding truth than with finding ways to re-interpret God’s words for our own convenience, following the example of the serpent in the garden of Eden - “Did God really say…?” And this is taken to extremes by scholars whose real intention is to debunk the whole thing.

If we start to imagine that there are flaws and inaccuracies (bar those that come about from imperfect translations) or that it was limited to the knowledge of the inspired authors, then it starts to become unreliable. And if it is unreliable in part, then it is unreliable. A bit like being a ‘mostly virgin’ - you either are virgin or not, and the Bible is either reliable, or not. My experience is that it is reliable. Those that find it slightly unreliable end up picking and choosing the bits that suit them, or else if they are more sincere reject it altogether. But if we are to have the Bible as reliable, that should not preclude us from admitting that our own interpretation of it is not reliable, and needs always to be re-examined. Neither should the Bible take the place of God.

Present an overview of the Bible using a simple chart.

Reference

1 Matthew, Stephen, Getting the Most from the Bible (School of the Word Series), Havestime Sevices Ltd, Leicester, LE6 0UT, 1990

2 McDowell, Josh, Evidence that demands a verdict, Campus Crusade for Christ, San Bernadino, California CA 92414, 1977

3 http://www.ntcanon.org/

4 W O E Oesterley D D Litt D,An Introduction to the Books of the Apocrypha, 1935. First published S.P.C.K. 1935. Prepared for Kata-Pi by Paul Ingram 2003 katapi bible resource pages

5 Guthrie, Donald, New Testament Introduction, 1970, IVP, Leicester, UK

Session 1 - Why History, Why Doctrine?

The title of the first session is “Why History Why Doctrine” and will involve you in reading about the development of the Church up to AD313 when the Emperor Constantine gave civil rights and toleration to Christians throughout the Roman Empire.:

What was it like to become a Christian in those first centuries?

Becoming a Christian in the first three centuries was a very difficult decision. In Britain today this would be about accepting some apparently old fashioned ideas from some of the more cobwebby sections of the cultural and political establishment. We have a degree of respect and respectability, but are also the butt of some good natured humour. There is little malicious opposition. The little opposition we have is usually in the form of excessive political correctness, and is disguised in the language of human rights and individual freedoms (for everyone except Christians).

In the first three centuries, becoming a Christian was to join an avant-garde underground movement. It was often to join something illegal and clandestine. Opposition was very real, “in-your-face”. You did not have the protection of British Law to guarantee a fair trial. To become a Christian was to risk everything. At any moment you could be arrested and imprisoned and sentenced to death. This was clearly not just a personal choice – these consequences would also have a serious impact on your family. There was no welfare state to look after them while you were away or after your execution. We forget as well how terrifying these ordeals must have been. The shouting of a mob, unrestrained by any police, wanting your blood. (Compare this to the British soldiers we saw recently, set on fire by an Iraqi mob.) The pain of whips and beatings. The sight of a very real lion in the circus coming to eat you alive – slowly.

These days we imagine that God is under some kind of obligation to give us an easy life free of all discomforts. In those days, to become a Christian was to invite every kind of discomfort. You could not be a half-hearted or nominal Christian.

In theological terms, most discussion at this time centred on the nature of Christ. Who were we worshipping? There were various debates on the nature of the trinity, and whether Jesus was both fully human and fully divine, or if he was more of one than the other. Gnostic doctrines had him as less than God, while others believed he had only one divine nature and was not fully human (Docetism). Irenaeus was a key figure in resolving these issues.

What Practical Problems and difficulties did the Church have to face?

This is covered to some degree in my comments above.

Christians were blamed for natural and other disasters. The fire in Rome (when Nero ‘fiddled’) was blamed on Christians, as was the destruction of Ephesus, because the pagan gods were angry when pagan worship stopped.

Christians were sometimes forced to go into hiding to avoid persecution. But how do you get food when you are hiding?

What was happening to the empire in those three centuries?

This period saw the rise of the Roman Empire to its greatest peak, both in terms of the extent of its territory and in terms of its economic, administrative and military civilisation.

It also saw times of total chaos. There were times when madmen were emperors and had short reigns ending in bloody deaths. There were Emperors who lacked any sense of morality, committing murders and sexual immorality of every type.

Some Emperors orchestrated persecution of the Church, seeing it as a rival to the cult of the Emperor.

There were also times when the burden of leadership was too great for one man, and ‘the purple’ ie the Emperor’s authority was shared. This process began the division into east and west empires, although this was reveres several times.

Towards the end of the period various Germanic tribes began to push into the northern part of the empire, escaping from the Huns that were emigrating from Asia. Some of these Germanic incursions were peaceful, but many were violent. Eventually, some time after Constantine, the Visigoths sacked Rome, followed by the Vandals who sacked it again. The last Emperor of the West abdicated in 476.

When it became legal to be a Christian (AD313 Edict of Milan), what fresh problems did this raise for the church.

The main problem with the legalisation of Christianity was that it rapidly became the religion of the establishment and therefore became a political force. This meant that the theological debate moved from abstract ideas of Christology into much more practical debates about who was the real church, who had he political power, which of the various streams of church life was the real one. Which one had apostolic authority?

Also, being the established religion and having political power attracts ‘converts’ whose faith is for convenience only. They don’t have the quality of their faith tested by persecution. These converts come in two types – the malicious ones who are deliberately abusing the church to gain power or influence or respectability, and the ones who genuinely think they are doing the right thing but are actually just following the trend and going through the motions rather than having an actual belief in the Lord Jesus’ atonement for them as individuals. Both these types still exist to some degree in the church today. The former are often actively harmful. The latter tend to blunt the effectiveness of the church.

Another problem was that of how the church should deal with Christians who in the times of persecution had abandoned the faith, but now wanted to be re-admitted. The Donatists argued that they should be excluded permanently, while Augustine held a doctrine of original sin and imperfection covered by God’s grace. He reasoned that nobody is perfect, and that you could never fully distinguish a true believer, therefore these people should be readmitted and that sacraments administered by them were valid. (This reasoning has been taken to extremes, for example being used to justify not expelling actively paedophile priests.) Even at the time of Augustine the clergy were notoriously immoral, and this prompted Pelagius to counter the teaching of Augustine. He regarded humans as capable of separating themselves from sin and living holy lives. Thus, following the example of Christ, they would earn their salvation. This has become the dominant philosophy of the Roman Catholic Church, and lead ultimately to the Reformation in which Luther and others returned to the doctrine of salvation by grace.

References/Researched Materials

John D Woodbridge Ed, Great Leaders of the Christian Church, Moody, Chicago, 1988.

style="font-size:100%;">Alister E McGrath, Historical Theology, Blackwell, USA, 2003

http://www.channel4.com/history/microsites/H/history/guide03/timeline53.html

http://www.srcf.ucam.org/cucn/features/churchhistory.html

Session 1 Beginnings in Genesis Chapters 1 to 15 - talk notes

Session 1

Beginnings in Genesis Chapters 1 to 15

Introduction

Well - here goes - there’s no official video, but is there a spycam hidden somewhere?

Beginnings

How Many

I found 91 beginnings.

I think I was crossing the boundary between finding beginnings and writing a new commentary

I’ve listed them on the hand out, so that those of you that get really bored can look through and see what you think.

I’m not going to go through every one, but will pick out some that illustrate my points. I’ve highlighted some on the handout.

Features

Order from chaos (writer emulates God)

1,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14

The thing that comes out to me first is that the story of Genesis starts off by creating order out of chaos.

The writer emulates this by bringing order from chaos himself as he writes things down and sets them in place - almost a demonstration of the points he is trying to make.

There is some comment both in my NIV text notes and in the course text books that there are parallels with the Canaanite myths of the gods defeating the sea and the sea monsters. But as we read on and find the patriarchs describing God as the Creator of Heaven and Earth we realise that the sea and its monsters are actually part of God’s creation. And it was good. But before I rubbish those ideas completely, there is a parallel in the apocalyptic writing in Revelation, where various beasts come up out of the sea, only to be defeated by God.

And I suppose this brings me on to one of my pet theories about the creation story. Because when I write a long, technical engineering report at work, I put in an executive summary at the beginning, so that non technical people can read it too. And I see the first chapter of genesis as an executive summary of the whole Bible. I see that it shows God creating the whole world and its contents. I believe that we are still in the sixth day where God is creating mankind in his own image, male and female. I feel that the seventh day of Gods rest is yet to come. And that the time when God says ‘it is good’ - although it has had a prehistoric fulfilment, still awaits its final fulfilment when a new heaven and a new earth are created in which mankind lives in harmony with God and all evil has been purged.

Separation

1,4,5,6

Must rush on.

One of the themes that kept coming up for me was Separation - separation of light from dark, sea from sky, sea from land, good from evil, and as the book progresses, of righteous people from unrighteous.

57, 65, 74

But here we have a problem, as mankind keeps undoing that trend. There is intermarriage. There is continual contamination of the righteous families with evil deeds.

Repeated very soon

5,6,57,63

And as soon as one new thing happens, it is usually followed on with more of the same. If God makes something new, he usually does something else similar soon. And if mankind discovers a new sin, he usually commits it again very soon. Well that matches my experience, anyway!

Scene setting

52,57

So this is a scene setting. It presents the problems of a race that is unable to live with God, when that is the purpose for which it was created.

45,50,54,71,90

And it starts to present God solution to that problem, which will ultimately lead to a race of men that is truly ‘Good’ - there is the Protevangelium - he will crush your head and you will bruise his heel. And there is the concept of proper blood sacrifice being necessary to be accepted by God. And there is ample evidence of God’s mercy, despite human sin.

Writers Intention

And so I think that the writers intention was to set the scene for the remainder of the Pentateuch, which is primarily about God’s dealings with the righteous line represented by the nation of Israel, primarily through his covenant relationships.

Most significant for writer

And so the most significant single beginning for the writer is the first mention of God’s covenant with Abram in Chapter 8, from which the rest of the Pentateuch, and indeed the whole Bible, flows on.

Why Relevant to today

Genesis is relevant today, not least because the promise of land lies at the heart of most news reports about the middle east today. Does the Covenant refer to the modern nation of Israel? Or has the true Israel always been a community of faith, rather than the physical descent of Abraham? Or is there a dual interpretation where all the eschatological prophecies refer both to the Church today and to the nation of Israel tomorrow?

But whatever perspective you take on that the other key theme is that of God providing a pathway for reconciliation, right from the very beginning of the world story, and that the events of Calvary are not just an accident of time, but God’s plan right through the ages.

Joseph

And then changing topic completely, I promised to talk about Joseph. He is commonly known as the dreamer with the colourful coat, and also for his relationship with Potiphar’s wife. And its this latter point that I want to pick up on. Because Joseph was a man who, in extreme pressure, did what was right. Remarkable in itself, but my point is that he did not have any scriptures to guide him. He did not have the NIV Study Bible - he had not been on the foundation course. And yet he still knew that there was a God who demanded absolute righteousness, and that he was better off trusting in the care of God and risking the wrath of Mrs Potiphar, than the other way round. He must rage at us, with all our Bibles and commentaries and study aids and courses and seminars and tutor groups, when we intellectualise everything and say ‘Did God really say this? Did God’s prophet really write this and say these words?

I hope we can follow his example and remain true to our God, even when it is not quite convenient just at the moment.

Session 1 Beginnings in Genesis Chapters 1 to 15 - Table

1 The Human and World Scene

2 Abraham - Through you I will bless the whole world

From my reading

NOT GOD (1)

Item	Chapter / verse	Description
1	1v1	Heavens and Earth (two places)
2	1v1	Plurality of single God (2)
3	1v3	The creative Word (Jesus - compare John 1v1)
4	1v3	Separation of Light and Dark (physical and spiritual - note the light is good, doesn‘t say the darkness was!)
5	1v6	Separation of water above and below (physical and spiritual, if water represents people or beings on earth and in heaven, or heavenly minded and earthly minded - evocative of the gulf between Lazarus and the rich man in the parable)
6	1 v 9	Separation of water and land (God is in charge of the waters feared in Canaanite myth)
7	1 v 11	Plants
8	1v14	Heavenly bodies
9	1 v 14	Years, Seasons, Days, etc (Note that the bodies used to define the length of the day were not created until the fourth day - how were the first three days measured? What were ‘evening and morning’ before there was a sun?)
10	1v 20	Everything that swims or flies (including the sea monsters feared in Canaanite myth(3))
11	1v24,25	Wild animals
12	1v24,25	Tame animals
13	1v24,25	Creatures that move on the ground - a third category? (Suggest non-Adamic hominids - unspiritual man, ie looks like a man but has no spirit to relate to God, is like an animal - Neanderthals etc)
14	1v26	Man
15	1v26	An image of God
16	1 v 26	Delegated authority
17	1v29	God provides food
18	2v2	God rests. Exhausted? No, complete!
19	2v2	Sabbath
20	2v9	Evil (an aspect of the tree)
21	2v10	Rivers, especially Tigris and Euphrates which feature later in the Bible
22	2v15	Work
23	2v15	Rules
24	2v19	Man starts to exercise delegated authority
25	2v21	A living creature not formed from dust
26	2v24	Marriage, monogamy. You can’t leave home to be joined in unity with multiple wives.
27	2v25	Innocence
28	3v1	The Accuser enters the scene to spoil God’s work and separate mankind from him. Was the Accuser a literal snake, created along with the other animals? Was the snake possessed by the Devil? Was the snake a symbol of the Devil? We believe God created all things, and that the devil was initially perfect, but at what stage in the six days was he created? (If in the six days?!) When did he turn against God?
29	3v1	Doubting God’s word. “Did God really say?” Reads like a 20th century theology textbook!
30	3v3	God’s word embellished with human rules
31	3v4	Temptation
32	3v4	God accused of lying to protect himself
33	3v5	The desire for a moral framework outside of God.
34	3v6	Human Sin (Evil already existed in the tree and in the serpent)
35	3v6	Sin spreads like a disease.
36	3v6	Man does what his wife tells him to! I used to think that Adam was absent during the temptation and that she took it to him and he ate, possibly unwittingly. Here it says he was with her, so he knew the story and was fully culpable and had no grounds for passing the buck. He was the one who had received the command from God, but he did nothing to correct Eve’s misquotes and did not support her against the Devil and did not intervene to stop her taking the fruit.
37	3v7	Guilt and shame. Separation from each other
38	3v8	Fig leaves - a vegetable sacrifice attempting to cover sin (like Cain’s). See item 50 below
39	3v8	Hiding from God (The garden changes from meeting place to hiding place) (4)
40	3v9	God calls sinful man, still desiring relationship. He knew what had happened and where Adam was, but wanted a response.
41	3v10	Confession
42	3v12	Blame culture
43	3v14	Punishment
44	3v15	Enmity between those whose father is the Devil (eg he is the father of lies, and also of murder John 8v44) and the living (ie Spiritual) whose mother is Eve (v20). In Particular this refers to Jesus.
45	3 v 15	God’s plan of salvation introduced.
46	3v16	Difficulty in procreating - once sin is in the world it becomes hard to obey Gods commands!
47	3v16	Disruption of gender relationships
48	3v17	Work becomes painful toil - see item 46 above.
49	3v19	Death - not instantaneous as might have been expected, giving apparent credence to the Devil’s lies, but death does come.
50	3v21	Blood sacrifice to cover sin (like Abel). The wages of sin is death, as promised by God. Without the shedding of blood there is no remission for sins.
51	3v22	A new exclusion from the tree of life which was not forbidden before - continues the death theme - but ultimately leads to the tree of life that is the crucified Christ.
52	3v24	Exclusion from God’s presence.
53	4v1	Sex/pregnancy/birth
54	4v2	Varying roles Shepherd/farmer. Although livestock is mentioned in many places before here, (which implies that rather than becoming domesticated at a later stage God had created the animals to be domestic) Gods instructions had been to tend the garden (implying plants). And he banished Adam from Eden to work the ground (implying plants). So was Abel straying from the plan by keeping flocks rather than farming? And if so, why was the vegetable sacrifice rejected? NIV study notes (5) point out the difference in Attitude - Cain just brought ‘some of the fruits’, whereas Abel carefully chose the best, the firstborn. This looks forwards towards the Tithe. It also points to Jesus, the chosen firstborn lamb of God. Were the sacrifices for sin, for thanks, or for love and worship?
55	4v4	God responds to human’s sacrifices. Won’t accept any old thing. How did Cain and Abel know that God had/had not accepted their respective offerings?
56	4v5	God accepts the younger brother, rejecting the older. (Compare Esau/Jacob, Joseph, Israel, David etc)
57	4v8	Sin moves on to the next generation, together with the lies and excuses to cover up. Again, the Lord knows everything, but still asks so as to bring out the response from Cain. The curse is very similar to his fathers curse on the ground, with a similar ejection from the place where he was.
58	4v13	Unrepentance, complaint about God’s justice
59	4v15	God provides for the sinner
60	4v19	Polygamy
61	4v20	Nomadic lifestyle, music, metalwork
62	4v25	God starts again with a new genetic line.
63	4v26	Men began to call on the name of the Lord. This seems different to the previous ongoing relationship - perhaps more distant? NIV study notes (6) contrast Seth’s line calling on God, rather than the self reliance of Cain’s line illustrated by Lamech in the previous verses.
64	5	Genealogies!!!
65	6v2	Mixing of spiritual and unspiritual things by mankind. Interpretations of the sons of God/daughters of men sons daughters 1 Angels humans(7) 2 kings subjects(7) 3 Godly men Ungodly women (7) 4 The line of Seth The line of Cain (7 and 8) 5 Humans (the image of God) Female hominids (see item 13 above) 6 Men (Adam made by God) Women (Eve made from man’s rib) (I suggest 4 makes the most sense)
66	6v3	God restricts man’s life. (This suggests that the extreme ages in the text are not accidental or just different ways of measuring time. Tests with laboratory animals have shown that lifespan is affected by the level of irradiation, which would change in the cataclysm of the flood. The rate of change follows a similar pattern in the Bible and the lab)
67	6v4	The Nephilim
68	6v6	God suffers pain owing to human sinfulness
69	6 v9ff	God provides deliverance from his judgement, but this requires obedience and faith
70	6v22	Someone does as he is told at last!
71	8	A new beginning, marked by an acceptable sacrifice! (tough on the birds - survive two years of flood and then get sacrificed!) No more curses on the ground
72	9	A Covenant.
73	9v3	Meat added to man’s diet, but respect for life maintained
74	9v25	The start of conflict between Canaanites and Israelites
75	10	Population of the world
76	10v10	Cush built cities and centres of population, but did God really intend a dispersed rural population? (see Ch11 v4)
77	10v10	Babylon.
78	11	False religion - attempt to reach heaven by human effort. False Gods.
79	11 v 7	Languages
80	11v26	Abraham
81	11v31	The start of the Spiritual journey to the promised land
82	12	The Abrahamic covenant
83	12v6	The Lord appears at Shechem - where later the tabernacle would rest, and where the Samaritan woman told Jesus “our ancestors worshipped on this mountain”. The covenant renewed and detailed.
84	12v10	Egypt comes into the story
85	13v14	The covenant renewed and detailed
86	14v18	Melchizedek - A priest-king like Christ - king of righteousness and king of peace
87	14v18	Jerusalem
88	14v18	Bread and wine - just a normal meal here, but given by Melchizedek it does point towards Christ.
89	14v20	Tithing -allegedly - but this one-off giving a tenth of possessions does not in my view lead to regular tithing of income.
90	15	The covenant renewed with symbols. Blood. Fire. Details added to the covenant about time and place, and things in between.
91	15v6	Righteousness through faith

References

1 NIV Study Bible, Hodder and Stoughton, 1987, note on v1, p8

2 ibid

3 ibid, note on v 21, p9

4 ibid, note on v8, p12

5 ibid, note on v3 and 4, p 13

6 ibid, note on v26, p 15

7 ibid, note on v 2 p16

8 My Dad told me so it must be true!

Metal v Rap

I found this article by Duane D Aubin [click on post title] on an Iron Maiden fan site. In a sound and well researched academic approach, it compares heavy metal and rap music, and finds them to have remarkably similar roots. It concludes with lyrics from their songs, and also from some Christian songs. An unusual mix, but worth reading.

ADSENSE

This is just to add some words to let adsense know what kind of site I have, since I haven't posted anything meaning ful yet. Yes I know it looks a bit cynical to do the commercial bit before the spiritual bit, but my material is all at home and I can't get to it right now.

church, bible, anabaptist, anglican, evangelical, theology, christianity, salvation, Christ, Jesus, God, saints, brethren, missionary, Church of England, charismatic, baptism