Scripture Reflections – Page 2 – Scribbling Theology

Propitiation and Redemption in the Book of Romans

09/07/202115/08/2025 scribblingtheology3 Comments

This was a recent essay I did in my Romans class at college. I’m proud of this because I got pretty good grades for it so I thought I’d share it with all of you. Enjoy 🙂

The themes of redemption (ἀπολυτρώσεως) and propitiation (ἱλαστήριον) can be found throughout the entire storyline of the Bible. From Genesis 3, where God makes the promise that a seed will come to destroy the serpent (Gen 3:15), then God takes an animal, slays it, and covers Adam and Eve in animal skin (Gen 3:21), through to the sacrificial laws in Leviticus, all the way to Jesus in the Gospels, these themes are richly integrated into the very fabric and thrust of the Bible’s entire narrative. Paul, in particular, picks up on these essential themes and, in his epistle to the Romans, he masterfully espouses a rich theology in light of the Messiah and the entire Old Testament Scriptures. However, the themes of propitiation and redemption in Romans have not been without controversy.

This essay will aim to trace Paul’s usage of both themes of propitiation and redemption throughout the book of Romans. This will be done by exploring critical passages in Romans where these themes occur, exploring the debate among scholars and the various interpretations of the terms, and finally exploring any implications that are applicable to the Christian life.

Redemption in Romans

First, it is crucial to have some historical context behind the idea of redemption to better understand how Paul uses the word in Romans. In the Greco-Roman world, to redeem someone was to liberate a slave by purchasing (or ransoming) their freedom (Morris 1993, 784). This understanding of redemption was true for all of antiquity, going back as far as the Exodus story where God frees (redeems and ransoms) Israel from servitude to the Egyptians (Ex 12-24). For Paul and his audience, the theme of redemption would have evoked memories of the exodus stories of freedom from slavery, crossing the red sea, wilderness wanderings, Passover, promised land, and exile (Wright 2002, 470-471).

Twice we come across the word redemption explicitly being used. The first is in Romans 3:24 “and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus,” and then again in Romans 8:23 “And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies.” However, redemptive imagery can be found all over the letter such as in Romans 6, where Paul uses slavery language to demonstrate that those in Christ are now slaves to righteousness and God rather than sin and the flesh (Morris 1993, 785).

Redemption in Romans 3:24

As aforementioned, the first place we find the word redemption is in Romans 3:24 quoted above. In this passage, Paul is arguing that justification (the forensic declaration of being acquitted from sin) is a gift from God that comes via freedom from slavery (redemption) to sin (Hagner 2008, 70-71). Scholars debate whether redemption in this passage includes payment (or ransom) so that one can be set free. As already mentioned, the ancient world and secular Greek literature always assumed some payment would occur for the slave to be set free. However, when one considers both the Septuagint (LXX) and the New Testament, it is evident that a ransom is not always present in the idea of redemption (Schreiner 2018, 197-198). Nevertheless, most scholars agree that Paul most likely had both ransom and redemption in mind (Schreiner 2018, 198). Though, instead of the ransom being paid by God the Son to God the Father (Moo 1996, 230-231), it was paid by God in Christ to “the personified power of sin” mentioned in Romans 3:9 (Dunn 1988, 180).

Redemption in Romans 8:23

The second passage we find the word redemption is in Romans 8:23. Here we have Paul discussing the redemption of the created order in relationship with human redemption. Throughout the entire letter of Romans, Paul has an impressive theology of creation that culminates in this passage as he is concerned with the renewal of everything God has created, not just humans or His elect (Stenschke 2017, 261-289). Scholars agree that redemption is closely related to adoption as they are used almost interchangeably to demonstrate the now and not yet tensions in Paul’s argument. Paul argues that the Christian has already been redeemed (adopted), that they are being redeemed (spiritually), and that they will be redeemed (physically) at the eschatological end of the age (Moo 1996, 518-520). Mike Bird explains this well in his commentary when he says, “in the case of redemption, it is not just redemption from the penalty of sin, but the redemption of the body from the presence of sin that remains outstanding. The resurrection of the body will be the event that will consummate both adoption and redemption” (Bird 2016, 280).

Hilasterion in Romans

Propitiation or the Greek word hilasterion (ἱλαστήριον) occurs only once in all of Paul’s letters in Romans 3:25, “whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins,” making Paul’s use of the word a hot topic for debate among scholars. C. H. Dodd famously argued that the word should be translated as expiation (the removal of sin) as opposed to the pagan idea of God’s anger needing to be satisfied through sacrifice (Hodd 1935, 82-95). Later, the reformed interpretation of propitiation (to satisfy God’s wrath) was championed by Leon L. Morris in his book “The Apostolic Preaching of the Cross” (Morris 1965, 144-213) as he called into question the validity of Dodd’s interpretation of the word (Moo 1996, 198-199). Additionally, others have argued that the hilasterion should be interpreted as “mercy seat” where atonement took place in Leviticus 16 (Gundry-Volf 1993, 279-284).

Propitiation

Some scholars argue that hilasterion should be translated as “propitiation”, meaning “the removal or satisfaction of God’s wrath.” Interestingly, there is some debate among exponents of propitiation as to whether “sacrifice” exists in the passage. Scholars agree that a sacrifice is not found in the atonement, making it difficult to argue for a sacrifice in Romans 3:25. However, some would argue that Paul innovatively develops the idea of a present sacrifice in the propitiatory theme (Moo 1996, 236). On the other hand, scholars would reject the idea of a sacrifice being present that Paul’s expression means “to make atonement” not “to offer a sacrifice.” They argue that, at best, sacrifice is in the back of Paul’s mind, not in the forefront. Nevertheless, advocates all agree that “Christ adverted the divine wrath from sinners” (Morris 1988, 181).

Scholars argue for propitiation in Romans 3:25 in two primary ways. First, scholars explain that the common use of the word in the ancient world was to either satisfy or remove wrath (Kidner 1982, 119-136). Second, proponents of propitiation argue that the biblical context of Romans 3:25 is that all of humanity are sinners under the wrath of God (Rom 1:18-3:20), insinuating that if hilasterion does not mean the removal of wrath, then humanity is still under it (Mounce 1995, 117).

Expiation and Mercy Seat

Other scholars argue that hilasterion should be translated as expiation meaning that Christ’s death “is how God does away with his people’s sin – not symbolically, as in the ritual of Leviticus 16 in which the material mercy-seat figured, but really” (Bruce 1985, 111). In other words, God removes sin or cleanses a person via Christ’s blood and His death. Scholars who advocate for this view recognise the Old Testament connections that Paul is making to Exodus 25 and Leviticus 16, where the lid of the ark or “the mercy seat” was the place where sin was dealt with. It is where the high priest during the Day of Atonement would sprinkle blood as a sacrifice to cleanse the temple and himself so that he would not die in the presence of God (Wright 2002, 474). Additionally, the priest would lay the sins of the people on the head of a goat and literally remove the sin by sending the goat away from the camp. All of this was in Paul’s mind in Romans 3:25 (Dunn 1988, 171). These same scholars point out that in these rituals there is no mention of judgement or wrath being vicariously satisfied through the animals on behalf of the people. In fact, the killing of the animals was never part of the atonement, they were slain elsewhere, and it was the blood that was used at the alter (Wright 2016, 295-355). Finally, these scholars are quick to point out that the word hilasterion nearly always means or refers “mercy seat” in the LXX (Bailey 2000, 155-158) and in it means mercy seat in its other New Testament occurrence in Hebrews 9:5 (Stott 2001, 114).

Satisfy or Cleanse?

So out of the interpretations discussed in this essay, which are the most convincing? Both. When all the evidence is considered, there is no reason not to believe that Paul here has both in mind the secular use of the word hilasterion (propitiation) and the biblically canonical one (expiation and mercy seat). As N. T. Wright says in his commentary, “But that fact remains that in 1:18-3:20 Paul has declared that the wrath of God is revealed against all ungodliness and wickedness and that despite God’s forbearance this will this will finally be meted out; that in 5:8, and in the whole promise of 8:1-30, those who are Christ’s are rescued from wrath; and that the passage in which the reason for the change is stated is 3:25-26…” (Wright 2002, 476). In other words, the redemption of humanity comes via Christ’s hilasterion, that is, His expiating sacrifice as that removes sin and, in turn, wrath from those who are united to Him by faith (Bird 2016, 119).

Implications for Christian Ministry and Living

The themes of redemption and hilasterion are among some of the most important themes in all of Scripture as they relate to the death of Jesus and our salvation. These themes are central to the Gospel, and therefore, central to the Christian life and ministry. For some, the nuance and semantics might lead some to dismiss the question of there being any implications in these fleshed out themes. However, without a nuanced understanding of our salvation, the Christian is left deficient in their ability to espouse the Gospel that saved them. These themes affect Christians in two main ways, in our church ministries (i.e., pulpit ministry) and how we live out our vocation as image-bearers (Gen 1:26).

Ministry

Gospel-centred preaching is at the heart of our church services and ministries. Preaching God’s Word is how we teach, rebuke, correct, and instruct our members in righteousness so that they may be equipped to live out the Christian life (2 Tim 3:16-17). Therefore, having a nuanced and concise understanding of how we are saved shapes the way we live our lives. Is the emphasis of the Gospel on being saved from an angry God who hates humanity until we trust in Jesus, or is that we have been freed (redeemed), cleansed from sin (expiated) so that we can now live out our vocation as God intended? If it is only the former, then that simply solves God’s attitude towards humanity. The latter however, free’s humanity, in Christ to live as they were meant to, a kingdom of priests imaging God (1 Pet 2:9). This freeing and vocational calling needs to be the focus of our sermons.

Christian Life: Our Mission

If we get the Gospel nuances right in our pulpits, then we can live biblically in our lives and mission. If we see that Jesus’ death has freed us, ransomed us, cleansed us from sin for a purpose, we are starting to get to the heart of the Gospel. God has always intended humanity to be a new creation in Christ that images him and lives as genuinely human. N. T. Wright sums this up well when he says, “through the cross of Jesus won the Passover Victory over the powers, that he did this precisely by dying under the weight of the world’s sin, and that Christian mission consists of putting this victory into practice using the same means” (Wright 2016, 408). Love your neighbour (Mk 12:30-31) and enemies (Matt 5:44), even to the point of death so that they may “taste and see that the Lord is good” (Ps 34:8).

Conclusion

In this essay, we explored the themes of redemption and propitiation in Paul’s epistle to the Romans. Paul’s use of the word redemption in Romans 3:24 indicates a clear theology of the individual being set free from sin, and 8:23 indicated Paul’s theology that the entire created order groans as it eagerly awaits to be set free (redeemed) from sin on the eschatological day of judgment when Jesus comes to make all things new. Furthermore, this essay explored Pauls use of the word hilasterion, which could either be translated as propitiation or expiation (and mercy seat taken from Leviticus 16). From all the evidence considered, it seems that Paul emphasises a theology of expiation with a propitiatory theme implicit in the text. This means that Jesus’ death cleanses the believer from sin, sets him free and then because of that expiation, God’s wrath is turned away from the believer (an implied consequence of Jesus’ death, not an explicit one). Finally, with that in mind, it is clear that this emphasis on expiation, when preached from our pulpits, results in a vocational calling for the Christian instead of simply an attitude shift from God’s behalf towards the person.

List of References

Bailey, Daniel P. 2000. “Jesus as the Mercy Seat: The Semantics and Theology of Paul’s Use of Hilasterion in Romans 3:25.” Tyndale Bulletin, no. 51.1: 155-158.

Bird, Michael F. 2016. Romans. 2^nd ed.The Story of God Bible Commentary. Edited by Tremper Longman III and Scot McKnight. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.

Dunn, J. D. G. 1988. Romans 1–8, Vol. 38A. World Bible Commentary. Dallas: Word Incorporated.

Bruce, F. F. 1985. Romans an Introduction and a Commentary. Tyndale New Testament Commentary. Downers Grove: Inter-Varsity Press.

Gundry-Volf, J, M. 1993. “Expiation, Propitiation, Mercy Seat” in The Dictionary of Paul and his Letters, edited by Gerald F. Hawthorn, Ralph P. Martin, and Daniel G. Reid, 279-284. Downers Grove: Inter-Varsity Press.

Hagner, Donald A. 2008. “Romans” in The Expositors Bible Commentary, Vol. 11, edited by Tremper Longman III and David E, 19-238. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.

Hodd, C. D. 1935. The Bible and the Greek. London: Hodder and Stoughton.

Kidner, Derek. 1982. “Sacrifice – Metaphors and Meaning.” Tyndale Bulletin no. 33: 119-136.

Moo, Douglas J. 1996. The Epistle to the Romans. The New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company.

Morris, L. 1955. The Apostolic Preaching of the Cross. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdman Publishing Co.

Morris, L. 1988. The Epistle to the Romans. The Pillar New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI; Leicester, England: W.B. Eerdmans; Inter-Varsity Press.

Morris, L. 1993. “Redemption” in The Dictionary of Paul and His Letters, edited by Gerald F. Hawthorn, Ralph P. Martin, and Daniel G. Reid, 784-786. Downers Grove: Inter-Varsity Press.

Mounce, R. H. 1995. Romans, Vol. 27. The New American Commentary. Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers.

Schreiner, Thomas R. 2018. Romans. 2^nd ed. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic.

Stenschke, Christoph. 2017. “Human and Non-Human Creation and Its Redemption in Paul’s Letter to the Romans.” Neotestamentica, no. 51:2. 261-289,

Stott, John. 1994. The Message of Romans: God’s Good News for the World. The Bible Speaks Today. London: Inter-Varsity Press.

Wright, N. T. 2002. “Romans” in The New Interpreters Bible, Volume X. 393-770. Nashville: Abingdon Press.

Wright, N. T. 2016. The Day the Revolution Began. New York: Harper Collins Publishers.

Living Water John 4:1-42

25/02/202015/08/2025 scribblingtheology2 Comments

Jesus answered her, “If you knew the gift of God, and who it is that is saying to you, ‘Give me a drink,’ you would have asked him, and he would have given you living water.” – John 4:10

The story of the women at the well (John 4) is a famous one, and its narrative elements are as old as time. A wise sage (Jesus) meets a broken person (the woman at the well) and offers her insight about God, life, and herself. As a result, the person and the village are changed, rejoice, and the sage goes on His way to the next group of people who needs His wisdom. Every movie ever. Except this isn’t just a story, Jesus isn’t just a sage, and He gives the broken woman not only sound insight but hope and life. Here’s the scene. It’s a hot afternoon, Jesus, a pure-blooded Jewish rabbi, sits alone by the side of a well. A Samaritan woman (typically hated by the Jews), also alone, comes to draw water from the well when Jesus asks her for a simple drink. This simple request, scandalous for its time, ended up showing the woman that her need was more than just a cup of water, instead, she needed living water from which she’d never thirst.

The theme of living waters is splashed (pun intended) all over the Scriptures. Like most themes, we find it on the first few pages of the Bible in Genesis 1. The first time water is even mentioned is in Genesis 1:2 “The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.” Coupled with the term without form and void (wild and waste), the imagery here is an earth that is a chaotic watery wasteland with God’s Spirit sovereignly hovering over it ready to order and shape. In the rest of the chapter, waters or seas are mentioned for a total of 16 times. We see from the beginning of the chapter that waters are chaotic, but God eventually turns it into something ordered, good, and life-giving. The theme continues:

In Genesis 2 after God rests in His cosmic temple, God places the Garden in Eden, and with the tree of life at the centre of the Garden, rivers flow forth to water and give life to the entire world (Genesis 2:10-14).
In Genesis 6-9, the world has become exceedingly wicked. Everyone has turned away from Yahweh and follows after their own rebellious desires. As an act of judgement and restoration, God floods the world both destroying it with chaotic waters but also renewing with those same waters. The flood is giving life to a sort of newly created order in which God will start again with His new Adam Noah.
In Exodus 14 after Israel has been freed from the oppressive rule of Pharoah in Egypt, they come to the beach of the Red Sea that separates them from the promised land. God, through Moses, parts the waters to allow His people to safely travel through eventually closing the sea behind them, destroying the pursuing Egyptians.
God is depicted as being living water in opposition to idols and other gods (Jeremiah 2:13, 17:13).
Like the Garden of Eden, the temple is depicted as having water flowing out of it (Ezekiel 47:1-12) giving life to the surrounding area.
Zechariah 14:8 talks about living waters flowing out of Jerusalem (also analogues for sacred space) watering the whole earth in the new creation.
As we come back to the woman at the well, we see Jesus obviously identifying Himself as the waters of life. Jesus is the temple that houses the presence of God, that gives life to those around Him (John 4:10-11). In fact, John depicts water flowing from the side of Jesus on the cross (John 19:34).
Those who are united to Jesus in faith will also have living waters flowing from their hearts (John 7:38) as part of the new temple and the new creation.
Finally, in the new heavens and earth, we see Jesus, the Lamb of God leading people to rivers of living water (Revelation 7:17) to drink from (Revelation 21:6) that flow from the throne of God and the lamb with the tree of life on each side of the river (Revelation 22:1-2).

These are just a few examples of what living waters throughout the Bible. Whether or not the woman at the well was clued into even most of these ideas is uncertain. However, what we do know is that after the conversation she had with Jesus she believed, she was transformed, and as a result, many others believed in Jesus as the Messiah as well. At the end of the day, two things can be taken away from this. 1. That real-life comes from Jesus the Messiah. You will never thirst. 2. If you’re a Christian, your job is to go about watering the earth and giving life to it with the Gospel and by loving others. If salvation is anything, it is giving life to those who don’t have it.

Seven Days that Ruled the World: Genesis 1-11 Part IV

21/11/201915/08/2025 scribblingtheologyLeave a comment

Genesis 1 is one of the most loved and hotly debated chapters in all the Scriptures. Probably the most famous debate has been around issues like the age of the earth. Young Earth Creationists use Genesis 1 (and of course other passages) to argue for the existence of a Creator and even go so far as to use it as a model or paradigm for their scientific method. Others interpret Genesis exclusively as mythology, seeing no authority in the text whatsoever and understanding it as an ancient Jewish origins account of the world. These people think that in light of modern science, Genesis 1 has nothing to offer its contemporary readers. Two very different understandings of the text lead to two very different ways in which you can understand the world and God. I believe the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

In past blogs in this series, I have categorised Genesis 1-11 as mythological theological history. What I don’t mean by this is that the events in Genesis 1-11 didn’t happen. Instead, the primary point of these chapters is the divine truths the author is presenting. Mythological doesn’t mean fiction in this context. The mythological genre can be better understood as parabolic or allegorical. The events in Genesis 1-11 happened. However, the events recounted in the narrative bring out a theological point rather than a detailed account of the past. As Tremper Longman III says, “The book of Genesis is not a history-like story but rather a story-like history.” After we explore the literary genre of the chapter, we need to ask ourselves some critical questions.

What is this saying about God?
What is this saying about creation?
What is this saying about humanity?

As we have already seen in the first verse, the Lord God is the creator, of all that exists. What we see in the rest of the chapter is that God places importance on an ordered and ruled creation rather than merely leaving it to its own devices. Unlike the other gods of the time, Yahweh is deeply concerned with every piece of His creation as He places everything in the right place and humanity has the crowning jewel.

The seven days of creation in Genesis 1 are not a scientific account of how God created the world, rather, it is a literary device standard in the Ancient Near Eastern world to describe God who is king ordering a cosmic temple to settle in and rule over. Another way to explain it is that Genesis 1 is not about the material origins of the universe. Instead, it is about the function of the things that exist with God at its centre. As John Walton explains:

I believe that people in the ancient world believed that something existed not by virtue of its material properties, but by virtue of its having a function in an ordered system.

Beginning in a state of chaos, in days 1-3 light, darkness, the sky, the earth, and the sea are all formed, separated and ordered. In days 4-6, God fills these spaces with the Sun, moon, stars, animals and humans to rule over them. In other words, God gives them a function. On day 6, humans are made in the image of God. The image or the imago Dei is another debated issue, but two things are clear in the text. The imago Dei is an ontological reality that is reflected in the function of flourishing humanity. They’re to have dominion over the earth (God’s cosmic temple), they’re to multiply and fill the earth.

On day 7 (the Hebrew number for completion – a recurring theme throughout the entire Bible), after having ordered His cosmic temple, Yahweh rests. The word rest here is important because as the story of the Bible progresses, it takes on developed meaning. Here, though, the word rest, according to John Walton, has royal and divine significance. It’s not merely God stopping or ceasing from His work (though that’s, of course, the apparent meaning of the text), instead, it’s God sort of sitting on the throne after completing the structuring of His cosmic temple where He now dwells.

In Genesis 1, the scene is set, the cosmic temple has been ordered, and God rules amid humanity and His good creation. Good though creation may be, it isn’t perfect. There is untapped potential that God wants humanity to cultivate and produce. This is the functional role that humanity is supposed to live in. Humanity in the world, God’s cosmic temple, is supposed to act as proto-priests as they tend to His good creation in harmony and peace. Genesis 2 fleshes this out more where Adam and Eve are to keep guard the Garden which is designated roles given to priests in Israel later in the Biblical story. For now, however, we see both male and female, and indeed all of creation was meant to live in an ordered world where God dwells and reigns from.

So what do these observations say about God? God is a divine king who wants to dwell imminently with His good creation as opposed to the ANE common understanding that gods were separate tyrannical rulers. What does this say about creation? That all of creation is good but has the capacity for more as it’s given to humanity to cultivate and rule over. What does this say about humanity? That humanity as God’s vice-regents, they were to live in harmony with God’s and the created order as they reign alongside God over the rest of creation and cultivate it.

As John Walton summarises

The key features of this interpretation include most prominently: The Hebrew word translated “create” (bārāʾ) concerns assigning functions. The account begins in verse 2 with no functions (rather than with no material). The first three days pertain to the three major functions of life: time, weather, food. Days four to six pertain to functionaries in the cosmos being assigned their roles and spheres. The recurring comment that “it is good” refers to functionality (relative to people). The temple aspect is evident in the climax of day seven when God rests—an activity in a temple. The account can then be seen to be a seven-day inauguration of the cosmic temple, setting up its functions for the benefit of humanity, with God dwelling in relationship with his creatures.

Life and Death: Genesis 1-11 Part III

02/09/201915/08/2025 scribblingtheologyLeave a comment

Death is the sound of distant thunder at a picnic. – W. H. Auden

Quick note: I’ve skipped a few sections in this series, but I felt compelled to write about this sooner rather than later. So like Starwars, some of these posts will be out of order. Thanks 🙂

There is nothing more sobering than the death of a loved one. When someone dies, it is the perfect time to deeply reflect on the value of life, purpose and destiny. Why does death exist? Why do we all have to die? After we die, then what? Important questions and the answer largely depends on what you believe about humanity, God and the Bible. It’s taken me a while to write this post because I’m constantly challenged on my perspective of death. Growing up, death was a reasonably foreign idea. I had a cat that died, but apart from that, I didn’t really have any relationship with it. It probably wasn’t until my dad died just a few years ago that the reality of death kicked in.

In the Bible, the first place we come across the idea of death is in Genesis 2:15-17. Here God has placed mankind in Eden to work and keep it. Then God tells them that they could eat from any tree in the Garden except the tree of knowledge of good evil; otherwise, they’ll die. What an odd story. Eat fruit from any tree except this one, or you’ll die? Is the fruit poisoned? Does God really like this one particular tree? Are they allergic to its fruit? What’s going on here? A careful reflection on the story might lead one to consider that there’s more going on here than meets the eye. First, there are two main trees in the Garden here (Gen 2:9). The tree of knowledge of good and evil and the tree of life. Don’t eat from one, but you can from the other. In the story, these trees were representative of important and more profound realities. Wisdom/knowledge and eternal life. Let’s focus on the tree of life for a moment.

In the ancient near eastern world, these kinds of trees are associated with youth and the reversal of age. In the Gilgamesh Epic, there is a plant called “old man becomes young” that grows at the bottom of the cosmic river. In the rest of the Bible, the tree of life is portrayed as offering life and new life (Prov 3:16-18; 15-4), and can also be found in Revelation (2:7; 22:1-2, 14-15, 18-19) where the tree of life and the river of life are associated. For me, this sheds a bit of light on the meaning of what’s going on here in Genesis. A new creation is happening in Revelation. Renewal of the earth and the removal of sin and corruption where creation is finally united to God in the complete sense of that phrase. In Genesis 2, something similar is happening, unity, flourishing and absence of sin.

Furthermore, the mention of rivers in Genesis 2 flowing out from the Garden coupled with the tree of life says to me that this is where all life and goodness comes from, this Garden, this sacred space. Except for one crucial difference. In Revelation, there is no tree of knowledge, there is no presence of sin.

Now for the tree of knowledge of good and evil. The name given to the tree is counter-intuitive. Knowledge is good, right? Isn’t gaining the ability to discern between good and evil something we should have? Obviously, something more is at play in the story. First, it’s important to note that the Hebrew word for evil here is different from the way we use it today. Western philosophy is loaded with a certain ethical definition that isn’t necessarily in the original Hebrew word. It’s probably better to understand the word evil as bad or not good for you. For example, the word can also be used of things God does (Jdg 9:56-57; 2 Sam 12:11; Isa 45:7). However, we know that God is good and that in Him there is no darkness at all (1 John 1:5), so the word doesn’t always have to have the same philosophical definition that we have for it. I suppose my point is; this tree represents knowledge to distinguish between what’s bad for us and what’s good for us in the world. We call this wisdom. Essentially, eating from the tree meant choosing to live by our own wisdom (this is the definition Genesis 3 gives for defining to be like a god), rather than living by Yahweh’s wisdom. Let’s just stop for a moment. It’s not like Adam and Eve didn’t know what the right thing to do was. They certainly believed that they were going to die if they ate the fruit from the tree. It wasn’t until the serpent tempted them that they decided to become gods themselves.

So now to death. God said, “of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die” (Gen 2:17). The thing is Adam and Eve don’t die when they ate the fruit, at least not in the conventional sense. Adam lived until he was 930 years old. He had a long full life, longer than ours. So then death needs to be understood as something more than simply not existing. First, the plain meaning of death here does incorporate physical death. Adam might live until 930 years old, but he does end up dying, and I believe that’s something that’s not apart of God’s good creation (Gen 3:19; Rom 5:12; 1 Cor 15:55). However, the kind of death emphasised here is a relational separation from God who is the source of all light and life (Gen 2:7; Job 33:4; Neh 9:6; John 1:3-4; 1 Tim 6:13). Like I argue in my post on Genesis 1, Moses’ audience and the later Exilic audience would have understood Genesis 2-3 as their current experience, being separated from the land, sacred space, and God’s presence as a result of human rebellion.

To conclude, death is two-fold. It is separation from God’s presence and the ceasing of one’s physical existence. One inevitably leads to the other. Because Adam and Eve were exiled from the Garden (God’s presence), so was all of humanity in Adam. Because the inevitable consequence of rebellion and separation is physical death, all shall die. But there is good news. God makes all things (including death) work together for the good of those who love Him, according to His purposes (Rom 8:28). Though we all may die, those who turn to Christ will actually find their life (Matt 10:39, 16:25; Mark 8:35; John 11:25-26), and will take part in His resurrection (John 6:39; Rom 6; 1 Cor 6:14, 15:20-23; 1 Thess 4:16; Rev 21:1-5). We’re all exiles now (1 Peter 1:1-2), but one day, those who have bowed the knee to Christ and given Him their allegiance will be raised up on the last day and rule alongside Him in a New Heaven and a New Earth in perfect harmony with God, one another, and creation. So let’s choose to eat from the tree of life (God’s wisdom), rather than choosing to decide what’s good for us. The fear of God is the beginning of wisdom (Prov 9:10), and it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God indeed (Heb 10:31).

Genesis 1-11 Part II: In the Beginning

16/08/201915/08/2025 scribblingtheology1 Comment

In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters. – Genesis 1:1-2

A long time ago before I became a Christian, I remember dating a girl who’s family were hardcore believers. I remember one day being at their house, bored, and picking up a Creation magazine. Two things stuck out to me. First, that the earth was around 6000-10,000 years old and second that they didn’t believe aliens existed. Immediately I knew they were crazy. However, it wasn’t long until I thought these things myself. When I became a Christian, I hit the ground running with the Scriptures. I soaked up everything it had to say and just believed what I thought it was telling me. For most of my Christian life, I believed that God created the earth around 6000 years ago, that there was a real talking snake in the Garden, and that ideas like evolution were a lie cleverly constructed to deceive the world into believing that God doesn’t exist. I was taught by many people (people who are still dear friends today) that unless you believed these things you weren’t taking Jesus, the Bible or the Faith seriously. So I joined their tribe. I often went street preaching, seeking to debunk evolution and turn people to Jesus. For me, atheism and evolution went hand in hand, and if you could disprove one, the other would fall. Sure, I had heard about Christians out there who believed in evolution (they’re known as theistic evolutionists). However, they were considered liberal, twisting the Scriptures, compromising and it probably wasn’t long until they walked away from the Faith altogether. Since then, a lot has changed. Bible college set me on a trajectory of seriously studying the Scriptures in its original context and genre. I remember quite clearly that the first theological position that shifted was my eschatology. I went from being a Premillenail Dispensationalist to a Convenential Amillinealist. The next thing that started to change was my approach to the Scripture itself. I went from reading Bible verses in isolation from one another to seeing huge thematic threads that reverberated throughout the entire Biblical narrative (I came to know this as biblical theology).

I began to understand the importance of context, genre, audience, authorship and to look for the authors intent (much of which I discuss here). Huge biblical themes like temple and sacred space, priesthood, union with God and much more, lit up the Bible as it began to sing to me a sweet alluring song that I haven’t been able to get out of my head to this day (not that I’ve tried). Eventually, I came across Tim Mackie and the Bible Project. They kept pointing out how important the story of Genesis 1-11 was for the entire biblical narrative, and wow was I amazed. Coupled with what I was learning at college, these guys turned the Bible from Netflix into 4k VR surround sound where, at times, it was almost like I could touch God Himself through the very pages I was reading. Now, as a result of all this, over the last three years or so I’ve shifted in my view of Genesis 1. Let’s explore.

Genesis 1 has been the subject of much speculation and debate for thousands of years. Each generation or era has a different take on what’s happening in the text, and I actually don’t think that’s a horrible thing. I believe God intends for us to reflect on whatever it is we’re reading in the Bible into our own context and live out the implications as God’s people. However, this shouldn’t be at the expense of the original intended meaning of the text. As far as I can tell, I see three main theological themes being explored in the first chapter. 1. God and who He is. 2. The ordering or construction of sacred space. 3. The establishing of humanity and their vocation in relation to God, sacred space, and the created order.

When we turn to the first page in the Bible, the very first thing the author wants us to notice is that there is a god and that this god created the heavens and the earth. Who is this god? This is where context is so important. If Moses wrote Genesis (I discuss authorship in a previous post), then his cognitive environment would have shaped his understanding of who this god was. For Moses and the Israelites in the Exodus events, the same God who brought them out of Egpyt was the same God who was the Creator in Genesis 1. This can be further supported by the use of the title “LORD God” in Genesis 2:4 (and onwards) where the author seems to be making an emphatic claim that this is indeed Yahweh Himself. The God of Israel is the God of the entire cosmos.

Just this line of thought alone has some profound implication for its readers. The most obvious is that God doesn’t merely create the universe, order it, and leave it to its own devices (deism). Instead, if this god is Yahweh Himself, we see that He is always at work throughout human history. God is both transcendent and immanent. He is distinct from His creation but is at work in it and often through it to bring about the redemption of a fallen world. The New Testament later picks this up by throwing Jesus into the mix (see: John 1 and Col 1:15-17).

Furthermore, in a polytheistic world, the idea that one God created the cosmos would have been a little edgy. In the ancient near eastern world (ANE), there were many other creation narratives, each depicting a council of gods creating the cosmos, usually chaotically, through violence and battle. Instead, God here simply speaks, and there is light, stars, animals etc. Very chill. To me, this says something about God’s character. Rather than having chaos reign, God is all about order, peace, shalom. In fact, this can be further supported by the use of the word create. This leads me to my next point. Order out of chaos and sacred space.

Here is where I blend a few ideas together. First, we read that the earth was formless and void. The Hebrew wording here can be translated as wild and waste, desolate and chaotic. Picture, if you can, a tumultuous watery wasteland that continuously churns and destroys. This was the state of the world before day one. Immediately the readers would have picked up on what was happening here. In the surrounding ANE world, there were plenty of creation narratives where chaotic and wild waters were to be overcome by the gods. It’s where the great leviathan dwelt, chaotic and dark sea creatures at odds with the plans of the gods (see the Enûma Eliš as an example). To the ANE world, dark, chaotic waters and leviathan were something to be feared, yet in the text, God simply brings order out of this chaos by speaking, unlike the ANE gods that wared over it. Furthermore, the leviathan was made to be a good creature, not an evil one in Genesis 1:20-23 (c.f. Ps 104:26). Similarities? Yes. Absolutely. It goes without saying that we’re going to find similarities between people groups in the same cognitive environment.

The differences, however, are important. Instead of God having to fight or war for lordship over the chaos and darkness, He is lord from the very beginning. The chaos creatures are actually His, and so are the waters. They’re subdued and ready to be moulded in the hands of the Creator. From here, God takes the wild watery wastes and uses them to form His sacred space – temple.

John Walton in his book “The Lost World of Genesis 1” argues that the Hebrew word for “created” in Genesis 1:1 shouldn’t be understood as ex nihilo (creation out of nothing), rather it should be understood that God orders the cosmos into a cosmic temple (sacred space). I recommend you read his book and wrap your head around the full argument. From what I’ve learned from him and other resources I concur. The ANE world was more concerned with function and order then they were about the material origins we’d usually read into the text. One analogy Walton uses is the difference between a house and a home. The way we usually read the text is like building a house. We place down the foundations, the walls, roof etc. Where the ANE was more interested in a home with furniture, food etc. A home is where one thrives, lives and flourishes, the other is more about material origins. This is likely what’s happening in the text. The author is more interested in function and home in the sacred space God is about to order, rather than the material origins of the universe. In this blog, I explore the theme of temple and how it relates to the biblical story. In the next post, we’ll explore more about the theme of temple and how it relates to what’s happening here.

So to wrap up this part of the series:

The god in Genesis 1 is Yahweh. He is the sole creator, sustainer and Lord of life.
The earth was in a wild, dark and chaotic space then God starts to order it.
God is arranging a sacred space or temple.