The Witnesses

the witnesses

In pondering the witnesses which GOD has always preserved for Himself, in this Study we will specifically consider these two, the witness of the words, and the witness of the works. We will come to see in this Study that the overall purpose of the words and works of GOD is for the primary intent of instilling within the searcher of truth, faith.

Of course the witness of the works entailed those actions of GOD, often through HIS servants, which demonstrated supernatural or superhuman abilities. These were intended as proof positive that some divine action was at work. Though they often go hand in hand, let us first consider the witness of the words, the witness of the scriptures, indeed, the witness of the Bible itself.

As an attentive reader of various opinions and commentaries upon the Bible, I have frequently wondered why the speculations and theories of modern day theologians and scholars concerning the origins of the scriptures have been so ill-defined and nondescript. They too often just casually state certain conjectures about who wrote (or who didn't write) the Bible, as if they had something significant upon which these assumptions were based. But then I stumbled upon the reason for their vagueness. It's because there continues to be such a wide disagreement between these same commentators pertaining this vital and most important subject. They not only don't agree among themselves, but their theories seem to continually change and mutate.

Someone will put forth one conjecture and a few scholars will embrace it for a time, but then it will be seriously challenged and so they will flee that theory and adopt the next one. It seems that hardly any of them agree with one another, and some disagree most violently with the rest. And then when one of their suppositions is met with difficulty or impassable road blocks, someone just invents another theory to supersede the previous ones, and then they all just continue along on their merry way.

Nevertheless, there is one assumption which many of them do seem to gravitate towards. The basic idea which most of these critics cling to and fully endorse is that the writers of the Bible were some unknowns who got most of their tales and legends from others of an age much later than the events which it depicted. They can't seem to agree among themselves on who wrote the Bible, but they do certainly declare with one voice who didn't write it. For them it is an assumed fact that Moses didn't write, nor Isaiah, nor even Matthew.

We discover the development of this doctrine, labeled Biblical Criticism, by one of their own proponents, E. A. Speiser, in his Commentary on Genesis. We pick up his argument in the introduction on page XX.

It required, however, the penetrating probing of Spinoza (seventeenth century) to launch "higher" biblical criticism- that is, internal analysis as opposed to textual or "lower" criticism- on a truly productive course. Steady subsequent progress left little doubt that instead of being the work of Moses in its entirety, the Pentateuch was actually the product of a number of writers. In time, the critics were able to draw a sharp line between Deuteronomy (D), on the one hand, and the four preceding books- or the Tetrateuch- on the other. Within the Tetrateuch, a cleavage soon became apparent between the so-called Priestly source (P) and the outright narrative material; and the narratives, in turn, eventually yielded two main strands which came to be designated as J (Yahwist) and E (Elohist).

So initially they sliced off DEUTERONOMY from GENESIS, EXODUS, LEVITICUS and NUMBERS. But that was not good enough. That did not satisfy their craving. Eventually they found it necessary to divide the rest of scripture up into differing sections, initially according to which name for the Deity was used, Yahweh or Elohim.

Thus, according to these skeptics, if certain sections of the Pentateuch contained the word Yahweh for GOD then these critics labeled those passages as the "J" writings; but when they found passages which used the word Elohim for GOD, then they supposed that they had discovered a different writer whom they labeled "E". Then, when they couldn't decide or agree to which of these writers a certain passage might have belonged, they invented another writer, or school of writers, whom they labeled "P" representing some unknown priests.

One of the passages which apparently began their work was DEUTERONOMY 31:9, "And Moses wrote this law, and delivered it unto the priests the sons of Levi, which bare the ark of the covenant of the Lord, and unto all the elders of Israel". Of course Moses probably would not have written such a passage about himself, so these critics posited the theory that if Moses didn't actually write this passage, then maybe he didn't write much which has been attributed to him. They then began the arduous and evolving task of dismantling the rest of scripture.

Over time what they erected was a multitude of theories whereby they supposed that some portions were written by any number of authors while other portions were written by certain schools of writers. They attached letters to represent each section, such as D for the Deuteronomist, P for the priestly writers, J for Yahwist, E for Elohist, R for the redactors and T for the traditionalist. Sometimes they even felt the need to combine them, such as JE or RJE. Thus they had to continue adding and adjusting their theories whenever the general consensus took issue with what had previously been accepted. As Speiser wrote,

The critics of the nineteenth century may have felt that they had all the answers that really mattered. But fresh discoveries and more refined tools of analysis have made twentieth-century students at once more sophisticated and less sanguine. . . . . The thing to bear in mind, however, is that, where so many unknowns are involved, a reasonable margin of error must be allowed. [page XXI]

Mr. Speiser made excuse for these bogus theories created by those nineteenth critics by declaring that errors were to be expected. Thus, he named the new twentieth-century scholar's opinions as fresh discoveries, using refined tools, being more sophisticated and less sanguine. According to him, they had of course come to expect errors in some of the earlier theories concerning who wrote what sections of scripture because their hunches were dealing with what they supposed to be so many unknown writers over such a vast span of time.

page 1/19^

Mr. Speiser reflected that,

A significant milestone in the literary criticism of Genesis was the observation published in 1753 by the French physician Jean Astruc that, when referring to the Deity, some narratives in this book use the personal name Yahweh ("Jehovah"), while other and apparently parallel accounts employ Elohim, the generic Hebrew term for "diving beings." It would thus seem to follow, Astruc argued, that Genesis was made up of two originally independent sources. [page XXII]

Because some sections even of GENESIS used the word Yahweh for GOD while others sections used the word Elohim, Dr. Astruc then came upon the conclusion that here also they must be dealing with at least two different writers. Certainly this is possible and should be considered, but not for very long, especially when we learn that no where does scripture ever proclaim that Moses or any other single individual originally wrote this first book. The Bible clearly teaches that Moses wrote portions of EXODUS (MARK 7:10), LEVITICUS (MATTHEW 8:4 & ROMANS 10:5) and DEUTERONOMY (ACTS 3:22 & 1 CORINTHIANS 9:9), but nothing is said of him actually writing GENESIS.

Church Tradition has long supposed that Moses sat down one day with a blank piece of paper and GOD told him exactly what to write concerning the genesis of mankind and the history of Israel. It was generally thought that GOD revealed to him how around 4000 B.C. the earth was formed and then in what manner mankind came to exist. But the Bible says nothing of the sort. Nor is it ever stated anywhere that Moses originally wrote this most ancient book.

So, if Moses did not write GENESIS, who did? And was GENESIS for the most part written around the times of the events depicted in the book, as we believe, or was it written long after the ages of the Patriarchs, as most scholars have come to proclaim? And further, does GENESIS record and convey the truth regarding the lives of those individuals, or were all the stories made up centuries later? Answers to these questions must be diligently searched for.

As such, we will attempt in this Study to demonstrate that there is abundant evidence that although Moses couldn't have initially written GENESIS, he probably did assemble and edit the original writings which had been given to him. He may very well have been handed authentic copies of these ancient tablets by his father-in-law Jethro, either when he first fled from Egypt around 1531 B.C. (EXODUS 2), or more likely when he later led Israel out after their captivity around 1447 B.C. (EXODUS 18).

In that case, Moses could have been guided in this editing process by his father-in-law, who as a priest would surely be knowledgable of many of the forgotten details written in the original tablets. It is also notable that Jethro's ancestor Midian was himself a son of Abraham (GENESIS 25:2), whom we would not be surprised to find in possession of at least copies of these ancient writings.

We shall explore how there were at least eleven tablets, from before Adam through to Jacob, that were passed down from generation to generation, which preserved the histories of those ancient peoples. Thus, we will see that there is no good reason for suspecting that the book itself was a forgery, written many centuries after the last of the Patriarchs had passed away, but rather it recored and preserved a true history and is therefore a trustworthy witness for GOD.

Even Speiser had to admit that the critic's conflicting and changing theories were full of speculation, which needed continuing evaluation. It wasn't as if they had hit upon a final equation and now all of their perplexities had been solved. Rather, the closer their theories were examined, the more doubtful many of them became.

The question of P's date is difficult to solve for several reasons. Numerous sections, especially in the other books of the Tetrateuch, have long been relegated by the critics to a relatively late age, after the Babylonian Exile in many instances. Of late, however, there has been a growing sentiment- backed by a substantial amount of internal evidence- in favor of dating various portions of P to pre-Exilic times, and in some cases to the premonarchic period. This evidence embraces even certain passages in the ritualistic Book of Leviticus. A careful new look at the P material in Genesis is therefore definitely in order. [page XXV to XXVI]

So rather than thinking that all had been settled and that these scholars were ever in agreement, there has actually been much disagreement. Initially they supposed that most all of the Pentateuch must have been written after the Babylonian exile (538 B.C.); but then others of their tribe came to suspect that maybe portions could have been written much earlier, perhaps even before the monarchies of Saul and David (around 1,000 B.C.). As a side note, the ancient dates referred to in this Study are approximate, all according to accepted sources.

page 2/19^

Over the years, the Documentary Theory was put forth and then largely rejected, being replaced with the Fragmentary and Supplementary Hypotheses. Then there was the Deuteronomistic History Theory, which was then superseded by the Priestly Hypothesis which was then rejected for the Oral Tradition Hypothesis. As such, there is still no uniform and defined and accepted theory. It is all largely speculation.

Let us consider a further analysis by Mr Speiser of this so-called Higher Criticism. Here he was attempting to match and align the supposed age of the writings of GENESIS with that of the Assyrian and Babylonian Dynasties, suggesting that the unknown writers of GENESIS might then have gotten much of their information from ancient Mesopotamia.

Although there is as yet no firm basis for dating the patriarchal period- which must technically be put down as prehistoric until a direct synchronism with the outside world can be established- conservative estimates would anchor that age in the second quarter of the second millennium B.C. (approximately the eighteenth-sixteenth centuries). In terms of equally conservative Mesopotamian chronology, such a span would take in much of the Old Babylonian Dynasty, from Hammurabi down. Now the reign of Hammurabi dovetails with that of another outstanding monarch, Shamshi-Adad I of Assyria, and it parallels an illustrious stage at Mari. (from pages XLIII to XLIV)

Thinking that much of GENESIS was not written till more than a millennium after the ages of which it depicted, and supposing that its writings then might have coincided with the writings of the scribes of Hammurabi (1704-1662 B.C.) from ancient Babylon, or perhaps to the times of this Shamshi-Adad (1808-1776) of Assyria, they presumed that unknown individuals must then have taken the tales and legends of these ancient pagans and then re-worked and re-fabricated much of those records into the book of GENESIS.

Because both GENESIS and other ancient writings sometimes recorded similar events (i.e., the Garden in Eden, the Tower of Babel and the Flood of Noah), they supposed that one copied from the other, which may very well be the case. But did the writers of GENESIS copy from Hammurabi's scribes, or did the writers in ancient Babylon copy from GENESIS? Modern critics unfortunately suppose and affirm that it was GENESIS which contained the plagiarized material.

These days, many if not all scholars have come to assume that GENESIS was written sometime after the Old Babylonian Dynasty, around 1830 B.C. Because certain passages in GENESIS clearly described places and events which happened long after the times depicted in the Book, they then assume that some unknown writers must have assembled the entire book using later sources, many centuries after the fact.

Howbeit, if the first book of the Bible was instead originally written as separate ancient tablets, which Moses (1571-1451 B.C.) later took and edited and assembled into one unit, then that would fully explain why certain passages alluded to things which were not originally known to the Patriarchs. Moses, or some other ancient hand had on occasion inserted various clarifications into the original texts.

Nevertheless, that GENESIS in its entirety could not have been originally authored by someone centuries after the events spoken of, is intimated in many passages. One such is this one concerning the location of the border of Canaanites.

GENESIS 10:19 And the border of the Canaanites was from Sidon, as thou comest to Gerar, unto Gaza; as thou goest, unto Sodom, and Gomorrah, and Admah, and Zeboim, even unto Lasha.

Obviously, even by the time of Moses, Sodom and Gomorrah no longer existed. In fact, these cities had been so obliterated that no one knew even where they had ever been. So why would someone many centuries later endeavor to pinpoint the location of this particular border by using these lost cities as reference points? Of course the logical answer is that they would not have; howbeit, the original writer of the tablet very well would have. He no doubt had known exactly where these two cities were and could define the border of the Canaanites as being in that vicinity.

On the other hand, when Moses himself eventually surveyed these ancient tablets and came across a passage which described some place or thing which was no longer widely known by that antiquated name, he might then have had occasion to add his own remark with an updated description. An early example of this might be from the second tablet where the four rivers streaming out of the Garden of Eden were described (the red colored sections were probably added later to the original text for a bit of clarification).

GENESIS 2:10-14 And a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted, and became into four heads. The name of the first is Pison: that is it which compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold; And the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium and the onyx stone. And the name of the second river is Gihon: the same is it that compasseth the whole land of Ethiopia. And the name of the third river is Hiddekel: that is it which goeth toward the east of Assyria. And the fourth river is Euphrates.

In Moses' day the location of the first three rivers were no doubt little known, so Moses, or some other editor, apparently thought to expand upon their location. Howbeit, the great river Euphrates being well recognized, there would have been no reason for him to note its location, so the text simply mentions it.

page 3/19^

Thus, when Moses was editing these tablets, evidently recognizing that many of these ancient locales were no longer widely known, he very possibly inserted his own comments to help the wandering Jews recognize the place's actual location when they eventually entered into the Promised Land. Very possibly he was aided in this by his father-in-law, the priest of Midian. There are many more likely examples of this in GENESIS.

GENESIS 14:6-7 And the Horites in their mount Seir, unto El-paran, which is by the wilderness. And they returned, and came to En-mishpat, which is Kadesh, and smote all the country of the Amalekites, and also the Amorites, that dwelt in Hazezon-tamar.
GENESIS 16:14 Wherefore the well was called Beer-lahai-roi; behold, it is between Kadesh and Bered.
GENESIS 23:2, 17, 19 And Sarah died in Kirjath-arba; the same is Hebron in the land of Canaan: and Abraham came to mourn for Sarah, and to weep for her . . . . . And the field of Ephron, which was in Machpelah, which was before Mamre, the field, and the cave which was therein, and all the trees that were in the field, that were in all the borders round about, were made sure . . . . And after this, Abraham buried Sarah his wife in the cave of the field of Machpelah before Mamre: the same is Hebron in the land of Canaan.
GENESIS 26:33 And he called it Shebah: therefore the name of the city is Beer-sheba unto this day.
GENESIS 28:19 And he called the name of that place Beth-el: but the name of that city was called Luz at the first.
GENESIS 35:6 So Jacob came to Luz, which is in the land of Canaan, that is, Beth-el, he and all the people that were with him.
GENESIS 36:8 Thus dwelt Esau in mount Seir: Esau is Edom.
GENESIS 48:7 And as for me, when I came from Padan, Rachel died by me in the land of Canaan in the way, when yet there was but a little way to come unto Ephrath: and I buried her there in the way of Ephrath; the same is Beth-lehem.
GENESIS 50:11 And when the inhabitants of the land, the Canaanites, saw the mourning in the floor of Atad, they said, This is a grievous mourning to the Egyptians: wherefore the name of it was called Abel-mizraim, which is beyond Jordan.

Then at other times, the origins of peculiar customs and manners might no longer be understood, so Moses might have elaborated upon them also. Here are a few examples.

GENESIS 32:32 Therefore the children of Israel eat not of the sinew which shrank, which is upon the hollow of the thigh, unto this day: because he touched the hollow of Jacob’s thigh in the sinew that shrank.
GENESIS 35:20 And Jacob set a pillar upon her grave: that is the pillar of Rachel’s grave unto this day.
GENESIS 43:32 And they set on for him by himself, and for them by themselves, and for the Egyptians, which did eat with him, by themselves: because the Egyptians might not eat bread with the Hebrews; for that is an abomination unto the Egyptians.
GENESIS 47:22 Only the land of the priests bought he not; for the priests had a portion assigned them of Pharaoh, and did eat their portion which Pharaoh gave them: wherefore they sold not their lands.

And finally, there were circumstances, then evidently lost to time, which Moses might have thought important for his fellow countrymen to understand.

GENESIS 6:4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.
GENESIS 9:19 These are the three sons of Noah: and of them was the whole earth overspread.
GENESIS 36:31 And these are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom, before there reigned any king over the children of Israel.

Another aspect of the error in dating GENESIS, which many of these 19th century scholars made, was in assuming that GENESIS could not have been written as early as the events which it depicted, thinking that writing had not yet been invented.

Some had therefore suggested that perhaps the GENESIS stories were passed down by oral tradition and then finally merged with the writings of Hammurabi's scribes. Howbeit, archeologist have now unearthed a multitude of written artifacts dating at least as far back as 3200 B.C., long before Moses (1571-1451) and Hammurabi (1704-1662 B.C.), or Abraham (1996-1821 B.C.) or even Noah (2948-1998 B.C.). Indeed, these ancient written shards now reach back even to the time of Adam himself (4004-3074 B.C.).

page 4/19^

Even so, we are clearly told in scripture that these records in GENESIS were written, not spoken. They claimed to be from written records and not oral traditions.

GENESIS 5:1 This is the book [seper] of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him.

This Hebrew word seper, which is rendered the book in the KJV, invariably means written narrative or finished writing. The ancients originally wrote upon stone or moist clay tablets, for there were obviously no books or even scrolls as we today know them. Rather, their writings were usually grouped in stacks of hard, well preserved sun-baked clay tablets. It should be noted that some ancient tablets of certain pagan societies survive even unto the present time, many thousands of years after they were first etched into the soft clay.

Howbeit, ignoring or discounting these important archeological finds, some critics have theorized that many of the Biblical events were taken and reworked from heathen fables. Stories like the Garden of Eden and Noah's Flood were similar to those unearthed in ancient Babylon, so they assumed that later writers must have incorporated these into the GENESIS record.

But isn't it just as likely that the original history of the Patriarchs were copied and re-used in the later histories of other peoples? Isn't it just as possible that the pagan world learned of these events as recorded in GENESIS, and then took them up into their own histories? Of course it is.

Just because archaeologist have unearthed more ancient artifacts from the metropolises of Mesopotamia and Assyria rather than from the land of the Patriarchs, doesn't mean that the history of ancient Babylon predated that of GENESIS. We should remember that for the most part the Patriarchs were pilgrims and sojourners, wandering and traveling from place to place with no permanent cities in which to bestow and preserve their historical writings. They were nomadic shepherds and herdsmen, who generally lived in tents.

Another difficulty with these theories of this Higher Criticism arises when we consider the monotheistic beliefs of the Patriarchs. If the writers of GENESIS got their information from the Old Babylonian Dynasty, or some other pagan culture, then how are we to account for the Patriarch's belief in one supreme GOD? And why and when then did Israel come to reject the universally accepted polytheism for this new and novel and radical idea of there being only one Almighty Creator?

This is a real problem for modern day scholars to overcome, trying to figure out and explain how Moses (or whoever else they might have thought wrote GENESIS) arrived at the one-god idea from a heathen world which made gods out of rivers and storms, stars and planets and cattle, birds and snakes, and most anything else. If these writers of GENESIS copied from Mesopotamian histories, which always imagined many gods ruling and fighting each other over the earth, then when and how did they decide that Yahweh was only one single all powerful deity?

Moses' belief was summed up aptly in one of his most pronounced passages;

DEUTERONOMY 6:4 Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord:

Israel had also been warned that if they failed to keep and honor their covenant with GOD Almighty, that they would again be enslaved by these pagan nations, who still continued to serve their images of these supposed gods which neither see, hear, nor eat or smell.

DEUTERONOMY 4:28 And there ye shall serve gods, the work of men’s hands, wood and stone, which neither see, nor hear, nor eat, nor smell.

It has often been contested that the writers of GENESIS were not the only ones to strike upon the belief in this one GOD concept, but a certain Egyptian Pharaoh named Akhenaten (1387-1366) may have been the first. Yet his belief was not anywhere close to what Moses or the Patriarchs believed. Akhenaten's belief was summed up briefly in David Rohl's A Test of Time, page 198.

. . . . elevating the sun-disk, Aten, to the heart of the Egyptian pantheon, relegating many of the most powerful deities . . . . to a much lower state.

There is no evidence that Akhenaten (Amenhotep IV) adopted the Patriarch's monotheism. Moses and the Patriarchs believed in an invisible all powerful Creator, but Akhenaten apparently just placed this new sun-god over and superior to the other gods, which many of them still recognized.

page 5/19^

Taking a quote from W. P. Albright, the absolute uniqueness of the Patriarch's beliefs about GOD is reaffirmed in Illustrated Manners and Customs of the Bible, page 110,

In the ancient world, only Israel was fully monotheistic. But let us be sure we understand what this means. Monotheism is not simply a matter of arithmetic. Perhaps the most succinct statement is that of W. P. Albright, who says that monotheism is "the belief in the existence of only one God, who is the Creator of the world and the giver of all life, . . . [Who is] so far superior to all created beings . . . that He remains absolutely unique." This made Israel radically different from her pagan neighbors.

As such, if the record in GENESIS depicted a true witness of the events, and Moses and all the Patriarchs got their enlightenment from these original historical tablets, then all is made clear. To Adam and his progeny, Yahweh was revealed through the tablets and then worshipped as a single Deity. While the surrounding civilizations accepted many gods, the Patriarchs continually and firmly held to the belief in one all powerful Creator.

Mr. Speiser admitted this problem with all of these theories and attempted to address this difficult issue.

Since the Mesopotamian system was vulnerable chiefly because of its own type of polytheism, a possible remedy that an inquiring mind might hit upon would lie in monotheism. But to conceive of such an ideal initially, without any precedent in the experience of mankind, called for greater resources than those of logic alone. It meant a resolute rejection of common and long-cherished beliefs, a determined challenge to the powers that were believed to dominate every aspect of nature, and the substitution of a single supreme being for that hostile coalition. The new belief, in short, would call for unparalleled inspiration and conviction. Without that kind of call, Abraham could not have become the father of the biblical process. [from page XLVIII)

He wrote that an inquiring mind might have hit upon this radical monotheistic belief, but also recognized and thus admitted that arriving at that belief would require greater resources than logic alone. Indeed, his is a wild and reckless understatement. The ancient tablets revealed that the Patriarchs were the sole and only people to state and believe that there was only one true GOD, who stood head and shoulders above all other imagined gods.

Of course many are aware that the word often rendered in scripture for GOD, Elohim, was plural. As such, some try to then proclaim that the Patriarchs were really not entirely monotheistic, but that supposition is a false and misleading one. Quoting the Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, in defining this word on page 44, we read,

The plural ending is usually described as a plural of majesty and not intended as a true plural when used of God. This is seen in the fact that the noun 'elohim is consistently used with singular verb forms and with adjectives and pronouns in the singular.

Examples of this in GENESIS, as well as throughout the Jewish Bible, are almost without number.

In 1:1, GOD (plural) created (singular)
In 1:2, the Spirit of GOD (plural) moved (singular)
In 1:3, And GOD (plural) said (singular)
In 1:4, And GOD (plural) saw (singular)
In 3:1, 8, 9, 13, 14, 21, 22 the LORD (singular) GOD (plural)

Thus, it is clearly irresponsible for us to unquestionably accept the theories and assumptions made by these higher critics without serious misgivings. There are just too many insurmountable difficulties to be ironed out, and too much which they have evidently not even seriously considered.

Let us then briefly digress so as to take some time to consider and ponder more fully this great book of GENEIS itself. Let us see and study how these tablets were written and assembled. Then we shall at long last have an important key so as to unlock what so long has been cloaked in a maze of confusing and contradicting theories.

The tablets are both separated and connected together by what are known as Summary Statements, which function sort of like chapter headings. These statements are how the ancient writers guided their readers in joining one tablet with the previous one, for it was not practical for these clay slabs to all be assembled together into one book so as to maintain the proper order.

page 6/19^

The great Summary Statements in these tablets are "these are the generations of", with the key word in each of these statements being toledot, rendered generations in many versions. We thus find the phrase used in the following passages, giving evidence of at least eleven individual tablets.

These are the generations of the heavens and the earth. [2:4]
This is the book of the generations of Adam. [5:1]
These are the generations of Noah. [6:9]
These are the generations of the sons of Noah [10:1]
These are the generations of Shem. [11:10]
These are the generations of Terah. [11:27]
These are the generations of Ishmael. [25:12]
These are the generations of Isaac. [25:19]
These are the generations of Esau. [36:1]
These are the generations of Esau. [36:9]
These are the generations of Jacob [37:2]

Where most of us have gone wrong and lost the scent in trying to understand these statements, is in assuming that they referred to what followed instead of what had already been written. We thought of them as a Title Page of a new chapter, rather than a summary statement concerning that which had already been written.

For example, at the close of the first tablet we notice that it was written, "These are the generations [histories] of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens". Yet the entire account of the heavens and the earth being created all preceded this passage. It is worthy of note that this subject concerning the heavens and the earth are mentioned seven times in the previous tablet (1:1 to 2:4) but not once in the following tablet (2:5 to 5:1). Thus, it only stands to reason that this summary statement must be referring to that which preceded and not that which followed.

What then followed this first summary statement, in the next tablet (2:5 to 5:1) is the record of Adam and his time in the garden, and then his being expelled out of paradise, and further details concerning his wife and children. Thus, when we come to the end of this second tablet it is then summarized that "This is the book of the generations [histories] of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him; Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created" (5:1-2). This all refers to the tablets which preceded it, not that which followed it.

The next passage (beginning the third tablet) then stated how long Adam lived and certain details that would have followed his death (3074 B.C.). This third tablet then related that history of their tribe, all of which Adam's descendants would have been well familiar with. Thus, this third tablet is then concluded and summarized with "these are the generations [histories] of Noah" (6:9). These so-called generations (histories) of Noah were set forth in the passages which proceeded this statement, not in those which followed it. That record of the history of Noah reached back to Adam and his sons; then to Enoch and Methuselah; ending with Noah and his sons.

Thus, this Hebrew word toledot often translated generations, might more appropriately be rendered histories, for it doesn't necessarily refer to those descendants which followed the statement, but rather to that which preceded the statement, that which came before the statement. All of this is precisely set forth for us in P. J. Wiseman's most enlightening book entitled New Discoveries in Babylonia about Genesis, page 48.

It will be seen, therefore, that the word is used to describe history, usually family history in its origin. The equivalent phrase in English is, "These are the historical origins of . . ." or "These are the beginnings of . . ." It is therefore evident that the use of the phrase in Genesis is to point back to the origins of the family history and not forward to a later development through a line of descendants. This is made abundantly clear from the only occasion of its use in the New Testament, where in Matthew i. I, we read, "The book of the generations of Jesus Christ," following which is a list of ancestors. Here it certainly means the exact opposite of descendants, for it is used to indicate the tracing back of the genealogy to its origin; and this is precisely the meaning of the Greek word "geneseos" translated "generation." So that when we read "this is the book of the History of Adam" it is the concluding sentence of the record already written and not an introduction to the subsequent record.

This is further corroborated by Arthur Custance in the introduction to his book, Time and Eternity, on pages 52-53.

page 7/19^

It seems likely now that the critics were not altogether wrong in arguing that Genesis bore signs of multiple authorship. Not unnaturally, they took this to mean that these were in reality late documents organized into a single whole and ascribed to Moses in such a way as to give the impression that Moses was indeed their author. Many evangelical scholars reexamining this evidence came to the conclusion that what Moses really did was to set forth in a connected narrative form a transcript of some eleven ancient documents, each of which was written by a contemporary of the events recorded who then signed himself as the author in the familiar words: "This is the history of Adam," " . . . of Noah," " . . . of Shem," etc., or more familiarly, "These are the generations of . . . ." It appears that the word generations may equally well be rendered "history," being a collective word. It may be for this reason that while Moses was the editor of Genesis, he was not strictly its author, and while tradition ascribes Genesis in its present form to Moses (a tradition which was never challenged in the New Testament) no quotation from Genesis is ever introduced with the words, "As Moses said . . . ," or "As it was written by Moses. . . ."

The Bible Dictionary also substantiates this definition of toledot, stating on page 411;

From its OT usage, however, it is apparent that the word [toledot] means 'history' or 'genealogical history', of a family or the like.

The New English Bible renders the word toledot as story in GENESIS 2:4, while the Jerusalem Bible has origins, both connecting the passage by paragraph markings with the preceding section and not with what followed. Even though they failed to always follow through with this definition in the following occurrences, at the outset at least they recognized this meaning of the word.

We should note that the Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament quarrels with this interpretation of the Hebrew word toledot, for on page 380 we find them claiming,

The often repeated statement that the book of Gen is divided into natural sections by the word toledot does not work out on close examination. Sometimes, as in Gen 36:9, it merely introduces a genealogical table.

Perhaps sometimes it might have, yet that doesn't negate the clear observation of the definition of the word. The general and basic idea of toledot has to do with some sort of history which evidently had already been set forth in the preceding passages. In their reference given above, (GENESIS 36:9), it is true that a genealogical table did follow the reference to toledot, but a genealogical table also preceded it. To which of these the passage referred, or to both, is anyone's guess. Howbeit, toledot does not suggest the generations or descendants following the passage, but rather a history, usually that which had already been detailed in the previous section.

Thus the history of Noah (6:9) had been laid out in the third tablet (5:1-6:9), not in that which followed. Howbeit, the history of Noah's sons were then covered in that fourth tablet, as 10:1 and 10:32 clearly state;

Now these are the generations [histories] of the sons of Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth:

These are the families of the sons of Noah, after their generations [histories]

The record of the great flood (7:1), the covenant of GOD with Noah and his sons (9:8), the many descendants of Noah's sons (10:1), the Tower of Babel (11:1) and the descendants of Shem (11:10) were all things which Noah's sons would have been most familiar with.

We should note that the last usage in GENESIS of this word of toledot was in 37:2, "these are the generations [histories] of Jacob"; then comes the story of Joseph and his entire life from age 17 to his death in GENESIS 50:26, the close of the Book. As there is no concluding Summary Statement here, who then wrote this last tablet? Perhaps we have an answer in R. K. Harrison's book, The Archaeology of the Old Testament, page 37.

page 8/19^

Against this background it would not be surprising to find considerable local colour in the Joseph narratives. The phrase "overseer over his house" is a direct translation of a title used of officers in Egyptian noble houses, whilst the designations which indicated that Joseph was "over my house" and "father to pharaoh . . . lord of all his house . . . ruler throughout all the land of Egypt" correspond precisely to the office of Prime Minister or Vizier of Egypt. The titles "chief of the butlers" and chief of the bakers" are familiar from Egyptian inscriptions. The royal birthday procedures including the release of prisoners, the place accorded to magic in Egyptian life, the general attitude towards Asiatic semi-nomads, the one hundred and ten years of Joseph as the Egyptian ideal of a fruitful and happy life, and the embalming of Jacob and Joseph were all characteristic features of contemporary Egypt.

Thus, while much of these manners and customs, these titles and language, might be quite foreign and even strange to the Israelites, they would have been quite familiar to an Egyptian. As such, we would not be at all surprised if one of Joseph's trusted scribes was commissioned to writer his biography, his history. This could be the reason for there not being a Summary Statement at the close of GENESIS. The final tablet may have been written for Joseph by his Egyptian servant.

The point has more than once been set forth in the Studies of this Site that GOD would not leave Himself without witness. There was no reason or purpose for Yeshua's (Jesus') life and ministry, nor for Him being betrayed and crucified and resurrected, if there was not going to be an accurate record left of those events. Why would Almighty GOD go to all the trouble to arrange and engineer all of these incidents only to then allow the true record of these happenings to be lost to time?

If these things did indeed occur, then we must acknowledge that GOD would protect and preserve a true history of those events. Surely Almighty GOD would somehow and in some fashion have been able to guard and protect the accurate truth of what happened. If not, why does it even matter if there ever was a Yeshua, or a collection of scripture? Why then even bother with reading the Gospels, or epistles? Are they then good for nothing more than a few good sermons on moral living? Are they profitable for little else?

It follows then, that each of us are saddled with a responsibility concerning the Bible. We either throw out all of these ancient writings as false and untrue, as invented and untrustworthy, as fables and legends, or else we admit that any so-called discrepancies must then lie in our own understanding and not in the integrity of the ancient witness itself. Perhaps it is we who have erred and not the scriptures. Perhaps it is the scholars and theologians who have lost their way.

When the Prince of Peace, the giver of life was walking amongst His nation, what did they do? Many of them sought and worked tirelessly for His destruction. These were the men of letters. These were the religious and political leaders of that age. They were the scholars and theologians which knew the ancient languages of their religion. Indeed, they knew the scriptures better than practically anyone else. Howbeit, as Yeshua no doubt sarcastically exclaimed, "You study the scriptures diligently, supposing that in having them you have eternal life; yet, although their testimony points to me, you refuse to come to me for that life" (JOHN 5:39 The New English Bible).

Nevertheless they were blind. Blinded evidently because they were not of His flock. Perhaps they had been called, but because of their hard hearts they had not been chosen. They had not been enlightened. All of the great events of their age were rushing upon them, with them being totally oblivious to all of it. Many of them were to miss out on the purpose of the ages, the great Resurrection, and the setting up of GOD's new kingdom in heaven.

They were perhaps much like their ancestors of old, who were unable to see because their hearts had become hard to the workings of the spirit. Thus, they absolutely refused to hear HIS voice.

HEBREWS 3:7-11 Wherefore (as the Holy Ghost saith,
- To day if ye will hear his voice, Harden not your hearts, as in the provocation, in the day of temptation in the wilderness: When your fathers tempted me, proved me, and saw my works forty years. Wherefore I was grieved with that generation, and said, They do alway err in their heart; and they have not known my ways. So I sware in my wrath, They shall not enter into my rest.) [PSALM 95:7b-11]

GOD had performed many outstanding works, not only so as to get Pharaoh to release Israel from bondage, but also to guide them through the wilderness. Yet many still refused to believe and acknowledge HIM and recognize HIS guiding presence. As such, they hardened their hearts and insisted on going their own way. Therefore, GOD let them go. They insisted in finding their own path, so they died and rotted and decomposed in the wilderness, never finding that Promised Land which had once been theirs for the taking.

page 9/19^

As it was in the times of Moses and the Prophets, and as it was later in Yeshua's own day, so it is with many even at this present hour. Not believing the witness of scripture, they invent another way. Not believing the records which have been preserved for us, not accepting the witness which GOD has provided, they turn away and follow their own course. They have been persuaded that these writings cannot possibly be true, so they create another reality which they think better suits them.

The question for us is a simple one, Do we trust what men of renown speculate about the scriptures, or do we trust what Yeshua and the other Biblical characters believed about those ancient writings? Here are a couple for examples of what Yeshua thought concerning what Moses and the prophets were said to have written.

LUKE 16:31 And he [Yeshua] said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.
JOHN 5:46-47 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

The only way for the critics to be able to disregard the clear endorsement which Yeshua repeatedly made of the Mosaic writings, is for them to question the authenticity of the Gospels themselves; and that is what the skeptics have done. These scholars doubt that Yeshua even said such a thing. That gets rid of their nagging problem. They don't have to try to explain why Yeshua believed what they don't, if they can cast enough doubt upon the records of the evangelists themselves (see the Study, The Source and Sequence of the Gospels).

Howbeit, the choice for us is pretty straightforward. Are we willing to disregard the writings and testimonies of the Bible; are we to be seduced away from these sacred writings. Do we believe that Moses and the prophets wrote, or do we believe that they didn't write? Is there something in scripture which GOD has for us to hear, or is there not?

HEBREWS 1:1-2 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son . . . .

Did GOD so speak in times past unto the fathers through the prophets? And did HE then speak unto the apostles through HIS Son? Did Moses, Isaiah, Matthew, John, Peter and James write words of truth, or not? Modern criticism confidently says No! They believe and affirm that both the Hebrew Bible (the Old Testament) and most all of the Christian scriptures (the New Testament) were written long after the events which they depicted, by some unknowns.

First they must get rid of both GENESIS and the writings of Moses and the Prophets by declaring that they were written by those of a later age. But as Yeshua repeatedly quoted those writings as being authentic, now they have to get rid of His words too; so they proclaim that the Gospels themselves were not even written by those to whom they have been attributed. Howbeit, as Almighty GOD would surely preserve an accurate record of the events surrounding the life and ministry and death and resurrection of His Son, then they must get rid of GOD himself, which the evolutionists have well done (see the Study, Consider the Lilies). Now you bundle up the whole mess in a neat little package called Higher Criticism.

Howbeit, for those of us who dwell in a different world than the pagan scholars, the evidence is overwhelming. We recognize that this creation which lies around us on every side, could not have just floated into existence out of nothing. We can plainly see the evidence of both the creation and then of a Creator. To ignore the clear facts which nature and the heavens declare is to walk blindly through life. Thus, we can't imagine Almighty GOD, the creator of the whole Universe, not being able to preserve and protect a record of HIS deeds. It is thus a perilous pentacle upon which the skeptics have perched themselves. Scripture gives us a different perspective.

1 JOHN 5:9-10 If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath testified of his Son. He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son.

Nevertheless, if we come to decide that these records cannot be trusted, then what are we left with? What have we then? We have just what many suppose, a bunch of wearisome contradictions; just another old and outdated book among the many collections of the ages. But on the other hand, if the testimony of scripture can be trusted, then what we possess is the key to unlocking the purpose of the ages. Indeed, we then have opened unto us the purpose of our own existence!

page 10/19^

The great witness borne to in this Study is both of the words and works of GOD. We see that we have the words of the Patriarchs, and Moses, the Prophets, of Yeshua and His apostles. But we shall also see that we have their works. First we have the works of GOD. Then we will note the works of Yeshua, which account for the loyalty and commitment of His followers. Lastly we have the works of His disciples which also give reason for this rapidly spreading flame of the first century Church.

How can one explain the explosive development of the gospel's message when Yeshua as an adult never traveled more that a hundred miles from His home. We have no evidence that His ministry endured for more than two or three years, and then His life was quickly snuffed out. And his original rag tag group of followers were not some elite academics or renown men of influence, who ruled over and controlled the halls of power, but rather they were for the most part poor and unlearned and unlettered fishermen. Yet somehow their message has endured, even prevailed for over two millennium.

Nor were these first Christians always welcomed with open arms by their fellow Judeans. Instead, they often found themselves rejected and persecuted and chased from their homes and communities. How then did they suddenly amass such an astounding following? How then did their writings not end up in the ash heap of history?

These are facts which are rarely recognized by the skeptics and agnostics. As such, this is a reality which the scholars and critics seem little interested in discussing. Howbeit, this is the real lay of the land, so to speak. If the Bible does not reflect the true history of GOD's workings among men, then we need and should expect decisive answers and explanations to these inquiries, but generally what we hear is silence. That or else ridiculous and absurd endeavors to explain away what for us cannot be explained away.

Let us now direct our attention upon the works of GOD, and no work could be more pronounced or of greater majesty and significance than the first one given to us in scripture, HIS original creation.

"In the beginning GOD created the heaven and the earth".

Recent discoveries have well established the fact that the universe did actually have a beginning. This is completely contrary to what learned astronomers of the last couple of centuries had come to believe, which was that our world had always existed and was only changing and evolving with the ages. But now we know that it is expanding; it is moving out away from some central origin. That beginning was evidently this original work of GOD, which has been clearly spelled out for us at the opening of the very first tablet of scripture.

But apparently something interrupted or dispelled that first creation, so GOD went about re-making and re-forming the world in which we now live (2 PETER 3:7). The evidence for this is primarily found in the second verse of scripture, "And the earth was [became] without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep". One hardly thinks that this is how GOD would have originally created the world, without form? And void? (ISAIAH 45:18). Doesn't sound like much of a divine creation. So we are naturally led to understand that the original creation was displaced and thus a new one was then re-made in its place. To see why the word was would more accurately have been rendered became here, see Without Form and Void by Authur Custance at custance.org.

This little detail answers much for us which has caused the learned to question and stumble at this record in GENESIS. Church Tradition has long taught that the creation began with Adam and Eve 4,000 years ago, which many find to be preposterous; thus they find just cause to walk away from the Bible at the very start. Howbeit, we should note that this first scroll never says anything about the earth being created four thousand years ago, but rather it was originally created eons ago, in the beginning.

This makes sense of the fact that the earth and the universe are evidently billions of years old. But becoming without form and void (for some reason unknown to us), it was afterwards re-made. Continuing on in this first tablet we have the record of the six days of creation where the heaven and the earth were being reconstituted. This explains why the dinosaur fossils and prehistoric man are reportedly hundreds of thousands of years old. Then, as noted in the second tablet, GOD then formed the man Adam, breathed into his nostrils the breath of life (GENESIS 2:7) and placed him in the Garden east of Eden. Thus this second Tablet records events which occurred roughly four thousand years ago. This is what the record plainly declares, for those who read without preconceived notions. See the Study on GENESIS.

And thus in the third verse of GENESIS we are told that GOD spoke, using only HIS word to make and re-create our vast and intricate universe. It has been well documented that all of life, indeed, all of creation is ruled over and regulated by mathematical equations; that "mathematical principles govern the universe". The galaxies and solars systems, each sun and moon in this vast celestial world are all held together and kept moving through empty space by exact and precise axioms, regulating their orbits and courses.

page 11/19^

We also now know that all living things are assembled like an intricate computer program, each cell requiring an incredibly complex system of digital code in their DNA. As such, each of the elements which make up and comprise everything which we can see, hear, taste or touch is from the command of an all powerful and all knowing Creator, all spoken into existence. HIS word issued forth a vast array of commands which set in motion the laws which put and keep the world spinning, in perfect obedience, so to speak.

HE it was that also decided to paint our planet in vibrant living colors, planting beautiful flowers of every possible description. It was the Creator who made the morning song birds to sing their marvelous melodies, and made the enchanting deep blue oceans with their fascinating corral reefs, as well as the awe inspiring gallery spread out in the seemingly endless expanse of the night sky; all spoken into existence by HIS words.

The Creator further arranged that the earth maintain regular seasons so mankind could plant and harvest a sustenance from the land. GOD organized the weather patterns so as to nourish our planet with rain and snow, filling the oceans and streams and lakes. It was HE who distributed across the Land every kind of plant and animal for our learning and inspiration.

Even so, there are those, indeed there seem to be many, who deny and still ignore this creation and imagine that there is no such Creator. But I suppose that is as it should be, or at least how it has always been. The same individuals who deny the clear evidence of creation also refuse to accept the clear evidence of Scripture.

Still, it is a wonder why more of them don't seem to consider and ponder the astounding creation lying here before us. Apparently they can't see the world which we see. The skeptics don't recognize the reality which testifies to a great Creator. Perhaps an explanation for this might lie in Yeshua's own words, where He explained the simple reason why many of the unbelievers and agnostics of His own age didn't recognize all which GOD was bringing to pass even as they stood against Him and called for His destruction.

JOHN 10:25-28 Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father’s name, they bear witness of me. But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: and I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

Evidently they believed not, because they couldn't believe. No well prepared sermon or miraculous act was going to be able to persuade them, for they hadn't first allowed these great works of GOD to instill within them a desire to know. Their hearts were hard, and thus weren't able to be molded by the Creator. They hadn't nurtured the likelihood and the evidence that Yeshua's words and works were indeed the witness that it was Almighty GOD that was at work.

Because of their obstinacy there was evidently a veil over their eyes blocking out the true light. Their minds were closed to the plain reality of all that was occurring around them. The prejudices and false misconceptions of many, simply refused to let them to see what was in perfect sight. Their hard-heartedness would not allow them to consider and ponder the workings of the Creator. The purpose of the ages was hid from their view. They were blind and unknowing. They had completely closed off their hearts to the working of the holy spirit.

Many in our own times are not all that different. It seems like the vast majority of the scientific community, and even for the most part the religious community, are in total disbelief concerning the workings of the Creator. Howbeit, it was not always this way. Prior to the nineteenth century the founders of modern science pretty much without exception acknowledged a Creator. They believed not only in the Book of Nature, as well as the Clockwork of Nature, but also in the Laws of Nature. They recognized that the universe was revealing GOD in all HIS magnificence, just as did the written scriptures. They discovered that the whole celestial body moved with the precision of a finely tuned clock, with all of its gears and wheels, each intricately cut and shaped. It all pointed to a great intelligence behind the curtain, so to speak.

In his insightful book Return of the God Hypothesis, Stephen Meyer well summarized this enlightened age of days gone by.

Each of these three metaphors- the book of nature, the clockwork of nature, and the laws of nature- expressed and presupposed belief in a divine creator and/or sustainer of the natural world. Nevertheless, many of the founders of modern science did not just assume or assert by faith that the universe had been designed by an intelligent agent. They also argued for this hypothesis based on discoveries in their fields of study. Johannes Kepler perceived intelligent design in the mathematical precision of planetary motion and in the three laws he discovered that describe that motion. Robert Boyle insisted that the intricate clocklike regularity of physical laws and chemical mechanisms as well as the astronomical structures in living organisms suggested the activity of "a most intelligent and designing agent." Carl Linnaeus later argued for design based upon the ease with which plants and animals fell into an orderly groups-within-groups system of classification. Many other individual scientists made specific design arguments based upon empirical discoveries in their fields. [page 47]

But then entered and gained the ascendancy the materialists, agnostics and unbelievers who hoped and worked toward erasing the clear evidence of creation and inventing their own theories and hypotheses. What they came to suppose to be an eternal universe, they suspected had just evolved over the eons from space dust, or pond scum. Many of their admirers and followers were evidently anxious to swallow down this refuse, hoping to eliminate GOD from HIS creation. Not having to order their lives according to the rules and regulations of a moral GOD, who required devotion and obedience, was the new enlightenment which they hoped to fix upon society.

page 12/19^

But the Patriarchs were of a different breed. For the most part, they were men who lived their lives out in the open fields and prairies. Guarding and watching over their flocks and herds, they spent countless hours considering and studying the movements of the night skies. They observed the precise and punctual orbits of the passing heavenly bodies for they had long before learned and recognized that these night stars were placed in their orbits for specific purposes.

GENESIS 1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs [ot], and for seasons [moed], and for days, and years:

According to appendix 12 in E. W. Bullinger's Companion Bible, the word signs (ot) in this passage is derived from the Hebrew word athah, meaning to come. The word seasons (moed, DANIEL 8:19) had more to do with the appointment of time or a set time rather than designating the four changing seasons of our planet. As such, these signs and set times had to do with and referenced something or someone to come. They were placed in the heavens as indicators pointing to a coming age, and of a coming Redeemer. They were somewhat like road-signs directing the star gazers to a future event when some great scheme was to be accomplished. That scheme was no doubt the very purpose of the ages.

This is plainly set forth elsewhere in scripture, one such place being in this psalm;

PSALM 19:1-6 The heavens declare the glory of God;
And the firmament sheweth his handywork.
Day unto day uttereth speech,
And night unto night sheweth knowledge.
There is no speech nor language,
Where their voice is not heard.
Their line is gone out through all the earth,
And their words to the end of the world.
In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun,
Which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber,
And rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race.
His going forth is from the end of the heaven,
And his circuit unto the ends of it:
And there is nothing hid from the heat thereof.

Thus, these ancients recognized that the night skies showed forth and painted for them intricate and descriptive pictures of a coming age. From the constellations of Virgo to Leo, the starry heavens indeed displayed GOD's handiwork. They uttered speech, they showed knowledge. Evidently, these lights were not just scattered about the firmament haphazardly, but were purposefully placed and given specific names so as to tell an enthralling story. As another psalmist also wrote, "He [GOD] telleth the number of the stars; He calleth them all by their names" (PSALM 147:4).

We have further evidence of the witness of these heavenly bodies succinctly laid out in that most ancient book of Job, when he wondered and spoke of the immensity of the Creator.

JOB 9:8-10 Which alone spreadeth out the heavens,
And treadeth upon the waves of the sea.
Which maketh Arcturus [the great Bear], Orion [the coming Prince],
And Pleiades [the congregation of the Judge], and the chambers of the south.
Which doeth great things past finding out;
Yea, and wonders without number.

As GOD later interrogated Job, HE asked him, "Hast thou commanded the morning since thy days; And caused the dayspring to know his place" (38:12). The ancient start gazers well understood that each morning brought the anticipated sunrise, the dayspring just where they had expected it to be. Night after night they could count on the exact appearance of the morning sun. Even though it's rising and setting regularly ebbed across the horizon, in Winter towards the south and in Summer to the north, it was every morning just where they expected it to be.

page 13/19^

Then the Creator reminded Job that the vastness of the heavenly bodies were well beyond his power, even beyond his comprehension.

JOB 38:31-33 Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, Or loose the bands of Orion? Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth [the twelve signs of the Zodiac] in his season? Or canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons? Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven? Canst thou set the dominion thereof in the earth?

This heavenly expanse is so enormous and precise, so powerfully huge and punctual, that ancient man had no trouble in recognizing an omnipotent hand in its creation. This is perhaps where Biblical faith first entered for many. Wondering at the immensity of the night sky and recognizing the precise orbits of its celestial bodies, any honest spectator had to admit that some incredible intellect was behind its creation.

No doubt we ourselves have on occasion noticed the precision of the movements of the heavenly bodies and observed the sparkling of distant galaxies, wondering at the immensity of this universe. As in a small way like Moses and the burning bush (EXODUS 3:3), we might have paused and pondered and asked from where this all came. Perhaps we then begin to sense that this marvelous world could not really have just evolved from nothing. This event in our lives might have indeed been the catalyst that first opened our hearts to faith.

Back in JOB 9 we are pointed to what has been called the oldest lessen in the world, as he queried, How should man be just with GOD? (JOB 9:2). Of course the answer to that question is Faith, for the just shall live by faith (HABAKKUK 2:4 HEBREWS 10:38). It is Biblical faith which opens up to us the hidden world of GOD, allowing us to see the reality and fullness of HIS existence. This faith is our continuing enlightenment for understanding the truth. It is the gradual unfolding of GOD's ways. It is our awakening to the purpose for our existence.

As we are willing to consider and ponder the wonders of GOD's creation, then faith has access and can enter into our heart. It can implant within us a quest to know and understand the purpose of creation, and that search can then be nourished as our Creator carries us along that awakening and enlightening road into a new life, a renewed life.

HEBREWS 11:3 Through faith we understand that the worlds [aion, ages] were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

Apart from faith it is not likely that we are ever going to come to realize and acknowledge much if anything concerning GOD's original purpose in HIS creation. As the song writer once wrote, "Faith is the key that unlocks the door". When we first awaken to the reality of a Creator, faith is like a tiny seed which is implanted within us. Having thus begun by believing what we had first sensed, the hearing (akoe) of faith (GALATIANS 3:2-3), our faith then has the opportunity to grow, even exceedingly (2 THESSALONIANS 1:3).

We are then nourished by this word of faith (1 TIMOTHY 4:6), as it matures into that fruit of the spirit (GALATIANS 5:22). Then, as we continue in the faith (ACTS 14:22 & COLOSSIANS 1:23), our faith is increased (2 CORINTHIANS 10:15) and we become stedfast and established (COLOSSIANS 2:5,7). It's all according to the steps which GOD has laid out for us to follow (ROMANS 4:12), first beginning with that original spark which awakened us to the reality of a Creator.

This commencement of our journey of faith often originated when we first looked at and considered GOD's wondrous creation. We began to question that perhaps there surely must be some creating force behind it. We might have observed the marvelous design of a towering sequoia or of a mighty oak tree and became convinced that some great intelligence must have had a hand in making them. Or perhaps we had watched the swiftness and unison of a thousand birds in flight, or the frolicking of two kittens at play, and couldn't have imagined that some incredible mind didn't design their natures. We might have recognized GOD's delivering hand in protecting and preserving us from some mishap; or perhaps we recalled a chance meeting with some individual, or some written work which changed the whole course of our lives.

These various encounters inspired us to look closer, to further consider and ponder the promptings of a heavenly hand. It is then what happened after that, that often determined our destiny. Did we cast off and ignore these evidences of a Creator, or did we push our way through the crowd to know and understand more? As Yeshua declared unto this woman who was cured of the issue of blood, Thy faith hath made you whole (LUKE 8:48).

page 14/19^

The simple and plain truth is that GOD's works are ultimately for the purpose of instilling within us a desire to know. HE didn't create this vast universe, or align events so as to save someone from a tragic disaster just to impress everyone. Nor did HE work the astounding miracles of Yeshua's life and ministry and resurrection just for our amusement or entertainment. HE did it all primarily to get our attention. To attract us to the light. To maybe cause a spark to ignite within our hearts, so as to inspire us to come to have faith.

HEBREWS 12:2 Looking [away] unto Jesus the author [archegos] and finisher of our faith; who for [instead of, RSV margin] the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.

Thus, these individuals to which HEBREWS was written were instructed to look at, or unto Yeshua. Considering and pondering His life and ministry and resurrection was intended to author and finish their faith. This Greek word archegos is elsewhere rendered Prince and Captain. He was the source, the cause, the pioneer of faith for those to whom the epistle was addressed. They were instructed to look away from their own fickleness and look unto His firm and determined stand.

Some of the Christian recipients of this letter had been tempted to waver in their commitment to the gospel and turn back to the old religion. The pressures from their fellow Jewish religionist were intensifying as the rebellion against Rome became more widespread, growing more threatening. As such, the epistle admonished them to instead stand fast with the believers, to live by faith and not be tempted to draw back from their expected commitment to the truth (10:23-39).

They were thus reminded that Yeshua's own faith allowed Him to push through the agony and humiliation and shamefulness of the crucifixion. Despite that which He had already gained, the joy already awaiting Him, He confidently placed Himself in the hands of His Heavenly Father, knowing full well that it would probably result in His horrific torture and death. His faith believed against all odds that GOD was true, and that if He placed Himself upon the altar at Calvary, then GOD would later, in a short time, awaken Him from that eternal slumber. As such, they were being instructed to order and arrange their lives in light of their coming resurrection (10:37).

This resurrection was what the apostle Paul looked at and saw when he himself converted on his way to Damascus. And that's what all of the other apostles and disciples did when they finally saw His resurrection and heard His promise concerning their own gathering together into heaven. Their faith unfolded and then began to develop and mature.

It should however be noted that when Paul wrote elsewhere that the believer walks by faith and not by sight (2 CORINTHIANS 5:7), he didn't mean that the physical senses have no impact whatsoever on faith. This passage from Paul's epistle to the Corinthians was speaking of death and resurrection, as the context plainly shows.

2 CORINTHIANS 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.

Thus, in the context of this epistle to the Corinthians, to walk by sight was to be constrained by the fear of death and thus be detrimentally steered away from the truth; but to live by faith was to allow the reality of the resurrection to determine how they lived their lives.

It is noteworthy that our first example of faith in the Bible was that of Abel's, as told us in HEBREWS 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 . . . ."

The question which has often been posed concerning Abel's offering being accepted while his brother Cain's was rejected, is how did they know? It is recorded in the Genesis account, that because Cain's offering was not respected he was very wroth (4:5). Somehow it must have become evident that Abel's offering from his flock was what GOD required and not the fruit of the ground from which Cain had made an offering.

We are fortunate that HEBREWS 11:4 gives us the answer. It says there that Abel's offering was by faith, which requires one to understand and awaken to what GOD would have us to know and believe, for "faith cometh by hearing" (ROMANS 10:17). Biblical faith does not just spring from nothing; it is not created from our imagination, or some feeling or impulse we may have. It must be based upon a promise, something seen or heard, some message or report from GOD, some evidence of HIS hand at work.

The word rendered hearing in this passage in ROMANS is from the Greek word akoe, which in the KJV of the Christian scriptures is first rendered fame.

MATTHEW 4:23-24 And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people. And his fame [akoe] went throughout all Syria . . . .

We notice here that this fame, this akoe, this hearing, was spreading throughout the Land only after the people had been taught and preached to and healed of all manner of sickness. They heard His words and saw His works. Thus, the hearing from which faith evidently comes, is a faith that first is awakened by things which one is exposed to. Faith springs from certain experiences of life which we first notice and then attribute, often to a supernatural force.

page 15/19^

Elsewhere in scripture akoe is rendered as rumors (MATTHEW 24:6), report (JOHN 12:38), that word of GOD which is heard (1 THESSALONIANS 2:13) and the preached word (HEBREWS 4:2). Thus, Biblical faith requires the recipient to first know and understand what is the message, what is the report, what is that which is for his learning. Faith doesn't issue forth from nothing. It must have a source, an activator, an instigator.

Thus, Abel must have in some way heard from GOD or else-wise become aware of what was required for his offering to be by faith. As such, because GOD is just and fair in his dealings with man, both brothers must have equally known what GOD desired as an offering. Both must have heard.

Thus, Abel evidently obeyed the command but Cain did not. Perhaps Cain thought in his own mind, or conceived in his own heart that he would out-shine or out-do his brother. In all likelihood he could have thought that by working harder in the difficult task of planting and harvesting a crop, he would then more satisfy and impress his maker. But alas, we have already been told that the ground from which Cain's offering came was cursed (GENESIS 3:17). There was probably nothing from that dirt which was at that time going to please the Creator.

We should further note that after Adam's great sin in disobeying GOD (concerning his partaking from the forbidden fruit) scripture gives us a hint that GOD had offered him a way back into HIS graces. In a seemingly insignificant and passing comment, it was written that "Unto Adam also and to his wife did the Lord God make coats of skins, and clothed them" (GENESIS 3:21). It is thus intimated in this passage that something must have died so as to furnish the skins so as to cover their naked bodies. We can perhaps see here in this brief statement the earliest evidence for the necessity of shedding of blood for man's redemption, for without the shedding of blood there was no remission of sins (HEBREWS 9:22). Again, as Moses himself wrote,

LEVITICUS 17:11 For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.

It was evidently necessary and vital that man understand the seriousness of his sin. This was apparently shown him by the requirement of something dying. When he saw that his disobedience was going to result in the best of his cherished flock dying, it was expected that he would recognize the gravity of his errant way. He himself might end up perishing if he didn't awaken to the immensity of the situation he had caused, so the shedding of the blood of one of his own choice lambs was perhaps a last ditch effort to convince him of the weight of the situation.

Nevertheless, we are still left with the question as to how did the two brothers come to know that one offering had been accepted while the other had been rejected? No doubt, GOD did here what we are told that HE was prone to do, HE accepted the offering of HIS obedient servants by sending fire down from heaven so as to consume that which was accepted.

LEVITICUS 9:23-24 And Moses and Aaron went into the tabernacle of the congregation, and came out, and blessed the people: and the glory of the Lord appeared unto all the people. And there came a fire out from before the Lord, and consumed upon the altar the burnt offering and the fat: which when all the people saw, they shouted, and fell on their faces.
1 CHRONICLES 21:26 And David built there an altar unto the Lord, and offered burnt offerings and peace offerings, and called upon the Lord; and he answered him from heaven by fire upon the altar of burnt offering.
2 CHRONICLES 7:1 Now when Solomon had made an end of praying, the fire came down from heaven, and consumed the burnt offering and the sacrifices; and the glory of the Lord filled the house.
1 KINGS 18:38 Then the fire of the Lord fell, and consumed the burnt sacrifice, and the wood, and the stones, and the dust, and licked up the water that was in the trench.

If so, if this is how the two brothers realized which offering was accepted and which was not, then that would fully explain for us and make perfect sense of the record. We might also see here the reason why the ancient believers considered the heavenly fire to be holy and sacred, and so endeavored to preserve it by keeping some of the embers burning upon the altar. Thus they were often instructed to light their sacred incense from the coals of an already smoldering fire (LEVITICUS 16:12 NUMBERS 16:46 & REVELATION 8:5).

This might similarly explain for us what exactly was meant when it was stated that Abraham took fire in his hand when he went to offer up his son Isaac as a sacrifice (GENESIS 22:6). Did he bring a coal from a sacred fire with him so as to make the offering acceptable to GOD? One might expect that he did. But we should also note that others might instead use their own man-made fire for sacred purposes, which evidently is referred to as strange fire (LEVITICUS 10:1).

As previously noted, we are instructed in scripture that Biblical faith is often from a hearing, from being exposed in some way to GOD's revelation (ROMANS 10:17). The literal Greek of this difficult passage reads, "So faith by [ek, is out of the] report, but the report by [dia, through the] word of Christ". Faith is the result of some report, but that report or message to which Paul referred here is apparently through the word, the gospel of Christ. As such, faith springs from or is aroused by a hearing or heeding of a report or message.

It might help us to more fully understand Paul's intent here if we looked at his context, where in the previous passage he referenced another statement from the prophet Isaiah. Note how Paul aligns obeying the gospel with believing the report.

page 16/19^

ROMANS 10:16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias [Isaiah] saith, Lord, who hath believed our report [akoe]?

The full passage from the prophet read, "Who hath believed our report? And to whom is the arm of the Lord revealed?" (ISAIAH 53:1). There, Isaiah had been complaining that few if any had heeded his warning of the coming catastrophe upon their Nation and City, which he saw so clearly drawing frightfully near. He had heralded the report, he had cast far and wide his gross descriptions of the approaching doom, but few had heeded his report.

This report is to what Paul alluded to in his passage about faith. That was the source of faith. If they would have believed Isaiah's warning, indeed, if they would have accepted Paul's current admonition concerning their own approaching peril, then perhaps they still could be saved. But many in Paul's audience were as stiff necked and obstinate as were those in Isaiah's time.

This Roman congregation could be saved from destruction, but only if they were willing to believe the report, the gospel (10:16). If they considered and pondered the message, if they would heed the word of faith which Paul preached (10:8), they would then have realized that the arm of the Lord was standing by to protect and deliver them.

Quoting from the previous chapter in ISAIAH (52:7) Paul had just declared in ROMANS 10:15, "How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!" This was the source of faith; hearing the gospel of peace, recognizing the glad tidings of good things, as well as heeding the warnings of the consequences for not regarding or believing the report.

But dis-belief sees no GOD. Obstinance sees no arm of the LORD. It sees "no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind pitiless indifference" (Richard Dawkins). It sees only a world without a Creator. A creation without a Maker. As such, a man without faith cannot possibly see what for us is most clear. Faith sees what unbelief can't. Faith sees the delivering arm of the LORD while the faith-less see only blind pitiless indifference.

What Paul was then saying in his epistle to the Roman assembly, was that if you are to have this saving faith, then you must believe that which GOD has presented to you. You must recognize and obey the message, the report, indeed, the fame of Him of whom you have heard. You must be believers of the gospel.

Yeshua's original disciples also witnessed to this fact, that His works demonstrated for those ready to believe, that GOD had approved of Him. As the apostle Peter so alluded in the first sermon of the Christian Church,

ACTS 2:22, 32 Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by [dia, through] him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know . . . .
This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.

Without question the greatest work of which Peter referred to here was Yeshua's own resurrection. Many of these men of Israel had no doubt already inspected with their own eyes the vacant tomb. They had noticed the heavy stone which had once been sealed upon the doorway, evidently now somehow inexplicably thrown into the distance (LUKE 24:2). They had seen the empty shroud which had been molded around his corpse, still rigidly lying upon the slab where He had been laid, with the face covering neatly placed off by itself. They had heard how some had even claimed to have witnessed His resurrection.

And now they had themselves been present in their crowded temple when they saw and heard the ancient tongues of fire which sat upon each of the disciples, again perhaps typifying the offering up of that heavenly sacrifice. All of this is the only way of explaining the vast multitudes, many thousands, which joined their fellowships that day (ACTS 2:41). By all which they had now considered and pondered, they had been brought to the place where they could believe, where their minds had been prepared to believe, where faith had gained access into their hearts. Many of them had finally come to accept the report.

As such, the immediate purpose for these mighty signs and wonders was not only to heal and cure and free the oppressed, but rather they were for the greater intent of proving that Yeshua was who He said He was. Having accomplished that, the ultimate reason of these evidences of GOD's presence was so as to inspire and arouse faith in the believer. The same was the aim of the signs in the starry sky, so as to instill faith in that ancient star-gazer; to cause him to stop and consider, to ponder and ask how and why was what he saw there, the promise of a coming Redeemer (see The Witness of the Stars, by E. W. Bullinger).

page 17/19^

Thus, Yeshua's devoted followers went out and witnessed to these works. They spread far and wide the proof and evidence that their Messiah had come and gone, but was now awaiting them in His heavenly kingdom.

ACTS 5:12-14 And by the hands of the apostles were many signs and wonders wrought among the people . . . . And believers were the more added to the Lord, multitudes both of men and women.

The evidence that Yeshua was who He said He was is the works which He and His apostles accomplished. Aside from that, without accepting that Almighty GOD was with Yeshua in performing all of those amazing and facinating miracles, we will have little inclination to approach His words, let alone discipline and devote ourselves to a lifelong quest for truth.

JOHN 3:2 The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.

Nicodemus recognized that GOD was at work in Yeshua's ministry. So did Joseph of Arimathaea (JOHN 19:38), but the vast majority of the religious leaders in Israel simply closed their eyes to this reality. This was indeed their Unforgivable Sin, because they refused to consider, they completely rejected the fact that Almighty GOD was involved in this ministry. Indeed, the works themselves, the works which Yeshua accomplished, which were plain for all to see; these works gave adequate testimony that GOD had sent Him.

JOHN 15:24 If I had not done among them the works which none other man did, they had not had sin: but now have they both seen and hated both me and my Father. (JOHN 5:36; 10:37-38; 14:11)

Yeshua more than once stated that the works which He was performing, in themselves, were to separate the believers from the non-believers. These works divided the obedient from the disobedient, the faithful from the unfaithful, those with open ears and hearts from those who wanted to hear nothing more. Yeshua's intent was never to unify His audience into one grand likeminded assembly, but rather He endeavored to show and demonstrate that they were not and could not all be of one camp.

MATTHEW 10:34-36 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man’s foes shall be they of his own household.

It is too often a wearisome endeavor to try to convince someone who has no interest to hear. You can't force feed a person who has no hunger. As the saying goes, A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still. We are not, nor ever will be all of one tribe. Only if a student has already recognized a Creator and are then seeking an understanding of the truth, can you then have an open door to expand upon the word and works of GOD.

Whether or not a listener recognizes and accepts the works of the Creator, that is what usually separates those entering through the straight gate from the multitude clamoring along the broad way (MATTHEW 7:13). Those are the two camps and it is too often a waste of time and energy to tirelessly attempt to bring the two opposing forces together as one happy unit. They are like oil and water, like night and day. If Yeshua Himself couldn't convince the naysayers, who do we think we are in so attempting to over-rule their disbelief?

Not all have faith (2 THESSALONIANS 3:2). Some look out upon GOD's creation and see "no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference". They see no guiding hand behind it all. And for others, those who have been talked out of the reality of the creation, their's is a shipwrecked faith (1 TIMOTHY 1:19). Their's is a dead faith (JAMES 2:17, 20, 26). These are those who have drawn back from the faith (HEBREWS 10:38-39). Perhaps they once believed, but no longer. They have come to put away all which they now perceive to be Biblical nonsense.

page 18/19^

Nevertheless, we should recognize that sometimes faith does indeed have different levels, different degrees. One person's' faith may very well be measured differently from that faith of another. Perhaps some are weak in faith (ROMANS 14:1) while others are strong in faith (ROMANS 4:20). Some are rich on faith (JAMES 2:5) while there are those who are lacking in faith (1 THESSALONIANS 3:10).

We learn that the level of one's faith is usually measured by the maturity of his Christian experience, or else by the degree of his commitment to the words and works of GOD. Too often his level of faith is regrettably determined by some prejudice or preconceived notion which binds and blinds him to certain aspects of the truth. Church Traditions often have this dampening effect upon one's faith.

As is often the case with a word or phrase, the very first occasion of faith in the Christian scriptures (the New Testament) is most telling.

MATTHEW 8:10 When Jesus heard it, he marvelled, and said to them that followed, Verily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel.

Yeshua had been listening to a certain Roman centurion explain why he had total and complete confidence that his servant could be healed with only a word from the Lord. Matthew noted that Yeshua marveled, and then stated that this man's faith was greater than all others in Israel. Obviously, if his was greater than others, there must be degrees of faith. If he had a greater faith, then there must have been those who had a lesser faith. Something must then somehow affect how much faith a person has. In some way the level and quality of one's faith must be able to be measured and proportioned (ROMANS 12:3, 6 & EPHESIANS 4:7).

Evidently, faith is then to a great degree affected by the experiences of life. GOD exposes us to something for our learning, and then building upon that encounter, we are then introduced to others, with each experience leading to the next one. As we remain meek and coachable, our faith continues to grow (2 THESSALONIANS 1:3) and increase (2 CORINTHIANS 10:15) and abound (2 CORINTHIANS 8:7).

Biblical faith often springs from a passing observation; a glimpse of something perhaps not yet fully understood; a subtle knock upon the door of one's consciousness. It is a cyclical process, where one first recognizes something seemingly remarkable, or even something strangely unusual, and dwelling upon that first dim perception, he then considers and ponders more fully upon it. He senses more, and thus progressively builds upon that first concept. As he remains faithful to this process he begins to develop within himself a spiritual and unseen confidence and assurance. See the Study, Through Faith.

Our first chore is simply to come to believe that GOD is, "for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him" (HEBREWS 11:6). Once we have awakened to that reality, then all the rest is only a matter of a faithful and diligent search, a consistent knocking upon the door of truth. GOD is then able to lead us from one experience through another, so as to guide us unto and into the depth of HIS word.

The very goal and purpose of the words and works of GOD is faith. It is all for the intent of arousing faith within the heart of the believer. Therefore, the preached word, indeed the whole creation is of no profit at all if it is not being blended with faith (HEBREWS 4:2). All of life's experiences, all of our daily routines are practically pointless if they are not being fused together with a growing and maturing faith. To put it another way, faith without works is dead (JAMES 2:17); it is dead if not in harmony with life's daily experiences. Therefore, it is faith which gives life to the righteous (ROMANS 1:17 GALATIANS 3:11 & HEBREWS 10:38). This is why life without righteous works is a waste, for only by works is faith made perfect.

page 19/19^