Comments on: Lenten Devotional: “More on Faith” or “By Faith” or “Abel and Cain Going Toe To Toe In A Sacrificial Face Off Where Only One Will Remain, Next Right After These Messages”

By: Chris Brady

Chris Brady — Mon, 03 Mar 2008 17:06:49 +0000

John – sorry about the confusion! Skype is a telephony program that you can also use to chat, but I am not on it all that often. (I use it mostly for recording podcast interviews.) The other contact is for AOL Instant Messaging. If you have AIM (or any other AIM client) that should work as well. (If others have trouble with this please let me know.)

All of that being said, my email is cbrady AT targuman.org. I will update this to the contact links as well.

By: John

John — Mon, 03 Mar 2008 15:36:54 +0000

Hi Chris

I would like to continue to talk via email. I cant get your “contact” links to work. I even downloaded Skype, but it is apparently not what I wanted. If you want to email, I think you have my address where I signed in a couple of days ago.

Thanks

John

By: Chris Brady

Chris Brady — Mon, 03 Mar 2008 03:36:03 +0000

John, thanks again! You are certainly correct that we must never simply read a single sentence or verse in isolation. On the other hand I think looking to the NT for the explanation of texts in the OT or Hebrew Bible, while it may be convincing for some Christians, is not a reasonable method for those trying to read the Hebrew text on its own terms and in its own context. (In the case of Acts 7 it seems to me more like Stephen is extrapolating from the Genesis text, or perhaps remembering an oral version, rather than providing additional authoritative information. That, of course, will depend upon one’s understanding of the authority and inspiration of Scripture.)

My point with my students, and the one I would make here, relating to Gen. 4 is that God did not have to tell them to offer the sacrifices. It was understood that this was how you communicated with God. This is the language used to converse from human to divine and would be understood as instinctive. That is, at least, one reasonable option without presuming a back story that is not related. The fundamental point about Genesis: the author often did not give us information that we would like to have! Why, is another question…

By: John

John — Mon, 03 Mar 2008 02:57:08 +0000

I appreciate you addressing my comment.

I would say your “kernel” never existed without the obedience that shows it. As you know, not every sentence that addresses a subject in the Bible does so exhaustively. My understanding is that the rest of Hebrews 11 expands, explains, and completes the statement of the first few verses.

Cain and Abel – God must have commanded a blood sacrifice and Abel complied, but Cain thought he knew better. This is not revealed in the Genesis narrative, but precedents abound of one text being supplemented by another. For instance God’s call of Abraham in Ur is not revealed in Genesis, though it occurred in that time period. It is revealed in Stephen’s sermon in Acts 7. Noah’s blood offering in Genesis and the numerous blood sacrifices of Abraham must have had some kind of background whereby they knew that this kind of offering was what God wanted.It would make complete sense if this background went back to Cain and Abel. There is, of course, the obvious typification of the once for all atoning sacrifice of Jesus in the O.T. blood offerings, which would not be true of the grain offerings (Cain).

Having said all that, the simpliest solution is Romans 10:17. Since faith comes by hearing God’s word, and Abel offered his sacrifice by faith (Hebrews), then God had commanded the boys what to offer.

Also, I appreciate your last paragraph of your March 1 post.

Respectfully

John

By: Chris Brady

Chris Brady — Sun, 02 Mar 2008 22:14:39 +0000

Thanks Bob. I would tend to agree, that inaction, or at least the decision to not act, is an action in itself. I like your formulation that faith is not matured until it is put into action. I think that summarizes it quite well.

By: Bob MacDonald

Bob MacDonald — Sun, 02 Mar 2008 06:53:31 +0000

Addendum – I wonder if faith presents itself in not doing sometimes. For not doing can also be an action – it’s very like the Tao te Xing – action by inaction. There is a strange example on my blog here – it arrived a day or so ago due to mistaken identity and so I wrote this answer to a person in trouble.

By: Bob MacDonald

Bob MacDonald — Sun, 02 Mar 2008 04:04:27 +0000

Re: the difference between inner trust and action based on trust – I wonder if thinking about faith is a product of our cerebral culture. The Greeks – I am reading again Jerome Creech on the Editing of the Hebrew Psalter and noting how Greek translated taking refuge as hope – the Hebrew more of an action, the Greek sounding like more of an inner mental state.

I think I would say that faith is not matured (I might even go stronger than this) until it expresses itself in action. Two passages translated ‘do’ come to mind (without being too definitive here) – we will do them and we will understand – somewhere in Torah about obedience (hearing and doing) rather than understanding first then doing (inner preceding the visible action) and secondly – what must we do? (in Acts) and its answer – believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved – sounds like an internal state of thinking but I don’t think this is a correct reading of ‘believe’.

Paul’s instruction in Romans – if you by the Spirit do put to death the deeds of the body, you will live – sounds to me like doing the Torah – by which a human will live. That is the faith that justifies. Don’t get me wrong – I do not think we have to do Torah like it was a legal requirement – not at all. But I do think we need to follow the instruction of God – Torah as instruction. And this we can follow in Christ Jesus by the invitation into his death through our baptism – action that leads us into the Holy of Holies.