The Message of the Old Testament1

On the surface, the Bible is a diverse collection of writings, a veritable anthology of different literary works. The reader encounters a wide variety of genres produced over a long span of time by countless authors. In the midst of diversity, however, the careful reader is drawn into the organic unity of the Bible. Though it is difficult to explain, the Bible's message coheres on a profound level. This message cuts across time and genres, so that not only is the Bible composed of many different stories, we may also say that it tells a single story.

Tremper Longman III & Daniel Reid2

The Old Testament, contrary to most popular perception, presents a unified story of salvation and divine grace. A careful reading of it reveals a golden thread of redemptive purpose running throught it book by book. This (relatively short) article takes you through it to see what it has to say.

Gen 1-3 - In the Beginning

These chapters are the most important chapters of the Bible. Without them, the rest of the Bible makes no sense. They tell the story of the creation of the universe and the earliest days of human civilization. Whatever our interpretation of the details of how this world universe came into being, the first chapter asserts the simple message that God is the sovereign of all things and any attempt to understand the world without God is bound to be, at best, incomplete, but also, ultimately, false and futile.

Set in this context, Gen 1-2 also makes two important affirmations about human beings. First, they are special and endowed with capabilities and qualities not enjoyed by other creatures; they—man and woman—were made in the image of God, had the breath of God breathed into them, provisioned with a world already created good (and "very good"; 1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25, 31), gifted with the joy of companionship uniquely tailored for them in their individual identity as male and female, and finally blessed and made rulers over the earth and all in it. The first two chapters celebrates life and divinely appointed freedom as nowhere affirmed in the world's religious literature. At the same time, these chapters also affirm the fact of human limitations. There were the natural limitations: humans are created, finite beings. While the tentalizing openness to the possibility of immortality is held out, humans are clearly capable of death, whatever that may mean. There was also, then, the imposed limitations: "you are free to . . . but of the tree of . . . you must not" (2:17). Within the context of these chapters, this single limitation amidst a plethora of free choices is an emblem of divine trust and largesse. God could have "house-proved" the Garden of Eden against the possibility of the first human pair disobeying by removing the prohibited tree of "the fruit of knowledge of good and evil" (or not having one planted there in the first place). But that would have required God to "house-prove" it against them. God trusted the couple enough that He did not see the need to do anything against them. Everything said about God in these two chapters showed Him to be a God for them, and He trusted them to live for Him. Gen 3 relates and highlights the story of the first human pair choosing rather to live for themselves. Yes, they were tempted, but in the temptation they chose to listen to the tempter over against listening to God. If, as we have said in our first paragraph on this section of Scriptures above, the first message of Genesis is that "God is the sovereign of all things and any attempt to understand the world without God is bound to be, at best, incomplete, but also, ultimately, false and futile," than the first couple chose to falsehood and futility over truth. They chose equality with God ("you will be like God") a thing to be grasped.

God had promised the first couple that "the day you eat of it you shall surely die." Some read this as implying the immediacy of death upon disobedience. The sentence rather has the force of the certainty of death. Before they died, however, they had first to be expelled from the Garden of Eden. Dying in Eden would have polluted the holy place God had so carefully prepared. More frightening than than that, leaving them in Eden before they die would have exposed them—and their descendants—to the greater temptation of eating "from the tree of life and eat, and live for ever" (3:22) in their "fallen" state. Driving them from the Garden, on the other hand, held out the possibility of redemption. To doubly ensure the couple's protection from a fallen immortality, God set a cherubim with a flaming sword to guard the way to the tree of life (3:24).

Gen 4-11(v26) - Life Outside Eden

Though now, outside Eden, and alienated from God and from one another, the couple was never left berefted of God's presence or His kindness. Neither had they forgotten God. Here they first realized God's command and desire that they should be fruitful and children were born to them. They came to God still, in worship and in offerings. Yet here, at the very place where they were supposed to meet with God, the spark for murder was first struck. Grasping equality with God had motivated the first sin, now grasping for honour with God—bringing (or, rather, failure to bring) an offering pleasing to God—led Cain to kill his brother. God may have warned that death would be the price of disobedience. Death entered the world by the hands of an intemperate human. Yet God's hand of judgment stayed and instead grace prevailed for him who deserved death. But it becomes clear that, from now on, all humans would fall into one of two lines defined by the inclination of their hearts towards God; those who like the descendants of Cain, whose line would always remain in anmimity with God, and those of Seth, who would incline their hearts towards Him.

While the human race continued to increase, God remained faithful to His word. God had said, "You will surely die." Chap 5 affirms this with its refrain: every generation recorded ended with the affirmation "and then he died," and in doing so, proved the lie of the serpent which, in tempting Eve, had promised "you will not surely" (3:4). Every generation, except—or so it seems—Noah's: the end of the chapter simply affirms that "after Noah was 500 years old, he became the father of Shem, Ham and Japheth." (v32).

Chap 6 seems to move on from Noah to a totally different subject, as it turns its attention to the rest of the human race and their exploits. These early verses tempt us to speculate. Whatever may be our understanding of the Nephilim and "sons of God," or what they were doing with "daughters of men,"3 notice that the key point of this part of the chapter is "how great the wickedness of the human race had become on the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of the human heart was only evil all the time" (v5) (This sentence remains the most intense articulation of the extent and depth of human depravity found anywhere in the Bible or human history; beating even the Nazis in their systematic and murderous anti-Semitism). God's decision was to wipe out the world with a great flood. V8 surprises us with the re-entry of Noah into the story for "Noah found favour in the eyes of the Lord." But why? Because, the chapter continues, he was a righteous man, blameless among the people of his time, and he walked faithfully with God" (6:9). God—because He is never indiscrimate—does not sweep everyone away without care. In so describing Noah, the author affirms what he has already articulated in the previous chapters, i.e, all humans belong to one of two histories: the history of life and the blessed, and the history of death and the lost. It is a point that will be illustrated in the accounts of the flood that follows.

Much has been written about the Flood. However interesting they may be it is crucial that we do not miss one simple fact, and that is, the flood narrative (Gen 6-9) is an amazingly piece of literature crafted as a chiasma (view the chiasma) at the center of which is the affirmation that God remembered Noah.4

We have already seen how in Creation God had brought dry land out of the watery chaos. Now in a great act of Un-creation all dry land submerges into the watery chaos. In Creation God had set a firmament to separate the waters below from the waters above. Now the windows of heavens above are opened to deluge the earth below. This is then followed by a Re-creation when, upon the exit of Noah and his family from the ark, "God blessed Noah and his sons, saying to them, 'Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the earth. . . As for you, be fruitful and increase in number; multiply on the earth and increase upon it.' (9:1-7).

If reading about this Re-Creation our hope for a better world is lifted, it is also quickly dashed as Noah calls a curse upon the offspring of his youngest son making them subservient to the others. And before long—as the human race increased once again—we hear them plotting a grand scheme with undertones of equality with God a thing to be grasped. Motivated by a desire to "make a name for ourselves" (11:4) they built a city with a tower that "reaches to the heavens." In ancient times names do not, as it is for most of us, serve merely to distinguish Arya from Brya or Crya. To name an object or person is to discern what it/he is, thus enabling us to relate to it/him in an appropriate manner. To name someone is to define how we are to relate to him, or, as in the case of a child, to clarify our hope of how he/she would related to the rest of the world as he/she grows up. To "make a name for ourselves" is, therefore, the equivalent of "we will decide how we will live, we will be the boss of our lives." It is a declaration of independence from God, who first called things into being and, therefore, determined their fates. This motivation of their hearts found expression in the work of their hands: a tower to assault the reaches of the heavens, the sanctum of God/gods. With a more developed understanding of God as sovereign of all things, a psalmist would later reflect on similar attempts and ask, "Why do the nations conspire, and the peoples plot in vain? . . . The One enthroned in heavens laughs; the Lord scoffs at them" (Psm 2:1-4). The Lord here more than scoffs; He scattered them and confused their languages and history remembers ever afterwards their abject failure as Babel.

We cannot, however, leave the story here. There are important materials we have skipped over that we need to consider, though we skip over them in most of our readings of them in our daily readings too and do not know what to make of their significance. I am here thinking of the genealogies in Chap 10 and 11:10-26. Let me set out the outline of the text so that we see better how the story flows.

Genealogy (Adam-Noah, 5:1-9:29)
This is the accoount of Adam's line . . . When Adam had lived 130 years . . . After Noah was 500 years old, he became the father of Shem, Ham and Japheth (5:32)

[the Flood, 6:1-9:27]

This is the account of . . . . After the flood Noah lived 350 years. Noah lived a total of 950 years, and then he died (9:28-29)

Genealogy (Noah-Terah/Abraham, 10:1-11-26)
This is the account of Noah's sons . . . The sons of Japheth . . . The sons of Ham . . . The sons of Shem . . . (10:1-31)

[Babel, 11:1-9]

This is the account of Shem . . . Two years after . . . Terah-Abraham (11:10-26).

Here are a number of important observations:

1. All these chapters (but not 11:27-32 which actually starts a new story) constitute essentially the genealogy of Adam to Terah/Abraham, but split into two sub-genealogies: of Adam-Noah, Chaps 5-9) and of Noah's Sons to Terah/Abraham (10:1-11:26). These two sub-genealogies, each on its won, is interrupted by a major event of rebellion against God, the Flood in the first case and Babel in the second.

2. The genealogy in Chap 5 follows a set formula: When M had lived x years, he became the father of N. After he became the father of N, M lived y years, and had other sons and daughters. Altogether M lived z (= x+y) years, and then he died. No matter how many years and how many children each generation produced the stress is that they died.

3. The genealogy in 11:10-26 is similar in form to that in Chap 5. When R had lived a years, he became the father of S. After he became the father of S, R lived b years and had other sons and daughters. What is missing is the stress that they died, though surely they did. While the clause "and then he died" appears 9× in the first genealogy, it does not appear at all in this second one. Death reappears only in v28 which belongs to the next account beginning (which begins at v27).

4. Chap 10 records the generalogy of Noah's sons. But notiece that is is framed differently from the other two. The reason for this may be highlight that it is doing something quite different from the other two. And, indeed, it does for it reports not merely the sons but the nations to which they eventually became the eponymic fathers. In doing so, Chap 10 anticipates the account of Babel in the next chapter, since it was as a consequence of Babel that nations arose. That the author was deliberate in reporting the heads of the nations here ahead of Babel is clear since he place an unmistakable anticipative "bread crumb" for us as he ends this account: "These are the sons of Shem by their clans and languages, in their territories and nations. These are the clans of Noah's sons, according to their lines of descent, within their nations. From these the nations spread out over the earth after the flood" (10:31-32). Hearing the repeated "nations" in these two verses, Shelock Holmes would have said, "Aha!" The last three words, he would have explained, should have been "after Babel," not "after the flood."

Story Paradigm

What then are we to make of these intriguing facts about this narrative? Here's my attempt to understand them.5 To do this, I use a basic paradigm of all narrative accounts, whether these find expressions in the bibilical historical accounts, our testimonies we give before a congregation, or a "once upon a time" story. They all begin with a prelude in which the main charaters are introduced within a specific setting (e.g., "Now Judah lived in Canaan, the land where his father had stayed"). This is soon followed by a major conflict of some kind ("Now Israel [i.e., Jacob] loved Joseph more than all his other sons . . . Joseph had a dream . . ."). Once this major conflict is introduced the rest of the story essentially tells the resolution of this primary conflict. This always consists of the introduction a series of other secondanry conflicts which are always only partially resolved. As we move through the story we are, therefore, moving from one conflictual context to another. As the accumulation of these partial resolutions eventually converge and lead to the complete resolution of all the conflicts, including—most important of all—the primary one. The "once upon a time" stories represent the most basic form of story telling. The more creative forms involve mixing of these various elements of conflicts in complex ways so that, e.g., a series of seemingly unrelated conflicts are resolved simultaneously by the resolution of one of them.

Gen 1 introduces the setting within which God and the first human pair is introduced to us. Their relationship is described. The disobedience of Adam and Eve (the first attempt to grasp equality with God) introduces the primary conflict in the relationship between God and humans, and created the context within which everything else in Scriptures is to be understood. We see a partial resolution to the conflict: the first couple (and the serpent) were judged, but the grace of God still prevailed. The promised death was delayed, and they were prevented from further disaster by their expulsion from the Garden of Eden.

Gen 2-4 continues the story outside Eden and Cain and Abel are now introduced to us. The first secondary conflict comes in the murder of Abel by his brother. It does not only violate the fundamental bond holds family together, by his judgement at the hand of God it also deprieved the future of the human race. Though Cain was judged and banished from arable land, grace also prevailed; he was marked by God with with an emblem of divine protection, Eve conceived again. Sin now marks not only Eden but also outside Eden. Gen 5 tells how children were born to Adam's child Seth, and his children's children. But, no matter, who long they lived or how many children they gave birth to, they all died, and thus underlined for us that the promise of the serpent that "you will not surely die" (3:4) was, in fact, a lie. Chap 5, in another word, has left us with a context of death, of judgment.

Gen 6-9 introduces us now deeper into the depravity of the human heart as the human race spread, and another attempt to grasp at equality with God in the intercourse between the "sons of God and the daughters of men," an act that drives the primary conflict of the broken relationship between humans and God so deep, it required the annihilation of the human race by the flood. Yet grace prevailed—one human race existes that God saw as deserving saving. This preserved the human race but sin persisted, leading to the cursing of the descendants of Ham. The last line of the Flood Account ("and then Noah died") reminds us, however, that, despite the salvation of Noah and his family, the Flood story is to be read within a context of judgment.

Gen 10, we have already noted above, lists the descendants of Noah's sons but it is not in the form of the ordinary genealogy that we are familiar with. It preampts the story of Babel and lists, instead, the putative fathers of the nations. It is what is commonly called "The Table of Nations." How are we to read this? Why does the author put the Table of Nations here when it properly belongs after 11:9? I shall come back to this in a while.

Gen 11:1-9 tells the story of Babel, another human attempt at rebellion against God with heavens in sight. God's judgement is clear: they were scattered, they very thing they had intended to prevent, and their speech were confused (and from that, we get the 'nations," each with its own language. The story ends abruptly with v9, so that, while judgement is clear, there is no act of grace. The story stands, as it were, within a clear context of judgment, but with nothing to indicate what is to be the fate of the nations in their relationship with God. Again, how are we to understand this? Not only that. Notice that the judgment of Babel continues to affect every one of us still. We are all born members of one nation/language or another.

Gen 11:10-26 is the genealogy of Shem, the first son of Noah. The genealogy is identical in form to Chap 5 except for one fact. While everyone listed in Chap 5 died in the end. Though every one of Shem's descendants obviously died, that fact is not noted at all. On account of this we can savely conclude that this is indended to create a context of grace. The following account of Terah (v27-32) ends with an introduction to Abram. Once we get into reading this account we cannot stop for the story continues all the way through the rest of the OT, and finds all their conflicts resolved finally in the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ in the NT.

So how are we to understand all this? Let me lay out what we have just said, with contexts of grace in green and contexts of judgement in grey. At the end of each box is a link; click on it for an explantion. I will summarize everything at the end of the last box.

Low Chai Hok
©Alberith, 2021