Two Eerie Passages in the Bible (Genesis 15:7-19 and Matthew 27:45-50)
When I think about rather spooky episodes in the Bible, these two come to mind immediately. And although one is from the Old Testament and the other from the Gospels, I am beginning to wonder if there might be some sort of deeper connection between the two. You might want to read both these passages first so that the comments below will make better sense.
Genesis 15:7-19
An article in The Dictionary of Biblical Imagery explains that “in the ritual 'cutting of the covenant' between God and Abraham, Abraham sleeps; and God alone, in the form of a smoking pot and flaming torch, passes between the animal carcasses, symbolic of the fact that the covenant belongs to God alone (Gen 15:7-21).” Thus, it is a covenant of grace.
In another anonymous entry in DBI, the author says, “In a covenant-making rite similar to those attested among their neighbors, the Israelites passed between the parts of a slaughtered calf to ratify a covenant (Jer 34:18; cf. Gen 15:9-10). The implication here is that whoever breaks the covenant will be butchered and torn apart like the slaughtered calf.”
Similarly, Carr says, “The ceremony (9-11,17) reflects the ancient practice in which the participants in a covenant oath passed through the dismembered parts of a animal and proclaimed a similar fate on themselves if they disobeyed the terms of the agreement.”
“While the symbolic meaning of the strange ritual associated with the establishment of this particular covenant has not been determined to any degree of certainty, the fact that Yahweh alone (as represented by the flaming torch and smoking furnace) passes between the dismembered animals seems to highlight its unilateral nature.” (Williamson)
Koopmans: “The torch signified God's presence, frightening but at the same time reassuring, just as the covenant itself contained promise of blessings and threat of curses.”
“There are eight occurrences of the nom. 'asan in the theophanic contexts. Twice it is used figuratively of Yahweh's anger...In other cases, the term is used to describe the smoke that attends actual theophanies: God appears to Abram as a smoking furnace (Gen 15:7) and a similar comparison is used of Mount Sinai when God descends upon it (Exod 19:18 [2x])...” (Niehaus)
“God's power over darkness is evident in the fact that he uses it to achieve his purposes. He uses darkness to cover himself from human view, for example. In OT theophanies the concealing or covering quality of darkness makes it part of the means of God's appearances. When God performs the ritual of 'cutting the covenant' with Abraham, for example, 'when the sun had gone down and it was dark, a smoking fire pot and a flaming torch' (images of God's appearance) pass between the divided carcasses (Gen 15:17). In other words God himself is cloaked from human view by the veil of darkness.” (DBI)
Ross states, “In the darkness the Lord symbolically ratified the covenant promises with the firepot and the blazing torch, assuring Abram of the ultimate fulfillment of the promises (17-21)...The horror of darkness that came upon Abram may have been prompted by the coming deity or by the thought of the birds of prey coming down on the animals for the offering (an ominous thought, since the birds were unclean and were attacking the sacrifice for God.)...These images [i.e. fire pot and torch] are part of the fire, or burning, motif to describe the related ideas of God's zeal and his unapproachable holiness... Skinner says that 'Yahwe[h] alone passes [symbolically] between the pieces, because He alone contracts obligation.'”
As to the meaning of this obligation, Wenham explains, “The 'deep sleep,' 'fear' and 'darkness' all suggest awe-inspiring divine activity (cf. Gen 2:21; Isa 29:10; Exod 10:21,22; 14:20; 15:16; 23:27; Deut 4:11; Josh 2:9)...The interpretation of this mysterious rite is much discussed...This act is... interpreted as an enacted curse...It is God himself who walks between the pieces, and it is suggested that here God is invoking the curse on himself if he fails to fulfill the promise...While this interpretation could explain the phrase 'to cut a covenant,' it leaves many features of this rite unexplained...Is it compatible with OT theology for God to say 'May I die, if I do not keep my word?'” My response to this is that it may not have been revealed in OT times, but it certainly is compatible with NT theology, as I hope to show below.
In a similar manner to that of Wenham, Hamilton points to the controversy regarding the idea of God actually placing a curse on himself and mentions several attempts by others to blunt this interpretation. For example, Hasel states, “It is not a dramatized curse that would come into play should the covenant be broken, but a solemn and visual affirmation of the covenant that is essentially a promise.” And Hamilton himself concludes, “It is not necessary to read into Gen. 15:17 any sanctions of self-curses to which Yahweh exposes himself. Rather it is a confirmation of Yahweh's promise of land to Abram's descendants.” Not all scholars agree with these contentions.
Matthew 27:45-50
This is the most complete of the three Synoptic accounts of Jesus' final minutes (see Mark 15:33-37 and Luke 23:44-46 for the others). Thus, Matthew records the supernatural darkness which descended on the scene of the crucifixion, the ripping of the temple curtain from top to bottom, and dead believers roaming the streets of Jerusalem for a short period of time. Here are some random quotations relating to these events:
Geldenhuys: “It was a time of utter spiritual darkness that the Son of God had to pass through, as the Substitute for the guilty world. Therefore it was also inevitable that the world of nature, the creation of God through the Son (John 1:3), should on that day be radically affected.”
“The darkness could be a symbol of the powers of evil at work. Jesus had said at the time of his arrest, 'This is your hour, and the power of darkness ([Lk] 22:53). His death and resurrection will scatter this darkness. Or one might consider the darkening of the whole land as a prophecy or portent of the tragic days ahead for a land that had rejected God's Christ...Or again, the darkness could be nature's participation in the event taking place.” (Craddock)
Marshall feels that the “darkness over the whole land...can be seen as a symbol of divine displeasure at the rejection of Jesus by men.”
“The darkness meant judgment, the judgment of God upon our sins, his wrath as it were burning itself out in the very heart of Jesus, so that he, as our substitute suffered the most intense agony, indescribable woe, terrible isolation or forsakenness. Hell came to Calvary that day, and the Savior descended into it and bore its horrors in our stead.” (Hendricksen)
R.E. Brown references a number of OT passages in the context of the darkness which accompanied Christ's crucifixion, but not Genesis 15. And Hill only cross-references Exodus 10:22 and Amos 8:9.
Lane talks about the “ominous aspect to the darkening. In the plague of darkness which preceded the first Passover, darkness over the land was the token that the curse of God rested upon it (Exod. 10:21f).”
Fitzmyer says, “The darkness should be understood as one of the cosmic phenomena often associated with the Day of Yahweh in the OT (Zech 1:15; Joel 2:10; 3:3-4)...”
Mann states: “We suggest that what we have here is biblical imagery used to describe an event which for all the human tragedy involved was yet the act of God in the redemption of Israel and humanity.” He also compared it to the deliverance of the Jews from Egypt following a time of darkness.
“The evangelist and his readers would have envisaged a supernatural darkness symbolizing the advent of the divine judgment (cf. Isa. 13:9ff; 50:2f.; Jer. 15:6ff.) with the death of Christ on the cross, which the Church also significantly enough believed to be the supreme act of God's mercy and love.” (Anderson)
Correlation Between the Two Events (Galatians 3)
As you can see from the above, none of the scholars cited appear to draw any parallels between the covenant of God with Abraham and the atoning death of Christ on the cross although they had no trouble finding other OT parallels with the latter event. So I was beginning to have second thoughts regarding my concept that they might be somehow related to one another. But then I came upon the following opinions in relation to Galatians 3 which tended to tie these chronologically remote occurrences to one another.
When Wenham turns to the NT application of Abraham's covenant with God, he notes that in Romans 4, “Paul stresses that faith for Abram meant believing in God's promise of a child. While Genesis implies that the sons of Abram must be men of faith, Paul turns to the words around and explains, 'it is men of faith who are the sons of Abraham' (Gal 3:7)...In exercising faith, the people of the new covenant both imitate Christ and also walk in the footsteps of our forefather Abram.”
Kline also cites Romans 4 when he states, “The land belongs to Abram's seed only within the terms of the covenant and this only in the seed of Abram, Christ, in whom the land-promise is transfigured into its cosmic antitype (cf. Rom. 4:13) and the heirs of Abraham become the universal covenant community of the NT, there being neither Jew nor Greek in Christ.” And of course that New Testament covenant came into being with the death of Christ on the cross.
But it is only in Galatians 3 that these to key passages are firmly brought together through the writing of the master theologian Paul, as the following comments attest:
Galatians 3:13 reads, “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us...” Note that this verse comes right before a reminder of the promise made to Abraham's offspring (singular), namely Christ. Briggs notes that the Septuagint versIon of the OT utilizes the same Greek word for “offspring” as found in the covenants of God with Abraham in passages such as Genesis 15:5.
Guthrie specifically notes that Paul's referral to the 400+ years of predicted exile ties in Galatians 3:17 with Genesis 15:13.
And Ribberbos in his discussion of Galatians 3:15 says that “in the making of the covenant with Abraham.., the fulfillment of the law is in symbolical form made to depend wholly upon the divine deed. Abraham is deliberately excluded – he is the astonished spectator (cf. Gen. 15:12,17).”
Bruce adds, “The curse of Dt. 27:26 was pronounced at the end of a covenant-renewal ceremony and had special reference therefore to the covenant-breaker. Christ accordingly underwent the penalty for the covenant-breaker...the curse which Christ 'became' [in Galatians 3:13] was his people's curse, as the death which he died was their death...The 'blessing of Abraham' [in Galatians 3:14]...which is granted to faith replaces the 'curse' incurred under the law; this reinforces the effectiveness of Gn. 15:6 (quoted in v 6) as a solvent to the apparent contradiction between Hab. 3:4b and Lv. 18:5.”
But it remains to J.L. Martyn in his masterful commentary on Galatians to given the most complete understanding of the relationship between God's covenant with Abraham and Christ's sacrifice:
“For Paul, as for the ancient author of Genesis 15, faith has its genesis...neither in the threatening situation nor in the threatened human being but rather in the God who promises...Paul indicates [in Gal. 3:7] that he is now functioning as an exegete, drawing out the meaning of Gen 15:6.”
On Galatians 3:8, he explains, “the minor premise is Paul's certainty that the God who is doing this new deed is the same God who dealt with Abraham. Conclusion: Read in light of this new deed, the promise spoken to Abraham by scripture (in God's behalf) was the word of this same God, indeed the gospel of Christ.”
“In this sentence [i.e. Gal. 3:9] Paul gives a conclusion to his interpretation of both Gen 15:6 and Gen 12:3, drawing from the former the expression 'those whose identity is derived from faith' and from the latter the verb 'are blessed.'”
“...in 3:13-15 Paul paints a picture of the only juncture at which God's blessing and the Law's curse met one another, the crucifixion of Christ.”
In conclusion, and in support of my earlier contention, here are some parallels between God's covenant with Abraham and Christ's atoning death on the cross:
Both are stories taking place in an ominous darkness.
In both, the disembodied and invisible hands of God are revealed through their actions – carrying a torch and a fire pot compared with the supernatural tearing of the temple's curtain.
Adding to the eeriness of both scenes are the flapping of scavenger birds, explicitly mentioned in Genesis and certainly present at the crucifixion. In addition would have been the stink of decaying flesh at the respective happenings.
There is a balance of life and death present on both occasions. In Genesis, it is the combination of the sacrificed animals and the promise of new life. In the Gospel accounts, it is the atoning death of Christ so that we could have eternal life as well as the strange appearance of dead saints in Jerusalem.
One instituted an important OT covenant between God and man, while the next made possible the New Covenant for all who believe. In addition, the theme of belief is foundational to both events.
Just as God positioned himself between the two rows of sacrificed animals, Christ was positioned right between two dying sinners.
And most importantly, the similarity of the two events explains the fact which Wenham and Hamilton had trouble understanding – the strange notion of God pronouncing a death curse on himself to guarantee the covenant between Himself and man. That was, in fact, what God went ahead and did when mankind could not keep the obligations of the various OT covenants unaided. He, as the God-man Jesus Christ, took the curse on Himself.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments