AbrahamIsaacJacob, God of

/
5 Comments

Burning Bush

Credit: Evan Leeson
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ecstaticist/
CC BY-SA 2.0
Last night at church we did a lectio divina reading of Exodus 3. I was struck by the way in which God identifies himself. Moses walks up to the burning bush and God says, "I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob." I've seen this phrase often in the Bible as a way to identify God. It had never occurred to me, however, to wonder if there was any significance to this. I mean, one has to think that it requires some real chutzpah to continue and claim Jacob and think this won't come back to haunt you. God is obviously not running for office any time soon. In any event, I have an idea that I'm going to look into and, as I know you all come here for biblical insight and spiritual guidance, thought I'd share it here (also, I didn't want to forget my thoughts on this matter and making them into a blog post will help me to remember).

Harold Shank, one of my professors during my college days (yes, college days, not years), once pointed out the following outline regarding Genesis (it sets up the context for Exodus):

  • Genesis 1-11: God deals directly with creation



  • Genesis 12-25: God deals directly with creation through a mediator (Abraham)



  • Genesis 25-36: God deals only with one person (Jacob)



  • Gensesis 37-50: God almost never appears (He speaks to Jacob in Gen. 46 and
    Joseph mentions Him as he is dying at the end of the book)

  • Here's the thing, God doesn't appear in Exodus until chapter 3. Yes, there are some things that would indicate he's working behind the scenes (like when the Hebrew midwives outwit Pharaoh), but that's it. If you were reading the Bible (or just the first five books--Torah) from the start, it would actually be quite a long time inbetween when God was highly, evidently active and the burning bush. A lot has happened in the mean time. His chosen people become enslaved and are grossly mistreated and there's even a (attempted?) genocide by Pharaoh.

    So, God shows up at the burning bush, identifies himself as the God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob and says his name is I Am. What I'm wondering is if, when God is idenifited by his relationships with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, this foreshadows God's direct involvement with creation. Is this construct indicative of God working in creation as he did with these three men as opposed to a behind the scenes (providential) work?

    When the "God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob" is invoked, what exactly is the plea? Or, for example, when such a construct is used in urging people to repentance ("Return to the God of...") as in 2 Chronicles 30:6, what exactly is the exhortation? Is this construct indicative of God's (for lack of better terminology--hey, my brain can only handle so much) level of direct involvement in the lives of His people?


    You may also like

    5 comments:

    Ty said...

    I don't know if it addresses anything you are thinking about right now, but forwhatit'sworth I tend to be apophatic in my theology anyway, so I often see God as more real in the times He is most obviously absent. It is a little like thirst; if you had no real evidence that water existed, thirst would be evidence enough that it is real.

    Brian said...

    I guess my curiosity is more literary than theological. When the "God of Abraham, Issaac, Jacob" construct is used, is it indicative of some larger theme in the narrative. Of course, I believe that the literature is theological, thus there any literary device is meant to point us to God. But I'm trying to identify is such a device is present.

    Ty said...

    Do you ever wonder what it says about Israelite oral history that these are the ancestors they remember, perhaps relate to, and they are mostly louts?

    Ty said...

    Could this, by any chance, mean that God has acted with all of Israel by interacting with these representatives? I get the impression that they think of themselves as represented by their ancestors (at least the important ones). If I remember correctly, in The Instructions, Levin's main character, Gurion Maccabee, a potential messiah himself, postulates that God would not communicate directly with the messiah because communication was not necessary and God is ontologically bound to do that which is necessary. He also points out the dynamic of indirect communication, declaring that God only ever communicated with the first two kings directly, and that was rare.

    Brian said...

    I've certainly wondered why they didn't at least gloss over their stories a little bit, especially Jacob.