Lecture 10.docx

Alright, we left off with two further interpretive issues dealing with the first portion of the Torah and that is what we refer to as Genesis. And when we come to Genesis chapter 12, we come to the narrative of the patriarchs. Abram, name change to Abraham, his son Isaac, his son Jacob, name change...

Alright, we left off with two further interpretive issues dealing with the first portion of the Torah and that is what we refer to as Genesis. And when we come to Genesis chapter 12, we come to the narrative of the patriarchs. Abram, name change to Abraham, his son Isaac, his son Jacob, name change to Israel, and his twelve sons, the sons of Israel. Now once again, just as we talked about last week in Genesis 1, certainly as we read Genesis 12-50, that it reads as historical narrative. It reads as a history of what took place in the past. Obviously once again, selective, representative of events, representing events that took place in a literary fashion so that Israel might again understand more of their historical antecedents. And as you can see, there has been a discussion over the last 200 years in particular, both on the what. Did these individuals exist and did these events take place? And also the when. When did these individuals live? And of course we could also add where. Where exactly did these events take place? And so we come to what has been reignited in the last 20 years in exegetical discussion and that is how do we understand this narrative as far as the patriarchs are concerned. Now in reading Merrill, you are reading position one, what I call the traditional orthodox view. As far as Merrill is concerned, and he makes a statement, the Bible is accurate. And we come assuming the accuracy of the Bible and all he is going to do with any kind of extra biblical data is use it to shine light upon the biblical text. In fact he doesn't get into any kind of extensive apologetic except in a number of statements and a few places in his footnotes. And so to have a more apologetic slant, I refer you back to Kaisa's history of Israel in the notes, extensive discussion on the historicity and chronology of the patriarchs on pages 51 to 66 of that book. And that is the first edition because my understanding is the second edition is going to be released in the near future. So those pages in the future as you take a look might be a little different. But that is the traditional orthodox view, the way in which both Jewish and Christian scholars approached the latter part of Genesis through about 1800. But in the last 200 and some years there were started to be great debates beginning with the archaeological revolution, the archaeological artifacts that started to be found in the 19th and 20th century, the supposedly cast dispersion, cast doubt upon the historicity. As these archaeological finds we've never been able to find any verification of the names of the patriarchs and any of the artifacts that have been found. And particularly for about a hundred years, nothing could be found outside the Bible concerning the Hittites. All that changed really part of the 19th century and the early part of the 20th century. And it's interesting what archaeology for a hundred years took away. In the 20th century archaeology gave back through the labors of a man by the name of William Albright and what became known as the Albright School. And Albright said that he had not found any archaeological evidence that would call into question anything that was in the Bible. But of course he's taking the Bible of face value to be history and then with the archaeological information, geographical terms that are found in the Torah. And even though there are not patriarchal names, there are similar names that have been found in the archaeological records. The Albright School pointed out the archaic features that are seen in Genesis chapter 14 that very much is reflected in the type of warfare and battles that can be seen in the archaeological record that go back to around 1500 to 2000 BC. The patriarchal life, the price of slaves and the form and structure of the covenants have all been found now in the cultures that inhabited the ancient Near East. Once again in the period from 3000 BC to approximately 1000 BC. And that was a time of the kind of hurting and living intense that is seen in the book of Genesis. And so this has become known as the maximalist view that we can take the Bible face value and then as we take a look at the archaeological finds that have been made that those finds fit in to the Bible. And at times the Bible is somewhat reconfigured to fit into those archaeological finds. Probably the major reconfiguration is in the book of Exodus with the dating of the Exodus. That it was the maximalist school of archaeology that first proposed and is still the strong supporters of what is known as the late date for the Exodus based upon archaeological evidence. That is that we will see that the Exodus took place in about 1260 BC not in approximately 1445 BC as would be seen as you add the numbers as far as the biblical text is concerned. And so this was the maximalist viewpoint. Now there was another school that came out of Germany known as the traditional historical view. And this believes that there are some historical kernels of fact but these have been relayed over many generations of oral tradition that have embellished the accounts and yet there is a kernel of historical truth. And of course as interesting as only the modern exegete that is able to you know be able to take a look at the text and see where the embellishments have taken place and see what is that literal core that does seem to go back to some kind of historical remembrance. And of course depending upon the exegete is you know where that kernel might be. But this has all been thrown at the last 25 or so years by what is known as the minimalist viewpoint. Which is the Bible is completely unhistorical, inaccurate, and if there's any kernel of historical truth in it is very very difficult and hard to find. And certainly does not adhere to what we know today from the archaeological record. And so very interestingly the minimalist viewpoint which is becoming stronger and stronger has really turned Pentateuchical studies and studies in Genesis and particularly the events of the Exodus and conquest and said that these once again are unhistorical stories that are only therefore in the text in the biblical text for theological reasons that they really have no historical basis whatsoever. So completely again overturns the traditional orthodox viewpoint or the maximalist archaeological viewpoint or even the other German traditional historical approach that has been associated more with with form criticism. So rampant skepticism is alive and well again in biblical studies and the average lay person if he goes down to a secular bookstore today and you know buys the latest the material on the Bible is going to find a sustained attack upon the Bible as having any kind of historical reliability at all. So we've gone from it might be slightly reliable to it's basically reliable to the Word of God is without error it is completely reliable and having the discussion you know for a couple of generations be within that frame of reference to now the total skeptic coming in and saying there is no historical foundation to the Bible whatsoever. That this is all myth from Genesis 1 at least into post-exilic Israel that until we get to the records that come out of Babylon and the Persian Empire we can't even be sure that such an entity as the people of Israel living in a land of Israel even existed. In fact some of the more radical minimalists say that the whole history of Israel was dreamed up by post-exilic Israel to give them claim before the Persians that they really could go back to Jerusalem and build their temple live in that land they had to dream up this history to give them to give support you know for the arising of the Jewish religion that took place during the Persian period the post-exilic period that only then can we talk about you know the Jewish people and Israel and all of this fairy tale was just made part of their Bible to support their claim. So really in the end the Bible is nothing more than a propaganda piece of post-exilic Judaism to lay claim you know before the Persians that they could go back to Jerusalem and build the temple there. That's how completely skeptical things have become and it's interesting because in contemporary university religion classes in the last 25 to 30 years we have moved from positions two and three to where the predominant position people will get in a religion class and universities the kind of people you're going to run into now in your ministry are being saturated with position number four. The Old Testament is just religious propaganda from the post-exilic time period and so better get ready as you preach the Old Testament of course that's one of the reasons we're in the past evangelicals have shied away from preaching the Old Testament because they don't know how to deal with this approach. Well as you can imagine I take position one. Gave you a little bit of that testimony you know before we started class today that I no longer you know look to the latest scholarly find and by the way one has just come to pass in the last week or so that they think they found the town mentioned the Gospel of Mark and this all ties into gospel accuracy but we're not waiting for the latest historical find to verify what is in the Bible. The Bible claims to be God-breathed scripture and when it makes historical claims we accept those claims as being accurate. So like Dr. Merrill I take position one the traditional orthodox view that the Bible is accurate and you say well what what happens when you find an artifact that seems to prove the Bible or is stated to prove the Bible wrong and my answer always to that is well there must be some misunderstanding concerning that artifact. It's very interesting that we have to realize that interpretation is just as much an issue for an individual who comes to the Bible as it is to an individual who comes to some kind of archaeological find. An archaeological find is not self interpreting. Someone has to interpret based upon some kind of presupposition. So why can't the interpretation of the data be wrong? It's very interesting again reading this article this is what you see again and again that here is the sensational you know ethylene you know town that Jesus went to found. Then you read the article and you find out that that the archaeologist in the end says well it seems that this is that town. Based upon what kind of data? Well process of elimination is in the right place and seems to be coordinate to some other villages. So this must be but what did you find to say this was that exact town that is in Mark? And as you get to the end of the article you realize there is no you know clear indication that it's one of the same town. And General you're going to do that again and again as you go through you know archaeological finds when you read the whole report well it just seems putting everything together this is the best interpretation. Well why does that best interpretation trump the interpretation in the Bible if that interpretation by the archaeologists in some way contradicts what is in the scripture. So we just live in the day and age where the academic community is so quick to pridefully say we figured it out and the Bible must be wrong. And again they should have learned their lesson by this point that their interpretation generation too is called into question and shown to be misguided and so we move on. Hundreds of years ago the confident assertion that there is no evidence in the ancient Near East of the Hittites, this people called the Hittites that we find in the Bible. Well now we've found the whole Hittite Empire where it was located in central Anatolia and so one of the cries of those number one and number two many times is those who want to take three and particularly four remember the Hittites. Just when you think that you have disproved the Bible God has his way of showing that well that is proof behind the Bible after all but we're not waiting for that we're not waiting for the Bible to be proved. Now what about the chronology of the patriarchs? When did the patriarchs live? And this point let me just give you the and remind you of the chronological tables that you have you seen in Merrill but on page 47 and into page 48 he gives you a list beginning with the birth of Terah and of course Abraham was the son of Terah and Abraham being born in 2136, 2166 and so Merrill counts back but the key dates is 2166 the birth of Abraham and then by putting the chronological notations that are found in Genesis is able to reconstruct that that chronology from 2166 all the way to the death of Joseph in 1806. Alright so it's on page 47 48 now this assumes as you can see an early Exodus and what is known as a long sojourn. You say what do you mean as far as as the sojourn is concerned? Early Exodus we're going to talk about when we get to Exodus an early date for the Exodus as opposed to a late date 1446 instead of around 1260. Well what do we mean by the by the long or short sojourn? Okay so we know the dating of the Exodus is the foundation for this. Well when we read the the Septuagint the Septuagint reads a little differently on Exodus 1240 than does the Masoretic text. The Masoretic text and reflected in our Bibles Exodus chapter 12 verse 40 now the time the sons of Israel lived in Egypt was 430 years. So this is the long sojourn 430 years. But the Septuagint reads that's the Greek translation the sojourning of the sons of Israel which was the sojourning in Egypt and Canaan 430 years. Now as we take a look at at Genesis Abraham entered Canaan 75 years of age. Isaac was born when he was a hundred. Alright and so Abraham was in Canaan 25 years before Isaac was born. Isaac was 60 years of age when Jacob was born. Jacob leaves Genesis chapter 46 when he was a hundred and thirty years old. Alright so obviously 130 years. Isaac was 60 at 60 and Abraham had been in the land 25 years before Isaac was born. Therefore the sojourn from when Abraham entered the land to when Jacob left the land was 215 years which then means that 430 years equals both the patriarchs being in Canaan as well as the time they're in Egypt is 215 years that's where we get the 430. Well the question comes where did the Septuagint get this reading and the answer is we do not know. Why do they add Canaan into this 430 year time period. We don't know and this is where again we have to have a basic presupposition. That basic presupposition is the fact that the Masoretic tradition though not being perfect has well passed on you'll find this out in OTI the Old Testament text and so we believe unless there is great evidence the contrary that the Masoretic text should be taken at face value and this is in the last decade the movement particularly among evangelical textual critics those of work in textual transmission of the Old Testament that there has been a resurgence of support for what we have in the Hebrew text from which our English Bibles have been translated. So that's why we are going to assume not only an early Exodus but also the long sojourn and that is the position that Merrill takes and of course you can then argue back from the day of the Exodus you know 1446 BC and you can start to add the 430 years. That's when Jacob entered the land left the land entered into Egypt and so that becomes a very very key date as far as Merrill is concerned so his descent into Egypt 1876 how does he get that? He gets that by adding 430 years Exodus chapter 12 to his date for the Exodus which will substantiate when we get to take a look at Exodus and then what he does is start to add the years back obviously if Jacob's descent at 130 1876 and we can go back and see the birth of Joseph of the birth I'm sorry I want to get here to the the birth of Jacob I know you got it here the birth of Jacob and Esau there it is in 2006 that's adding the 130 years to his descent and then obviously adding the 60 years for the birth of Isaac. Isaac was born when Abraham was 100 years old so that gets the the birth of Abraham and you can see how by adding the the dates that are given to us in Genesis that Merrill comes up with this with this chronological chart. Now once you have this chronology some very very interesting facts emerge which show us that Genesis is not in strict chronological sequence for instance Genesis chapter 25 begins with the narrative concerning the the the death of Abraham. Abraham's life after Sarah and after Isaac is married and he dies he dies in 1991 we have the genealogy of Ishmael and then we have the account of the birth of Jacob and Esau but notice that Jacob and Esau were born before Abraham died. Genesis 25 is not in strict chronological sequence in other words Moses ends his narrative concerning Abraham before he begins his narrative concerning Jacob whose name is going to be Israel. So right there just just putting the dates together show us that we need to be careful that even though everything in Genesis is historically accurate it does not mean that it is in strict chronological sequence. By way this is going to be true of the Old Testament historical narrative as a whole that it is once again written it is not unhistorical everything that it portrays took place but not necessarily always in exactly the same sequence as given to us in the text. So why is the sequence the way it is because ultimately the history is more than mere history it is history that is teaching yes theological truth and so Moses and the drags of the Holy Spirit completes his narrative of Abraham's life before he turns then to pick up the narrative concerning Jacob beginning with Jacob's birth and then the progress along the way. So we have to be sensitive to that as we read the Old Testament text and the Old Testament never says that it has been written in a strict chronological sequence. It just says that whatever it recounts reflects represents exactly what happened historically. Now obviously we have those minority who take an early Exodus but take the Septuagintal reading which obviously is as we are already seeing going to put all the dates for the patriarchs 215 years later. You add a late Exodus which is approximately 200 years later and that is also going to give a later date for the patriarchs. You add a late Exodus with a short sojourn and you are going to get the patriarchs down to about 1600-1500 BC. And there are some out there that take that position and then Reconstructionist is very very simple. That is our minimalist who say this never happened anyway and even if it did you couldn't completely reconstruct it. And whatever that early era was of the early peoples of Israel could be anywhere down to who knows 1000 BC before whatever events might have created this propaganda wherever they might have arisen who knows. And so that is the historicity chronological discussion and you should be aware of it because every commenter is going to get into it. And whether you like it or not if you get into preaching Genesis you are going to find people in the congregation that have been impacted by this kind of discussion for no other reason they have taken Bible as literature in a high school or college class and just have these ideas floating around in their minds. You have got to be ready. I have many times used the example of when I first started teaching I was in the office when a shipment of books came in from the UPS man. And UPS man said to the secretary is this a religious school? And she said yes. She said well what is your theological position? We are evangelicals we are Bible believing. And here is the UPS man who starts bringing some of this latest skepticism talking to the secretary well you can't believe the Bible because of the da da da da da da. And found out that his brother was going to Claremont University and was passing on his reading to the UPS man and the UPS man was buying it so who knows where you are going to run into this. So watch out for UPS men. They might be very skeptical of the Bible. And he was going through all of this recounting of all the contradictions that are found in the book of Genesis and how it doesn't tie in with history. And I thought if a UPS man knows all of this you better be careful. You are going to run into people that you start preaching the Bible and you are going to say on what basis. Well you are going to have to go back to the basis that the Bible is the word of God and I accept it. As historical and by the way there are there are arguments against everything that you are bringing up anyway. And if God ever gives you the ability to believe you will see them. Well in this latter part of Genesis the key passage. Genesis chapter 49 verses 8 to 12. As we already know this is where Jacob is looking ahead to the end of days. And speaking about what blessing is going to come to the tribes that are going to come through his sons. At the end of the days. And in verses 8 to 12 he speaks concerning Judah. Now remember we talked last week about Genesis chapter 22. The end of verse 17. And your seed Abraham's seed singular shall possess the gate of his enemies in your seed. That singular seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed. So a question arises. Who is this seed? Who is going to possess the gate that is the entrance control. What goes in and goes out he's controlling the gates of the fortress the city of the enemy. I.E. he is controlling his enemies and bringing blessing to all of the nations. Who is this seed? Well in Genesis chapter 49 here is the link. This seed is an individual who is going to come from the tribe of Judah. Jacob is able to look ahead give this prophecy this blessing. I was going to take place at the end of the days. Judah your brothers shall praise you. Notice your hand shall be on the neck of your enemies. Your father's sons shall bow down to you. So Judah you're going to be the tribe that receives praise from all the rest of the sons of Israel. All your brothers are going to praise you. You're going to have the prominent position. And that prominent position is tied into the fact that you will be the one. Whose hand will control the neck of your enemies. And to have a hand upon a neck means that there is sovereignty. There is control. And because of this control a regal control because it's tied in your father's sons shall bow down to you. They're going to recognize your authority. They're going to recognize your regal position. Judah is a lion's whelp. From prey my son you've gone up. He crouches he lies down as a lion and as a lion who dares rouse him up. Now he concentrates upon the fact that that that giant that Judah is like a young lion. And when this lion is roused that he is going to come forth. And not only defeats Judah's and Israel's enemies i.e. God's enemies. But also is going to take this regal position. In fact. Even before this individual chapter verse nine verse ten. The scepter shall not depart from Judah. Nor the rule of staff are between his feet. And then they debate a statement until Shiloh comes. And to him the obedience of the peoples. So a kingship is going to be established. In the tribe of Judah. And the rule is not going to depart from Judah until. Well until Shiloh comes what does that mean. What is Shiloh. And the best understanding is Shiloh represents. Two terms which mean. Which is to him literally. The one to whom it belongs until the one to whom it belongs comes. Shiloh is not the personal name in the Messiah until Shiloh. Nor the name of the town in the central highlands. Pointed differently. Nor does it in of itself mean ruler. It could be repointed tribute to him but. Again to him. The scepter. The rule of staff. And that is the rule of staff will not depart from Judah will not. Go from underneath his feet his control. Until Shiloh comes. And the scepter. The scepter. The scepter. Until he or the one to whom it belongs that is the ultimate rule comes to him this one only comes. The obedience of the people. He when he comes ties his fold to the vine and his donkey's cult to the choices vine. He washes his garments and wine and his robes and the blood of grapes. His eyes are dull from wine his teeth his teeth his teeth. His teeth white from wine his teeth white from milk. He said what does all that mean. It means. That wine and milk are so abundant. That well he can even tie. Tie his fold. To the choices vine. He can wash his robes in wine. Why because wine is plentiful. The choices vine. So a donkey might you know while it's tethered to that vine you know stomp it down who cares there's plenty of other choice vines. In fact his eyes are darker than wine his teeth whiter than milk. Verses 11 and 12 are a picture of abundance and prosperity. That are going to be established when the one to whom it belongs. Finally comes and rules and reigns. That's when the enemies will be defeated and control. He is the one the seed that was being spoken of in Genesis chapter 22. So Genesis chapter 3 the one who's going to come is the seed of a woman. Genesis 11 he's the seed of Shem. Genesis. Genesis chapter 22 he's the seed of Abraham. Genesis 49 he is the seed of Judah. And of course later on in second Samuel 7 we're going to find out he's the seed of David. So I go all the way from the broadest parameters the seed of a woman to the narrowest parameter in the line of Abraham in the tribe of Judah in ultimately the family of David. So this is one of the key messianic passages. That is seen here at the end of Genesis and of course prepares us for another messianic passage when we get to Numbers 24 which will fill in even more details about this king who is going to come. Is going to arise at the end of the days. That is this one to whom the throne belongs. That has been introduced in Genesis chapter 49. So until Shiloh comes best understood to see and it is taking a look at ultimately the Messiah. And with that echoing in our ears Genesis comes to an end and we go into the next section that begins in Exodus 1 is going to go all the way through Numbers chapter 25. Very interestingly just toward the end of this next great division of the Torah as we have already said Numbers 24 in the Balaam Oracles is going to go back and talk once again about this king in Numbers chapter 24. It is going to tie it in again to the lion's whelp and to the imagery of the lion in the third discourse and then to the king who is going to come from Jacob and defeat his enemies in the fourth of Balaam's discourses in Numbers chapter 24. Imagery has already been introduced in Genesis chapter 49. Alright finally just a few words about preaching Genesis. And this gets into the whole discussion of interpreting and on the basis of that interpretation preaching biblical narratives. Now on pages 80 and 81 of cracking Old Testament codes you have what is called the Bible of the Lord. And the Bible of the Lord, the Bible of the Lord, gives you some salient points, seven points in how to interpret narrative. All the way from identifying each scene of the narrative to studying the stylistic devices that the author uses. And he lists them there. Repetition. Omission. We talked about omission last week by the way. Emphasis by omission. Inclusion. Chiasm. Irony. And he's explained these previously in this chapter. And you need to read through it and then see his application of these principles to the narrative of Jacob wrestling God in Genesis chapter 32. And you can see how he sets up the scene and the characterization that is there. And how we can interpret the passage. Then we get into history by Dr. Merrill. And he talks about even the questions about the accuracy of historical narrative. And gives you some of the key ideas we've already introduced as far as historical narrative is concerned. And then gives guidelines in interpreting history. That is narrative as history. And to a certain extent you've got to put what Dr. Kaiser gives you from the literary point of view. This is a literary style narrative. To the fact that this literary styles we've been talking about. Reflects history. So it's referred to as historical narrative. And once again Dr. Merrill adds some further guidelines for interpretation. And he gives as his fifth interpretive principle. Do not suppose that what happened in a historical narrative is prescriptive for what should happen. Historical narrative declares what happened. It does not necessarily stipulate what should have happened. Abraham married his sister, should you? Jacob married two sisters, should you? Abraham sent his servant hundreds of miles to negotiate and find, well find and then negotiate and bring back sight unseen a wife for Isaac, should you? It's not necessarily prescriptive for what should happen. And in fact he says with his seventh statement. Do not look for devotional or doctrinal content in every historical narrative. Do not look for devotional or doctrinal content in every historical narrative. Some historical narrative just gets us from here to here. What's the devotional aspect? The devotional aspect. You know, Abraham sent out his servant. Wow. That's just like God sending us his servant, Jesus Christ. To get for the father a bride for his son. Wow. That's the father. The servant. Jesus Christ who has come to this world to get a servant for himself. Well that doesn't quite preach so. Alright, we'll make the servant the Holy Spirit. God sends the Holy Spirit to search out a bride for his son. A bride who has not yet seen the son. I mean I heard a whole sermon about Rebecca talking to Eliezer on the way back. What's the son like? Is he handsome? Is he strong? Is he kind? Is he patient? And she fell in love with him along the way just as we're falling in love with Jesus. You have not yet seen him but you are that bride on the journey back to meet the son. Because of the father's desire that his son have a bride. And that's a good dispensation. He doesn't believe the church is anywhere in the Old Testament. Well, take it at face value. What is Abraham doing in chapter 24? He doesn't want Isaac to marry a Canaanite. Why doesn't he want Isaac to marry a Canaanite? Because the Canaanites are under God's judgment. Cursed. Abominable the Lord. He doesn't want Isaac to be married to someone who is under Yahweh's curse. Yahweh's curse. So his answer is what? Send back to my home, to my family, and get a wife from there. And Isaac then turns around and Jacob, after he receives the blessing, Isaac sends him away also. Not so much to get a bride as to get away from the anger of Esau. And go back to Patan Haram as well. So take a look at the text and be careful. How do you preach narrative? Very, very carefully. Set it up on where it is found within the text. See how that narrative is functioning and preach it. Now, does that mean that there are no kinds of models that are given to us in historical narrative? And the answer is a very definite no. There are places where the narrative does give us a model. Romans chapter 4 brings up Abraham as an example of one who was justified by faith. Romans 4.1, what then shall we say that Abraham our forefather according to flesh has found? When it comes to how he was justified before God, we have to read the narrative very, very carefully because Abraham's example of faith and how God rewarded that faith is an example of the believers of the kind of faith that we are to have. With the same kind of consequence coming from God. And in fact, 1 Corinthians chapter 10 can talk about what happened to Israel in the wilderness. This is outside of Genesis, but it happened as examples to us upon whom the end of the ages have come. So historical narrative doesn't necessarily prescribe. The narrative always describes, but within that description there might be examples to follow. How does one know? Well, because Genesis is part of the Torah. And there is also going to be at Sinai deducted material given, teaching material given. Reiterating the excitations, Moses himself is going to use history and draw lessons from it when we get to Deuteronomy, the climax of the Torah. So there are lessons in history. There are lessons to be drawn from historical narrative. But here's what makes preaching narrative very, very difficult. You better make sure that the lessons are implicit within the text you're preaching and not extraneous. Another example, since it was done a number of years ago in chapel. In fact, it's been twice in chapel preached. And soon as this text was opened, and I pray it doesn't happen this semester, everybody looks around at me. But Genesis chapter 39, as giving instructions to the godly man in how to avoid temptation. Now Genesis 39 does describe how Joseph resisted the temptation to sexual sin from Potiphar's wife. But Moses wasn't writing along, got to chapter 39 and said, you know what, this is a good point for me to teach the Israelites how to not be seduced by the loose woman. Chapter 39 is the outworking of you meant it for evil, God meant it for good. That Joseph faces calamity, and yet God is with him and delivers him. Because ultimately he had been chosen in that generation as the deliverer of his family, the deliverer of Israel, the sons of Israel. Genesis 39 shows two things. Number one, God's continued blessing of Joseph in spite of his being sold into Egypt. As emphasized, verse two, the Lord was with Joseph. He became a prosperous man. The master, verse three, saw that Yahweh was with him and the Lord caused all that he did to prosper in his hand. He found favor in his sight. In other words, here the brother who is sold by his brothers, the Lord is with him and the Lord is blessing, prospering him. And prospering Potiphar because of him. And yet there's a further calamity. The Potiphar's wife intervenes and seeks to tempt Joseph. Joseph understands, verse nine, how can I do this great evil and sin against God? And so he refuses. The result of that evil, now of Potiphar's wife, is that he's thrown into prison. But once again, verse 21, the Lord was with Joseph and extended kindness to him and gave him favor in the sight of the chief jailer. You see, this is another evidence of Joseph being delivered because the Lord was with him and the Lord was going to use him. So that's, yeah, I mean, chapter 39 is not there. This is how you resist temptation. Chapter 39 is to show that the dream of chapter 37 is in the process of coming to pass. And all of the attacks, all of the calamities that come to Joseph are not going to thwart God's plan and purpose for his life. In fact, if you want to preach Genesis 39 and get the point is to use the principle from the New Testament, all things work together for good to those who love God and who call the coin to his purpose. And even the calamity that comes into Joseph's life is being used by God for good, the ultimate well-being deliverance of his people. And chapter 39 is not about Joseph overcoming temptation. That's, yeah, that historically happened. But it's all about God's being with Joseph and graciously delivering him and blessing him so that he can become the conduits of salvation and become God's instrument because of God's call upon his life. Now, if I was preaching a didactic passage, the Seventh Commandment, you shall not commit adultery. Or, you know, Proverbs chapter seven, my son resists the seduction of the adulterous. Or even the first Corinthians, you know, chapter six, should you take your body and unite it with a harlot? And want to give an example of someone who resists that temptation, who was a wise man, a godly man, a law-keeping man. Then obviously we could point back to Joseph. But that's by illustration. That's not the point of the passage. And I was saying, is the authorial intent of Genesis 39? That's why we have to be careful in narrative. Now, is it an example? Yes, it is. An example of what? Well, when God has his hand upon your life, his calling cannot be thwarted by whatever calamity he allows to come in to your experience. By the way, did you know when you came to seminary you signed up for calamity? Some of you don't know what you're going to go through. Some of you had a blessed life until this point where nothing has gone wrong. When you come to seminary, everything goes wrong. That's what we call the curriculum behind the curriculum. And you're going to have to cling to this truth. And if you want to remember Genesis 39, no matter what calamity God allows to come into my life. Number one, Lord, protect me from sin just like Joseph. And number two, may I know that like Joseph, you're in the process of fulfilling your call upon my life. Nothing can thwart it. God's in control. That's the example you need to learn from Genesis chapter 39. Now along the way, I pray that it does allow you also to resist temptation because there's plenty of temptation in Southern California. But that's not the point of this passage. And that's why you have to be careful in preaching narrative. You can jump off and who knows where you might end up. You might be also preaching, you know, and on the way home, Rebecca, which is living anticipation of finally being married to the son, just the same kind of anticipation you should have as a believer in Jesus Christ. Yes, you should have that anticipation, but it's not based upon Genesis chapter 24. That's all we're saying. Be careful. Be careful. And so many times, you know, you get the right principle, but you preach it from the wrong text. So be careful with with narrative. Now, that doesn't mean you shouldn't study narrative. You shouldn't preach narrative. Just be careful as you do. And I've given you some resources there. You're going to read Kaiser's preaching and teaching Old Testament next semester. And I think I pick up narrative about Jonah, Jonah's narrative, which has also been abused by many. Hey, next time you get swallowed by a fish, then you can make prescriptive for you. But until that time is descriptive. All right. And we'll talk a little bit about that at that point. Matheson's great book, The Art of Preaching Old Testament Narrative. It's a good book, great principles. Some of the examples are hard to follow. It's a little too inductive. Davis, great book, The Word Became Flesh and Pratt for the interpretation he gave us stories. So you're going to have to learn to interpret narrative before you can preach narrative. And Matheson's book is divided into three parts. The first third is the hermit, the hermeneutics, how to interpret narrative in the Old Testament. Second one is how to then preach it. And then third, he gives you some examples of the preaching.