It was more important to these ancient editors who produced the Old Testament to preserve conflicting traditions and put them together somehow, even if awkwardly, than to eliminate them for the sake of achieving logical coherence.
While I don’t think there is any intention here to present Abraham as a model of virtue, neither do I think Abraham is simply kicking into fight-or-flight reptilian brain mode.
Let’s channel Gary Rendsburg’s article a bit more and explore a few more ways that David and the monarchy are embedded into the stories in Genesis.
The book of Genesis, however old the stories may be, were recast and shaped into their present form during the monarchic period for the purpose of explaining and defending the writer’s present.
Questions that Pete addresses in this Facebook Live video: In the Christian’s common understanding of Isaiah 52 and 53 referring to Jesus the Messiah, is that an accurate and fair application? How do I talk to friends about double predestination? Where is the line drawn between prophecy and creative use of scripture? If Adam and the Genesis […]
And that is where we find “resurrection” in the Old Testament: returning to the land, where God and his temple are, where there is peace and security, the land promised to Abraham, the land “flowing with mik and honey.”
Matthew interprets Isaiah creatively, not in keeping with what Isaiah meant. The child’s birth is not miraculous in Isaiah, but the deliverance of Judah from a military coalition is.
The ancient Israelites were as detached from their official religion as are many/most Americans from official Christianity.
Things go wrong when two spies’ first stop is a prostitute’s house.
The Bible—even where it talks about God—is a relentlessly contextual collection of ancient literature that takes wisdom and patience to handle well, and in doing so drives us toward further contemplation of God here and now.