Genesis 1:1-2:4a

It's the beginning of “normal” time in Year A of the lectionary. The perfect time to begin at the beginning. If only it were so simple. If only we could verify that Moses somehow transcribed this directly from God's lips. But we'll never understand what this book is about without knowing what it grew out of. Other religions in the region at that time were polytheistic. Their gods competed with each other. Origin stories began with chaos and the gods brought order. They brought it by ruling over realms, like the ocean or crops.

Then this new story comes along that says there is one God who created it all and is in charge of it all. The elements of polytheism stick around though, like God saying, “Let us make humankind...”. Recent translations have updated “man”, because that's what people want, but you can't erase “us”, people would notice and wonder what you were doing. Also, most Bibles have taken the old words for God, but the word used at this time in Hebrew is Elohim, which is plural. I checked a few translations, there is a Bible called the “Names of God” version. BibleGateway is a good source for different translations. Elohim gets used as if it is singular, but grammatically it is plural. I don't know what they were thinking when this was first written down, but I wonder if this story of the “new one God” is a more recent invention.

A few key words in the Bible get changed and change how we think about the meaning, but some have remained, sometimes you can't wipe out centuries of tradition. Christians might claim “us” refers to the Trinity, a tradition that didn't begin until the 2nd century and took centuries to become what is commonly taught today. But it's not clear what the Trinity is, even Augustine, who wrote extensively on it, said so. The “one God” idea had developed, then Paul came along and added a son. It's a confused doctrine. No wonder preachers rarely mention these elements.

Have we come far from these days of saying my god(s) is better than your's? Seems to me it is still exactly what we have today. One big difference, they have to also argue against science. So, instead of just putting one mythological creature up against others, they argue that this is an accurate description of creation, or that revelation is an equal “way of knowing”. These were not intended by the original writers.

Even without the text, or the literalist interpretation, the ideas persist. In a modern myth, Daniel Quinn's book Ishmael: An Adventure of the Mind and Spirit, a psychic gorilla challenges a man to think about his creation narrative. After he recites the Genesis story, the gorilla says, “I know you don't believe that”. The man then tells a story of a Big Bang, stars forming, galaxies, then the earth, finally creatures appear and evolve into humans. The gorilla points out that it is still a story that puts humankind as the pinnacle of creation, the ultimate reason for everything else that came before it.

How far have we really advanced from 3,000 years ago?

Psalm 8

I know I don't mention Psalms much. This one would have come along centuries after the Genesis story. It's attributed to David, who was a shepherd when he was young. I think the reference is that it seems to be the imaginings of a young man looking up at the stars and wondering about the immensity of it all. Of course, it was just 150 years ago or so when we started to realize just how old and how big the universe is. No matter what this Psalmist thought, it was nowhere near the scope we are faced with when we ponder such things today.

It seems he's almost on to something in verse 4, as he asks God, “what are human beings” that you bother with them at all? But he shuts that wondering off and places himself just below God. Then he starts listing all the things he has dominion over. I see here how the Genesis story has been turned into a story of domination and exploitation. In actuality, he might as well be a flea, staking his claim on a patch of the dog. He has no control over the birds or whatever is in the sea. Whatever gets you through the night I guess.

Personally, I find it much more inspiring and calming, knowing that everything that is, resulted from something else and all of it resulted due to forces and laws that are still in place. They are not the result of a plan that I am not allowed to understand and yet need to accept if I am to find everlasting peace. I don't need to understand it all. If I want to ask any question or search for any answer, I can do that without fear. The only sacred places are places where and when I need to show respect for others. The questions I ask myself are, I am giving enough of myself and am I respecting myself?

I live in a narrow band of atmosphere. If I go a few feet underwater, I need special equipment. If I ascend more than a mile or so, my brain will start to die. The universe outside that band is hostile to me and wants nothing but to reabsorb my constituent parts. But I have everything I need within that. I am the result of millions of years of adapting to this environment, so it suits me just fine. I bask in its beauty because the beautiful things are things that nurture me, like sunlight and clean water. That it will end some day, just makes me appreciate it that much more, and makes me want to take care it for whomever or whatever comes after me.

2 Corinthians 13:11-13

This is Trinity Sunday, so I guess that's why this is included. On the Vanderbilt page that I link to there is a button for “Other Versions”. If you haven't tried it, this is a good one to test it out on. It brings you to that Biblegateway.com page linked above for Genesis that lets you pick from dozens of translations. Most of them don't mention all three parts of the Trinity. The word “trinity” does not appear in the Bible. Most believe Paul would not have been a Trinitarian. The concept appeared sometime in the mid 2nd century with Tertullian and did not fully develop until the 4th century. No, Constantine did not make it up.

2 Corinthians is covered more thoroughly in the second year and there are better verses for the trinity elsewhere. So I'm going to just move on. I don't recommend trying to teach about the trinity at all, except as an historical artifact.

Matthew 28:16-20

Another trinity quote. The translations will be more consistent on this one. We see not only an attempt to make some sense of there being both the God of the Old Testament and this new Jesus but we see an anointing of him. This is Jewish Matthew wanting to keep this part of Judaism. This is post-resurrection Jesus, letting everyone know just what is going on. He was unclear, secretive, even vague in life, but now he can just come out with it. As he explained when coming down from the mountain after the Transfiguration, he had to do that so he could fulfill the prophecy. Which leads to the question, why have that as the prophecy?

This passage has also led to some confusion. Is this a command for all people for all time or just these eleven for their lifetimes? Is Jesus still available to us or who is included in “with you”? “End of the age” is also a big problem. The promised second coming doesn't seem to be happening, and people are starting to ask questions.