Genesis and Dragonball Z

I am sitting in Jake's living room along with Jake, Cameron, and Ben. We just got back from taking Cari lunch. Right now, Cameron is playing a Dragonball Z game, and Jake and Ben are playing Pokemon on their laptops. I didn't feel in the mood to just sit and watch someone else play a video game. I remembered that Jake's dad's iPad was charging on the kitchen counter, unused and waiting. So I decided to pick it up and mess with it. After some imdb action, I decided to turn my pondering to a more significant matter. I found a literary analysis or Genesis by some guy named Dennis Bratcher, who I think teaches at Point Loma Nazarene University, whatever that is. I am currently at the end of the essay, but I wanted to write down my thoughts on it before I forget.

Initially, Bratcher urges readers to (as best as one can) approach genesis without theological hopes, without using other books to understand Genesis, and to read the story completely instead of lifting verses or paragraphs, a method that i think is appropriate. It is foolish to try to solve our problems from today with textual evidence from Genesis. Now, I'm not saying that i don't believe in the Bible's legitimacy. I'm saying that the themes and ideas and concepts from the stories in the Bible are the real truth. Jesus drank wine and walked around without a home. I don't think we should live like Jesus just because He lived that way. We should try to understand why He was doing those things, everything He did, then we can see the nature of God, the things that we should care about. I don't think I explained that very well.

Bratcher talks about the two separate creation stories in Genesis and the meaning for the first story. The Isrealites had lived in a society where the common belief was that Ba'al created the world. Here, however, the author chooses the directly challenge that assertion with a story of God creating the world. I was grateful for this cultural context.

He also talk about how the greatest part of all of God's work is 'the creation of a community in which the man can exist in interaction with others'. I thought this was an interesting assertion.

The most interesting part of the article came when Bratcher discusses the consequences of Adam and Eve eating the fruit. Originally, God said that the penalty for eating the fruit was death, even on the very day. However, if you remember, Adam and Eve don't die. They are cursed, along with the serpent and the ground, and then cast out of the garden forever. Bratcher says that 'the simple fact of the story is that God does less than His own law allowed. He lets the couple live and gives them the gift of life a second time, on the other side of the boundary! Here is a profound affirmation of the nature of God. God responds to disobedience, not with the full weight of justice, but with mercy and grace!'

This was mind blowing to me.