BibleProject

Welcome to episode 3 of our series on the Son of Man! In this episode, Tim and Jon dive deep into the history, the story, and the ideas surrounding one of the most famous figures in the Bible: the Serpent.

In part one (0:00-8:00), Tim and Jon briefly recap the previous episode. Humanity is supposed to live in peaceful coexistence and be responsible for the animals.

Tim says that Daniel’s vision in Daniel chapter 7 of the Son of Man shows us that humans are meant to be over the animals, but instead they end up behaving like animals.

In part two (8:00-24:30), Tim dives into Genesis 3 and begins examining the serpent. The snake is presented as crafty. This is the Hebrew word "arum.” In other cases in the Bible, this word has a positive connotation, but in this context, it means a negative use of intelligence. Gen 3:1:

So in Genesis 3, arum is translated as “crafty.” This is the only time it's translated with a negative sense, but usually arum means sharp, quick thinker, problem solver etc.

Tim also briefly says that in other ancient religions, especially in Egypt, snakes were symbolically significant. Tim says the snake is presented as a creature alongside the humans. It uses its divine blessing (wisdom) to twist the divine command by telling the humans that they can be like-God (or “like gods”). But the humans already are God-like, having been made in God’s image.

Tim observes that after Adam and Eve take the serpent's advice, eat the fruit, and are expelled from the Garden, the very next story is one where Cain also listens to “sin” that is described as “crouching” at his door. Both of these narratives portray humans being ruled by beasts, instead of ruling over them. Death is the result. Once humans choose to redefine good and evil, they become beastly.

In part three (24:30-28:00), Tim quickly goes over the Messianic promise that God gives in Genesis 3:15:

Tim says that this sets up the main plot conflict for the biblical story. Humans must recover their ability to rule over the beasts, and this will be done by the true Son of Man who strikes the serpent.

In part four (28:00-end), Tim overviews the whole biblical fall narrative. Tim says that the story of Noah is significant, as it represents a failed restart of creation. Noah was set up to save the animals from the flood. He did so, and seemed to act as a true son of man. Noah gets off the boat, and God recommissions Noah to “be fruitful and multiply” and fill the earth. Then God pivots and gives humanity a new diet:

Noah eventually falls away from following God’s blessing. And one of his son’s (Ham) descendants Nimrod is mentioned as being the first “hunter” in the Bible. Nimrod was also the founder of Babylon. Why are we told both of these details about Nimrod’s life? Because it represents an archetype that is developing. Humanity is now choosing to become part of a cycle of acting like beasts, creating a violent, killing culture.

Since humanity has chosen this path, they now must be saved by the true Son of Man. He will be the seed of the woman, but instead of giving in to the violence of humanity, he will choose to overcome it.

Thank you to all of our supporters!

Show Produced By:

Show Music:

Show Resources:

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Welcome to episode two of our series discussing the biblical theme of the Son of Man. In this episode, Tim and Jon discuss humanity's role in relation to other parts of creation, specifically animals.

In part one (0:00-30:15), the guys briefly recap the first episode and quickly go over Daniel’s dream in Daniel 7, where he has a vision of the Son of Man appearing.

Tim then dives into the language and ideas presented in Genesis 1 and specifically focuses on the order of creation and how the days are paired.

Wild (tohu) = unordered

“Let us create the human (ha-adam) in our image and as our likeness…

Gen 2:1-3: God rests on the seventh day, which does not end.

Tim then focuses on humanity's relationship with animals. Tim notices that humans are the “second comers” to creation, who are given the responsibility to rule over the animals who came first. This is a pattern that shows itself many times in Genesis. (Think about Joseph’s sons later in the story.)

Tim then asks what it means for humans to be called to rule over the animals. Tim cites Richard Bauckham’s book Living with Other Creatures,

“It is not often well enough noticed that the command God gives to humanity refers to two rather different matters. It refers first to the relationship of humans to the earth, secondly to their relationship to other living creatures...and they are not the same thing. Humans are not alone in being told to be fruitful and to multiply and to fill, the first and birds were given the same blessing on day 5. Only humans are told to fill and to subdue the land. In the narrative this refers clearly to agriculture, taking possession of the soil and working it in order to make it yield more food for humans than it would otherwise do.

But what about all the other land animals? How does humanity’s role of subduing land relate to God’s blessing of the animals to fill the land? Notice God’s next words to the humans:

Why does God tell humans that he has given every plant for food for the other living creatures? Surely, the reason is that it is the humans who need to know that the produce of the earth is not intended to feed them alone, but also all the living species of the earth. The clear implication is that the earth can provide enough food for all creatures. Humans are not to fill the earth and subdue it in a way that leaves no room and no sustenance for the other creatures who share the earth with them. God has given them too the right to live from the soil. So the human right to make use of the earth, to live from it, is far from unlimited. It must respect the existence of other creatures.

The biblical portrait of human dominion over the animals must be filled out by the Bible’s vision of “royal rule.” Since Genesis depicts the image of God as a kind of royal function, the rule of a king over others, it is worth recalling the only passage in the law of Moses that refers to the role of the king in Israel (Deut. 17: 14– 20). There it is emphasized that the king is one among his brothers and sisters, his fellow-Israelites, and should not forget it. He should not accumulate wealth or arms or indulge in any of the ways kings usually exalt themselves above their subjects. Only if they remember their fundamental solidarity with their people will kings be able to rule truly for the benefit of their people. Similarly, only when humans remember their fundamental solidarity with their fellow-creatures will they be able to exercise their distinctive authority within creation for the benefit of other creatures.” (pp. 226-228)

In part two (30:15-41:30), Jon asks about carnivorous animals like lions. Tim says that life survives at the expense of other lives right now, but apparently, in the new creation, that will fundamentally change.

Tim says that humans bear responsibility for animal’s destiny; that’s why we are called to rule them. This is humanity acting in their identity of the divine image.

Tim shares this quote:

Tim says that a human making an idol is an oxymoron. Humans are the image of God, so why would they make one?

Tim then posits that in Genesis 3, an animal (the snake) is the one who deceives Adam and Eve. Humans end up getting ruled by the animals instead of ruling them.

In part three (41:30-53:00), the guys discuss Psalm 8:

O Lord, our Lord,

In part four (53:00-end), Tim shares this quote:

“One point of saying that God is the absolute sovereign (as the biblical texts say time and again) is to say that he is free: free to exalt and share his own power and divine power with those whom he wills, through a transformation of their nature and identity; free to create entities that in various ways share in his identity as ruler and judge, and who manifest his presence within the world… The God of the biblical story is able to enter into and take on the nature and identity of the very reality he has created, taking it up into his very self. God’s identity is, apparently, “sharable.” … God’s identity is not a zero-sum game. To say that God shares his identity with humanity does not mean he suffers a loss of being; on the contrary, it is actually a way of saying that his identity is magnified and his glory extended.” [Tim’s note: “and, we may add, this is the way the divine love is extended as well.”] - Crispin Fletcher-Louis, Jesus Monotheism, 310-312.

Tim says that for God, relationship with creation means entering into a shared relationship with it.

Show Produced By:

Show Music:

Show Resources:

Gerhard von Rad, Genesis: A Commentary

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In part one (0:00-19:30), the guys discuss what “son of” means in our current culture. They bring up certain phrases like “Sons of Anarchy,” “Sons of Liberty,” etc. Tim says this means that someone identifies with an idea or ideology.

Tim then offers the fact that historically people have referred to Jesus as Christ. Christ is actually a Greek word meaning Messiah. Messiah in Hebrew means the anointed one.

Tim then says that Jesus never referred to himself as Christ or Messiah, and when others would refer to him as this, he would reply that he is the “Son of Man.” Why is this?

For example in Luke 9:18-22:

Jesus refers to himself as the Son of Man in the third person immediately after Peter called him the Messiah.

Tim then posits that Paul doesn’t use the phrase “the Son of Man” in his writings. Instead, he uses phrases like “the firstborn of all creation” or “the new humanity.” Tim says this is because Paul is taking the message of Jesus to an international audience that isn’t familiar with what the Son of Man means.

So what does the Son of Man mean? And where does it come from?

Well in part two (19:30-32:00), Tim takes us to Daniel 7, a famous dream that Daniel had where the Son of Man appears. Tim says that this dream is very iconic and well known in Jewish history. Everyone would have known about it.

Daniel has a dream about a succession of beasts that trample humanity. There are thrones established in the heavens over the earth, but only one of them is filled. It’s filled by the Ancient of Days, which is Daniel’s phrase for God/Yahweh. So there is an empty throne, then a figure called the Son of Man rides up on a cloud to the Ancient of Days. The Son of Man is presented to the Ancient of Days and then is given dominion. The Son of Man then sits down on the empty throne.

In part three (32:00-end), the guys break down the phrase the Son of Man. If someone refers to themselves as “the Dark Knight,” people automatically know that they are referring to Batman. Similarly, if someone calls themselves “the Son of Man,” they are referring to a certain character in the Hebrew storyline. They discuss what it means for Jesus to be comfortable inserting himself into Daniel’s dream.

Thank you to all of our supporters!

Show Produced By:

Show Music:

Show Resources

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In this episode, Tim and Jon revisit the different ideas and themes that have been discussed in our podcast series on the identity of God in the Hebrew scriptures.

In part one (0:00-27:30), the guys briefly outline some of the ideas in the series. Jon asks Tim if in the garden of Eden is the serpent’s offer to the humans of becoming “like God,” or in Hebrew, “like elohim.” Does it actually imply that humanity was looking to be in a different class of being than the one they were created to be? Tim says he thinks this is right. It’s about an overreach from what your created realm of authority is supposed to be.

Tim says that these stories are designed to be elusive and allusive. They are supposed to be somewhat vague and not to be read like a textbook. They are also supposed to allude to other stories in the Bible.

In part two (27:30-49:00), the guys continue to reflect on the takeaways from their discussions in the God series. Jon says that he wishes he could arrive at more closure around the idea of the Trinity, but he wonders if that’s even possible. Tim sympathizes and says that the idea to some degree lacks language and human ability to comprehend it. Tim says that Peter says people are made to be “participators in the divine nature.” 2 Peter 1:3: “His divine power has given us everything we need for a godly life through our knowledge of him who called us by his own glory and goodness.”

In part three (49:00-end), Tim says there are a few other things that he learned in the series. For example, in the ancient world, the concept of giants is a huge idea. Giants are always connected to being divine or semi-divine. Tim says the Hebrew word nimrod actually means rebel in Hebrew. Tim also says that he realized how huge Daniel 7 is. It’s a chapter that is crucial to understanding Jesus’ worldview and who he thought he was. Tim also mentions two books (see resources) that helped him understand the ancient Hebrew view of God/Yahweh among other gods.

The guys wrap up the conversation by talking a little bit about the upcoming Q+R and looking forward to the Son of Man series premiering next year.

Thank you to all of our supporters!

Show resources:

Show Produced By:

Show Music:

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Thank you to every single one of our podcast listeners. Because of your generous support, we were able to release over 40 episodes this year!

We also wanted to mention our #EveryDollarDecember campaign. We are raising support for our translation teams across the world. Every single dollar raised this December will be used to fund the translations of our videos. You can find out more about this campaign at thebibleproject.com/donate.

Merry Christmas from Tim, Jon, and The Bible Project team!

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Welcome to the final episode in our series on God! Today Tim and Jon discuss the Christian doctrine of the Trinity.

In part one (0:00-31:00), Tim and Jon briefly discuss how identity is always contingent upon things revealed by that individual. At any point in time, we are never aware of a full identity of something or someone because our knowledge of that thing is always partial.

Tim says that God’s identity as a community of love represented in the Trinity is mirrored when humans choose to live in a community of love as well.

In part two (31:00-42:15), the guys continue to break down the doctrine of the Trinity. Tim expands on the identity of God as a father and shares a quote from Reeves addressing why Jesus used the word father to describe his relationship.

Jon says that things get very metaphorical very quickly because God’s relationship with Jesus is not a one-created-the-other relationship. Instead, their relationship is a symbiotic one. They give and receive love as a father and son should give and receive love.

Tim goes further and points out that biblical writers say that God is not only father but also love. The guys both agree that when discussing this, you quickly find yourself at the limits of language. There is an inability to articulate the identity of God, and that is the point.

In part three (42:15-end), Tim shares the Baptism of Jesus as seen when looking for the Trinity. The Father loves the Son through/by the Spirit. Tim cites Reeves again:

Tim then shares 2 Corinthians 13:14: “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship [Grk. koinonia] of the Holy Spirit, be with you all.”

Jon says that the word “God” becomes a stand-in for Father. Tim says that’s correct and can be confusing at times, but it should be examined contextually to see what it’s referring to. Tim then shares Galatians 4:4: “Because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying, “Abba! Father!”

Tim closes the episode by sharing a final quote from Reeves:

Show Resources:

Show Music:

Show Produced By:

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

This episode continues our series on the portrayal of God as a character in the Bible. Today Tim and Jon dive into the Gospel of John and how it portrays the relationship between God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit.

In part one (0:00-13:30), Tim says that reading John is similar to watching a remake of a movie, only with a different director. The Gospel of John was the Gospel that was written the latest, and John himself seems to have been the last living disciple of the original twelve. Tim says that John feels like a reflective retelling of the story of Jesus. This means the language used in the book is slightly different than in other Gospels and books in the Bible.

Tim says that John specifically hones in on using the language of “oneness.” It echoes the Shema. For example, Tim cites Richard Baukum, saying that in John 5:16 (Healing the crippled man on the Sabbath):

Or again in John 10:30-31: “'I and the Father are one.' The Jews picked up stones again to stone Him.”

And again in John 14:10: “Philip, do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father is in Me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on My own initiative, but the Father abiding in Me does His works.”

Tim says that the point is that John has reflected the Jewish Shema in Jesus and God the Father’s relationship intentionally.

In part two (13:30-23:30), Tim and John look at the divine name.

In part three (23:30-28:10), the guys look at John 17. Tim calls this chapter the climatic summary of the themes in the book.

John 17:5: “Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.” Tim says that Jesus was the pre-existent word and wisdom of God and the embodiment of his divine glory.

In part four (28:10-end), Tim shares John 17:11. "Holy Father, keep them in your name, the name which you have given me, that they may be one even as we are one.” Tim says that Jesus and the Father bear “the name” showing that they are one.

John 17:20-26: “I do not ask on behalf of these alone, but for those also who believe in Me through their word; that they may all be one; even as You, Father, are in Me and I in You, that also they may be in Us, so that the world may believe that You sent Me. The glory which You have given Me I have given to them, that they may be one, just as we are one; I in them and You in Me, that they may be perfected in one-ness, so that the world may know that You sent Me, and loved them, even as You have loved Me. Father, I desire that they also, whom You have given Me, be with Me where I am, so that they may see My glory which You have given Me, for You loved Me before the foundation of the world. O righteous Father, although the world has not known You, yet I have known You; and these have known that You sent Me; and I have made Your name known to them, and will make it known, so that the love with which You loved Me may be in them, and I in them.”

Tim says that the true nature of God the Father’s relationship with Jesus is mirrored in how people relate with each other through love.

Tim shares a quote from scholar Larry Hurtado: “The Gospel of John draws on a rich, almost interchangeable association of God and God’s name to express a uniquely intimate relationship between Jesus and the Father. Indeed, for the author of the Gospel of John, for whom the biblical traditions provided the authoritative store of vocabulary, images, and themes by which to express the significance of Jesus, this divine-name tradition constituted the most profound way to portray the relationship of the “son” to the “father.” To speak of Jesus as invested with the divine name, as given the name, as manifesting God’s name in his own words and actions, as coming with and in the name of God, was to portray Jesus as bearing and exhibiting God in the most direct way possible in the conceptual categories of the biblical tradition and within the monotheistic commitment of that tradition. In the centuries following the Gospel of John, Christians began using terms and conceptual categories from Greek philosophical traditions (words like: being, essence, person). But it’s important to see that the use of the divine-name tradition in John is on it own terms an equally radical and direct claim about the relationship between Jesus and God.” -- Larry Hurtado, The Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Early Christianity.

Jon comments that the Gospel of John seems to be the most Jewish of all the Gospels. Tim says he agrees. John speaks directly to all of the Old Testament Jewish “shelves” of who God is. All these shelves are difficult for many modern people to fully understand without learning how an ancient Jew would have thought and acted. Jon says there are not only other languages to deal with when reading the Bible (Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic, English etc) but also foreign ways of thinking. Ancient people thought differently than modern western people.

Thank you to all of our supporters!

Show Resources:

Show Music:

Show Produced By:

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Welcome to another episode in our series on God as a character in the Bible! Today, Tim and Jon dive into Paul’s understanding of God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit. The passages that Tim shares are commonly referred to as the “Trinitarian texts” of Paul. These passages were fundamental to the Christian doctrine of the Trinity.

In part 1(0-11:00), Tim uses an example out of Galatians 4.

Here, Paul invites people to see that the same Father-Son love that was communicated by the Spirit at Jesus’ baptism is inviting us into the community of divine love as well. Tim says you quickly reach the point in Paul’s letters where all the terms are interchangeable. Jesus’ Father becomes “Our Father”.

In part 2(11:00-21:50), Tim shares another example, this time out of

Tim points out that this statement is very similar to the Shema. Paul has taken the God/Spirit unity and put Christ in the middle of it. Paul and the early Christians believed that Jesus was divine from the very beginning. Christ’s divinity, identity as God, and the doctrine of the Trinity, are beliefs that the earliest Christians shared, it was not an idea later imposed on Christianity.

In Part 3 (21:50-end),

Resources:

Music:

Produced by:

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

This is a very special episode of our podcast. Today Tim and Jon talk with N.T. Wright, a well-known biblical scholar. Wright has heavily influenced many areas of theology, especially through his work outlining the Apostle Paul.

Dr. Wright outlines his childhood and his original introduction to the Bible (0:00-9:40). Dr. Wright discusses Paul’s mindset as a Jew, especially before his transformation on the road to Damascus (9:40-18:20).

Dr. Wright explains what he thinks happened to Paul on the road to Damascus. He thinks Paul was meditating on the vision in Ezekiel 1 while on the road. He also explains what he thinks happens during the decade after Paul’s transformation. Dr. Wright also mentions that it’s unusual that Paul never returns to Tarsus in Acts (18:20-31:50).

Dr. Wright then discusses Paul’s balance between being loyal to his Jewish roots but also believing that the Jews and their God were supposed to be a blessing to all the nations. Dr. Wright says that for Paul, the whole point of the Gospel was to give Abraham his single worldwide family and that through the Jews, God would redeem all humanity. Paul believes that ultimately all people are God’s people, not just the Jews (31:50-end).

Show Produced by:

Show Music:

Show Resources:

N.T. Wright’s online classes: www.ntwrightonline.org/thebibleproject

Thank you to all of our supporters!

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

This episode continues our series on God as a character in the Bible. Today Tim and Jon dive into the writings of Paul in the New Testament.

In part one (0:00-7:25), Tim explains that Paul’s writings are actually chronologically written earlier than the Gospels, even though they come toward the end of our modern Bibles. Tim says this is important because it shows that the theology expressed by Paul wasn’t something that developed years later after the Gospels. Instead, Paul’s stance on Jesus actually predates the accounts.

In part two (7:25-22:10), Tim and Jon examine Romans 10:8-9, 12-13: “The message concerning faith that we proclaim: If you declare with your mouth, 'Jesus is Lord,' and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved…. For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile—the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, for, 'Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.'”

Tim’s point is that the Greek word “kurios,” when translated through the Hebrew, equates to Paul calling Jesus Yahweh. So in the quote from the book of Joel, the logic would be: Jesus = Kurios = Yahweh.

Joel 2:32: Hebrew: “Everyone who calls on the name of Yahweh will be saved.”

Joel 2:32 Greek Septuagint: “Everyone who calls on the name of Kurios will be saved.” “Jesus is Lurios”

Romans 10:9, 13: “Everyone who calls on the name of Kurios will be saved.”

Tim moves on and talks about Jesus and the Shema in 1 Corinthians 8:4. “Therefore concerning the eating of foods sacrificed to idols, we know that there is no such thing as an idol in the world and that there is no God but one. For even if there are so-called gods whether in heaven or on earth, as indeed there are many gods and many lords, yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him.”

Tim says that Paul has basically inserted Jesus into the Shema.

The Messianic Shema in 1 Corinthians 8:6:

The Shema in Deuteronomy 6:4-5:

Tim says the analogy of 1+1=1 is a mathematical analogy to show how Paul reasons that Jesus and God the Father can be one and separate at the same time. With this logic, he can fit both Jesus and God the Father in the Shema comfortably.

In part three (22:10-end), Tim outlines Colossians 1:15-20:

And He is the image of the invisible God,

And He is head of the body, the church;

Tim points out that this is a sort of summit of Paul’s ideas on Jesus. In Paul’s mind, Jesus unites all of the Old Testament themes, and all of the labels and titles Paul gives Jesus in this passage trace back to Old Testament ideas. Tim says Paul breaks with the meanings of the words and how they had been used in the Hebrew scriptures. Tim says that this passage is originally formatted as poetry, which makes sense because there are so many complex ideas being presented that poetry is the only proper way to appreciate it.

Thank you to all of our supporters! You can check out all our resources at www.thebibleproject.com

Show Produced by:

Show Music:

Show Resources:

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.