From today’s chapter, Exodus 3:

The angel of God appeared to him in flames of fire blazing out of the middle of a bush. He looked. The bush was blazing away but it didn’t burn up.
Moses said, “What’s going on here? I can’t believe this! Amazing! Why doesn’t the bush burn up?”
God saw that he had stopped to look. God called to him from out of the bush, “Moses! Moses!”
He said, “Yes? I’m right here!”
God said, “Don’t come any closer. Remove your sandals from your feet. You’re standing on holy ground.”
Then he said, “I am the God of your father: The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob.”
Moses hid his face, afraid to look at God.

It’s fascinating that God didn’t simply speak to Moses. For Moses’ ancestors he generally just talked to them, though a few times he appeared to them. But Moses needed something particular to get his attention and apparently the voice of God alone wouldn’t do the trick. So God sends an angel to create a bush that burns without being consumed. Moses is drawn to the enigmatic and seemingly-impossible flame, and then when his attention is fixed, God spoke to him.

As remarkable as grace is in the big sense - that God would offer redemption to such fatally flawed people, as we’ve seen throughout Genesis and life in general - it’s so much more intimate in stories such as this. God was prepared to redeem Moses, we see that in his charge that Moses go liberate the Israelites But God also had a such a knowledge of Moses’ person that he new what it would take to get the message across, and God had such a care for Moses that he was willing to employ such a finesse technique to speak that word. I think it would have been reasonable for God to have thundered his commands to Moses and expected compliance; but God is unreasonable… unfathomable. And so instead of commanding through a booming voice, he lures Moses through a burning bush, then lays out the path for Moses’ redemption.

For some reason - and I’m hoping it’s more than just the animated film’s influence - I thought Moses accidentally killed the Egyptian, then immediately fled out of guilt and fear. Writing the real story, of Moses’ cold-blooded and calculated murder, then his flight after Pharaoh’s attempted hit, gives me a slightly different context for our story’s upcoming hero.
I think this just continues to illustrate how so often I’ve misconstrued so many of the Bible’s major figures in overly positive lights. I think I do this in everyday life too, exaggerating some people’s positive traits and even rewriting what happen to flatter them. I don’t think it’s just me, either. I think we all do this - I’ve certainly seen it during this election cycle in political coverage. Favored candidates have their lies treated as misstatements, or terrible policy positions considered only for their few strong points. Prior to this writing, I thought Moses fled chiefly out of guilt after accidentally killing a bad person. But the truth is that our exalted politicians are prone to the same moral failures as the rest of us, and Moses was every bit as evil as the violent Egyptian.
But the real truth - the enduring reality of Scripture - is that God sees. He understands. He listens. He remembers.
And most importantly for us, He redeems those which are otherwise worthless.

Genesis has been written.
These 50 chapters have covered so much ground; the creation of the world, the annihilation of almost all of mankind, the introduction of sin, first jealousy, first love, incredible journeys and the constancy of man’s dependency on God.
The worst of men have succeeded when God’s grace was bestowed upon them, though the costs of his grace have been on occasion steep. And the best of men have found themselves in nearly unbearable circumstances.
Here we are now, the nation of Israel in a strange land, holding onto the great promise of God. It’s unfair I know they are staring in the face of an exodus, when Genesis ends with their relative comfort. But that’s how history works; I get only a glimpse, but my glimpses are of a story that’s already been completed. So while Joseph’s brothers may know the fuller story, they and their families end this chapter of their lives with little idea of the struggles to come.

Read Genesis 40
Wrongful imprisonment must be terrible. But even worse would be false conviction stemming from righteous action. Writing today’s chapter, I was reminded of the Shawshank Redemption; A story about two imprisoned men finding solace and redemption in jail. Like Andy Dufresne, Shawshank’s main character, Joseph rapidly earns privileges while in jail. Both are wrongly convicted, and must contend with their certain resentment for the unfairness of their respective incarcerations. But where Defresne’s redemption is based on his own patience and wisdom, Joseph’s coming redemption stems from his almost-brazen assumption that God will deliver:

Joseph said, “Don’t interpretations come from God? Tell me the dreams.”

His reckless confidence lead to a perfect interpretation of the cupbearer and baker’s dreams. There’s no evidence Joseph had interpreted before - in fact his quote leads me to think he never had. But his certainty in God’s provisions is so great.

I wonder where my confidence is. Is it from myself, my past success or does it stem from a sense that God can perfectly deliver? (That, of course, presumes confidence which is a whole separate discussion.)

What Joseph did - assuming God would come through on something like interpreting a dream - could be characterized as foolish. But it would certainly be foolish to presume God’s ability suffer the same marginal cap as my own, and I think I’d prefer to fail in the face of possibility of success than in the face of sure doom.

Here’s this week’s schedule:
May 6: Genesis 31
May 7: Genesis 32
May 8: Genesis 33
May 9: Genesis 34
May 10: Genesis 35
May 11: Genesis 36

The missing posts for completed chapters are forthcoming.

Fleeing the land that God has revealed as your home did not work so well for Abram, so God is kind to Isaac and spells it out; Stay put! But unfortunately he didn’t also spell out that it never worked out so well for Abraham to pretend his wife, Sarah, was his sister. So Isaac felt he was in the clear on that, and went to task. Fortunately Abimelech saw “Isaac fondling his wife Rebekah” and was wise. Of course, this is the same Abimelech that Abraham tried to dupe into believing Sarah was his daughter so I’m guessing was he at least a shade doubtful of Isaac’s story in the first place.
Abimelech is right to be angry, and points out just how selfish Isaac was. I think that’s been the root of so many of my frustrations with Abraham too. Interesting how the failures of the father echo so loudly in the son.
God’s grace continues to land on Isaac and a resentment grew in Abimelech’s people. I wonder if it was at least in part the sort of resentment that comes from witnessing a hypocrite at work. The reconciliation between Isaac and Abimelech reinforces that view: this was not an apology, per se. More a recognition that God’s side is the right side, even when the wrong people seem to be on it. Kind of a ‘the friend of my God is my friend, even if he’s my enemy’ sort of proposition. Credit to Abimelech and company for again displaying the maturity I typically associate with God’s team (again, my deficiencies coloring my view of earned favor) and Isaac for accepting their peace offerings.
Thoughts on Genesis 26?

What is going on between brothers bartering over a simple meal with such steep costs? People sure were dramatic then. Hyperbole (“I’m starved”) leads to ransom (“my stew for your birthright”) leads to a rash promise, bound into an oath. There are some strange sibling dynamics at work.
I do appreciate that Rebekah turned to God during her strange pregnancy. An odd characteristic is the tendency so often that figures had to ignore God until he overwhelmed them into corrected focus.
As for Abraham, he married again, had more kids and finally died. I’m not sure the circumstances, but I appreciate that Isaac and Ishmael buried him together. Thought time and time again family doesn’t work out quite the way I would expect (see: Cain and Abel; Lot and his daughters; etc) it seems good that the loss of their father would bring together two men pitted as antagonists through their mothers and children.
Thoughts?