Jesus in every book...but not Satan.

Received an email from Logos that had this blurb.

Granted, this is more of a theological assertion than a scholarly assertion (though surely these two can overlap?), but even among many with a theological proclivity, it has become passé...or even a sign of provincial naiveté...to insist that hassaataan is to be found in Genesis. I wonder why that is?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

DAL

Because they’ll have another sale on Satan later 😂 It’s just business 👍😁👌

DAL

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1074383#Comment_1074383

Just find it odd that there are people who seem willing to say, "The serpent in Genesis...is just a snake, but the seed of the woman...that's JESUS!!!"

Simon’s Brother

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1074409#Comment_1074409

Just as odd is the claim Jesus is on every page, in every single story. You need to read things into the text that are not there to make those sort of claims. But don’t let that get in the way of a ‘good’ marketing blurb, especially when you use a popular children’s bible story book to back up your claim. FL seem a bit confused as to who their market is when they come up with stuff like this advertisement.

Agreed David people are willing to say odd things.

J. Remington Bowling

When will FL realize their market is pretentious academics keeping up with the most enlightened opinions of their colleagues and who don't say embarrassing stuff that sounds as though God might have had some coherent plan spanning the entirety of human history?

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1074422#Comment_1074422

When will FL realize their market is pretentious academics

I hope that you are wrong ... but some academics are better trained than others. Your characterization is a gross misrepresentation of my hugely insignificant sample of 3 Biblical academics that I have known well enough to make an informed judgment.

However, I am often tempted to suggest that FL takes their market to be sloppy academics when I see how many errors are not reported and corrected. Note while I get very annoyed at the error rate in Logos, the error rate is actually quite low for the industry. But if users paid attention and reported errors, we could get it even lower.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1074412#Comment_1074412

Just as odd is the claim Jesus is on every page, in every single story

What? I thought you'd have been one of the first to pick up on the red Jesus watermark behind every FL screen [8-|]

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1074422#Comment_1074422

spanning the entirety of human history?

Pretentious, enlightened-opinions, embarrassing, sounds-as-though. That'd be a neat crossword. Those same academics portray the Navajo 4th level origin story as untrue, maybe copied. But that's just their opinion. How could they know? What's not there might be there.

Simon’s Brother

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1074432#Comment_1074432

Just as odd is the claim Jesus is on every page, in every single story

What? I thought you'd have been one of the first to pick up on the red Jesus watermark behind every FL screen

What? I thought that was an errant visual filter which I was yet to find the source so I could remove it. Now I understand... [H]

Eduardo Fergusson

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1074438#Comment_1074438

I don't understand the nature of this thread, there are scholars who believe that Jesus is seen in Genesis, so is more of a theological position, maybe FL is not aiming at you with this publicity...

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1074444#Comment_1074444

there are scholars who believe that Jesus is seen in Genesis

For myself, I complain when FL is anachronistic in their tagging to put the Holy Spirit into the first chapter of Genesis. However, I also hold with Fr. Alexander Schemann that Christians rightly read the Old Testament through the lens of the Cross - a view obviously not available to the author or intended audience of the OT scripture. There is also the question of "all scripture points to" can either mean all scripture collectively or it may mean some minimum size of text - a jot? a tiddle? five verses? If I were creating an ad campaign, I'd stress the recent studies on the topic and suggest the buyer might want to learn why it is such a hot topic. That way I don't push a particular theological perspective or get myself in tangles with the theological perspective of other ads.

James Chandler

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1074422#Comment_1074422

When will FL realize their market is pretentious academics

I may be pretentious, but I don't consider myself an academic. I got my Master's only because it was necessary to move into ministry.

David Thomas

Interesting that at the same moment David Paul initiated this thread I was listening to a podcast by Logos author Andreas Kostenberger about the different approaches to Biblical Theology. They had 2 episodes (15 minutes each) with Jason DeRouchie about approaches of Biblical Theology in the OT. For those who prefer text over audio, there is also a blog on the subject.

SineNomine

1. The genealogy of Jesus given in Luke traces back to (and through) Adam, who shows up in Genesis.

2. The Gospel of John is generally understood by scholars (and everyone else) to be teaching that Jesus is the Logos through whom God created the world. Genesis begins with two accounts of God creating the world.

FL's marketing in the highlighted line isn't necessarily a "theological assertion".

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1074633#Comment_1074633

Isn't your proof, proof of the Christian reading of the OT rather than proof that the plain meaning of the OT contains Jesus? Admittedly, I have no horse in this race but should we ever gain a significant Jewish market we should remember that there is a distinction.

MWW

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1074687#Comment_1074687

As a Christian I found Faithlife's advertisement for "Christ in the Old Testament" something that caught my attention and drew my interest. I think that is what they were hoping for. I also hope they don't worry too much about being PC. [:)]

Allen Browne

Granted, this is more of a theological assertion than a scholarly assertion (though surely these two can overlap?), but even among many with a theological proclivity, it has become passé...or even a sign of provincial naiveté...to insist that hassaataan is to be found in Genesis. I wonder why that is?

Perhaps it's because Rev 12:9 identifies the "ancient serpent" as Satan.

What I do is to encourage readers to hear the Genesis story in its own setting first, before trying to make sense of it in canonical context.

To use an analogy, a good spy novel might contain a murder in the first chapter. Later in the book it's revealed as an assassination by a foreign power, but we don't have that information up front: we're meant to hear the opening chapter as the story that leads us into a greater conflict. So, we need to start by reading Genesis 3 as a collusion between humans (agents/images of the heavenly king and guards of his garden) and a lower animal (one they're meant to manage), leading to rebellion against earth's true sovereign, a grasping for power that results in all the relational strife/conflict we experience.

Simon’s Brother

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1074697#Comment_1074697

What I do is to encourage readers to hear the Genesis story in its own setting first, before trying to make sense of it in canonical context.

Totally agreed.

Reuben Helmuth

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1074692#Comment_1074692

I also hope they don't worry too much about being PC.

Agreed. I'd prefer they were a little more Mac. 😜

P.S. I do also agree with your intended meaning!

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1074697#Comment_1074697

What I do is to encourage readers to hear the Genesis story in its own setting first, before trying to make sense of it in canonical context.

Agreed

Mark

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1074697#Comment_1074697

What I do is to encourage readers to hear the Genesis story in its own setting first, before trying to make sense of it in canonical context.

This should always be the first step.

Hamilton Ramos

Read the posts, very interesting to see the different reactions / opinions.

I thank God for all the unpretentious, non-academicians, that really get it very simply:

Jesus the "Word made flesh" ring a bell?

How about Jesus the "Living Torah"? bad news for the Religious authorities in Jesus' times that self-proclaimed living Torah themselves.

Colossians 2:8 See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ. 9 For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily, 10 and you have been filled in him, who is the head of all rule and authority. 11 In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, 12having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead. 13 And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, 14 by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross. 15 He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him.

Looks like Jesus is the Word of God come from Him, made flesh to be nailed to the cross to free us from our legal demand.

As Jesus came out of God to work for us, God's Word comes to accomplish His purposes, they are related, and all work in our benefit.

I am conscious that Jesus is the key to the whole of individual salvation, He must be there in all of God's Word, because that was the plan from before the foundation of the World, the slain Lamb was sacrificed for us adopted children.

As far as satan, just a minor player, a created being whose end will be in the lake of fire, a place created specially for him and his minions, lake of fire not created for man, so shame on those that end up there by choosing the wrong side. So yes it is not all over, and is not of major relevance, is just a defeated adversary with a sealed destiny.

As far as the Word of God goes, it will judge, and those that conquer will get to sit c Jesus, the true epic Hero of the Story.

Simple, elegant, effective. Easy to get it by the unpretentious non-academicians. LOL.

Michael S.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1075001#Comment_1075001

As this thread is very close to venturing into Theological debate, I will just posit this one thing- how many times do the NT writers take OT Scriptures and apply them to Jesus, even though in the original context, they were about Israel? How did Abraham see Christ's day and rejoice? How did Moses speak of Jesus? Bottom line, if you deny that Christ is in the OT, then you are ignoring the NT. Im done, thank you for your time.

Simon’s Brother

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1075633#Comment_1075633

The post was never a denial of Christ’s presence in the OT but questioning why some deny Satan’s presence in the fall account.

As this thread is very close to venturing into Theological debate, I will just posit this one thing- how many times do the NT writers take OT Scriptures and apply them to Jesus, even though in the original context, they were about Israel? How did Abraham see Christ's day and rejoice? How did Moses speak of Jesus? Bottom line, if you deny that Christ is in the OT, then you are ignoring the NT. Im done, thank you for your time.

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1075708#Comment_1075708

questioning why some deny Satan’s presence in the fall account.

Actually, it was apocryphal jewish writers who saw 'the fall' (Sirach, and Eve only), and Satin/snake in Wisdom. Both late 2nd Temple, and leading to the Talmud and Kabala. The closest clear Christian usage is the early catholic church fathers, similar to the Mishnah.. Revelations quite obviously is Yam, but the references are interpretive.

Now, the Cherubim are far clearer. They're still on guard duty somewhere in the middle-east (smiling; churchmen happily choose what is real and what is not).

Simon’s Brother

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1075731#Comment_1075731

As always interesting insight.