A few things I can’t help but notice in study:

1. That pretty much all we need to know is already revealed in the first few chapters of Genesis, for example: the steps God takes to move creation (and our submitted spirits and lives) from a state of chaos and ‘choshek’ to shalom and Shabbat (and the pattern we are meant to follow); the way we fall (religion – our inclination to ‘shema’ any other word than God’s); the dark side of our free will, that is, our desire to be ‘god’ in our own lives, which results in our rejection of God; and His incredible and inexplicable mercy and compassion in the face of that rebellion.  It almost sounds blasphemous, but it seems a picture of a humble God, which seems contradictory to common understanding of what God ‘should be’.  Yet if this is so, and we are ‘made in the image of God’ then shouldn’t we be seeking to live from a mind/will/life that is also this kind of humble, compassionate, merciful?  It really seems to emphasize the critical need for humility and patience with each other as fellow sinners (or prone-to-sin-ners), instead of the usual condescending or critical or dismissive attitude we often hold with each other

2. The apparent contradiction between the utterly rebellious, rejecting, self-justifying ‘pass the blame’ actions and seeming mind-set of Adam and Eve (they never are recorded as having repented)…and God’s seeming actions of ignoring his own conviction and sentence (death) on them, yet He commands Joshua to destroy the inhabitants of Canaan, not only the adults, but the children, babies, animals.  Could they possibly be more guilty than Adam and Eve?  This is jarring and it is often hard to resist trying to explain it, it’s a trust issue at this point that God knows more of the details than I do.  But it is still there waiting for possible illumination. 

3. That there are consistent patterns taught in Torah that have to do with numbers…2, 3 and 7 for example

The number two, for example: the second day of creation isn’t called ‘good’ until the events of day three are initiated; there are two brothers or two wives…and there is a right to a blessing that belongs to the first, but is taken, given, stolen or rejected and it is the second who receives and keeps that right.  Cain/Abel, Jacob/Esau, Leah/Rachel…and then the interesting comment in 1 Cor 15:45 about the first and second ‘Adam’.  According to this text, the first Adam rejected his blessing (that was to be extended to all humankind) and the last Adam received and remained in it and through him, all the other righteous ones find rebirth and renewing; the reversal of what happened in the first Adam. 

4. From all that is written about Jesus it does seem a real possibility that somehow there is a picture of scattering (exile) in the first Adam and regathering (returning) in the last Adam.  Both completely human, but both somehow also unique from all other humans in their original state, and one chose death but the other chose life. Hope and life were rejected by the first but revealed through the last.  And the key seems to be repentance, humility and obedience…which isn’t a new thing!  Though if this is so, that Jesus is the ‘last Adam’ in this sense, then why isn’t there evidence to support it?  The world today seems no better off in any way than the world then, different, but not better. There were ‘tzadiks’ before Jesus and there are ‘tzadiks’ after…why isn’t there a real difference?  In the grand scheme, the concept of Jesus really fits, but the evidence is kind of shaky.

A Work in Progress

I hold the following understanding:

• God exists

• There is only ONE God   

• The Law of God was given at creation, and known and obeyed by Adam, Noah, Abraham etc

• The Word of God was given to Israel as the manifesto of their new nation, at Mt Sinai, where it was recorded by ‘the finger of God’ (which may or may not be an idiom, but which in any case attaches a very specific and distinct  importance to the ten words) and is divine and the ‘plumb-line’ for the rest of the Law as well as in determining how to interpret or accept other writings

• The Torah (first 5 books) contain the teaching of God, and understood in relation to the ten words

• The Prophets call people back to the Law, they don’t add new teaching

• The Psalms and Writings are descriptive of the Law and a lawful life, but don’t add new teaching

• The Rabbinic writings and the ‘New Testament’ may contain good description of a lawful life, but don’t add new teaching and aren’t necessary to understand the Law, and if they contradict or appear to contradict the Law, they’re either misunderstood or in error

• The teaching of God is understood as a whole unit and not bits and pieces, and it makes common sense

• The Law teaches how to honour God and how to show that honour in relationships with fellow creatures

• The ‘New Covenant’ is the Law written not on tablets of stone, but on thinking minds and expressed in daily life        

• I reject any concept of God not taught in Torah; including ‘trinity’, God being or becoming human, and of any other divine being (‘Satan’) holding power in opposition to God for the souls of men 

• We're meant to learn Torah individually but also as a community; our Teacher is our Father; there's a need to remain humble and teachable in all states of knowledge, arrogance kills communication and stifles growth