One thing that I thought that was interesting and I think is part of why Peterson’s discussion of the Biblical stories is how he will read a passage, then instantly go off into talking about his psychological practice. Maybe that goes into why he feels that pastors don’t believe what they are saying, since how could they not tie it into their real life? I feel that a lot of examples that people give in stories are cliches and maybe helpful. Idk… it was just an idea. One thing that I might say that stuck out to me was how you said, “God meets Israel face to face and Israel can’t stand it” and that reminded me of Jacob (before he was Israel) wrestling with God. One question that I had been wrestling with was how in Exodus (I think), it says that Moses was talking face to face with the LORD but it also says like a distance of a few verses that Moses couldn’t see God’s face. I had struggled with that and maybe tried to think of a way that it could be interpreted differently. At one point I googled “Jesus in the Old Testament” (looking for prophesies of him and I found someone arguing that the Angel of the LORD is Jesus: http://www.gordonconwell.edu/resources/Jesus-in-the-Old-Testament.cfm) At some point later I found Michale Heiser talking about the Jewish idea of two powers in Heaven: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hz8J4DTIkEg&ab_channel=FaceLikeTheSun and recently I found these (relatively) short videos on the topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNt5NKSse0Y&ab_channel=InspiringPhilosophy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-aVQ8MELeg&ab_channel=InspiringPhilosophy and the idea that this explains how these two verses with Moses make sense. Certainly, it helps explain how someone can say that No one has seen God multiple times when people see God all the time in the Torah. I think that one thing that it interesting is that Peterson does not really seem to bring in some of the passages that really scream “Chaos and monsters”, but he still finds it. I am not sure if it is because he has studied the rest of the Bible or he has heard it from ANE studies people or what: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbXHarFlX1s&t=5s&ab_channel=SentinelApologetics I also wished that I lived near Sacramento. Thank you. 🙂
I did my graduate work on Stephen’s speech in Acts 7, and much of my effort was focused on the function of the Temple in the speech and within the entire Lukan corpus. I became convinced that Luke’s Temple theology was significantly derived from the Deuteronomic vision of the Temple, expressed most prominently in the passages that described the doxological life of the community “at the place that the Lord your God will choose as a dwelling for his name”. In my analysis, I particularly emphasized the function of the Temple as the locus for the formation of the People of God – that place where all Israel, especially the orphan, the widow, the stranger, and all those who existed on the margins of society – were drawn together for the purpose of joyful celebration together in the presence of YHWH. I believe that Luke, unlike the other evangelists who conveyed more of an anti-Temple polemic – actually viewed the Temple in high regard, and that Jesus was fulfilling the function of the Temple in his daily preaching in the Temple, and that the early church continued to inhabit that vision as they daily continued to gather at the Temple. Of course this view introduces a problem wherein the schism that soon erupts following Stephen’s death, and the subsequent destruction of the Temple in AD70 eliminates any further opportunity for the physical Temple to offer any eschatalogical promise to the new Israel. I did not treat this question in much depth in my work, other than to posit that the subsequent geographic expansion by the Church to occupy the whole face of the earth from the singular location of the Temple represented some form of transitional movement to a more universal expression of the People of God. Your exposition here offers some intriguing possibilities for consideration. Seeing the Genesis account as a cosmic Temple creation, and the Revelation as an expression of the entire cosmos fully subsumed as a Temple, one is compelled by the fascinating possibility that the entire biblical story is a giant inclusio with Temple at the outer limits of the chiastic form. At the center of the chiasmus we find Jesus, having been the only one to fully satisfy the Law and the prophets, assuming his rightful role in “the place the the Lord your God will choose as a dwelling for his name.” The great turning point in history is the Jesus event, where the fallen Creation is now being restored. Thanks for the insight, Paul.