My question:
Would it be correct to say that the non-geographical God (Yahweh) enacted a geographical/earthly space for His presence to be maintained as accessible by Israel through the parameters described in Leviticus and Numbers as an accommodation to their understanding of how gods ruled, and then Yahweh through Jesus would later bring the idea of a limited accessibility to His presence on earth to an end by making Himself/Yahweh accessible to all humanity (devoid of geographical boundaries) through faith/allegiance in Jesus?
ChatGPT response:
This is a very thoughtful synthesis — and it fits closely with the trajectory you’ve been building around access / sacred space / priesthood / reconciliation. Let’s slow it down and evaluate it carefully in biblical terms.
Short answer:
Yes — with refinement.
But it’s better framed as progressive revelation and covenantal pedagogy rather than mere “accommodation to pagan geography.”
1. Was Yahweh “Non-Geographical”?
In the ancient Near East, gods were typically tied to land.
Chemosh → Moab
Dagon → Philistia
Marduk → Babylon
But from the beginning, Yahweh is presented differently.
Creator of heaven and earth (Gen 1)
Owner of all lands (Ps 24:1)
Not contained by heaven itself (1 Kings 8:27)
Yet He chooses one land (Deut 12),
one people (Ex 19),
and one sanctuary (Lev 16).
So He is not geographically bound —
but He is geographically manifested.
That’s crucial.
2. The Tabernacle as Deliberate Sacred Geography
Leviticus and Numbers
Leviticus and Numbers create a graded access system:
Camp
Courtyard
Holy Place
Holy of Holies
Only the High Priest enters once per year (Lev 16).
This is not because God is geographically confined —
but because holiness radiates outward in degrees.
You’ve already articulated this in your “access motif”:
Sacrifice cleanses sacred space so approach is possible.
This is Eden theology in architectural form.
The tabernacle is:
Portable Eden
Controlled access to divine presence
A microcosm of heaven on earth
So yes — Yahweh enacted sacred geography.
But not because He thought like Baal.
Rather:
It trained Israel in how divine holiness works.
3. Was This “Accommodation”?
In one sense — yes.
Israel came out of Egypt with a deeply spatial view of divinity.
God did not abolish sacred space immediately.
Instead He:
Reoriented it
Centralized it
Moralized it
Universalized it (eventually)
This is pedagogical covenant development.
You could say:
God met Israel within their spatial categories, but reshaped them toward universal sovereignty.
That’s different from “copying paganism.”
It’s redemptive reframing.
4. Jesus and the End of Limited Geography
Now we move forward.
Jesus Christ and John’s Gospel
Key developments:
1. “Destroy this temple…” (John 2:19)
Temple becomes personal.
2. Woman at the well (John 4)
“Neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem…”
Access detaches from location.
3. Veil torn (Matt 27:51)
Spatial barrier symbolically removed.
4. Spirit indwelling (Acts 2)
Sacred space becomes distributed.
5. “You are God’s temple” (1 Cor 3:16)
This is massive.
What Leviticus restricted geographically,
Jesus universalizes relationally.
5. But Here Is an Important Nuance
God was never geographically limited.
Even in the Old Testament:
Foreigners could join (Num 15)
Prayers were heard from exile (Dan 6)
Naaman could worship outside Israel (2 Kings 5)
So the temple was never about containing God.
It was about regulated covenant access.
Jesus does not remove holiness.
He removes:
Ethnic boundary
Geographic centralization
Sacrificial repetition
Priesthood limitation
Access becomes:
Faith / allegiance / Spirit participation
6. Your Statement — Refined
Here’s a version that keeps your insight but sharpens it:
The Creator who is not geographically confined chose to localize His covenant presence within Israel’s sacred space as a pedagogical means of teaching holiness and mediated access. Through Jesus, that localized and restricted access is fulfilled and expanded, so that divine presence is no longer centralized in one land or temple but made universally accessible through allegiance to the enthroned Messiah.
That preserves:
Sacred space theology
Your access motif
Progressive covenant development
Avoids implying God once thought like pagan gods
7. How This Fits Your Larger Motif
This perfectly aligns with your:
Firstborn priesthood framework
Reconciliation as access
Eden restored theme
Gentile inclusion trajectory
Movement:
Eden (open presence)
↓
Tabernacle (guarded presence)
↓
Temple (centralized presence)
↓
Exile (presence displaced)
↓
Jesus (presence embodied)
↓
Spirit (presence distributed)
↓
New Creation (presence universalized)
That’s not geography disappearing.
That’s geography transformed.
It makes me think of this:
Mark 15:37-38 (HCSB)
But Jesus let out a loud cry and breathed His last. Then the curtain of the sanctuary was split in two from top to bottom.
Godspeed, to the brethren!
Check out my book!
theidolbabbler.com 