Genesis Chapter 3 Commentary by Mark Dunagan

Genesis Chapter 3

Outline I.

The Temptation: 3:1-6

II.

Immediate Consequences: 3:7-10

III.

Confrontation and Excuses: 3:11-13

IV.

God's Judgment: 3:14-19

V.

God's Compassion: 3:15,21-22

VI.

Expulsion from the Garden: 3:23-24

“Needless to say, it is impossible to understand the rest of the Bible without understanding Genesis 3. God's intricate plan of redemption fulfilled in Christ is meaningless if the events of Genesis 3 are not historical” (Davis p. 85). The New Testament informs us that we are to understand Genesis 3 as being a strictly historical account (2 Cor. 11:3; 1 Timothy 2:13). Kidner points out, “On its historicity two things should be said. First, the New Testament assumes it and argues from it, making the first Adam as literal as the last, whose genealogy is indeed traced back to him in Luke 3:23ff. According to Romans 5:18,19; 1 Corinthians 15:20,21, Adam was ‘one man’, and his sin ‘one trespass’, as factual as 1 1

the cross and resurrection” (p. 66).

This chapter answers so many questions, especially concerning the existence of evil and suffering. “Atheism, in fact, is largely founded on the pessimistic belief that such an evil world proves either that God is not good (condoning evil as He does) or not omnipotent (and therefore unable to correct and remove evil). The philosophy of dualism tries to solve the problem by proposing an eternal principle of evil in the universe, as well as one of good” (Morris pp. 105-106).

We should be impressed that Genesis 3 provides the best and most logical answer for why evil and suffering exist (Romans 5:12). The answer that atheism must give for why people suffer (i.e. people suffer for no good reason, suffering is meaningless) is lame. In addition, for an atheist to bring up the "problem" of human suffering is to contradict his atheism. Every time the atheist complains about something that he or she perceives to be a "moral dilemma" or an ethical inconsistency they have just abandoned their atheism. Moral dilemmas do not exist in a no-God universe. Apart from the existence of God right and wrong, morals and ethics do not exist. It is significant that while the atheist abandoned God because of human suffering, the same atheist will not abandon evolution (which claims to be a system of survival, struggle and much suffering). Hence, we are forced to conclude that the problem of "human suffering" is simply an excuse that people hide behind.

The Serpent Genesis 3:1 “Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which Jehovah God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of any tree of the garden?”

“Was”: Watson notes, “Moses is not stating a fact of nature as he observed it in 1400 B.C. but a revealed fact of nature as it was in the dawn of history...though the snake if now far less ‘intelligent’ than the elephant, dolphin, chimpanzee and dog, he is still the Artful Dodger of the animal world...’clever at keeping out of trouble’...is the reputation which snakes still have in countries where they are plentiful” (p. 63).

“More subtle”: Crafty and cunning. “The most clever of all the wild beasts” (Sept).

2 2

“Which Jehovah God had made”: Aadlers observes, “When we establish this context we have no choice except to declare that the serpent also was good and that the favorable intent of the word (subtle) was intended” (p. 98). Since 1:31 had already declared everything very good which God had made, we already know that the serpent was not created for evil purposes or with an evil nature.

“And he said”: The New Testament informs us that the real tempter in the garden was the Devil (John 8:44; 2 Corinthians 11:3; Revelation 12:9). The serpent was simply a "tool" which the Devil used in his attempt to deceive Eve. If Satan can use free-willed, though ignorant human beings to entice others to sin (Matthew 16:2223), then he could equally use the animal creation. Some people have stumbled over the presence of a talking-snake in Genesis 3, and then insist that this and the surrounding chapter must be mythical. And yet: (a) We have talking animals further on in the Bible (Numbers 22:28), which the New Testament endorses (2 Peter 2:16). (b) The real speaker is the Devil (2 Cor. 11:3). (c) If this chapter is mythical, because of some miraculous event, then we must also consider the gospels and the book of Acts to be "myth", for they equally contain miraculous events.

The Temptation It is vital that we carefully observe how the Devil approached Eve, for his basic methods of temptation have not changed (2 Corinthians 2:11; 1 John 2:15-16).

“Yea, hath God said”: “Indeed, has God said” (NASV). “The serpent approached Eve...not with any brash denial or bitter denunciation. The sense would be, ‘Is it really true that…’” (Davis p. 88). “His first words should not be construed as a question but as an expression of shock and surprise” (Hamilton p. 188). “In other words, ‘Did God really say such a thing as that!’ Note the slightly mocking superior condescension to Eve's ‘naïve’ acceptance of God's command, a technique followed by Satan and his human emissaries with great success ever since” (Morris p. 110). “It served to raise a question about the fairness and justice of the trial command” (Aalders p. 99).

“The tempter begins with suggestion rather than argument. The incredulous tone —‘So God has actually said..?’ is both disturbing and flattering: it smuggles in the 3 3

assumption that God's word is subject to our judgment” (Kidner p. 67).

“Of any tree of the garden”: “He grossly exaggerates God's prohibition...Apart from this claim being…distortion, it is an attempt to create in the woman's mind the impression that God is spiteful, mean, obsessively jealous, and self-protective” (Hamilton pp. 188-189). “The circumstance that God has permitted man to make use of all the rest of the trees (Genesis 2:16) is pushed aside and negligible. The fact that man is definitely barred from one tree is dragged into the forefront and magnified into a grievous and very unwelcome restraint” (Leupold pp. 143-144).

Learn well how the Devil operates: (a) He tries to get us to question the Word of God, “Does the Bible really say that?” Skepticism concerning the Scriptures is not a mark of spirituality, rather it is a mark of being the Devil's tool. Unfortunately, even some Christians feel that they can "question" the wisdom of God's revelation all they want and yet still remain in His favor. It is so easy to start saying something like, “Now I'm not advocating this, but what would be wrong with....” (b) He tries to paint a picture of God in our minds of a cruel, oppressive and restrictive Creator who is not at all concerned about our happiness. (c) He tries to convince us that God's commands are completely unworkable, impossible and unreasonable. The ever popular, “Nobody can understand the Bible--or nobody can understand it alike” (i.e. hinting that it is unworkable and hence should be abandoned as our guide). (d) The Devil also tries to get us to focus in on what "we don't have or can't have" and ignore the abundant blessings that we do have. (e) He tries to convince us that God is holding out on us and that we are being unfairly deprived. (f) He appeals to our pride, “Are you really going to let Him tell you want to do?” (g) He tries to convince us that the things condemned in Scripture just can’t be that wrong.

Genesis 3:2 “And the woman said unto the serpent, Of the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat: Genesis 3:3 but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die”

“Neither shall ye touch it”: Eve "added" this to God's command. Compare these 4 4

verses with Genesis 2:16. How Eve responded to the Devil's question, is very insightful concerning what was going through her head at this time: (a) “By adding ‘neither shall ye touch it’ she overcorrects the error, magnifying God's strictness (she was to have many successors)” (Kidner pp. 67-68). (b) She failed to add that God permitted her and Adam to eat of all the other trees "freely" (2:16), indicating that Eve might be losing sight of God's goodness and generosity.

Ingratitude, losing sight of past and present blessings is often the first step towards sin (Romans 1:21). Making the commands of God's stricter isn't the key to overcoming temptation. The Pharisees were under the assumption that if they could build a fence of human rules around the law of God, they could keep people from sinning (Mark 7:1ff).

The answer to temptation is not being more conservative than God, and salvation isn't found in being the most conservative person around (Colossians 2:23). Salvation is found in appreciating the commands which God has delivered, and seeing God's goodness in His commands, and feeling that His commands need no room for improvement--in either a more conservative or liberal direction. God condemns both liberalism and conservatism which has departed from his word (2 John 9; Revelation 22:18-19) Genesis 3:4 “And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die” “Ye shall not surely die”: “After a careful approach the devil boldly advances to a positive denial of the Word of God. It should not be lost sight of how in temptations the attack centers about God's word” (Leupold p. 149). Notice how doubt in God's revelation is immediately followed by a flat denial of the truthfulness of His revelation. Doubt and skepticism never make one more "spiritual" or "loving" (the common assumption), rather they make one more "unbelieving". The very first doctrines denied are the goodness of God, the truthfulness of His commands, and the judgment of God. “Ye shall not surely die” is the equivalent to the modern, “God is too loving to punish anyone”.

Genesis 3:5 “for God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as God, knowing good and evil” “For God doth know”: Insinuating that God isn't being completely up-front about everything, i.e. that God is holding out or that a sinister purpose lies behind God's prohibition. “Your eyes shall be opened”: How often is some "sin" justified by the 5 5

contention that this activity will bring "enlightenment"? People said that drugs would expand your mind. The common justification for engaging in fornication is that one must "learn, get in touch with" or "develop" their sexuality, i.e. fornication is "educational". People claim that living together prior to marriage is essential, because one must "learn" whether compatibility is present in all areas or not.

“Ye shall be as God”: The Devil now appeals to human pride and arrogance (1 John 2:16 “the boastful pride of life”; Proverbs 18:12 “Before destruction the heart of man is haughty”). “To be as God, and to achieve it by outwitting Him, is an intoxicating program. God will henceforth he regarded, consciously or not, as rival and enemy...So the tempter pits his bare assertion against the word and works of God, presenting divine love as envy, service as servility, and a suicidal plunge as a leap into life. ‘All these things will I give thee’; the pattern repeats in Christ's temptations, and in ours” (Kidner p. 68). The Devil is saying that Eve doesn't have anything to fear from God, should she decide to go her own way. The Devil says that only "good and positive" things happen when you depart from God's word.

“Knowing good and evil”: Most of the Devil's temptations are "half-truths". God is not holding out on us, yet the Devil is (John 8:44). Davis observes, “What the tempter did not say, however, was that their opened eyes would see all things in the light of their own wickedness and rebellion...They saw good and evil only from the standpoint of sinners, from rock bottom” (pp. 89,91). They would "know" good and evil, i.e. they had once been good and now they were in sin. Leupold notes that the Devil purposely keeps many of his claims in "vague" language. “What advantages this entails is not stated. The good thing promised charms by its vagueness” (p. 150). Also note that the Devil never "commands" them to eat. He understands the art of seduction. The whole meaning of a passage can be completely changed by the addition of one word, “Ye shall not surely die”.

Hamilton notes, “the serpent intends to place before her the possibility of being more than she is and more than God intended her to be...Deification is a fantasy difficult to repress and a temptation hard to reject...Whenever one makes his own will crucial and God's revealed will irrelevant…that infinite individual attempts to rise above the limitations imposed on him by his creator” (p. 190).

The same type of temptation exists today: (a) The Devil has convinced many that our technology will save us, and we don't need God anymore. (b) He has 6 6

convinced others, that they need not accept the limitations God has placed upon them, i.e. if they don't like their gender, then they can change it.

Genesis 3:6 “And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat; and she gave also unto her husband with her, and he did eat”

Notice the "fatal" steps, "saw, she took, did eat". “The proposition that an adult can gaze at anything is ludicrous and naïve” (Matthew 5:28). The contention that what you listen to and what you watch doesn't have any real influence upon your life is also an ignorant viewpoint (2 Samuel 11:2-4).

“Saw that the tree was good for food”: Perspective is everything. The garden was full of many other trees which were good for food, yet we get into trouble when we focus upon that one thing we cannot have. We are ripe for temptation when we have allowed ourselves to lose sight of all the blessings which God gives us on a daily basis. “Delight to the eyes”: When in reality it probably wasn't that much more appealing than any other tree. “To be desired to make one wise”: “The tree made her think not of the horrible consequences of death but of the possibility of knowledge” (Davis p. 90). Kidner says, “The pattern of sin runs right through the act, for Eve listened to a creature instead of the Creator, followed her impressions against her instructions, and made self-fulfillment her goal. This prospect of material, aesthetic and mental enrichment (6a) seemed to add up to life itself; the world still offers it (1 Jn. 2:16)” (p. 68).

Hamilton notes, “Here is the essence of covetousness. It is the attitude that says I need something I do not now have in order to be happy” (p. 190). “That idea of sovereign independence, which had been presented to her by the serpent, lured her on” (Aalders p. 102).

“She took”: Merely "Looking" will never satisfy the person who is convinced that God is holding out on them. “Of the fruit”: The text never mentions the specific type of fruit. “And did eat”: “So simple the act, so hard its undoing” (Kidner p. 68).

Some actions can never be undone, even sincere repentance cannot change the physical consequences of some sins.

7 7

“And she gave also unto her husband”: “When Eve did not die (physically) immediately, she involved Adam in her sin. She may have felt that the tempter was correct after all” (Davis p. 90). “With her”: Many commentators just assume that Eve was alone when the serpent presented the temptation, yet the above expression may imply that Adam had been present during the whole discussion and temptation. Other verses seem to suggest such a view: (a) The New Testament places the entrance of sin at the feet of Adam, not Eve (Romans 5:12). Adam is viewed as being responsible for sin's entrance (1 Cor. 15:21-22). (b) This infers that Adam was guilty of sin, even before he ate, i.e. he had failed to speak up and protect the woman that God had given him. He had forsaken his responsibility of being the spiritual leader of his home. He had failed to "keep/protect" the garden (2:15).

Adam’s Silence F. LaGard Smith notes that Abraham failed in the same way (Genesis 12/20). “This was also the sin of Ananias…who, instead of supplying moral strength and direction to his wife...conspired with her...(Acts 5:1-11)” (p. 47). “If Adam was there but silent, it sheds new light on the problem with men. The church's interpretation of Genesis has perhaps allowed men to blame women for their problems--just as Adam blamed Eve--and to not face up to their failures....Like every man, I am silent just like Adam was silent. Sometimes I stand dumbfounded in the face of my confusion. When my wife asks me to share even the smallest part of myself, I occasionally bristle. When she cries, I may become angry with her. Her tears frighten me, because I don't know what to do with them. When she tells me I have done something wrong, I defend myself to the bitter end. If she finds fault with me, I find ten things wrong with her. I refuse to be wrong”. 1 God expects a man to be the spiritual leader of his family (Eph. 6:4). God doesn't endorse the concept of the "strong, silent type". Silent men are only inviting disaster into their homes.

“And he did eat”: The New Testament informs us that Adam ate with his eyes open (1 Timothy 2:14). “The woman does not try to tempt the man. She simply 1

'The Silence of Adam'. Dr. Larry Crabb pp. 90,97.

8 8

gives and he takes. He neither challenges nor raises questions. The woman allows her mind and her own judgment to be her guide; the man neither approves nor rebukes. Hers is a sin of initiative. His is a sin of acquiescence” (Hamilton p. 191).

Morris correctly notes “Many have suggested that he did this out of love for Eve, choosing to share her sin and guilt rather than leaving her to face God's judgment alone...this motive would almost make Adam appear noble in sinning, and the Bible never implies such a thing” (p. 114).

“If there is any clue as to how men and women might differ in their approach to temptation, it might be found in Eve's openness and trust....Eve may have overlooked the obvious command of God because, being guileless herself, she couldn't imagine someone else having guile. And her every instinct seemed to confirm his message. It looked right, it felt right...She looked at the fruit and it seemed okay to eat, she was impressed with how it looked aesthetically, and she felt that it would be a good thing to have the wisdom it could bring. ‘How could something with all that going for it possibly not be God's will?’ ....If you listen to some people who would promote a wider role for women in the church, you would hear them suggest that, in her sin, at least Eve acted intelligently and decisively, whereas to contrast Adam just took the fruit and crammed it down his throat! As if to say the woman's sin somehow comes off looking better than the man's! (As if to suggest that woman is more capable of making bad moral choices?)” (Smith pp. 44,43,44).

Smith makes an excellent observation when he notes, “There are many people today telling us that God's commands regarding the roles of men and women in the home (and, by extension, in the church) are not set in divine concrete...An expanded role for women in the church looks so good, feels so right, and sounds so spiritually true, so how in the world could it ever be contrary to God's will? But God had indeed said...And God through Paul has also said...(1 Timothy 2:11,12).

Eve, for all her good intentions and comfortable feelings, ignored what God had plainly commanded her. Are we, with good intentions and comfortable feelings, tempted to ignore what God has commanded us?” (pp. 61-62).

The Immediate Consequences Genesis 3:7 “And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig-leaves together, and made themselves aprons” 9 9

“They knew that they were naked”: Sin and temptation never deliver what is really promised. Here we see what countless others have also experienced, i.e. the anti-climax that accompanies sin. This Scripture also suggests that you can never really predict how you will feel after you have sinned. “What was formerly understood (nakedness) to be a sign of a healthy relationship between the man and the woman (2:25) has now become something unpleasant and filled with shame” (Hamilton p. 191). It is interesting to note that many in our society suggest that the path to freedom is through things that are sinful. Yet Adam and Eve sinned and they didn't become liberated (they were liberated before they sinned), they became "uptight" after they sinned. I think Aalders is correct in noting that more than just physical nakedness is under consideration here, i.e. their attempts to cover themselves physically is the outward manifestation of a guilty conscience, that is, they felt lacking before each other and God. “They sewed fig leaves together”: “Were pathetic enough, as human expedients tend to be…The couple, now ill at ease together, experienced a foretaste of fallen human relations in general. There is no road back, as the nudists, suppose and those who make a cult of frankness” (Kidner p. 69). “These actions suggest urgency and desperation” (Wenham p. 76). “It may be noted incidentally that the shame of nudity is no artificial inhibition introduced by the conventions of civilization, as certain anthropologists and self-serving sophisticates have urged” (Morris p. 116).

Genesis 3:8 “And they heard the voice of Jehovah God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of Jehovah God amongst the trees of the garden”

Consider the immediate consequences of sin: (a) Shame (which isn't something invented by a repressed society). (b) Fear. (c) Hiding from God. (d) Strained human relationships.

“Walking in the garden”: In the Hebrew suggests a habitual walk, “Such walks would take place in the early evening (the cooler time of the day)...Far from anticipating another time of fellowship with deity, the couple--now attempt to hide even from God” (Hamilton p. 192). Often the young and old are told that serving 10 10

God will cause you to "miss out". Adam and Eve found the exact opposite to be true. Life had been great when they were in fellowship with God. Their marriage had been great! Not serving God is what really causes you to miss out on really living. “Hid themselves”: Mankind has been hiding ever since. We might not use fig-aprons and trees to hide behind any more, but most people still do hide behind such things as atheism, humanism, evolution, false religion, 'I'm OK, you're OK', 'I'm a good moral person', 'Everyone is going to heaven', and so on. “Amongst the trees in the garden”: “The narrator refrains from commenting on exactly how one can camouflage himself and thus escape detection by God” (Hamilton p. 192). See Hebrews 4:12-13; Psalm 139:7-12. This brings up another consequence of sin: You're going to do and believe some very silly things if you try to live without God (Luke 15:12-17; 2 Thess. 2:10-12; 2 Tim. 4:3-4). Sin eventually makes a "fool" out of everyone who engages in it.

Confrontation Genesis 3:9 “And Jehovah God called unto the man, and said unto him, Where art thou?”

“Where art thou”: God knows where they are, but God is giving man the opportunity to repent and confess. “God's first word to fallen man has all the marks of grace” (Kidner p. 70). “Marvel of all marvels...God did not give up pursuit. He knew that Adam and Eve had sinned and still He made the approach.

No clearer picture could be painted of God's concern for the lost human race” (Davis p. 92). Even after man has sinned and violated a very basic and fair law, God still pursues the sinner (Romans 5:6-8).

Genesis 3:10 “And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself” “I was afraid”: Note how out of sync the world is with reality. People claim that believing in God/religion is to blame for all the "guilt" and fear in the world. What produced fear and guilt? Is was not serving God. Adam doesn't "fess up" at this point. He tells God about the "consequences" of his wrong action, but he doesn't admit that he did anything wrong. He wasn't straight-forward with God. Genesis 3:11 “And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten 11 11

of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat?”

Excuses, Excuses, Excuses

Genesis 3:12 “And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat” “The woman”: Adam admits a little bit more in this verse, but he infers that the real blame belongs to the woman. “Thus, in a way, he even blamed God, who had placed such a dangerous creature at his side” (Aalders p. 104). “Instead of praising God for His goodness, he blamed Him for his troubles!” (Morris p. 117). “Through rationalization the criminal becomes the victim, and it is God and the woman who emerge as the real instigators in this scenario” (Hamilton p. 194). “Here the divisive effects of sin, setting man against his dearest companion (cf. 2:23) and alienating him from his all-caring creator, are splendidly portrayed” (Wenham p. 77). Here we find another consequence of sin, i.e. cowardice, dishonesty, defending self at the expense of all others, the willingness to sacrifice others to cover your own faults and avoid punishment. Smith notes, “Whatever happened to his excited ‘This is bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh?’ Now the story is, ‘I never asked for her in the first place!’...Sin invariably attempts to spread the blame” (p. 49). It is interesting to note that Adam doesn't blame the serpent. Unfortunately many of us today end up blaming those who love us the most for our problems.

Genesis 3:13 “And Jehovah God said unto the woman, What is this thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat” Kidner contends, “God, by addressing man, woman and the serpent in that order, has shown how He regards their degrees of responsibility” (p. 70). Eve also tries to evade her responsibility. Neither Adam or Eve initially demonstrated any signs of repentance.

The Consequences and The Serpent

12 12

Genesis 3:14 “And Jehovah God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, cursed art thou above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life” Some complain, “How could God punish a mere animal, which was only the tool for Satan?” Kidner contends that the serpent never did have legs, but that “the crawling is henceforth symbolic—“ (p. 70). That is, the crawling is given a new significance. Morris notes, “Not because of direct culpability on its part, but rather as a perpetual reminder to man of the instrument of his fall and of the final destruction of Satan himself” (p. 118). We must also remember that animals have often suffered because of human sin (1 Samuel 15:1ff; Genesis 6:7; 7:21). “God's curse fell on innocent animals to remind us humans of the terrible result of human sin” (Watson p. 65). This also teaches us that willing and ignorant "tools" of the Devil will be punished along with the Devil himself (Matthew 25:41; Luke 12:47-48; 2 Thess. 1:8-9). So I need to make sure that I am not his accomplice. “Dust shalt thou eat”: The language of humiliation and judgment (Ps. 72:9; Isa. 49:23; Mic. 7:17).

The Promised Messiah Genesis 3:15 “and I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed: He shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise His heel” “Enmity”: Hostility and hatred. “Her seed”: Most consider this passage to be the first promise of the Messiah. The real power behind the Serpent was Satan himself (2 Cor. 11:3) and the "seed of the woman" is an expression that sounds a lot like “born of a woman” which is used in reference to Jesus Christ (Galatians 4:4). This verse may have a primary reference to the hostility between people and snakes, “There are places in the world where ten times as many people are killed by snakes as by all other kinds of animal life put together” (Aalders p. 106). Yet more seems to be involved in this verse that simply the general relationship between people and snakes: (1) It would be strange for God to pronounce a judgment upon everyone at the crime scene, except the Tempter himself (i.e. Satan). (2) The "seed of the woman" has a wound inflicted by the serpent (“thou shalt bruise his heel”), which isn't fatal. I think it is clear that since this is a judgment upon the serpent, it is assumed that the serpent will be defeated in this conflict.

13 13

“Bruise thy head”: This would be a fatal wound. Jesus came to destroy the works of the Devil (Hebrews 2:14-15; 1 John 3:8). In dying for our sins the devil inflicted a minor wound upon the Son of God, yet Jesus was raised from the dead, and in doing so sealed Satan's eventual doom. Smith and others note that this may also include a reference between Satan and the offspring of the woman, “God may be telling Satan that the human race would not always be such pushovers--that, taking a cue from Adam and Eve, they would be more suspicious of Satan's ploys. Even if he managed to be successful with most people, Satan would not be entirely successful with all” (Smith p. 51). Morris reasons in a similar vein. He argues that in deceiving Eve, Satan saw his chance to gain control over the human race. With the man and the woman doing his bidding, through them he could eventually gain a host of obedient followers, i.e. their children and descendants. Yet God quickly nips his plan in the bud: (a) All will not follow him so obediently. (b) Conception and childbirth would not be easy and rapid. (c) And one child born of the woman would end up bringing about his own downfall. Before moving on we should note that the Bible is scientifically accurate in saying that the woman has a "seed". For along time the "experts" believed that only the male of any species had a seed of propagation.

Consequences for the Woman Genesis 3:16 “Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy pain and thy conception; in pain thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee” “I will greatly multiply thy pain and thy conception”: “Your pain in childbearing” (RSV); “Your pain in childbirth” (NASV). This seems to suggest that "pain" would have been part of childbirth, even before sin entered the world. That an earthly paradise would involve work (2:15), some effort and some toil. “The sentences on the man and woman take the form of a disruption of their appointed roles” (Wenham p. 81).

Watson makes the excellent point that human suffering during childbirth causes big problems for the evolutionist. “Why should man, the most ‘successful’ mammal, have the greatest difficulty in reproducing the species? Why do female humans suffer so much more than female animals?” (p. 66). Carefully observe that 14 14

in all of these judgments upon the woman and the man, we find mercy. The woman isn't cursed with infertility...Childlessness is not her lot. And the man isn't cursed with starvation.

“And thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over you”: This is probably one of the most debated and discussed verses in Genesis 3. First of all we need to find out what the word "desire" means in this verse.

Many writes argue that same word rendered "desire" which occurs here and in Genesis 4:7 must have the same meaning. Hence they argue that "desire" here means the "desire to dominate". “Susan Foh…argued that the woman's urge is not a craving for her man whatever he demands but an urge for independence, indeed a desire to dominate her husband” (Wenham p. 81). Hamilton argues that both the words "desire" and "rule" have harsh meanings (Kidner agrees: 'To love and to cherish' becomes 'To desire and to dominate' p. 71). “It means a desire to break the relationship of equality and turn it into a relationship of servitude and domination.

The sinful husband will try to be a tyrant over his wife. ....the relationship now becomes a fierce dispute, with each party trying to rule the other” (p. 202).

Yet Davis takes "desire" in a positive light, “A desire so strong for something that one would run after...It seems reasonable to conclude that this ‘desire’ was given to alleviate the sorrows of womanhood and to bind the hearts of husband and wife ever more closely together” (p. 94). Some feel the word desire has a sexual and or emotional meaning, “She who sought to strive apart from man and to act independently of him…finds a continual attraction for him” (Leupold p. 172).

Wenham is right when he says, “Evidently he does not regard female subordination to be a judgment on her sin. In that woman was made from man to be his helper and is twice named by man (2:23; 3:20) indicates his authority over her” (p. 81). So subjection is not the punishment.

My own observations on this sentence are: (a) Even though the woman would experience intense pain in childbirth, she would still desire her husband. Even "sin" cannot finally drive the sexes apart, in fact, this desire is so strong that some woman will even stay with an abusive husbands. (b) Bad things happen when 15 15

both men and women fail to live up to their God-given roles. (c) Both genders are capable of abuse. Selfish women try to rule and manipulate their husbands and sinful men dominate and treat their wives in a very harsh manner. (d) God doesn't side with either the "good-ole-boys" or the feminists, both philosophies are just as self-serving and sinful. (e) Both the man and the woman can only find "protection" in Jesus Christ (Ephesians 5:22-33). (f) All self-striving results in self-losing. Adam remained silent and hence opened up the door for wives that manipulate. Eve took the lead and hence opened up the door for husbands that are abusive in one form or another. (g) We are either sowing the seeds for success in the next generation or destruction. What our children learn from us (by teaching and example) will either strengthen their future relationships or undermine them.

Consequences for the Man Genesis 3:17 “And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in toil shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life” “Hearkened unto the voice of thy wife”: Nothing is wrong with listening to your wife or even taking advice from her. What God condemns is obeying the voice of your wife instead of obeying God (Matthew 10:37). “Cursed is the ground”: “How different from life in the garden! Keeping it had been enjoyable, and Adam's labor had resulted in complete and unhindered productivity” (Davis p. 94). “In toil”: The woman's pain would be connected with childbearing (or someone said, in the realm of relationships). The man's pain and frustration would be found in trying to earn a living. “As the woman is doomed to suffer in her fundamental role as wife and mother, man will be similarly afflicted in his basic role as farmer and food-producer.(2:15)” (Wenham p. 82).

Genesis 3:18 “thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field”

“Thorns and thistles”: “Are eloquent signs of nature un-tamed and encroaching...a perennial threat” (Kidner p. 72). God either could have created these thorns or Morris argues, “He...rather withdrew that extension of His power which had 16 16

maintained a ‘steady state’ of life and order, thus allowing all things gradually to disintegrate toward disorder” (p. 125). “Evolution has no explanation to offer for the existence of thorns. ‘They protect the plant’, some say. So roses are protected, and dahlias unprotected. Yet over the centuries dahlias have ‘survived’, apparently, just as well as roses. Similarly, blackberries and gooseberries have thorns, raspberries and strawberries have none. But all grow equally well--even in the wild. Once again, the Bible explanation fits the facts. God put thorns onto some plants--mercifully, not all--to remind us that this world is under His curse” (Watson p. 67).

Genesis 3:19 “in the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return” “In the sweat of thy face”: Carefully note that "work" is not a consequence of sin (2:15), rather, it is work that is surrounded by obstacles, difficulties and opposing forces which are pulling in the opposite direction. “Eat bread”: "Early man" is a farmer. '"Prehistory" textbooks often state that man was first a hunter, then a farmer” (Watson p. 69). “Dust shalt thou return”: Adam and Eve would physically die. The Laws of Thermodynamics now applied to them. Various writers suggest that since Adam would not actually die until some 930 years later (5:5), that we see God's grace in these opening chapters. Sometimes we forget that "death" also contains "grace" and "mercy", i.e. that death can be seen in a positive light. Morris reminds us, “It was better that suffering and death accompany sin than that rebellion be permitted to thrive unchecked...With no death, men would proliferate in number and wickedness without limit” (p. 126). With death also came disease and more suffering. During this same time it is reasonable to assume that certain plants, animals and insects became poisonous and certain forms of bacteria became deadly. Again, the New Testament agrees that Genesis presents a historically accurate picture of what really happened (Romans 5:12; 1 Corinthians 15:21-22).

A New Man and New Covering

Genesis 3:20 “And the man called his wife's name Eve; because she was the 17 17

mother of all living” “Eve”: Seeing the text says that Eve was the "mother of all living", this excludes the notion of any human beings before Adam and Eve. This also seems to be a demonstration of Adam's faith. Even though death has entered the world, and Adam and Eve will both eventually die, the human race will survive (3:16). Morris notes, “Another point worth nothing is that Adam and Eve were not in the garden very long before their sin took place. God had commanded them to ‘be fruitful and multiply’, and in their initial state of fellowship and obedience, they would of course have set about immediately to follow this command” (p. 129). It seems clear that the very first child was Cain (4:1; 4:25).

Genesis 3:21 “And Jehovah God made for Adam and for his wife coats of skins, and clothed them” “God made”: Again, the mercy of God is demonstrated. Life outside the garden will not be easy. The fig-loin coverings wouldn't last long "on the farm". Man and woman need something more modest but also more durable and useable. God helps Adam and Eve "prepare" for their new existence. Hamilton observes, “The couple are not expelled nude from the garden. They are not sent beyond the garden totally vulnerable. In the same way Cain is marked before he is exiled (4:15), and God announces the post-Flood covenant even before the Flood commences (6:18)” (p. 207). “Coats of skins”: Kidner observes, “The coats of skins are forerunners of the many measures of welfare, both moral and physical, which man's sin makes necessary” (p. 72). “More than simply a covering. It is an actual robe-like garment.” (Hamilton p. 207). The same word is used in reference to one of the garments worn by the priests (Ex. 28:39; 39:27). Again it must be noted that in a world cursed by sin we cannot be naive. Nakedness has lost its innocence in our world. We cannot go back to the garden, the nudists are wrong. And neither can we argue that our society is so enlightened, that nothing is considered immodest anymore or that no one bothers to look at an immodestly dressed man or woman.

Modest clothing is essential, not because God is a prude, but because we live among human beings which are selfish. The same lust can be kindled in everyone of us also (James 1:13-14).

Paradise Lost 18 18

Genesis 3:22 “And Jehovah God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever” “The man has become as one of us”: Genesis 1:26 “To know good and evil”: Man isn't now equal with God or divine as the serpent claimed. Yet Adam and Eve now know good and evil by actual practice. As one writer said, they knew it from the rock-bottom perspective. Carefully note that "knowing good and evil" in this sense is a sad thing. Some claim that you must try everything in life. Others argue that everyone must live on the wild-side now and then or have at least one vice. To lose one's innocence is not something to celebrate, rather, it is something to mourn.

“Lest…eat…and live forever”: This seems to infer that Adam and Eve had not partaken of the tree of life previous to this point. The text doesn't say "again". This appears to be a logical consequence of sin, i.e. seeing that death entered the world, access to the tree of life must be removed. It also seems to be an act of mercy on the part of God. Since death has entered the world, death now becomes a part of man's hope and redemption. Death now becomes an escape from the trials of this world, a step into a better life for the faithful (Phil. 1:21-23; Luke 16:19ff). It would be a tragedy for Adam and Eve to eat and thus live forever on this planet, and yet apart from God's presence.

Genesis 3:23 “therefore Jehovah God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken” “To till the ground”: An imperfect world isn't any excuse for not being productive. God doesn't give Adam the right to give up or commit suicide. He is expected to deal with his new environment. For this harsh world even contains "grace and mercy" (Luke 6:36; Acts 14:17).

Genesis 3:24 “So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden the Cherubim, and the flame of a sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life” 19 19

“At the east”: Evidently this was the side on which the entrance to the garden was found. “Cherubim”: Spiritual beings (Exodus 25:18; 26:1). Leupold notes, “Because they are elsewhere in the Scriptures described as ‘the living ones’…they must represent the highest type of (created) living beings. They are particularly found in the Scriptures as honored by the privilege to stand in the immediate presence of the heavenly King...The root from which the word may be derived would suggest that the word as much means ‘a brilliant appearance’” (pp. 183-184).

“The flame of a sword”: “A revolving or zigzagging sword…is one that is sure to hit and bring death” (Wenham p. 86).

Closing Observations Some people complain that God put Adam and Eve at a great disadvantage. Yet the text tells us differently: (a) They were anything but deprived (2:15-16). (b) They had clear instructions from God (2:17). God hadn't burdened them down with excessive rules. (c) Proof existed all around them that God loved them very much (2:18ff). Leupold writes, “Yet a word on the question often raised at this point: ‘Why must there be a temptation?’ or ‘Why does God permit His chief creature on earth to be tempted?’ Does He not desire man's supreme happiness?

Why, then, does He permit a temptation which leads to 'death and all our woe?’

The answer must always be that God will have only that count as moral behavior worthy of being made in God's image, which is freely given and maintained even where the possibility of doing otherwise offers itself” (p. 145).

In addition, temptation and sin, not only open the door for punishment, but also for salvation and redemption. I think we need to remember that the ultimate goal was to get mankind to heaven. An earthly paradise wasn't the original goal.

Temptation and sin, gave God the opportunity to provide a Savior. Hence, the Devil didn't take God by surprise in the garden, actually God pulled one over on the Devil, without the Devil initially knowing about it, i.e. by tempting Adam and Eve the Devil was really cutting his own throat, for their temptation eventually lead to a Savior (3:15), who would and eventually will crush the Devil's power and influence (Matthew 25:41).

20 20