The Fall of MAN II

(Genesis 3:17-24)

EDEN TO ZION VIDEO SERIES

Transcript

Introduction

Hello, I’m Stephen Buckley, and this is part 2 of Genesis 3, working verse by verse through the pivotal moment in the history of man, shortly after the creation week.

In part one we witnessed Satan as the serpent deceive the woman; she ate; he ate; and when he eat everything changed.

God inquired of the couple beginning with Adam as head, and began his judgment with the serpent, before turning to the woman, and today we are going to look at the remaining verses 17-24, beginning with Adam’s judgment and the aftermath: the consequences immediate, lifelong, and those that remain.

Let’s get straight into it.

God spoke to the Man

Adam is held responsible for his own sin but also the corporate sin of his family and humanity as representing leader, and all under his rule are affected in his judgment. The buck stops with him. This priest-King is not immune to discipline.

Prepare to sin, prepare to suffer.

“And to Adam he said,

“Because you have listened to the voice of your wife

and have eaten of the tree

of which I commanded you,

‘You shall not eat of it,’

cursed is the ground because of you;

in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life;

thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you;

and you shall eat the plants of the field.

By the sweat of your face

you shall eat bread,

till you return to the ground,

for out of it you were taken;

for you are dust,

and to dust you shall return.”” (Gen. 3:17-19)

the voice of your wife

God’s judgment is “Because” of two connected transgressions, the second being the main clause: The first is following your wife’s leadership, reversing the roles in marriage, which then led to eating of the tree.

God rebuked Adam for agreeing and acting upon the woman’s wrongful advice to eat. Part of being a helpmate is to advise her husband. It is not that he listened to her per say, but that he listened to the voice of his wife over the voice of God. “‘listen to the voice of,’ is an idiom meaning ‘obey’”. He obeyed his wife over obeying his God. He failed to exercise his headship.

We must discern what is of God and what is contrary to the law and ways of God, from voices that surround us.

You shall not eat of it

He reminds Adam of his command and then begins to explain the profound implications.

“of which I commanded you,” – Me to you – it’s personal Adam.

What did I command you? Not that you shouldn’t touch it, as he glances over to the woman, but that ‘You shall not eat of it”. He’s underlining what he really did say, glancing over to the serpent.

His judgement corresponds to his transgression against his Word.

His sin was to eat and now in judgment, five times no less in three verses God uses the word eat. Notice he doesn’t mention the sin of eating to the woman in judgement. Only Adam, because he is head.

There is something about eating and the relationship between man and God. It would become more apparent in the books that followed: Clean and unclean animals; The rituals and regulations and importance of food within the festivals as they help frame stories within the greater story of redemption.

cursed is the ground

Out of the three, only the serpent is directly said to be cursed.

For Adam the ground is said to be cursed. Some will refer to the judgment on Adam and his wife as a sentence rather than curse, but there is a curse that comes upon them because of sin, even if it doesn’t use that word. It is an obvious point, but it must be noted that from Genesis 3 we know that God does curse. He blesses and he curses. Undeserving blessings, deserving curses.

They were given a fertile land blessed by God, and now the ground is cursed. The benefits of blessing are somewhat removed.

And it’s “because of you” Adam. Not his wife.

“Because you…” “cursed is the ground because of you”. The land responsibility was given to him, and his land is now cursed.

in pain you shall eat

The woman experiences pain in childbirth, the man will experience pain in toiling to eat. Hers regards role as wife and mother, his regards tilling - provision and maintenance of the land.

There is a sort of anguish that comes with both. It’s not just physical pain, but the pain brings on a frustration and mental exhaustion, a grieving of the original order and Edenic conditions.

Man is still called to work. Work is not punishment – the conditions are. The punishment is the pain in the process of their mission.

The very thing under his authority is now cursed. This is a biblical principle whereby when a person in authority is judged, that which is under the authority is also judged. And we’ll expand on this principle throughout.

Adam brought pain into the world. But there is promise in judgement for both the man and the woman. She will be in pain but will give birth. He will be in pain but will eat. “in pain” is the focus. But don’t miss “you shall eat”.

They will now see creation dimly, through pain.

thorns and thistles

One may argue, that it will be hard work from now on because they were removed from the fertile soil in the garden, but no, it’s more than that. A physical change in nature such that thorns and thistles will now grow.

If this isn’t a change to what grows in the ground, and it’s just because they were going to be expelled into the rougher ground that included thorns and thistles, then why say it – why say “cursed is the ground” before giving this example of what will now grow because of the curse? If the ground brought forth thorns and thistles before the curse, it makes no sense.

From this point on, the ground is cursed. Once upon Eden, work and worship went hand in hand. Now, the ground would produce thorns and thistles. The ground would have worked with him and now it will work against him. Work would now be tough, earning a wage to live on would be tough. A frustration of working the earth will lead to a mindset that ruling the earth is unobtainable.

The author is telling us, and the Israelites who received this text in the desert wilderness… the land was not always like this – it paves the way to the promised land via the promised seed. It sets up further revelation for “a new heavens and new earth” (Isa 65:17; Rev 21:1).

Although thorns and thistles are undesirable when working the ground, they are also heavenly provision necessary for the fallen world. Hawthorne for example is one the most common bush in the UK for farmers, church grounds, homes, to secure boundaries (including keeping animals) and protect them from trespassers. In judgment of Adam’s trespassing, God provided natural tools to guard from future trespassers.

I imagine that thorns and thistles would begin to grow to surround the perimeter of the garden sanctuary for extra protection from trespassers in the coming centuries. The garden within Eden was already an enclosed area with secure boundaries, but I can imagine thorny bushes, incredibly thick and high, would now make it an impenetrable fortress.

Today, we receive both pain and protection of thorns and thistles.

A whole class of thorns of would now grow with both beauty and harshness. The rose, for example is a picture of good creation peppered with the thorns of the fallen world. God would weave this motif of thorns throughout his story of redemption.

God would appear amidst a blazing thorn bush at mount Sinai, the Mountain of Law, with a promise of deliverance (Exodus 3:2; Acts 7:30, NASB; Luke 20:30). God commanded the tabernacle to be built with Acacia wood, a thorny bush or tree (Exodus 26:29; Exodus 26:29), which would then be covered in Gold – a picture of redemption. Because Moses had broken the law (Deut 32:49–51), the final place Israel encamps before entering the Promised Land was called Abel-Shittim, meaning “the Field of Thorns” (Numbers 25:1; Joshua 2:1). The people sat longing for a better Adam, the priest-king of Eden. Sat longing for a better Moses, the prophet of Israel. The anguish would point them to the prophet-priest-king of Messiah. Joshua, Yeshua, which means “YHWH saves” would lead them into the promised land. And Jesus, Yeshua, is the one who will save and establish the promised land, reversing the curse of thorns.

Thorns remind us of what was; what beauty can still be seen through the stain; Then consider the stains caused by the penetration in the scull of Christ; and the lavish grace poured out on us. Every pricked finger signposts the blood shed for us on the cross. His precious stain covers ours.

Because of the first Adam’s sin, the first curse was thorns. Because of the Last Adam’s obedience, his first adornment as rejected king was a mocking crown of thorns.

Adam eat from a living tree, naked, resulting in the cursed ground with thorns beneath his feet.

Jesus was hung on a dead tree, naked, with his blood dripping on the cursed ground beneath his feet from the thorns upon his head, to redeem creation.

Those who repent of sin and have faith in Jesus the Christ for salvation, will be made alive to once again dwell in Edenic conditions, free of thorns, amidst the Tree of Life.

eat the plants of the field

Man is to “eat the plants of the field”.

God is about to kill some animals and soon animals would begin to kill and eat each other. Therefore, the LORD underlines that for now, man is to continue his vegetarian diet. Barbecues are not on the menu, yet!

By the sweat of your face

Amongst the thorns and thistles Adam will fatigue in toiling for his vegetarian diet.

“By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread”

For those pushing a no carb diet, painting bread as bad for you – the first couple in history eat bread according to Genesis 3. In fact the Hebrew word for bread here is leḥem, as in Bethlehem meaning house of bread. The curse meant a lack of food, and the saviour would be born in the house of bread.

They would have to “embrace the concept of anguish” as a lifelong consequence. Previously he didn’t sweat profusely or produce undesirable body odour. Now his wife will receive him from a hard day’s work sweating and stinking.

“till you return to the ground”. Relief only comes for man when he dies. It’s not temporary - for the rest of your life, hard work. Retirement and pensions are a modern thing, that attempts to circumvent the reality.

Gruelling work for food is a reminder of the bountiful provision man once had, the fall that ensued, the promise of sustenance in judgment, and a signpost to a future rest.

The working week – the pattern and prophetic six days – would be defined by suffering. This age defined by suffering before the day of rest.

return to the ground

Here comes the kicker for Adam:

“for out of it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return.”

Now earthlings would return to the earth they were raised from in Adam.

The LORD reminds Adam of his creation, and humble beginnings. “I created you Adam, from the mere dust.”

The serpent persuaded them eat, and was made to eat, with immediate posture change, to lick the dust. The man who eat, is now made to eat in sweat, until his posture fails him, returning to the dust. The former represents death, the latter, will be reduced to the former, because of his submission to him.

Oswalt comments: “Because pride denies God it must deny us what God has given, ultimately life itself.”

Harrigan says: “Death was instituted by God to humiliate sin and pride so as to bring repentance (cf. Gen. 3:19; Ps. 73:3–20; Rom. 8:20).”

A limited timespan is a merciful decree. God “has put eternity into man’s heart” (Ecclesiastes 3:11), and yet we know that in a short time, we will return to the dust. It forces man to ask the big questions of life: Where did man come from? Why do we die? How can we be saved? And if we humble our posture and turn to God we answer correctly: from the dust (raised by God), because of sin, by the promised seed.

They would return to dust not deities. It is important we remember that we are made in the image of God, sacred beings, and yet remain humble in the knowledge that we are made from his molecular creation that he breathed life in to, to create great value. You were given life at the precise moment God willed, and he can remove it at his will.

In breaking the Word of God, he is breaking from the image of God. His image will now fade and turn to dust. Adam distorted the image of God, therefore his descendants will bear a distorted image of God: Disability, illness, disease, weakness, sinful nature which maims and murders the image of God. Although inherently distorted, every person on the planet still bears God’s image, having innate worth, and therefore deserving of respect and dignity.

We recall that Adam was made outside of the garden from the dust and now he is told he will return to the dust, presumably outside the garden. Adam must have known he was about to be kicked out. It would mean that Adam would not lie down and be put to rest in the garden, but the outer area where he was formed. From the dust to the same dust.

What did he mean by death?

What did God mean by returning to dust?

Adam didn’t die immediately. He didn’t die that day, or the month after, or the year after, but many hundreds of years later. So, the question arises, what did God mean when he warned Adam of the consequences in Genesis 2 that, “you shall surely die.” (Gen 2:17)

Firstly, he did die, eventually, nonetheless. It is the time gap that causes questions. But he did die, and we could just leave it there, but let’s understand better.

What is Adam’s understanding of returning to dust?

He has just heard that his wife will give birth to his child, and that toiling will continue. So, Adam understands that he will live at least a while. What’s more is that immediately before saying he will die in this judgement – God uses the phrase “all the days of your life” – indicating a limited lifespan but many days at that.

Did God withhold the Death penalty?

It does not fit that God withheld his death penalty in an act of grace, considering the importance God placed on the certainty of the punishment.

What if Adam repents?

There is no hint that repentance will reverse the curse, or death sentence, or suspend the sentence. Sin means lifelong consequences followed by death regardless of repentance. There are similar phrases to “you shall surely die” used elsewhere in scripture whereby if the person repented the sentence could be quashed, but not this precise phrase. It would not be right for God to pardon his sin.

Another question is: Was man immortal but now mortal in this judgement?

It is not the case that man was made immortal and if he sins he would become mortal. Paul informs us that God “alone has immortality” (1 Tim. 6:16). Also, what would be the point of the tree of life if man was already immortal?

Did he eventually die because he was expelled from the Garden?

Without access to the tree of life, his body would begin to break down.

We don’t fully understand how the fruit of the tree of life would bring about life. The fruit will have sustained them to live forever. Providing continual energy, nutrition, healing properties and so forth (because of demonstrated faith in God’s provision). As well as eating, perhaps the fruit or leaves could be rubbed on a graze for healing. We are told in revelation regarding the future tree of life that the “leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.” (Rev 22:2) I would underline again, obedience to God’s word in eating from this tree and not the tree of knowledge of good and evil means God’s biological providence.

Therefore, without access to the Tree of Life, would mean death eventually.

But this judgment seems to suggest this ‘returning to the dust’ involved more than that.

Even if they weren’t kicked out, the earlier judgments would still mean physical change for the woman, and physical change of the ground – the Tree of Life wouldn’t relieve the pain and go against God’s decree.

We know that not just man, but the animals would die too? Is that related to the expulsion of the garden? I can’t see how. The beasts of the field already dwell outside of the garden.

Some scholars argue that there is the absence of the word “die” within the judgment on man, saying the punishment is the expulsion from the garden, with death being the consequence. Firstly, we can look at passages that speaks of the crucifixion of Jesus that does not use the word die and we still understand it’s speaking of his death. Secondly, God said you “shall surely die” and now he says, “to dust you shall return.” He isn’t kicked out of the garden for what he has done. There are other reasons he is kicked out as we’ll see momentarily. Nothing is mentioned in this judgment of being kicked out. His judgment of death here in Genesis 3 to “return to the ground” matches the warning of death in Genesis 2.

The expulsion is part of the means that would bring about death. But let’s look more closely.

What did “you shall surely die” mean then?

This phrase in the Hebrew can be literally translated, “dying you shall die.” The form of the phrase underlines the certainty of death, which is why it is often translated “you shall surely die.”

It is true that immediately after they sinned, a spiritual death occurred, leading the two to hide and cover themselves. The relationship with God was broken.

But in Romans 5, Paul asserts physical death was the result of Adam’s sin. In context he speaks of the physical death of Jesus and then the physical death of Adam and all men. Again in 1 Corinthians 15(:20–22) Paul makes the same comparison of physical death and physical resurrection.

Therefore, it’s not one or the another, but both spiritual and physical death.

So, what of this gap between the judgment and physical death?

Numbers chapters 26, written by Moses uses this same phrase “dying you shall die.” In context, because of the unfaithfulness of the Israelites, God would only allow the younger generation to enter the promised land. Of the unfaithful we read: “For the LORD had said of them, “They shall die in the wilderness.”” (Numbers 26:65) This is the same formation in the Hebrew and could be translated, “dying you shall die in the wilderness.” They did not die that same day, but were cursed to die within the 40 years in the wilderness. Their physical death was a certainty in the wilderness but there was a gap between judgment and the day they returned to the ground.

What is also interesting is the recapitulation of Deuteronomy, again written by Moses, of this same episode: “And as for your little ones, who you said would become a prey, and your children, who today have no knowledge of good or evil, they shall go in there. And to them I will give it, and they shall possess it.” (Deu 1:39) The young and innocent, those who “have no knowledge of good or evil” would enter the promised land, but those like Adam, who tasted, so to speak, the knowledge of good and evil, were told “dying you shall die” (Gen 2:17).

Those who attempt to force an exclusively spiritual death onto the text, denying the physical death connection, such as old earth creationists, may draw attention to the word day in the preceding text: “for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.” Firstly, the Hebrew does not mean that they would die within the 24 hour day they eat. This same construction of the phrase that includes day (beyôm) “for in the day”, is used earlier in verse 4 of the same chapter meaning a period of time (in that case the period of the creation week), as do other uses of this same construction. Secondly, God is not a liar, and Adam didn’t die with a 24-hour period, therefore God didn’t mean he would die within 24 hours.

Researching the Hebrew, Hamilton explains that the full phrase indicates that the “the executioner is God” and that similar uses of the phrase means “you deserve to die.” He concludes the phrase conveys “the announcement of a death sentence by divine or royal decree.”

Both Adam’s life, and death are in God’s hands.

How does he die then if not immediately?

His body would now not be sustained in the same way, eventually breaking down, finally resulting in his death. Biological entropy would take over. Their bodies were cursed.

Adam and his wife’s DNA makeup was originally perfect and would contain all the biological information necessary for billions of people to descend over a week-of-thousands of years. But from here on out, genetic malfunction shall gradually increase. I highly recommend this book Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome, by Dr. John Sanford.

“At fertilisation, half of your father’s genome is mixed with half of your mother’s genome to form your complete genome.”

Because of Adam’s sin, errors would arise in the DNA data necessary to form life. Additionally, mutations would creep in after conception, during one’s life.

As a crude analogy: think of copying the contents of two CD’s or cassette tapes onto another tape, and then join its contents along with another onto a new tape. Continue this process many times over. Understandably, errors in will creep in from the copy process as well as general wear and tear along the way. The last one in the chain of copies could have all kinds of problems playing. Such is the circumstance we find today with the human genome.

For many generations Adam and his wife’s children would be able to marry each other without concern of DNA informational corruption leading to birth defects. Yet there would come a point in the future when the genes of closely related people should not come together to bear children for the increase in genetic error and mutation. While the theory of evolution attempts to convince people that mutations are a good thing, in reality, they are almost always disastrous to cell formation. Genesis tells a story which is the complete opposite to evolutionary theory, from cosmology to biology.

As previously mentioned, the serpent was cursed “above all,” all animal life was cursed. The fall means death for Adam but also death for all creatures – after all he was in charge of them. Therefore, curse remains on all that which was under his rule.

What is Physical Death?

As we know, the body and spirit are unified until death when a separation occurs. The body no longer functions, and the eternal spirit continues in some form.

From now on (up until the resurrection of Christ) the spirits of all men would go down to sheol, the holding place of the dead within the earth.

Oswalt says, “Death mocks every person’s claim to be God.”

Who could save Adam and his descendants from the grave - the promised seed! We learnt in part one that God’s promise to save is decreed before his judgment of death.

Conclusion

In conclusion:

Adam’s death meant both spiritual death and physical death as a result of Adam’s sin. Although Genesis 3 and Romans 5 emphasize physical death.

Physical death is caused by both revoking access to the Tree of Life and a curse on the body.

Adam did die within the prophetic day when we count God’s patience, as Peter exhorted. Adam died aged 930, just 70 years short of the first millennial day. Pointing to Psalm 90:4, Rabbis recognise Adam died within the thousand-year-day. This day of death would continue into 5 more millennial days of death, which all point to an eschatological millennial day when God will be judge and executioner. A day of rest for those who have faith in the promised seed.

Again, a limited lifespan is God’s grace. As Adam and his wife grew older and their bodies became less efficient, they would recognise they own insufficiency. An awareness of a ticking clock should drive them closer to rely on God more each day. That they didn’t die immediately gives a gracious chance to repent. They will still die, but hope in a resurrection.

Original Sin

This brings us on the concept of Original Sin, that Judaism doesn’t hold to.

The recognition of spiritual death on the day of Adam’s sin, means that all those who descend from him are born spiritually dead. We inherit the sinful nature and consequence of Adam’s sin. This sinful disposition results in habitual sinful behaviour.

There is Old Testament support for the doctrine of Original Sin:

“Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.” (Psalm 51:5)

“The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?” (Jeremiah 17:9)

In the New Testament, Paul reminds the Ephesian Christians of their previous lifestyle and status, referring to them as previously dead:

“And you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience— among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind.” (Eph 2:1-2)

Being spiritually dead, or at least being born spiritually dead, means a sinful nature that Paul refers to as a “law of sin” that directs the flesh:

“I am of the flesh, sold under sin. For I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate… For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out… the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me. So I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand. For I delight in the law of God, in my inner being, but I see in my members another law waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members. Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin.” (Rom 7:14-25)

Our frustration is that we want to love, but hurt, want to abide but hide, want to trust but doubt. Which is why as Christians we long for the “restitution of all things” (Acts 3:21 KJB) to "make all things new" (Rev 21:5), to relieve us of this battle within.

We witness even with young children, you don’t have to teach them to be bad, you have to teach them to be good. It is the ‘law of sin’.

The imputation of sin from Adam can be viewed in two ways. Firstly, Adam is the representative of the human race, therefore his sin is our corporate sin. Secondly, we were all in Adam’s seed as he sinned, therefore we sinned in him. A biblical precedent for this hermeneutic can be found in Hebrews whereby the author states that “One might even say that Levi himself, who receives tithes, paid tithes through Abraham, for he was still in the loins of his ancestor when Melchizedek met him.” (Heb 7:9-10; cf. Gen 14:20) Though Levi was born centuries after, we can rightly say he paid tithes in Abraham. Following this logic, we sinned in Adam.

It is important to note that we are counted sinful because of Adam, even though his wife sinned first. On Genesis 3, Hamilton acknowledges it does “affirm the federal headship of Adam and the corporate solidarity of human guilt.”

As well as being spiritually dead, in Romans 5 Paul is clear that original sin brought physical death into the world:

“Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned” (Rom 5:12)

Adam sinned; his sin brought about death; as descendants we are born spiritually dead; our sinful nature then leads to habitual sin; which deserves the punishment of physical death; therefore we all physically die; Hence his sin is imputed to us.

Those that take issue with inherited sinful nature and effects for all because of one man - the individual for the corporate - one must first take note of verses 18-19:

“Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men. For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous.” (Rom 5:18-19)

Adam’s sin imputed to those in him. Messiah’s righteousness imputed to those in him. You can’t have it one way and not the other.

Condemnation leading to death in Adam; “righteousness leading to eternal life” (v21) in Christ Jesus.

How is eternal life made possible?:

“But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive.” (1 Cor 15:20-22)

Our hope is orientated towards the resurrection when we will receive eternal life. Adam was the death bringer. Christ is the life bringer. Adam’s sin means death. Christ’s death means life: Life-giving spirit from Christ.

It may sound peculiar to our western Christianity, but we are judged not just on what we do as individuals. What others have done bears down on our status and destiny. Adam’s rebellion affects us, and Christ’s obedience affects us. Communal effect of Adam’s sin; communal effect of Christ’s death.

Let’s develop this individual and corporate sin connection. Paul doesn’t discount his own sin. He holds both corporate guilt and individual guilt in appropriate tension. “There is a mediating influence of Adam’s sin on his posterity.” And we are accountable for our own individual sin. Yet we have made the Christian faith almost exclusively individual (and yes, your individual faith will determine whether you enter the Kingdom), but there are corporate effects from individual actions in your home, church, nation, and in this case the entire human population.

Various places in the Torah mention generational curses (Exodus 20:5; 34:7; Numbers 14:18; Deuteronomy 5:9) for example. We can accuse God of being mean to children of evil men, or blame ancestors for our own sin. But the emphasis of these passages is on the continued effects of sin, and the continuation of the sin by rebellious generations. The answer to break a curse in this situation is (yes, prayer) but repentance – do not continue in the sins of your fathers. Devine assistance with that and ultimate salvation requires the other side of the coin from repentance: faith.

There is the corporate effect of Adam’s sin and the corporate effect of Christ’s life, death, and resurrection. If righteousness is based on works then it’s purely an individual matter. But as Paul explains, Adam’s disobedience not only meant consequences for everyone else, but also their standing with God, and ultimate destiny. Equally, Christ’s obedience means consequences for everyone in him, their standing with God, and ultimate destiny. Therefore, we must repent and work at repentance (in keeping with faith), but it is not what I have done and can do, but what Christ has done for me.

Jesus would refer to people as being dead – “Leave the dead to bury their own dead.” (Luke 5:60) He is saying, the spiritually dead can bury the physically dead. Jesus would say “unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.”” (John 3:3) We must be born again: spiritually born of God, given the grace to repent and break the bondage of sin, accepting and trusting in the atoning sacrifice and resurrection of Christ. We cannot overcome sin apart from the Holy Spirit working in us. Sanctification is God cleansing us of sinful nature with our new status in Christ. Sinning is the natural cause of what Adam did. Living righteously is the natural cause of what Christ did. Hamilton says, “Our lives are the fruit of their activities.”

Paul describes Adam’s sin as breaking a set of commandments. He chose, entirely freely to break God’s commandments. Adam turned his freedom into bondage through sin. Having been born into spiritual slavery, we too have sinned, enslaving ourselves, but now in Christ our decisions should be directed by God’s established boundaries. Choices should be made in light of God’s interest and not our own. Allowing God to free us from the bondage of sin, and hope in the resurrection to eternal life.

Original sin is contrasted with Adam’s original righteousness. Adam’s sin was contrary to the image of God’s morality. As the son of God, everyone after him would have been the son of Adam, therefore regal and righteous. His obedience and submission to Satan, means the sons of Adam became the sons of Satan also. Still bearing the image of God through Adam’s line; still with the priestly and regal calling, but corrupt and lost.

A Kingdom requires obedience to the king. Without righteous children, a kingdom would not be possible. Adam’s kingdom was in tatters.

Paul highlights three contrasts between Adam and Christ: order (46), origin (47), and followers (v49):

“Thus it is written, “The first man Adam became a living being”; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit. 46 But it is not the spiritual that is first but the natural, and then the spiritual. 47 The first man was from the earth, a man of dust; the second man is from heaven. 48 As was the man of dust, so also are those who are of the dust, and as is the man of heaven, so also are those who are of heaven. 49 Just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the man of heaven.” (1 Cor 15:46-49)

Adam is an antitype of Jesus. Adam’s corrupt image leaves us with a corrupt image. Followers of Christ will receive the image of Christ rather than the image of Adam. Christ-ians experience a “spiritual” birth, are "of heaven” in terms of status and while we have been born in the image of the man of the dust, in resurrection we will “bear the image of the man of heaven.” Paul corrects misunderstandings: There will be a resurrection. It means man will not go extinct. Death is not the liberation of the body. It will be a resurrection of the body not just the spirit. Suggesting this resurrected body will be divinely empowered.

Defence/Attack Structures (DAS)

This curse on the ground also raises the issue of Defence/Attack Structures (DAS).

Unbelievers look at the world today and ask, how the biblical story of harmony in Genesis 2 without animal death is possible, since animals instinctively attack and defend and appear designed this way. A wasp’s sting, a frog’s toxin, the Venus Flytrap, the Jaws of a crocodile, the claws of a lion, a serpent’s deadly squeeze or poisonous fangs, spiders complex webs to catch insects, the Bombardier Beetle shoots 100°C chemicals out of its backside at predators. Good observations are turned to question the credibility of the scriptures and the character of God. The answer lies here in Genesis 3; the curse.

The assumption is that it has always been like this. If you look at the world today and assume God created it this way, you must stop and recognise you are 6000 years removed from the original good creation.

Firstly, some of the present DAS features were not used for the purposes of killing and defence before the fall. And secondly, some of these features were brought about by God as a result of the fall.

In account of the first point, sharp teeth do not mean an animal is a meat eater. Giant pandas have incredibly sharp teeth, but their diet consists entirely of leaves, stems and shoots of bamboo. Sharp teeth and claws can crunch tough vegetation, open coconuts, and watermelon, or climb trees. Spider webs have been shown to catch pollen as food, so it is possible they were originally designed to have caught floating foods in the breeze. Even viruses and bacteria may have had a different and beneficial role originally.

On the second point, God triggered design features that were brought about as a result of the fall, such as thorns and thistles specifically mentioned here. I read recently that, “There is evidence that thorns are actually formed from altered leaves.” God may have triggered features such as glands to produce spider silk and venomous fangs. Some of these features may have sprung up immediately, others developed over time, either way it is God’s design as part of the punishment.

How did it happen? Did God change the DNA in a moment. The serpent was immediately made to slither, so it’s possible. But it is also possible for the large part that at creation these mechanisms were included latently in the genetic information and at the fall, ‘switched on.’ In God’s foresight, designing genetic material such that dormant genes could be triggered here in Genesis 3.

Personally, I lean toward an immediate change. We want to know the exact DNA design change, but for the Israelites hearing this, it would be a simple case of, the world was perfect and good, man sinned, as a result of the curse, physical changes and tendencies, mean everything dies and in the process, everything is attacking and defending for their lives. They had snakes biting them, and they knew it was a sin-cursed world in need of messianic redeemer.

whole creation groans

Today, even in the relative luxury we dwell in, in the West, we know something is deeply wrong. If like me, you wake up in the morning with a deep groan… I’d suggest it is an instinctive longing for the return of Christ and the redemption of all things. Paul explains:

“For we know that the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until now. 23 And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies.” (Rom 8:22-23)

The whole creation groans too – Genesis 3 is the origin of the Second Law of Thermodynamics – everything tends toward disorder. Your car will rust, your skin will burn, your headphones will tangle, your computer will crash, your garden will grow weeds… Both our bodies and the earth eagerly await liberation from the bondage of corruption.

That deep groan you feel is mercy. In his mercy he cursed creation. If it remained the same, without sickness, disease, pain, hardship… with a sense of invincibility, with long life, greater strength, and nature and animals working with us, we would accelerate sin to destruction. The curse limits damage and stirs that deep groan that knows something is terribly wrong with a desire for it to be put right. A groan that directs thoughts back to our creator for salvation.

These groans will develop unto birth pains.

The earth groans because it is under tension from the curse, resulting in natural disasters, such as earthquakes. Again, this is what Jesus warned of in the years before his return, of increased tension of mankind and the earth describing them as birth pains, or birth pangs. Pangs before the birth.

Vegetation diet of Animals

If animals didn’t kill each other originally, how could they survive on a vegetarian diet? There are examples of large cats surviving on a vegetarian diet. It has been documented that there have been lions, even vultures who refuse to eat meat. Bears too will frequently eat vegetarian foods.

Conditions would have been significantly different then. From atmospheric, to what grows in the ground, to how animals could digest food.

Creation ruling over man

The world was created for man. As image bearing representatives, man is to rule over the earth. It is this worldview of man designed to rule nature, that is the foundation of western society (although being eroded today) required to develop medicine (setting aside those who abuse medical science) – we find a way that nature helps us. Since the fall, rather than us ruling over creation, creation has increasing began to rule over us. There shouldn’t be a battle between man and nature. Yet animals attack us, viruses plague us, allergies cause irritation and pain.

Allergies are creation ruling over man because of original and accumulative sin for thousands of years. Therefore, when we come in contact with certain harmless foods for example our bodies reject it as a dangerous foreign object and our immune systems go into overdrive and cause havoc. My children suffered with allergic eczema, and so I prayed and continue to pray that creation will not rule over them, and that they will rule over creation as originally mandated. And God has answered and is answering those prayers.

Man has worshipped creation rather than Creator for millennia, and so now creation rules over man. And so people ask, why is the world like this – the answer is in Genesis 3.

Real physical consequences

These are real, physical, and relational changes to human nature, not just descriptive of what would have played out in any case, otherwise it’s not real judgement. Judgment means a real change in circumstance.

Arguing against a change in the locomotion of the serpent Andrew E. Steinmann says, “While the curse is often understood as the serpent being made to move on his belly, it ought to be noted that the other judgments of God do not transform the basic nature of either the woman or the man; the woman was always the one to bear children through labour (v. 16), and the man was always intended to labour with the soil (v. 17)” Yes, the woman was always intended to give birth and the man labour the soil, but was there a physical change? Yes! The change is that she will now give birth in pain, and the man will labour in pain. On top of that, their bodies will begin to breakdown and die. On top of that, the earth underwent physical change from the curse. These are real physical changes to the woman and the man, and the earth. If not, then what is the point of saying your judgment is this, but that was the case anyway?

Some point to Genesis 9, arguing that in the same way that God is said to set his rainbow in the sky after the flood, which will have existed before the flood, is like the serpent who didn’t have legs before the fall, or even the woman who would have endured pain anyway in childbirth etc. But that’s a false comparison. The rainbow is a sign of the covenant he made – a sign to remind God. He has chosen part of his existing creation to remind himself not to judge the entire earth with a flood. The judgement of the flood caused real physical changes. The sign is an appointed existing occurrence. Here in Genesis 3, we have a judgement on the serpent and mankind. For these curses to mean anything, a change in the physical is necessary. Judgment has consequences. Curses have consequences, otherwise we’re playing with words.

Covenant & probation

To surmise.

The Genesis 2, conditional, Adamic Covenant, with Adam prior to the creation of his wife, was broken. The blessing and commission as a couple and team to be “fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it” (Gen 1:28) as image bearers mentioned in Genesis 1, which occurred chronologically after Adam received his instructions to “work it and keep it” and commanded not to eat of tree of the knowledge of good and evil, is part of the Adamic covenant. The covenant is given to Adam as head but as a team, blessed and commissioned.

Adam broke God’s covenant, failing in his mission to rule and subdue; to guard the garden from intruders, the tree, his bride; to uphold the image of God; to preserve the order of the garden; to multiply righteous fruit. He chose to act against his calling and nature, in an unholy and unnatural manner.

Beale says: “Adam, however, failed in the task with which he was commissioned, which includes permitting entrance into the Garden to an antagonistic and unclean being… Adam did not guard the Garden but allowed entrance to a foul snake that brought sin, chaos, and disorder into the sanctuary and into Adam and Eve’s lives.”

Adam was to rule over the serpent, but he allowed it to rule over him. Adam, as priest in charge, should have cast the serpent out of the garden. Instead, he fell for the smooth tongue, chose to submit to it, and consequently was cast out himself.

Darkness had been unleashed on the world.

BROKEN COVENANT MEANS failed probation

He had broken the Adamic Covenant during his probationary period.

Man, and angles who are given free choice would have been tested during an initial probationary period.

Angles were given the choice of acting contrary to their calling and design, before being verified as holy or declared unholy – a vast gulf between good and evil. Was Satan as the serpent breaking his probation at that very moment? Was it the moment he deceived the woman? Was it the moment he entered the garden as a serpent? - If he did enter as a serpent. Was it the moment he chose to manifest as an unclean animal? Was his manifestation as a serpent the very moment he first sinned during his probation period?

When the LORD speaks to the serpent, is this the moment he was declared unholy? He chose to become an unclean animal and so God declares him unclean and unholy. I mentioned this previously. We cannot be sure of the initial fall of Satan nor the timing of certification of unrighteousness. I suspect a more formal heavenly ceremony for the host of heaven would have taken place not long after. What is apparent, is that one-third of the angels soon followed in sin, and no longer have the capacity to become holy and righteous.

Yet, Genesis 3 is the story of the Fall of Man, the precise moment Adam sinned, but unlike the angels his final status is not declared irreversible nor is he declared irredeemable.

His ego and his temporary status will take a hit though.

Adam’s name could have been made great and in him all the families of the earth blessed – now he is forever connected with the fall of man, family eviction, and actions that brought about curse and death. We are not being overly harsh and critical of Adam; I believe he would want us to speak plainly and candidly about his rebellion and the consequences. The bad news of the first Adam elevates the good news of the last Adam.

Edenic Covenant (Genesis 3)

Breaking the covenant and failing probation means judgement.

In Genesis 3 the judgement comes with promise in the form of an unconditional covenant we can call the Edenic covenant. Some see the covenant in Genesis 3 as part of the covenant in Genesis 2; others switch round the names of the Adamic and Edenic covenant… and it can get confusing when everyone is labelling them differently and some seeing no covenant or joint covenants or separate covenants. I certainly don’t want you to get caught up in the labelling… just understand there is a Genesis 2 interaction with God, a covenant, which is conditional (if Adam broke it, judgment would follow), and a Genesis 3 interaction with God, a covenant, that is unconditional (God will judge and will bring about the promised seed regardless of man’s actions).

The contrast in judgments between the man and woman reflect their nature and order.

Her judgment is primarily relational between the sexes and regards the capacity to give birth.

His judgement primarily regards the capacity to provide and death.

As Prager says, her consequences “are micro and personal, pertaining to feelings, pain, and desire.” His are “macro and broad, pertaining to the earth and to work.”

They overstepped the boundaries of the covenant – that was given to Adam and passed on to his wife. They trespassed. God’s blessing would now be removed somewhat and replaced with judgement. They distorted God’s order of things. Friction would arrive.

The Genesis 2 covenant was made with Adam the individual but also as the representative of mankind. Therefore, his judgement is a judgment on him and all humanity. Adam who was the head of mankind is told of the worldwide consequences of his actions. Personal sin affects those who are under your covering. For Adam the effects are worldwide until the Serpent is crushed by the offspring of the Woman.

As Sarna observes, “They made no effort to oppose the divine judgement, and the absolute sovereign will of God is never called into question.”

On his belly, the serpent too makes no sound to oppose judgment.

Genesis 3 teaches us that sin results in ramifications. We may cover up and hide. But sooner or later we will be challenged, weighed, judged.

Another Adam

When King Saul rejected God’s word and “transgressed the commandment of the LORD” (1 Sam 15:24) he is described in way that he is as good as dead. Samuel is representative of God as prophet. We read: “And Samuel did not see Saul again until the day of his death, but Samuel grieved over Saul. And the LORD regretted that he had made Saul king over Israel.” (1 Sam 15:35) It continues in the following chapter: “The LORD said to Samuel, “How long will you grieve over Saul, since I have rejected him from being king over Israel? Fill your horn with oil, and go. I will send you to Jesse the Bethlehemite, for I have provided for myself a king among his sons.”” (1 Sam 16:1) Saul is rejected and dead in faith, but He will anoint another King of Israel. Adam was rejected as king, but God will anoint another Adam to become the king of Eden, and of course Israel.

Verse 9 of Genesis 3 includes “But the LORD God” of v9 – the narrator here is hinting that God can still be man’s covenant partner as well as judge and creator. Adam’s mission to rule and subdue was not taken away (Ps.8) but it would be unattainable, aside from the promised seed. God would now raise up another man, another Adam, who could fulfil the mission. Although now the consummate rest would have to wait 6000+ years.

A NEW NAME

The sixth scene continues with a new name and new covering.

“The man called his wife's name Eve, because she was the mother of all living.”

Some early Jewish commentators suggested that her name is very similar to an Aramaic word for serpent. However, the narrator’s explanation “because she was the mother of all living” suggests the primitive form of the Hebrew verb Eve means “to live”, and that is how the Septuagint translates it, as “life”. Adam names his wife life (or mother of life) but only Christ could bring about eternal-life.

Adam means earth, Eve means life. They complement each other still. They would need to now rely on each other more than ever to cope in the new harsh realities of the world.

Adam first calls his bride woman, because she is a human being taken from man, then he calls her Eve, relating to her ability to bear children. Her first name points to her origins, her second name points to her destiny.

And still she was yet to bear children.

It could be the case that the narrator is explaining the name “because she was the mother of all living” (Moses or God’s dictation), or it could be that this was Adam’s explanation. If the latter, his use of perfect tense “was”, “because she was” is prophetic certainty that she would be the mother of all living.

I see this as act of faith on Adam’s part. A prophetic name. Immediately after being told his wife will be in pain through childbearing, the friction between them that will arise, his own hardship and eventual death, he believes in the promises of God. His response to judgment is belief in God’s Word that his wife will give birth, and the promised seed will arise. His wife will bring forth life, and the promised seed will resurrect back to life. He may not grasp the body of significance, but he understands the direction of the promise and has faith in God to deliver.

His voice is one of obedient prayer, harmonised with the persisting command to multiply, bearing fruit. Adam demonstrates repentance, that while he failed, going forward he intends to abide by God’s word and live by the promises.

Her new name points to a new start and future together and for mankind, according to God’s Word.

The significance of naming her before and after the fall, is that his authority over his wife remains. The original order was distorted in the activity of the fall, but they are to abide by the original order, and so his naming of her is an exercise in ordained headship. Adam abandoned his position and did not man up and protect his wife, but in naming her he is stepping up to his God given role.

A New Covering

“And the LORD God made for Adam and for his wife garments of skins and clothed them.” (vv 21)

Again, the use of LORD God, YHWH Elohim, indicates this act is personal. Personal in judgement and personal in provision.

The design of the garments are tunic skins like a long shirt; a robe that went down about the knees, made to be placed on their skin. Skin on skin.

What is the purpose of these garments?

Firstly, these leathers skins provide protection from the elements. Their soft skin is appropriate in the garden, but tough skins would be required for permanent dwelling in the rougher terrain outside. A hardwearing robe speaks of a robust future.

Secondly, making and giving the garments, as Wenham says is “both an act of grace and a reassertion of the creator’s rights.” He’s saying: “I’m the one who provides for you. You don’t get to decide what is good or not, whether you have a covering or not, or what type of covering you have or not. I’m the ultimate judge of good and evil, I’m the ultimate maker, taker, provider, gift giver.”

They lived under the garment of light, and on the garment of vegetation, surrounded by the garment of water that make up the seas, and now animal garments cover their body. Their creator has them covered.

Adam renames his wife, and God reclothes them both. These two actions speak of a future. One with order. Adam rightly reasserts authority over his wife, and now God reasserts his authority over man.

Thirdly, they were to replace the crude fig leaf covering they made for themselves.

The fig leaves were self-covering, the leather coverings are received from God. Manmade covering vs God-made covering. The former is seized, the latter is received. God is showing them that only he can provide salvation. And they accept the covering from God rather than the rudimentary self-covering. Adam and Eve require salvation that comes from God alone.

Skins, means animal skins. This is the first recorded death. And Adam and Eve would now have experienced death. Watching these animals die, they would know that they too would one day experience a lifeless body.

They would witness that the death of these animals necessarily means the shedding of blood.

Blood sacrifice. He covered them physically, but also “covered their sin by making for them their atonement.”

It teaches Adam and Eve that sin is only atoned for with innocent blood.

These are garments of salvation given to Adam and Eve. Isaiah would go on to speak of “Garments of salvation”:

“I will greatly rejoice in the LORD; my soul shall exult in my God, for he has clothed me with the garments of salvation; he has covered me with the robe of righteousness, as a bridegroom decks himself like a priest with a beautiful headdress, and as a bride adorns herself with her jewels.” (Isaiah 61:10).

The LORD God, as bridegroom covers his bride’s sin, if she accepts. The LORD must provide the covering and the covering requires the shedding of blood.

I imagine Adam would have presented offerings on the mountain of the LORD, but this event would foreshadow animal sacrifice, and ultimately Messiah’s atoning sacrifice on the cross.

So, God clothes them physically, but also spiritually.

Fourthly, they were made so that they could approach the presence of God appropriately.

Is God flushed by their nakedness? No. He created and commissioned them naked.

The use of “clothed them” elsewhere is scripture is associated with clothing given by a king or the sacred garments of a priest. It shows their humanity is still intact. These were not thrown together; this is the creator of the universe that has made the couple special regal and priestly garments appropriate for the garden where they stood.

These are skins like the one Jacob gave to his special son Joseph. In other places in scripture we see where men and women could wear skins like this.

The same Hebrew word used for garment, is the same for linen garments or tunics worn by the Israelite priests. We read in Exodus 28 they were to:

““Weave the tunic of fine linen… After you put these clothes on your brother Aaron and his sons, anoint and ordain them. Consecrate them so they may serve me as priests… Aaron and his sons must wear them whenever they enter the tent of meeting or approach the altar to minister in the Holy Place, so that they will not incur guilt and die. “This is to be a lasting ordinance for Aaron and his descendants.” (Ex 28:39-43)

Again, in Ex 20: “And you shall not go up by steps to my altar, that your nakedness be not exposed on it.” (Ex 20:26)

Genesis 3 is a foreshadowing of the lasting ordinance, but also this work foreshadowed the work of restoring humanity to the blessing of his presence and fellowship.

God is not to be approached naked, nor inappropriately. Since the garden, clothing signals position and status in society. Modest clothes are fitting for our priestly design and calling. In the NT, Paul would major on appropriate dress when we come before the Lord in worship. Clothes to this day are a reminder of the original sin and sinful nature.

These new garments would now allow Adam, in this new fallen world, and in his (limited) priestly role to draw near to God, under the blood-shed covering.

Lastly, now their eyes were opened, God intends for man to remain covered before each other. Afterall, they were to populate the planet.

With regards to his career, a friend once said to me, “I feel like sometimes I’m faking it and I’m anxious a colleague will catch me out”. Imposer syndrome. I replied, “Next time you are in a board meeting, look around… everyone is wearing clothes”. Beneath the pinstripes, and colourful dresses, lies a broken person who would likely be ashamed if they walked into work naked. The cockiest person in the room would be embarrassed and ashamed if they walked in naked.

God desires us to be covered, modest in sexuality, protecting the eyes of those around us, setting us apart from animals.

Before the fall, nakedness is positive, they were pure and innocent. After the fall naked is negative, becoming a description of the poor, shame and guilt, and birth.

Since the fall, biblically, nudity is exclusively for a man and woman in marriage.

Adam and his wife would tell the future generations of why they all wear clothes.

In years to come their garments would be a reminder of where they once dwelt. I imagine after their garments had worn down, and been replaced, Eve hanging them up later in life, like people do with wedding dresses. A story to be told to future generations.

Fruchtenbaum says that there is a rabbinical legend that says Adam gave the skins to Cain, and when Cain died, Nimrod took ownership, Esau took them from Nimrod, and then later Jacob worn them when he was blessed by Isaac. Seems a little far-fetched, and I don’t know how they would bypass the Ark of Noah. Although it could be possible for Noah to have inherited them and taken them on board the Ark, and subsequently lost. Who knows?

The timing of receiving the garments is poignant. God is merciful before immediate physical geographical judgement. He clothes them before he expels them from the garden. He does not send them out naked and vulnerable.

We learn from the latter part of this scene: 1 – to approach God required proper covering. 2 – covering must be God made. 3 – proper covering requires shedding of blood. 4 – God provided a gracious covering before expulsion.

This is the end of scene 6.

Garden Exiles

In the final and 7th Scene, similar to the first scene that began in chapter 2 verse 5, man is passive and God is the sole actor.

Then the LORD God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil. Now, lest he reach out his hand and take also of the tree of life and eat, and live forever—” therefore the LORD God sent him out from the garden of Eden to work the ground from which he was taken. He drove out the man, and at the east of the garden of Eden he placed the cherubim and a flaming sword that turned every way to guard the way to the tree of life. (v22-24)

God is not speaking to a heavenly council as some have suggested, but rather He is in dialogue with himself.

“like one of us”  One is echad, not the numerical one but a compound one. Us we know is plural. There is oneness and plurality. One being, three persons of God.

It sounds like the serpent in a sense was correct in that “man has become like” God “in knowing good and evil”.

Though the reality is quite different from the implied lure that they could be like God and sit upon their own throne of wisdom to be served by the lesser.

Adam and Eve now know good and evil, experimentally. Before the fall they only knew the goodness of God, but now man “also knows the evil inherent in the rejection of God’s Word”.

As we edge closer to the end of the age, man is increasingly declaring himself to be like God. But no matter how much literature of the Enlightenment period we read, or countless growth hormones you take, we cannot not be like God, we do not determine what is good nor can we conquer evil, and we will return to the dust.

Reason for expulsion

What is God’s reasoning for expulsion?

“Now, lest he reach out his hand and take…” Lest he “take” and therefore he is sent to the ground he was “taken” from. There is a play on words with the repeated verve take.

“Now, lest he reach out his hand and take also of the tree of life and eat, and live forever—” It just stops… as if half way through his sentence he kicked them out. It creates a sense of urgency to deal with the matter.

This isn’t included in the initial judgement delivered to Adam for what he did. God’s reasoning is what he might then go on to do, and therefore he decides to act. Without access to the tree of life they would die. This is the primary reason given for kicking them out – to ensure they could not eat form the Tree of Life and that judgement of death follows.

Some may feel that death is too harsh a punishment. But imagine for a moment, without the groans of mercy, them having access to the trees of the garden and everyone lived eternally. Adam’s children would eat from both the tree of life and the tree of knowledge also – little consequences after all. Without the fear of death, an immortal posture would balloon the pride of the wicked. Evil would increase exponentially. Think of vicious dictators, and serial killers of the past - they would all still be alive committing even more evil. Imagine if God hadn’t cursed the ground and given them punishments – people would not grow weary, with more energy to sin.

Vlach explains that sending them out the garden was not only judgment but also a blessing: “If Adam and Eve remained in Eden and participated in the tree of life they may have been forever confirmed in their sinful state. So their expulsion was not only judgement, it contributed to their own good.”

God cares for your character over your conditions.

Regarding the question of.. “if they only had to eat once from the tree of life and be “saved” (gain immortality)” – and there is a connection here with the question around the doctrinal phrase “once saved always saved.” It was by the means of the Tree of life they would perpetually regenerate. It’s not clear if they had already eaten from the tree of life or not. Maybe because it didn’t matter either way. I suspect they had already eaten from the Tree before sinning. Like kids who get bored with their toys and then want to go and play with that one object they are not allowed to play with. Also, by nature the Tree keeps bearing fruits (“yielding its fruit each month” as it says in Revelation 22) suggesting it gives monthly divine sustenance to maintain the body forever. We have a continual choice which tree to eat from, so to speak. Adam’s choice of Tree in the garden was now removed.

Man lost his rights to work and dwell in the garden.

The modern era has witnessed a development of human rights movements. Although they appear to have vanished in the previous two years, but we won’t go there. As Christians we must recognise that the human rights movement is not biblical.

These movements prioritise rights over righteousness, rights above consideration of wrongdoing, and the result can be evil done in the name of rights. While they can be helpful in giving the oppressed a voice, they twist biblical principles and are free of the real solution. In fact, these “rights” are constantly changing, as if we can choose what is good, whereas God’s view of right and wrong never changes.

Adam did not attempt to plead a case for swatters rights. Essentially, Man lost any “rights” in the garden. Man’s mission remains, but Man lost his rights, so there is a tension between mission and rights. Have dominion over the earth? But you’ve handed over the rights to Satan.

We must not confuse innate worth of an individual and human “rights.” Our image bearing worth means it is wrong to trample over others, and there are creation realities that should not be transgressed. But to declare “my right” is to incessantly demand a false justice from the giver of rights.

David Cross in his book, What’s Wrong With Human Rights? begins, “the Bible is absolutely clear in affirming that every human being has inalienable value, but it contains no inference that God has given any rights to humankind except those that come through a covenant relationship with Him.”

Which is why we must be in covenant with Christ Jesus, covered by His blood, to become citizens of God’s coming kingdom in which rights and privileges will be restored, including eternal life (John 5:24), to victors over the evil one, of forgiveness (Matt 6:14), to be filled with the Holy Spirit (Luke 11:13), of truth and wisdom (John 8:31-32; Luke 21:14-15), inner peace (Matt 11:28), of access to the tree of Life once again, and a right and privilege to be in the personal presence of Jesus, the LORD God who once walked the garden.

Some of these can be received now to a degree, such as the Holy Spirit, wisdom etc so long as we remain within the boundaries of God’s New covenant. The more rights we demand, the more we re-enact the fall of man, and while we may not lose the right of heavenly citizenship, we may lose the right of authority for example. We require a life of repentance and acknowledgement that any rights and privileges from God are an act of grace.

Additionally, He banished them to purify the garden. God had to remove them from the garden to purge the uncleanliness, and transgressions from the sacred place. In Leviticus 13 (:45), the “leprous person” was to be expelled from the camp to die, to “wear torn clothes” and “cry out, ‘Unclean, unclean.’” Adam and his wife were now unclean people, expelled from the garden sanctuary to die, and initially realised they were wearing no clothes.

Forceful Expulsion

What man might do is now contrasted with what God did do:

“He drove out the man”

They are not asked to leave. They are not gently led out. They are thrown out of the garden.

In verse 23 we read “the LORD God sent him out” but then the stronger term “He drove out” in the following and final verse.

To drive out is akin to driving the Canaanites out of the land (Ex 23:28-31) because of their wickedness. It reminds us too of the Israelites who were expelled from the promised land for breaking God’s commands.

Indeed “to drive out” can be understood as to “divorce” (lev 21:7,14; 22:13). Man was “divorced” from the land and God. The Father’s search for a pure bride for the Son, began. Faith in God to deliver on the promised serpent crusher means Adam can be in covenant with God, albeit a circumstantially different relationship than before.

Adam was placed in the garden. Now he is driven out. The use of LORD God is personal. A personal forceful expulsion.

Man did not have a choice, nor were they kindly showed the door. They were driven out.

Did Adam and Eve protest eviction? Did they argue over who is to blame? There is no record of them saying anything. Perhaps they were thankful God didn’t kill them immediately. In His grace and mercy, He drove them out.

The exit and only entrance to the secure garden was in the east. If Eden was located about the land of Israel – then east would head into the wider world, whereas west would land at the Mediterranean sea – of course the topography would be different somewhat before the food. The east is mentioned many times in the book of Genesis (2:8,13;3:24;4:16;10:30;11:2).  The “people moved eastward” and settled to build Babel we read in Genesis 11. Babylon would rise in the east. Sodom and Gomorrah east thereof.

Driven from the garden of Salem, into a wilderness of chaos. Garden Exiles.

Exile and promise of restoration is a pattern that repeats throughout the bible.

Returning to Ezekiel 28 with the fall of man in mind: “In the abundance of your trade you were filled with violence, and you sinned; so I defiled you and banished you from the mountain of God--the guardian cherub expelled you from the midst of the stones of fire.” (28:16 NET)

The Hebrew for violence in this verse can mean various kinds of unrighteousness. I used the NET version because it separates the cherub from another individual I have previously argued is Adam, and so it translates the passage to understand guardian cherubim escorted them out under the orders of the LORD God. That is how I understand it.

He failed to forcibly remove the serpent so now he was forcibly removed.

Paradise Lost

What did Man lose in being removed? It is easy to skim over this, but this is a family eviction... this is man's eviction.

Man lost his reign of Eden.

God is behind any earthly throne, without this recognition sooner or later you will be removed from the throne (Dan 4:25). God appoints leaders and removes them. He gave it Adam, but now the kingdom will be taken from him and Satan now has dominion rights of earth. The Kingdom of Eden was lost. Never since has a kingdom properly been in place. Israel came the closest.

They reached for the heavenly throne; they were exiled from their own home.

Man lost the land inheritance.

Expulsion means they were without home or kingdom. No inheritance to pass down to their children.

Although they could still live in the wider Eden area, their children will be born and brought up outside of the garden, as life-long sojourners.

Exiled from the land, Adam would look up to the sky at night, and wonder how God’s plan written in the stars would play out.

Man lost the protection of the garden.

The enclosed garden was secure with only one entrance, providing excellent security.

Now they are in the open and would have to build their own boundaries and walls to protect from intruders in the years to come. Their home or kingdom would be man-made, not God-made. The challenge of securing boundaries and conflicts over land would begin.

They lost protection and covering of the garden and the canopy of trees under which relationship would grow. The field means exposure to harsh conditions and fewer trees to shelter under.

They rejected the conditions of the security and boundaries of God’s law, and so he gave them an insecure life with few physical boundaries.

Man lost out on the abundant provision of the Edenic fertile delta.

They were blessed with four rivers from one mountain source. But as they spread out, they would more likely have to choose one river to dwell by.

No longer could he “freely eat”. He ate from the only one, and now won’t be able to eat from any in the garden.

The fertile land is exchanged for sweating for food in the field and rougher terrain beyond.

Rather than gain an abundance of privileges and gifts and status, they lost abundant life in paradise.

I wonder if the leaves of the tree of life would float down the rivers into the land beyond “for the healing of the nations” as it will do in the restored earth (Revelation 22:2). And I wonder if the peoples rejected even the leaves. The garden of course would be drowned in the flood.

Man lost access to the raised peaks of the mountain of God.

No longer can he walk on “the holy mountain of God; in the midst of the stones of fire” (Eze 28:14)

Now he is sentenced to one day walk among the stones of fire in the valley of sheol.

Man lost the privileges that come with the duties as garden sanctuary priest.

He could no longer worship God within the inner sanctuary and present offerings.

His priestly breast-piece of gems left upon the mountain. His leather skins didn’t shine like his costly gems.

Now the priesthood is separated from kingship.

Man lost the intimacy of dwelling in the presence of the LORD.

They went from conversing face to face with the LORD, to alienation from intimacy.

They wanted to be “like God” in the garden, but now they are not with God in the garden.

They were immediately spiritually separated from God through sin. Spiritual death is emphasised in being expelled from God’s sanctuary and dwelling. The relationship broken.

Those that have been estranged from family through fallout would say that it feels like a death and a grieving process. When a loved one dies – we grieve that relationship with them. It can feel like something inside of us has died. Thinking they could become like God in that sense, they lost their pure intimate fellowship with God in the garden. They would grieve.

Man lost the ability not to sin.

Before the fall, man was “able not to sin” and “able to sin”. After the fall “He was not able not to sin.”

He was physically free; he is not enslaved. But he is enslaved to his own sin. Not a prisoner of God. A prisoner of his own actions.

Man lost the life of harmony.

A life of certainty and peace. Now a life of discord, toil, uncertainty, suffering, and in due course the chaos will return to the dust.

There is a circumstantial, irreversible, life-change for the couple.

In a sense, they died to their old life – a kind of reversal of being born again.

They were to be fruitful, multiply, and fill the land. Instead, they ate the fruit, they will multiply in pain, and were expelled from the land. Adam’s fall and expulsion did not render him unaccountable from here on out. The initiate mandate stands: to work and keep (or serve and guard), be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth, subdue it, as priestly, regal, image bearing representatives, even within the mechanics of the new harsh reality through blurry eyes and sore members, but they cannot re-enter the garden until the promised seed atones for sin and crushes the serpent. Again, for man to participate in the commission, he must enter into covenantal relationship with God, rejecting the covenant with the ancient serpent.

Guardian Cherubim

God “placed” Adam in the garden, and now he “placed” Cherubim “east of the garden.”

Cherubim is plural. It doesn’t indicate the number of Cherubim.

Are these the cherubim of Ezekiel’s vision with 4 wings and 4 faces and perhaps 4 of them? Though, they were associated with the portable throne of God. Are they the cherubim associated with the future temple structures that tend to come in pairs and often depicted with one face and two wings? We are not told. Of course, as previously detailed, Ezekiel’s cherubim and the temple cherubim could be the same kind of cherubim. We are not given a description here.

These cherubim represent the presence of God, although in no way do they intercede for God.

What we are told is along with the cherubim he placed “a flaming sword that turned every way”

At first glance one may assume the cherubim hold these swords. But it’s sword singular. Turning and spinning in every way as if the invisible hand of God is controlling it. The fire that engulfs it relates to the presence of God; the way to the presence of God.

This protection ensures that any attempt to enter would result in the death of the intruder.

I picture the sword directly in front the entrance and a cherub either side.

Adam was “to keep” the garden which is the same Hebrew word “to guard” for the cherubim. The cherubim took over the role of guarding from Adam. Adam failed to guard the garden, the cherubim would not fail to guard the entrance.

They were to guard “the way to the tree of life”. Another way was promised. The way. The only way to the Father and receive eternal life through the Son who banished Man from the garden. The one who banished, provides another way.

As the cherubim are positioned just outside the garden, nothing is said about working the garden. Without Adam and sons to maintain it – it would become overgrown.

These fierce cherubim and flaming sword to protect the entrance, underscores the existing natural security of the garden perimeter. It’s not a chain-link fence around an American yard, or featherboard fencing around an English garden. This would have been thick and high, circling the mountain of the LORD, the only entry point being in the east. The boundary with its guarded entrance would prevent intruders for 1600+ years until the flood of Noah.

I can imagine for 1600 years stories would be told about what took place. These stationed cherubim are most likely the same cherubim that escorted Adam and his wife out. Adam may have returned in the years to come and tell of how those very cherubim threw them out “hundreds of years ago”.

Assuming the cherubim remained visible like the sword, people would travel far afield to see the entrance to the garden and what stood there. They would likely see the light of fire from the sword from a distance, especially at night. No doubt, as wickedness increased some will have tried to enter the garden and will have killed.

You can see why cherubim were included in the tabernacle and temple designs. Also, how cherubim like creatures would become legend and depicted in future eras.

This is the first sword, meant not for attacking, but to guard. Others would discover metals in the ground and forge swords to attack and conquer. But they would never conquer Eden nor the “flaming sword that turned every way”.

Now that the Edenic Temple had been desecrated, and without Man to serve as priest, the Son of God would leave the Temple to sit on his throne of sapphire at the right hand of God. If his presence in the garden was fundamentally reduced, as man was no longer dwelling there to commune with, the temple would be essentially deserted until the flood.

This raises another thought and implication of guarding the garden. Other than the tree of life, others may have attempted to access the throne of the temple and declare themselves to be God. If of course this is what stood upon the mountain beyond the stones of fire. It will instead be a future event, when the antichrist “takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God.” (2 Thes 2:4)

No one took the seat in the original Eden, and no-one will take the seat in the restored Eden other than the same person, LORD God, Jesus Messiah.

Continuing Consequences

The consequences of the events described in Genesis 3 continue.

Suffering in a fallen world

Why is their evil in the world? As Sara says, “evil is a product of human behaviour, not a principle inherent in the cosmos.”

The questions of “How can there be a loving God with so much suffering and death,” is explained in the fall of Satan and the fall of man. Firstly, Satan’s failure to abide by God’s word and fulfil his mission as a powerful angel, however that looked. Secondly, man’s failure to abide by God’s word and fulfil his mission. The former could have been removed from the equation if man had operated the mediatorial kingdom as mandated by God.

To understand your own suffering, you are required to build the bigger picture beginning in Genesis and the pivotal moment of the third chapter. The world was originally good, but independence from God, means loss of righteousness, separation from God, cursed environment, physical death, clothing.

Why am I suffering for Adam’s sin? Don’t kid yourself, you would have done the same thing, if not reached quicker. “for the intention of man’s heart is evil from his youth.” (Gen 8:21) “for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23) “But that’s because I’ve inherited sinful nature.” You still chose to sin. In your suffering don’t continue the sin and look back to blame the first Adam, but look forward to the return of the last Adam and his accomplishment on the cross. The last Adam will protect his bride, did not and will not submit to Satan, will deliver his people, did shed his blood to atone for sin, will wipe away ever tear.

Adam attempted to grasp equality with God.  Christ Jesus however, “though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” (Philippians 2:6-11)

Man’s relationships are now in tension. His relationship with God is torn – the spiritual separation, and physical separation from the presence of the LORD in Eden. Sin, breaks down the vertical relationship between man and God, and also the horizontal relationships between men. The relationship between spirit and body would separate in physical death. Man’s relationship with creation would suffer as it worked against him under the curse of sin.

God is not obligated to immediately remedy to situation. He has already promised crushing and restoration, and the suffering in the world lies at the feet of men and not God. God requires the earth to be populated, during the course he will enact his purposes and teach man among other things the consequences of an evil heart.

We live in an age of discipline.

Demonic Rule

From Eden onward there has been a battle between God’s kingdom and Satan’s kingdom. Satan is no threat to the universal Kingdom of God, but for the time being he is thwarting every opportunity for man to establish God’s mediatory kingdom on earth. From this time on “the whole world lies in the power of the evil one.” (1 John 5:19)

The author of Hebrews explains that Christ will be king of all, but temporary demonic subjection exists: “Now in putting everything in subjection to him [Christ Jesus], he left nothing outside his control. At present, we do not yet see everything in subjection to him.” (Heb 2:8b) Currently much is subjected to Satan rather than man, and specifically the anointed God-man.

Satan, the ancient serpent now has control over the earth. He has strategically placed demonic princes to rule over each nation with armies under them. They have been in charge for thousands of years. They know the history of your nation inside out. They cause confusion, satanic worship, needless division, perversion of the truth, and influence the weave of the spiritual fabric of the nations.

In our ponderance and grievance of evil, Paul reminds us:

“For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places.” (Eph 6:12)

God allows this to happen in his patience. But his plan is in place.

There is a constellation called Draco, which is Latin for Dragon, and is a picture of a twisted serpent that coils around the pole star, never setting.

Glancing at the stars at night, Adam must have considered that this serpent would have a hold on the earth throughout redemptive history, until the heavens were renewed.

It is why the Lord taught his disciples to pray, “lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one” (Matt 6:13 NIV).

The problem of Sin

The climate is not the issue. The virus is not the issue. The economy is not the issue. Sin is the issue.

I believe JC Ryle said: “Sin never announces itself to us with its full intentions. It never says, “I am your deadly enemy, and I want to ruin you forever in hell”. It shows its pleasure, but hides its pain; shows its sparkle, but hides its death.”

Genesis 3 is the pattern of what happens when we sin: Transgression of the explicit command of God. Playing into the hands of the serpent. Consequences follow including spiritual, physical, immediate, longsuffering, permanent, and ultimate (for those without salvation). Curse followed by death.

Sin is not just a legal administrative account. It is a violation against a person. Like adultery in marriage, sin is a violation against God who created us for relationship. We are saying we know better ways to make us feel joyous, and providential… and that what he says is evil, is not, and therefore his law without worth, that his word is not true. A personal violation that challenges God’s character. We falsely indict God of not being enough. God retorts our accusation with judgement revealing his true goodness. As an honest and holy judge, God rules sufficient punishment and how and when it will be carried out. The purpose is to restore the violated relationship and the spoiling of his creation.

Today many accuse God of not acting when evil takes it course. It’s not that God is blind, on the contrary he is taking great care to defend his name and creation, enacting his judgements when he knows best, in public or behind the scenes, whether in this life or in the age to come. The more we enjoy our sin, the more offensive God’s judgements appear to us.

Genesis 3 was the start of man desiring an extension to power. Adam and Eve had all the earth under their rule, but they wanted more. Discontent hearts in the words of Hamilton seek for “power to be morally autonomous, power over somebody else’s life, power over the determination of one’s future.” An attempt to take power from God brings judgment on oneself, and estrangement from our maker.

You may have heard the saying - Sin isn’t bad because it’s forbidden. It’s forbidden because it’s bad.

In Conclusion

As Christians who have faith in Jesus Messiah, our decisions should not be made with self-interest in mind, but within the decrees of God. Are my choices honouring to God? Are they pleasing to him? Are my choices obedient to his word?

Are we submitting to the Serpent who slithered in the garden, or are we submitted to the LORD Jesus who walked the garden, and will walk the garden?

I read recently: “One of the most dangerous allures to disobedience is a loss of foresight, the ability to look beyond the immediate adrenaline rush, to see the horrific consequences of our actions. Adam and Eve never imagined they would one day be holding the lifeless body of their beloved son.”

That’s what we will look at next time within chapter 4.

We call it the fall of man, don’t we? But it isn’t really a fall is it? He didn’t trip, knock a fruit off and it accidently land in his mouth, sliced on his teeth and slipped down his throat. He chose to sin.

The trees were for provision for food and atheistically pleasing. The Tree then becomes the place of sin punishable by death, which according to the reflective side of torah, to be hung on a tree:

“And if a man has committed a crime punishable by death and he is put to death, and you hang him on a tree, his body shall not remain all night on the tree, but you shall bury him the same day, for a hanged man is cursed by God. You shall not defile your land that the LORD your God is giving you for an inheritance.” (Deu 21:22-23)

Thankfully for us, while Adam would eventually die, he was not hanged on a tree.

But Christ:

““Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree”— so that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promised Spirit through faith.” (Gal 3:13-14)

That one, I will leave to simmer.

May you be blessed in obedience as we place our hope in the resurrection at the revelation of Jesus the Messiah!

* * *

For a specific reference please contact us here.