God has just handed out His divine judgement upon the disobedient creation. As we watched, He passed judgement upon the serpent, the devil, the Woman, the ground, and Adam. Now let us turn our attention to the crowd's reaction. . . .
And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.
Here Adam finally give his wife an identity - He names her Eve. Prior to this she was known as Woman which was the equal of Man. Adam, by the way, means "ruddy", Eve means "lifegiver". In so naming Eve, he designated her primary task: "the mother of all living." God set Adam's primary task in chapter 1:26-28, in chapter 2:15, and again reiterated it in His sentence upon man here in chapter 3:17-19. It is to have mastery over the earth and to provide the necessities for him and his family.
Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them. Interesting point from the Scriptures here. God's standard of decency is NOT the same as man's. As we discussed briefly in reading verse 7, man sewed together fig leaves (remember fig leaves are approximately 5-7 inches in length) into an apron (word means a belt or girdle) which would then cover from the waist down and thought that was decent. God's standard of decency was that of a complete covering. Coat then meant the same thing essentially as it means today - a covering, a coat or robe. (all definitions of Hebrew words taken from Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible with Greek and Hebrew Lexicons). God covered from the neck down.
And the LORD 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: Satan was right. The truth was that man would become as his Father: he would know the difference between good and evil. Man now has that aspect of God and because of God's sentence of physical death and spiritual redemption, man would not be allowed to access the tree of life and eternal life. Can you imagine one man (or many) living for all time committing sin and wickedness? We are not talking about a man who lives a span of 60-100 years in his sin and wickedness but one that has been living since the creation of the world. As we know the reveled plan of redemption, eternal life is offered only through obedience to one Man (John 10:25-30; I john 2:23-25); the Man that Adam foreshadowed - Jesus (Romans 5).
Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. To prohibit man from gaining a eternal life physically, God sent him from the garden. Not only did this accomplish the purpose of prevention, it also signified the end of God providing their sustenance. This literally meant that man would have to toil to cause the ground to produce his food.
So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life. Man did not want to leave. God sent, and then drove (no not in a Beamer) man out of the garden. The word drove here means "A primitive root; to drive out from a possession; especially to expatriate or divorce: - cast up (out), divorced (woman), drive away (forth, out), expel, X surely put away, trouble, thrust out." Then to prevent man from returning, God put a guard. Did you ever notice how much East figures prominently in the Bible? Just a thought question. The entrance to the garden was on the east side and the guard was placed there. The guards were of the heavenly beings and were known as cherubims (see Ezekiel 10 for a description of cherubims), and they had a flaming sword that turned about every which way. This means that it watched all sides, no one could enter to gain access to the tree of life.
Readers, I am adding a new subsection to each post entitled "Lessons from this text." I hope you will help me develop this section in the comments with your own lessons.
Lessons from this text:
1.) Names have meanings: They can be used for identity, for position, and for description. Example: Eve means "lifegiver" and was given because she was the mother of all living (Genesis 3:20). Esau means "hairy" and was so named because he was a hairy child from birth (Genesis 25:25). Jesus means "Jehovah is salvation" and He was named so because "for he shall save his people from their sins." (Matthew 1:21).
2.) God's ways and standards are not the same as man's ways and standards. Man thought he was decent with just a simple apron. God's standard of decency was more covering in the form of a robe. Sure shows how far man has fallen when one looks at the "fashions" of today.
3.) God means what He says.
A.) When God has a plan, no one interferes with the carrying out of that plan including a tree of life.
B.) When God passes judgement, it is carried out completely. There is no compromise. His court is fair, and just the first time with no need for a retrial. Our judgement has yet to happen. We need to make sure that the evidence for our salvation is clear and present or we will not be judged favorably.
C.) When God sends, you go. Jonah found this out the hard way as well (read the book of Jonah). God sent and man went though not very willingly.
Christian
Why Does It Matter?
-
He remembers what the squall was, but his mom and dad never even had a
clue. Not even when the event took place. There is nothing quite like the
experience...
4 years ago
21 comments:
Christian, Very good post. A lot to think on before I would comment, but really interesting. Deboraw
Christian, Isa 55:8-9 tells us "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith Jehovah. 9) For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts."
Another thing that has struck me as interesting, Eve meant 'life-giver'-and in a sense all woman-kind is 'life-giver' in the chain of life on this earth. When a person stops to consider- what an honor. Yet, sadly, in many cases it is no longer an honor. Most want to 'hurry through' that area, get it over with so they can get to 'more important things'(?). Satan is still deceiving many people--Eve included, and Adam just goes along for the ride--I guess. Ecclesiastes 3:11-14 He hath made everything beautiful in its time: also he hath set eternity in their heart, yet so that man cannot find out the work that God hath done from the beginning even to the end. 12)I know that there is nothing better for them, than to rejoice, and to do good so long as they live. 13) And also that every man should eat and drink, and enjoy good in all his labor, is the gift of God. 14) I know that, whatsoever God doeth, it shall be for ever: nothing can be put to it, nor anything taken from it; and God hath done it, that men should fear before him.
Deboraw
Christian, Sorry to bother you...again, but I'm still pondering on this post. How old was Adam when he died? I don't think I would care to live that long--and have to watch the sorrow and sin in the world. Especially knowing I had brought it upon 'us'. He may have followed Eve originally so that they wouldn't be separated, but we aren't told when she died--probably before him. So he must have watched as they both grew old, and wondered...nine hundred years would be a long time.
We know names have meaning, I sometimes think we ought to do as some of the early people did and let folks 'earn' their names.
"And when I know that God is just (and fair) I tremble...who said that? But it is true. What if we were to receive the reward that we deserve?
Dear Deboraw,
Thank you for your comments and questions.
Yes, there are many who abdicate their God-given roles/positions to pursue their own desires; men giving up their roles as providers and leaders and protectors of the family, women who leave their posts as life-givers, nurturers, and lovers. Some indeed out of necessity (men cannot provide very well when they are disabled same as women who have need to step out of their roles due to those disabilities or the leaving of the man) but most leave out of a desire to fulfill their selfish gratifications.
Adam lived for 930 years total. Some of that was in the garden the najority out of it obviously. He had a lot of firsts in his life. First human, had the first wife, first saw the creation, first to partake in the providence of God, first father, first to till the ground, even the first to have a black sheep son. . . you get the picture. He was the first to experience death in a personal manner with the loss of Abel. How sad yet wonderful his life must have been. He knew God, not in the same way we know God but he heard and looked upon the Voice of God physically.
From the story of Esau and Jacob we can see that the practice of naming at birth has a long-standing track record. Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't the earning of a name apply soley to the surname?
"I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that his justice cannot sleep forever: that considering numbers, nature and natural means only, a revolution of the wheel of fortune, an exchange of situation, is among possible events: that it may become probable by supernatural interference! The Almighty has no attribute which can take side with us in such a contest." --Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Virginia Q.XVIII, 1782. ME 2:227"http://etext.virginia.edu/jefferson/quotations/jeffcont.htm"
Indeed we should tremble at the justice of our God but more so at His mercy. Great is our God.
Christian
I often wondered why God commanded the man not to eat of tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Other scriptures show that God does want his children to understand the difference between right and wrong and to do what is right.
There may be subtleties of language here. One writer suggested that what the tree of the knowledge of good and evil represented was the taking to oneself the determination of what is good and evil. In other words, when Adam took of that tree, he took to himself the prerogative of deciding right from wrong. He set his own standards rather than rely on God's definition of what is right and what is wrong.
Only God has the right to decide good and evil, right and wrong, righteousness and sin, and faith requires that we believe and obey God according to His standards, not our own. Adam's decision was, in its effect, a declaration of independence against God's authority to set moral standards. Instead, Adam set his own standards, and the world has followed that pattern ever since. This is why so many people have so many different opinions about right and wrong. People set their own standards independently of God's Word. That is why you can show what the Bible plainly says about standards of right and wrong to someone, and that person may say, "well, here is the way I look at it...".
People generally think sin is a violation of their conscience. But if the conscience is wrongly educated, it is not necessarily an accurate guide to right and wrong.
We can see the consequences of Adam's act when he thought he and his wife should cover their bodies. It was not wrong for them to be naked with each other anymore than it is wrong for a husband and wife today. But the idea that they were guilty for being naked was Adam or Eve's idea (no doubt influenced by Satan), not God. I have no doubt that God would have clothed them His way by the time mankind multiplied and other people were involved. But at this point, Adam was already deciding for himself what was right and what was wrong - he was setting his own moral standards not from God. God didn't tell him he was naked and needed clothing; Adam decided that himself.
God wants us to understand right from wrong and to obey what is right, but it has to be according to God's standards, not our own.
Dear Author,
Thank you for some thought provoking comments.
In regards to your wondering why God commanded man not to eat of the tree of good and evil, let me first ask of you what would have happened had man not eaten of the tree?
The nuance here I think is in the definition of the word "dah-ath" which is translated knowledge. It also means awareness. Therefore, by its very basis, the awareness/knowledge of good and evil neccessitates the responsibility or perogative of determining whether your actions are good or evil. In the same way, we teach our children right from wrong not just by verbally teaching but also by example. We as parents are responsible for their choices up until that time when they have developed that sense of right and wrong and are able to make their own determination. At that point we relinquish our perogative or responsibility for their choices and they take up that responsibility. Back to the garden and the tree: mankind did not have that awareness nor that responsibility until he became aware that there was a difference between the two. Up to that time, man was innocent.
I disagree with you here on your phrasing of "Only God has the right to set the standard". To say this is to imply that the standard has the ability to change. God does not change (James 1:17) and neither does His standard, therefore He is the standard. By His very being, He defines good and evil (Matthew 19:16-17). A right is something that can be denied (by someone stronger - real or percieved) or relinquished; for example a right to liberty can be denied as shown by countries with dictators, a right to exercise free will can be relinquished or denied as shown by Paul's use of the doulos meaning 'slave' in contrast with "servant" (also a translation of 'doulos' as is bond or bondman/bondservant) in Romans 6:16-17. When we relinquished our to sin, we lost sight of the fact that what we relinquish we can take back. That fact was declared in the sacrifice and ressurrection of Christ.
Man showed his desire to be like his parent by desiring to be wise like God even though God had said not to eat. In fulfilling that desire and going for what "I want regardless of the cost", man declared himself able to choose his own way. Notice that God respected that decision and allowed man to suffer the sorrows and joys associated with that decision at the same time as providing the way back to Him.
Well said on the conscience point!! Sin is a transgression of the law (I John 3:1-6). Conscience however was not mentioned in this passage but I Timothy 4:2 and Hebrews 10:22 speaks of evil consciences.
Why would God point out the fact that 2 realizations came with the eating of the fruit? The first was that they had sinned. The second, that they were naked? The arguement that nakedness was wrong only because man said it was, was presented to me by a man who wished to justify nude beaches, strip joints, and the like. However, in innocence, nakedness does not bring the fleshly desires that accompany the awareness of good and evil. Nakedness between a man and wife is not wrong but once you leave that bedroom it becomes wrong for exciting the lust. Man's standards for decency are indeed not the same as God's.
Another good point on us understanding right from wrong so that we might choose right and obey Him. We should not forget that God did not make us mindless robots but living, intelligent beings of choice that we might exercise that choice to serve Him.
Christian
Christian, (and 'author') have been enjoying the comments. I think there have been some very good -comments. Deboraw
Thank you for your comment.
I think you are mistaken when you say that God's standards for man do not change. The scripture that says that God does not change is referring to His eternal righteous nature and to the fact that He does not go back on His promises. But God has the right to make laws and change laws for mankind, and those laws are the standard for right and wrong for man.
One of the standards for mankind is God's law of the Sabbath, the fourth of the ten commandments. We are to rest on the seventh day (Saturday) as God commands. Yet this law did not always exist. According to Jesus Christ, the Sabbath was made for mankind (Mark 2:27).
Paul also testifies that God's laws can change. Notice Hebrews 7:12: "For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law." Paul is talking about the Levitical priesthood being replaced by the priesthood of Jesus Christ. We also know that the laws concerning animal sacrifices are not now in effect. Yet they will be in effect again in the millenium.
Even in those cases of standards that exist eternally, such as truth, mercy, faith, etc., God sets the standards for man in that God teaches man what those standards are. Moreover, God teaches man HOW to apply those standards. The principle of loving God with all our hearts is an eternal standard and law that does not change, but God gives mankind the standard of the first four of the ten commandments to teach us how to love God just as the principles of the last six commandments set the standards for how we should love our neighbor.
God can and does change laws that men must obey. There were new laws that came into existence when man was created, such as laws against adultery. This was not an eternal law because sex does not exist for angels or God, but for mankind. It is likely the Sabbath was created by God resting on the seventh day, which is logical because since it was made for man, it makes sense that it would be created when man was created. There were changes in the law at the time of Noah after the flood when God made meat available to man for food and when God commanded the death penalty for murderers. There were changes in the law with the first coming of Jesus Christ, such as the change in the Passover symbols from the slain lamb to the symbols of bread and wine. There will be other changes in the millenium, when animal sacrifices will be restored, no doubt as a teaching tool.
But God's righteous character never changes, and that part of the standard we are to emulate does not change. I think this is what you meant when you said God is the standard, and I agree. We still have to look to God for instruction in that standard, and that is the sense I meant when I said that God sets the standards.
I wish to join this interesting discussion.
It is true that God does not change, Malachi 3:6, James 1:17. Both passages refer to God's character as has been pointed out. It is also true that God's standard for right and wrong, that is "morality", also does not change. For example it has always been wrong to commit murder, as in the case of Cain and Abel (Genesis 4), even though it was not written as a command until the Decalogue was given in Exodus 20.
As creator God has the right to set the standard. (Romans 9:21). However we must remember that He has chosen to maintain the standard for morality (right and wrong) throughout time. It was wrong for Cain to murder Abel, it was still wrong under the law written and engraven on stone given to Moses, and it is now wrong as a part of the Law of Christ (Romans 13:9) and will be until the end of time. God has every right to change the standard of morality but His character will not allow it.
He also has the right to set the standard for acceptable faith and love. The command to love Him with our total being was part of the Decalogue and succeeds it as well. (Deuteronomy 6:5, Luke 10:27) In order to love God acceptably we must be obedient to His commands (see Hebrews 11:7-10, John 14:15). These standards are stable, unchangeable and enduring.
It must be noted however that God has the right, privilege and power to change what constitutes acceptable worship. For about 1500 years God required animal sacrifice and Sabbath worship. This was from the time of Moses until the death of Christ on the cross. With this event the final segment of God's plan for man began. The Law of Christ became our governing plan for acceptable worship. The commandments written and engraven on stone were fulfilled and set aside ( II Corinthians 3:1-11). It was replaced by the Law of Christ, a "new covenant".
It is important to note that there were no changes to the Law or covenant given on Mt. Sinai but rather it was replaced by a totally new law or covenant. Notice carefully Jeremiah 31:31-34, Hebrews 8, and Galatians 3:23-25. Nowhere in the new covenant are we instructed to offer animal sacrifices or keep the sabbath! Not only this but I know of no place where we are told they will be reinstated!
Thanks for reading and I pray that all will consider these things prayerfully and objectively.
Hi Josiah,
You mentioned that you know of no place in the Bible where the sacrifices will be reinstated.
There is a long prophecy in the book of Ezekiel from chapter 40 to the end of the book that describes a temple and a system of animal sacrifices. This has never occurred as described in these chapters since Ezekiel was written so it is yet for the future. There are details in the description that can be most easily understood if the prophecy pertains to the time after the second coming of Christ when Christ will establish peace and happiness over the whole earth as described in many prophecies.
It makes perfect sense that there will be animal sacrifices in the millenium. The animal sacrifices are a tool for teaching people about Jesus Christ. The animals that are sacrificed represent the sacrifice of Christ. These lessons are best learned by both doing the act and by understanding the meaning. But Old Testament Israel never understood the meaning. Their minds were blinded. But in the millenium God will remove the veil over their hearts and God will teach them. Christ will be king over all the earth. And for the first time Israel will be able to have the benefit of learning the lessons the sacrifices are designed to teach both by performing the sacrifices and understanding their meaning. That has never happened before.
I think you are mistaken when you say the new covenant does not include Sabbath observance. God did not create the Sabbath for Israel but for all mankind (Mark 2:27). It was made by God resting on the seventh day after creating man on the sixth day. God did not have to rest because He was tired. The only purpose to His resting was to create the Sabbath day for mankind as Jesus stated. Sabbath observance is commanded in the ten commandments, and the ten commandments are still God's law, which has not been done away (James 2:10-11, Matthew 19:17-18, Matthew 5:17-20). The first century Church kept the seventh day Sabbath, such as when Paul preached to the Gentiles on the Sabbath (Acts 13:42). I find no evidence in the New Testament that the Sabbath was done away or changed to a different day. The fourth commandment is as much in force today as the first commandment against having any god before the true God, the second commandment against using images to worship God, and the third commandment against taking God's name in vain.
The New Covenant is not a replacement of the law of the ten commandments. The New Covenant is based on better promises, that is, eternal life and the promise that God would write His law in our hearts. The spiritual law described by the ten commandments is a law for mankind that has not changed since man was created, and it is the foundation of both the old and new covenants.
The Old Covenant only promised national blessings for obedience, but the New Covenant promises eternal life in the Kingdom of God. The Old Covenant did not promise the gift of the Holy Spirit which would enable the people to keep the law in its fullest spiritual intent, but the New Covenant does. The Old Covenant did not provide forgiveness of sins and removal of the death penalty for sin, but the New Covenant does. Those are the better promises. But the spiritual law of God, as outlined in the ten commandments, including the Sabbath, is the same for both covenants (Hebrews 10:16-18, Jeremiah 31:31-34).
Dear Readers,
Thank you all for your comments and welcome to Josiah.
Great discussion we have going here and enlightening. Unfortunately I don't have time to spend reading them through at the moment but just wanted to let you know I am around reading and will comment later today if so the Lord allows. Keep it going.
Christian
Author: just a quick comment before I must go to work.
It appears that the scriptures do not agree with your interpretation of Ezekiel. For his prophecy was given during the Babylonian captivity (see 1:1-3) and fulfilled as recorded in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah. This fulfillment cannot be overlooked!
More later.
Dear Author;
As I read your post more thoroughly I had some questions that I need clarified. I would ask that you defend your answers with Scriptural references so that I might read and understand.
What is the purpose of animal sacrifices?
Were the 10 commandments a part of the Mosaical Law?
What was the purpose of the Sabbath?
Did Jesus fulfill the law?
Does or can the Bible contradict itself?
I appreciate your patience and await your answers.
Christian
P.S. Might I suggest that this discussion be transfered over to Josiah's blog as it is a more appropriate venue for this topic? My blog is simply here to discuss the text and we have, at this junction, left the text of Genesis 3. I would like to return to that purpose. - Christian
Christian:
To answer your questions and keep the comments on your post on-topic, I have posted your questions and my answers to my own blog Preaching the Gospel . Here is a link to my post titled The Ten Commandments, the Sabbath, and Animal Sacrifices.
Josiah:
In my post I offer evidence that the prophecy I referred to in Ezekiel was never fulfilled in history. Basically, the details about healing waters were never fulfilled, and the details of the settlements of the twelve tribes in each tribe's alloted land area was never fulfilled from the Babylonian captivity until today.
Christian, You asked about the name change tradition. I guess I'm not sure...Jacob was given the name Israel, Saul became Paul, Joseph became Barnabus, Naomi said 'call me no longer Naomi (pleasant) but call me Mara (bitter) because...'. Esau was Edom, I'm sure there were others that I can't think of...but there was usually a reason for the change. Deboraw
Christian, In rereading the post, the question comes to mind, what is meant by the phrase, 'become as one of us'? Of course He is speaking to what we know as 'the Word', and the Holy Spirit, but it is an interesting phrase, to me. And why do people try to tell God what He wants? Deboraw
Dear Readers:
Thank you to Author who has taken the off-topic discussion to his blog as well as to Josiah for his part and blog as well.
Thank you also to Deboraw for the question.
And to Deboraw; God indeed said "man is become as one of us" but He did not stop there. He finished with "To know right from wrong". This means that man had taken on fully an attribute of God to wit: to know the difference between right and wrong.
Christian
not to be rude ofc.. but are you sure this is not a site for the withnesses, if so i think it would be fair to state that at front page cuz otherwise you hide in shadows and as I understood men don´t and by the fact of light can´t hide... just asking not shouting :)
LEVITICUS have you read that....
Dear juzamdjinn55555,
Thank you for your posts, but they leave me feeling a bit confused. Yes I have read Leviticus many times but I am dealing here with Genesis. No this site is not Jehovah's Witnesses related (although if they wish to comment, they are free to do so).
Christian, Perhaps he was confused by 'Author's' questions, which came from a ? Armstongism point of view, and not by your blog? Deboraw
Post a Comment