GRACE THROUGH THE AGES
HANDOUT UNIT #3
By: Bradley Anderson
THE COVENANT OF ADAM
HISTORY OF THE COVENANT WITH ADAM
Our study of Adam begins in 1643, when the English Parliament appointed 121 "learned, godly and judicious Divines" from among the clergy of England and theology professoriate of Cambridge and Oxford to meet at Westminster Abbey for the development of a set of national religious standards.
Out of this work the divines codified covenant structure in Eden:
“The distance between God and the creature is so great, that although reasonable creatures do owe obedience unto Him as their Creator, yet they could never have any fruition of Him as their blessedness and reward, but by some voluntary condescension on God's part, which He hath been pleased to express by way of covenant.”
It may be noted that the voluntary condescension of God’s part denotes a kind of graciousness involving the condescending of God to commune with man.
The divines organized the covenant structure from Genesis 1-3 into two covenants which they understood as underwriting all of redemption in history accordingly:
“The first covenant made with man was a covenant of works, wherein life was promised to Adam, and in him to his posterity, upon condition of perfect and personal obedience.”
“Man by his fall having made himself incapable of life by that covenant, the Lord was pleased to make a second, commonly called the covenant of grace: wherein he freely offered unto sinners life and salvation by Jesus Christ.”
It may be noted that these covenants were originally adopted into Baptist, Congregationalist and Presbyterian confessions. The great Baptist minister Charles Spurgeon himself stated that:
"The doctrine of the covenant lies at the root of all true theology. It has been said that he who well understands the distinction between the covenant of works and the covenant of grace, is a master of divinity.”
The Westminster divines felt that the Edenic administrations of works and grace provide the terms which make redemption available to every generation in history.
As we noted in Unit 1, works/law and grace/promise are prominent themes in all of the covenants.
For our purpose I will be referring to the covenants of works and grace as law and promise covenants respectively.
In my view the original audience of the Penteteuch would have better understood covenant forms in a law framework that implied the concept of works and a promise framework that implied grace. We have more knowledge of ancient near east covenant forms today than the divines had in the 17th century.
The terms grace and works are difficult for modern evangelicals to process without confusing those terms with a predominant dispensational schema which traces grace to the New Covenant and works to the Old Covenant with Moses. I will be teaching however that grace is not a New Testament innovation, wherein God had never acted graciously toward man prior to Christ, nor is law an innovation of Moses, wherein God had never required obedience prior to Sinai.
OBJECTIONS TO THE COVENANT WITH ADAM
Support for the work of Westminster in developing a covenant of works and the covenant of grace with Adam fell out of favor with most evangelicals in the early 20th century.
The dispensational understanding of biblical theology (below) was integrated into the teaching of most bible colleges at this time.
The first American reference bible, Scofield, published in 1909, presented a dispensational understanding of redemption history for lay people which emphasized divisions in revelation with law and grace administered in separate epochs of history.
Karl Barth’s influence on conservative evangelicalism may have also contributed to the eclipse of the Westminster covenant of works in the 20th century, as Barth was a universalist who felt that a works/law covenant would work itself out in favor of the Calvinistic principle of limited atonement; Barth saw redemption as consisting only of grace.
The model I will be working from (below) projects the organic extension and expansion of the Edenic administrations of law/works and promise/grace, straight through redemption history. In this schema every successive covenant, then, contains elements of both law and promise, with varying degrees of emphasis.
Theological: law/works--------------------------------------condemnation---------------------------------------
promise/grace-----------------------------justification-----------------------------------------
Historical General: Adam---------------------------------------creation mandates----------------------------
Noah------------------------------------------civil-------------------------------------
Historical Special: Abraham-------------------blessing / promise-----------------------------
Moses-------------ceremonial------|
------------------civil-----------|
------------------moral----------------------------------
David--------------blessing / promise----------------
Christ-----new-----------
Adam’s failure to keep the law of Eden resulted in the imputation of condemnation to all his progeny, but Christ’s righteousness in keeping the law resulted in imputation of justification to Adam and those of his progeny who believe.
The greatest difficulty in defending the covenant of works and the covenant of grace with Adam lies in the fact that the word for covenant, berith, does not occur in the story of Adam. The first use of the word berith is in the covenant with Noah.
Another difficulty in advocating a covenant of works with Adam lies in the fact that ancient law treaties always involved the vassal swearing an oath to the Lord, but Adam did not swear an oath to the LORD God in Eden.
RESPONSE TO OBJECTIONS TO THE COVENANT WITH ADAM
The first occurrence of berith is used in the Bible story of Noah, but:
As already noted in Unit 1, the verb quwm which is paired with the first occurrence of berith in Genesis 6:18 is not the verb that one would expect from the first occurance of covenant in history, rather it is the verb that is given in the raising of a covenant, suggesting that a covenant is already in existence before Noah’s time.
Genesis 6:18 But I will establish [quwm] my covenant [berith] with you, and you shall come into the ark, you, your sons, your wife, and your sons' wives with you.
List of verb pairings with covenant in Genesis:
quwm berith - I will “raise” my covenant, chapter 6.
zakar berith - I will “remember” my covenant, chapter 9.
karath berith - the LORD “cut a covenant”, chapter 15 and 21.
nathan berith - I will “give a covenant”, chapter 17.
It is valid to assume that the covenant with Noah is a reset of a prior covenant and indeed we will see later that much of the content in Noah repeats what God had given to Adam in the creation ordinances.
Covenant would have had limited contextual meaning for Adam.
Adam was not a member of a society in which he is dependent upon the oath or promise of his neighbors in any contractual sense.
When the term covenant is used later in Noah, Abraham and Moses, God may be seen as modifying known contractual forms in ways that are serviceable to His divine purpose and understandable to mankind.
Israel was not in isolation, worshipping God in a novel system which was given de novo, rather Israel worshipped Yaweh and related to Yaweh in forms that every onlooking nation could learn from, because those forms were known forms.
What is unique about Israel is the composite of promise with law. The suzerain kings of the ancient near east used inducements of threats and bribes to secure the loyalty of their subjects.
2nd Samuel 7:1-17 does not contain the word covenant, but other texts indicate that a covenant was being made in the 2nd Samuel chapter 7 narrative. Significantly this may be seen as demonstrating that the absence of the word covenant in the creation narrative is not conclusive to there not being a covenant there.
Psalm 89:3-4
You have said, “I have made a covenant with my chosen one;
I have sworn to David my servant:
‘I will establish your offspring forever,
and build your throne for all generations.’” Selah
It is noteworthy that the prophet Hosea spoke of Israel as analogous to Adam as covenant breakers, like Adam.
Hosea 6:7
But like Adam they transgressed the covenant;
there they dealt faithlessly with me.
The names of God transition in the opening chapters of Genesis:
from God [‘elohiym], in the creation prologue of 1:1 - 2:3,
to the LORD God [Yehovah 'elohiym] in 2:4 - 4:26.
This may be indicating that Moses presented God first as the mighty Creator God and then as the relational Covenant God. This understanding is supported by the literary structure of Genesis.
There are ten toledots (genealogies) in the book of Genesis:
These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created. (Gen. 2:4a)
This is the book of the generations of Adam. (Gen. 5:1a)
These are the generations of Noah. (Gen. 6:9a)
These are the generations of the sons of Noah, Shem, Ham and Japheth.
These are the generations of Shem. (Gen. 11:10a)
These are the generations of Terah. (Gen. 11:27a)
These are the generations of Abraham’s son Ishmael, whom Sarah’s maidservant, Hagar the Egyptian, bore to Abraham. (Gen. 25:12)
These are the generations of Isaac. (Gen. 25:19a)
These are the generations of Esau (that is, Edom). (Gen. 36:1) These are the generations of Esau the father of the Edomites in the hill country of Seir. (Gen. 36:9)
These are the generations of Jacob. (Gen. 37:2a)
The name of God transitions from Elohim to Yaweh as Moses begins telling the toledots.
The toledots provide a backwards looking history and a forward looking plan of redemption in the form of family stories.
From the perspective of the first audience, the exodus reader, the family history formula is teaching them who they are, where they come from and what their mission is as God’s people. When they learn of the blessings and the promises of God to their forefathers, contrasted with the unflattering family histories of the people groups that they are interacting with, it is instructive and encouraging to their mission in God’s great plan of redemption; they are assured that what they are supposed to do next is written in the very promises of God to their forefathers! All they have to do is follow Joshua and trust God to keep promises that He made to their great forefathers.
The critical question regarding covenant between God and Adam is: are the ingredients of covenant, which we have already identified in Unit 1 in the relationship between God and Adam?
We may acknowledge that there are parties in God and Adam.
There is also a clear indication of blessing in the first words spoken to Adam in Genesis 1:28–30 which are reminiscent of the opening words of Abraham's call to covenant:
[28] And God blessed them. And God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” [29] And God said, “Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the face of all the earth, and every tree with seed in its fruit. You shall have them for food. [30] And to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the heavens and to everything that creeps on the earth, everything that has the breath of life, I have given every green plant for food.”
Of note: the blessings are given in the imperative form, e.g. be fruitful, fill the earth, have dominion. We will see this same pattern repeated in Abraham, where the blessing is given inside of the imperative to go from your country and your father’s house….and I will bless you.
It has been suggested by some theologians that the Tree of Life served as the sign of a covenant with Adam.
The stipulation for obedience together with the sanction curse for disobedience are evident in Genesis 2:15–17:
[15] The LORD God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to work it and keep it. [16] And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, “You may surely eat of every tree of the garden, [17] but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.”
The curse for breaking the Edenic covenant is death. There are no superlatives in Hebrew, so the original language reads that on the day you eat from it you shall die die.
This is a key point in our doctrine of salvation: Evangelicals of every persuasion agree that by His death Christ absorbed sin. But why did Christ have to die? Was the death of Christ required to fulfill the atonement laws of Moses? Yes! But, would it be more accurate to say that the atonement laws of Moses reflect that death became a requirement in redemption after Adam broke the command to not to eat of the tree, for on the day you eat from it your will surely die. May we say that the necessity of death in atonement did not begin at Sinai but in the garden?
Subsequent to the fall of Adam there is the promise of redemption given in the form of a man, born of Eve who will crush the head of the serpent. We will unpack this in greater detail below.
The Christ Adam parallel in Paul’s hamartiology (doctrine of sin) argues for a covenantal arrangement between God and Adam, because Adam is a public figure representing his descendents.
Romans 5: 18-20 18 Consequently, just as one trespass [of Adam] resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act [of Christ] resulted in justification and life for all people. 19 For just as through the disobedience of the one man [Adam] the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man [Christ] the many will be made righteous. 20 The law was brought in so that the trespass might increase. But where sin increased, grace increased all the more, 21 so that, just as sin reigned in death, so also grace might reign through righteousness to bring eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. [NIV]
Paul clearly teaches that all of mankind is represented by Adam and Christ.
Paul refers to Adam and Christ in Greek terms which present a two man representation model.
1 Corinthians 15:45–47 [45] 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.
Adam is referred to as protos anthropos.
Christ is referred to as eschatos anthropos.
Christ is also referred to as deuteros anthropos.
If Adam is the first man and Christ is the second man, then we are not to search for a third representative of man between Adam and Christ. Similarly, if Christ is the second man and the last man, we are not to look for a third representative of man between Christ and the end of history.
By using the three Greek terms protos, eschatos and deuteros, Paul is brilliantly establishing the federal representation of Adam and Christ while ruling out the possibility of other federal representatives of man from the past or the future.
Various designations have been used to name the covenants with Adam:
Adamic - it was made with the first man ['adam] Adam, hence it is understood to apply to all men and women.
Creation - it gives the blessings and institutions of creation: frutifullness, dominion, marriage and Sabbath.
Nature - it lays out the natural condition of man in his estate of Innocence before the fall.
Works - this term denotes that Adam is under a probation of obedience in Eden, “wherein life was promised to Adam, and in him to his posterity, upon condition of perfect and personal obedience.”
Life - because it lays out the terms for life; do this and live, do this and die.
Law - this denotes that Adam is under a command to not eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.
Now the creation account will be looked at closely to understand Adam’s relationship to God.
In the Genesis 1:1 - 2:3 prologue to the toledots we are given foundational teaching about the origins of the cosmos and mankind in a form which gives us great insight into the person of God. The creation narrative is given in fiat-fulfillment format.
Genesis 1 [1] In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. [2] The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters. [3] And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. [4] And God saw that the light was good.
Fiat is expressed in the phrase God said. “Let there be light,”
Fulfillment is expressed in the phrase and there was light.
The fiat-fulfillment format is used on each day of creation, suggesting what Meridith Kline calls a “two register cosmology of creation.”
God states let there be from the upper register,
while and it was so transpires in the lower register of the cosmos.
In this format we have some understanding of God’s existence in an upper register, but verse 4 continues with the words God saw that the light was good, indicating that His distance is not to be misinterpreted as indifference or absence from the lower register of creation.
Anyone with authority should take notice of the principle here: divine authority inspects what divine authority expects. The best understanding that we can form of God here is by way of comparison to fundamental violations of authority that we all experience:
Lack of clear commands and expectations.
Lack of followup to verify that what is expected is executed.
Follow up requires relationship building and investment in the lives of subordinates.
You can have the best organizational plan and structure in place and it will all fail if the leader violates these basic principles.
It is possible that Adam neglected to clearly communicate the covenant terms with Eve before she listened to the serpent? In such an act of negligence, Adam would have already forsaken his role as image bearer, (see below) before the serpent arrived. The fiat-fulfillment-format that God exemplified in creation was in principle required of Adam as God’s image bearer.
The creation account uses repetition to show that the plants and the animals are imprinted with the order of taxonomic kinds.
[11] And God said, “Let the earth sprout vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind, on the earth.” And it was so.
[20] And God said, “Let the waters swarm with swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the heavens.” [21] So God created the great sea creatures and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarm, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.
[24] And God said, “Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds—livestock and creeping things and beasts of the earth according to their kinds.” And it was so. [25] And God made the beasts of the earth according to their kinds and the livestock according to their kinds, and everything that creeps on the ground according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.
The creation account then breaks with the repetition of all life forms being made after their respective kinds to emphasize that man is made uniquely in the image and likeness of the triune God.
[26] Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”
[27] So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.
The Hebrew word for image [tselem] is oddly, the same word used for idols.
Idols were understood by the ancients as representative of the various gods in whose image they were carved to personify.
The offerings to the gods were brought to curry the favor of the gods over such things as rain for good crops.
The idol served the important function of acknowledging your offering so that you were credited.
Idolatry demeans both God and man.
God does not need our gifts, nor is He in any way beholden to us for our offerings or sacrifices.
We do not need to earn God’s love for us. We love God for who He is and because He loves us first.
God does not want us to think of ourselves or of Himself in the categories that were valued in idolatry.
In the Law covenant of Moses, religious offerings will be for the atonement of sin and for thanksgiving and homage to God, not for manipulating him or buying His favor.
Adam was made with a functional assignment.
As an idol of God, Adam is on assignment to care for the earth
When Adam is given dominion rule over the entire earth it is a responsibility to represent God.
Adam is God’s idol, that is to say that Adam represents God.
The Hebrew word for likeness [demuwth] means similarity.
Adam was made in essential likeness or similarity with God.
In the image of God, Adam has faculties which make him capable of acting as God’s representative.
In the likeness of God, Adam has faculties which make him capable of communion fellowship with God.
Adam, as a man, can understand God. God is accessible, to and through, Adam’s thoughts and experiences.
This understanding of man was challenged by 18th century enlightenment philosopher Emmanual Kant and in the 20th century Church Dogmatics of Karl Barth.
Verse 26 says “let us make man in our image, after our likeness.”
This could mean that God is informing the angels that He is going to make man as their representative of the Heavenly community. I find it difficult to imagine this kind of a purpose between God and angels.
It makes more sense to assume that this is an allusion to plurality within the Godhead; that Adam is being made as the representative of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, with functional likeness and essence that is modeled after the Godhead.
The trinitarian understanding of the expressions our image and our likeness are instructive of human social structures.
In the Trinity there is:
Ontological equality.
There is an equality in the divine nature of each member.
Every member of the Trinity is equally God.
The Son is not less God than the Father.
The Spirit is not less God than the Son.
Economic inequality.
Though every member of the Trinity is equally God, they are not equal in their respective roles.
The Son is obedient to the will of the Father.
The Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son.
Genesis 5:1–3 explicitly states that the image and likeness qualities given to Adam, pass to all Adam’s progeny. This means that all men are ontologically equal. Society should be required to reflect this value in every conceivable way, but if society attempts to build absolute economic equality, it is attempting something that even Heaven does not attempt! Even Heaven operates with subservient roles.
5:[1] This is the book of the generations of Adam. When God created man, he made him in the likeness of God. [2] Male and female he created them, and he blessed them and named them Man when they were created. [3] When Adam had lived 130 years, he fathered a son in his own likeness, after his image, and named him Seth.
It is significant that the blessings were given in the imperative:
be fruitful, multiply and fill the earth.
have dominion.
Blessing and obedience are seen here as compatible.
And God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”
We cannot explain why Adam sinned by saying he was defective or conflicted in his natural estate. God said Adam was very good. Adam’s sin can only be explained by the alluring power of sin’s enticements.
[29] And God said, “Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the face of all the earth, and every tree with seed in its fruit. You shall have them for food. [30] And to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the heavens and to everything that creeps on the earth, everything that has the breath of life, I have given every green plant for food.” And it was so. [31] And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.
To the blessings of fruitfulness and dominion God has instituted Sabbath rest. And thus ends the Creation Prologue of Elohim.
Genesis 2
[1] Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. [2] And on the seventh day God finished his work that he had done, and he rested on the seventh day from all his work that he had done. [3] So God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it God [Elohim] rested from all his work that he had done in creation.
Now begins the first toledot of Genesis.
God’s covenant name, Yaweh, is used in place of Elohim, signalling that the Edenic administration which follows is covenantal.
[4] These are the generations of
the heavens and the earth when they were created,
in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens.
The earth is given it’s own toledot.
This might be Moses’s deliberate way of suggesting that the earth has a natural history. All of the other nine toledots in Genesis will provide the history of families. By giving the earth a toledot, Moses is signaling that the earth has its own natural history too.
It also signals that the earth has its own story. As we will see, the story of the earth is joined closely to the story of man. In Augustinian anthropology and hamartiology, the emphasis is on the various estates of man with respect to sin. I am aware of no theologian that has worked out the corresponding estate of the earth to each of the four estates of the human condition.
The earth is not given a personality, per se, but it is given its own history. And below we will see that man was made from the earth.
[5] When no bush of the field was yet in the land and no small plant of the field had yet sprung up—for the LORD God had not caused it to rain on the land, and there was no man to work the ground, [6] and a mist was going up from the land and was watering the whole face of the ground—[7] then the LORD God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature. [8] And the LORD God planted a garden in Eden, in the east, and there he put the man whom he had formed.
TNow we will see two very different trees appearing in the Edenic administration:
The Tree of Life, which will reappear in the description of the New Jerusalem in Revelation 22, suggesting that it functions as a covenant sign which holds out the possibility of eternal life to Adam.
The Tree of The Knowledge of Good and Evil represents the totality of all knowledge. The phrase Good and Evil is best understood as a merism, with Good at one polar extreme and Evil at the opposite polar extreme, bookending as it were the totality of all knowledge. To eat of this tree is to desire the acquisition and control of all knowledge, not solely the knowledge that is limited in the subjects of morality and ethics. The acquisition and control of all knowledge attains to what is effectively autonomy from God. Independence from the suzerain lord was grounds for curse in the ancient near east law treaties. The main point in the ancient near east law suzerainty treaties was loyalty between the suzerain Lord and the vassal.
[9] And out of the ground the LORD God made to spring up every tree that is pleasant to the sight and good for food. The tree of life was in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
To take from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is to forsake their trust in God.
Whereas in all the other imperatives of creation Adam derives material benefits, e.g. food, the championship of Eve, etc, there is no material benefit from not eating of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.
There is only a relational benefit and a life benefit from not eating of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.
If you do not eat from the this tree you may have the fullest enjoyment that may be had of your relationship with God,
and you may live.
[15] The LORD God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to work it and keep it. [16] And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, “You may surely eat of every tree of the garden, [17] but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.”
The only thing that was not good in creation was Adam’s solitude as a man.
If Adam is alone he is not like God in his image bearing capacity.
God is not alone.
[18] Then the LORD God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him.”
[22] And the rib that the LORD God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man. [23] Then the man said,
“This at last is bone of my bones
and flesh of my flesh;
she shall be called Woman,
because she was taken out of Man.”
Just as Sabbath enhanced the blessings of dominion over the earth, Marriage will enhance the blessings that the man has in the imperative to be fruitful and multiply. (See figure 1)
[24] Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. [25] And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed.
(Fig 1)
(3) Blessings (2) Institutions (1) Command
Be fruitful . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . Marriage
Have dominion. . . . . . . . .. . . . . Sabbath
Communion with God . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Do not eat from the
Tree of Good & Evil
The institutions of Eden, Marriage and Sabbath, are organic with the blessings.
If man was fruitful without the fidelity of marriage he would be less than human.
Similarly, if man only worked in dominion rule and never rested, this too would make him less than human. The Sabbath teaches Adam that his work is not endless but toward a goal. Sex and marriage, work and rest are organic and constitutive of an idyllic order.
The command to not eat from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil may be understood to function organically with the blessing of being in fellowship communion with God. If Adam was in fellowship with God without having a means of being obedient to God, he would be less than human; he would be deprived of the fullest sense of what may be experienced from communion fellowship with God.
The serpent will now enter to contradict God and distort His word, to make Eve doubt His goodness. Interestingly the serpent knows that it is on this one issue that he may bring down the idyllic order of God’s wondrous work of creation.
Genesis 3
[1] Now the serpent was more crafty than any other beast of the field that the LORD God had made.
He said to the woman, “Did God actually say, ‘You shall not eat of any tree in the garden’?”
Confusion arises in the hearts of those who listen to the lie that God has not blessed us. The serpent is also conniving to transfer their allegiance away from a God to himself. In the ancient near east suzerainty law treaties, the transferring of allegiance is grounds for curse sanctions.
[2] And the woman said to the serpent, “We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden, [3] but God said, ‘You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.’”
The allure of sin deceives us:
into thinking there are no consequences to disobeying,
that disobedience will give us something better than what we already have from God.
[4] But the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die. [5] For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”
The anatomy of sin is here detailed in:
she saw, she took, she ate, she gave, he ate.
Sin makes a false promise to fill the senses and enlighten the mind.
[6] So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate.
Did sin enlighten them? In a sense it did open their eyes, but it also brought shame and fear.
[7] Then the eyes of both were opened, and they knew that they were naked. And they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loincloths. [8] And they heard the sound of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God among the trees of the garden. [9] But the LORD God called to the man and said to him, “Where are you?” [10] And he said, “I heard the sound of you in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked, and I hid myself.”
Sin brought shame of self, fear of God, alienation from God and even estrangement in marriage.
[11] He said, “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten of the tree of which I commanded you not to eat?” [12] The man said, “The woman whom you gave to be with me, she gave me fruit of the tree, and I ate.” [13] Then the LORD God said to the woman, “What is this that you have done?” The woman said, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.”
Note that God will address the three parties of sin in the order by which the sin arrived. God will address the Serpent, then Eve, and then Adam.
[14] The LORD God said to the serpent,
“Because you [the Serpent] have done this,
cursed are you above all livestock
and above all beasts of the field;
on your belly you shall go,
and dust you shall eat
all the days of your life.
[15] I will put enmity between you and the woman,
and between your offspring and her offspring;
he shall bruise your head,
and you shall bruise his heel.”
The curse of the Serpent has been referred to by theologians of every persuasion as the Protoevangelium (the first promise of redemption).
This passage was seen by the 17th century Protestant theologians as the covenant of Grace.
Grace is here stated in the promise of an avenger redeemer.
The protoevangelium is given in the format of:
Three levels of enmity :
between Eve and the Serpent.
between the offspring (plural) of the Serpent and Eve’s offspring (plural).
between Eve’s offspring (singular) and the Serpent.
The Hebrew for seed, zera, can be collective or singular.
The Hebrew for “enmity” is animosity toward another.
Eybah (a vaw). Numbers 35:9-21 city of refuge for those who commit manslaughter without enmity.
Let us break down the three levels of enmity:
Enmity between Eve and the serpent.
Enmity is put in Eve by God. God did not leave Eve in confederacy with the Serpent.
This is gracious.
Enmity between Eve’s offspring (plural) and the offspring (plural) of the serpent.
Offspring here is collective.
Some of Eve’s progeny will hate the serpent with her, while others will join the serpent in opposing God.
The idea of people living as children of the serpent is objectionable on many levels, but Jesus Himself will articulate this reality, as will the Apostle John and the pre-flood history:
John 8:44–45 [44] You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies. (ESV)
1 John 3:1–10 [1] See what kind of love the Father has given to us, that we should be called children of God; and so we are. The reason why the world does not know us is that it did not know him. [2] Beloved, we are God's children now, and what we will be has not yet appeared; but we know that when he appears we shall be like him, because we shall see him as he is. [3] And everyone who thus hopes in him purifies himself as he is pure.[4] Everyone who makes a practice of sinning also practices lawlessness; sin is lawlessness. [5] You know that he appeared in order to take away sins, and in him there is no sin. [6] No one who abides in him keeps on sinning; no one who keeps on sinning has either seen him or known him. [7] Little children, let no one deceive you. Whoever practices righteousness is righteous, as he is righteous. [8] Whoever makes a practice of sinning is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil. [9] No one born of God makes a practice of sinning, for God's seed abides in him; and he cannot keep on sinning, because he has been born of God. [10] By this it is evident who are the children of God, and who are the children of the devil: whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is the one who does not love his brother. (ESV)
Malevolence in pre-flood history is evidenced by:
Cain who feared men but not God after killing his brother.
The seed (zera) represents antithetical kingdoms which will be detailed in our study of Noah.
If our interpretation of this story is correct, we may say that:
there is only one race of man,
but there is not one loyalty in the heart of men
man is united in the bearing of one image of God,
but men are divided by their heart loyalties.
Enmity between Eve’s offspring (singular) and the serpent. Eve and Adam, together with all their posterity, are promised a champion avenger.
The singular pronoun individualizes this to one person. he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel
He will be born of the woman.
He will crush the head of the serpent.
He will be struck with a venomous wound; his path to victory over the serpent is a conflict unto his own death.
Genesis will continue in chapter 4 and 5 with genealogies that trace the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent through pre-flood history.
The creation ordinances which were formerly blessings are now a source of hardship to Adam and Eve.
They still carry the power to bless Adam and Eve, but they also carry the power to give pain.
The difficulties of life are frustrating to us because we know that the very things which frustrate are meant to bless us.
There is some blessing still attached to the creation ordinances, showing that God’s goodness is not taken from Adam. This is grace.
While childbearing will bring pain to Eve it will also bring the ultimate blessing that God has for man: redemption. From Eve’s own offspring there will come a champion avenger to crush the head of the deceiver.
[16] To the woman he said,
“I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing;
in pain you shall bring forth children.
Your desire shall be contrary to your husband,
but he shall rule over you.”
[17] 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;
[18] thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you;
and you shall eat the plants of the field.
[19] 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.”
All of humanity comes from Eve.
[20] The man called his wife's name Eve, because she was the mother of all living.
God did not take the life of Adam and Eve as He had warned them. God gave them a stay of execution. They will die natural deaths, but not on the very day that they sinned. Blood is shed in the making of garments to cover their sin and shame, signifying that death has occurred in the covering of their sin.
[21] And the LORD God made for Adam and for his wife garments of skins and clothed them.
And God drove Adam and Eve out of the garden to protect them from eating of the Tree of Life. It is understood that a change in Adam’s relational status with God has occurred, but that a restoration of that relationship may yet be applied.
[22] 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—” [23] therefore the LORD God sent him out from the garden of Eden to work the ground from which he was taken. [24] 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.
SUMMARY
Adam and Eve are given a stay of execution for their sin. And God will remove them and protect them from access to eating from the Tree of Life, the effect of which would make their sin status a permanent status, beyond the reach of redemption. This is grace in action.
All men and women are born in the relational status that Adam moved to after Adam sinned. Adam moved from life to death and from innocence to guilt. But a change of status will be secured for Adam and all his progeny, who believe, through redemption.
The change of status that occurs for Adam is technically a better status then the one Adam had in the beginning.
In the beginning, Adam could lose his life and his communion with God. But faith and trust in the promise of redemption, may now restore Adam to the eternal life that was originally held out for him by The tree of Life. In this new status of grace/promise, Adam’s communion with God cannot be lost. It is secure for eternity in the gracious promise of redemption.
The eating of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil was a sin that only had to be committed once to effect a loss of innocence and a complete change of status in Adam’s relationship to God. Adam will be removed from Eden and from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, but Adam doesn’t need to be protected from that tree because the damage that it affected was complete. Eating from that tree a second time would not make death more lethal. But eating from the tree of life would make death permanent and so Adam will need to be protected from the tree of life.
After their meeting in the garden, Adam sided with the serpent against God, but God chose not to leave Adam and Eve in a place of enmity and confederacy with the serpent against Him. God chose rather to put enmity in them against the one who is at enmity with Himself. This is grace in action.
God is reversing the enmity in the first generation of man. Right at the beginning of history, God intervenes to turn man’s heart back to himself. Adam did not deserve to be turned around by God’s putting enmity in his heart against the deceiver. This is grace in action.
God here declares His plan to reverse the enmity in His people (the seed of the woman) by redirecting their enmity towards the serpent.
That some of Eve’s offspring will become the seed of the serpent is difficult to accept, but a realistic perspective of history does seem to agree with this teaching.
The seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent will continue through the remainder of redemption history. There is one race of adam divided by loyalty to God or loyalty to the serpent.
The promise of a Champion Avenger will be the substance of the primeval gospel. In our study of Noah we will see that hope in the promise will be carried in the family line that produced Noah.
No comments:
Post a Comment