Genesis 3:20-24

2006.Jul.12 22:27

Aftermath

Now the man called his wife’s name Eve, because she was the mother of all the living. The LORD God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife, and clothed them. Then the LORD God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever”–therefore the LORD God sent him out from the garden of Eden, to cultivate the ground from which he was taken. So He drove the man out; and at the east of the garden of Eden He stationed the cherubim and the flaming sword which turned every direction to guard the way to the tree of life.
(Genesis 3:20-24)

The first point recorded, immediately after the curse on Adam, is that he names Eve. It would appear to me that Adam named Eve after the sin, but I suppose it could be that this just seemed the appropriate time to throw a random informative note into the narrative. I’ll assume the former, with the normal proviso that I may be quite off my rocker. Genesis 2:18-20 reveals a process wherein God states that man ought not be alone, forms animals, and brings them to Adam. Adam names these animals, "but for Adam there was not found a helper suitable for him" (Genesis 2:18-20) . After this, God creates Eve, who is apparently not named at that time. This leads me to believe that Adam very much considered Eve as part of himself, and vice-versa. It is after sin, which separates them, that Eve requires a distinct proper name (by which I mean, she may well have been called “Adam” to this point; “man” and “woman” seemed to have been used to distinguish). It also reveals how sin impedes a healthy relationship–Adam no longer considers Eve a completely suitable helper; I imagine she feels similarly towards him.

The footnote to the NASB tells me that Eve means life or living and she is so named because "she was the mother of all the living" (Genesis 3:20, NASB) . Again, we see that Eve’s role as mother is directed onto her, that like Adam with his labor, freedom has removed itself from her, and she is now bound to a role, which, while it has joyful aspects, also contains great pain.

In the next event recorded here, Jehovah, aware of Eve and Adam’s shame at their nakedness–which would have been the revealing result of their sin, had Jehovah not already been aware–makes for them garments of skin to replace their fig leaves. As Jehovah shows in the curse on Adam, the world is no longer a friendly place. Fig leaves may cover their shame, but it won’t protect the humans against the elements. Physical layers of separation are about to become commonplace, reflecting the emotional separation brought by sin.

The clothing and name given, Jehovah turns to the issue of the trees. There were two special trees in garden, that of the knowledge of good and evil, and the tree of life. Now that Adam and Eve have eaten of the tree of knowledge, God does not want them to eat of the tree of life, lest they attain eternal life through it rather than repentance, and consider themselves equal to and adversarial against Jehovah. Therefore, God sends Adam out (assumedly Eve also) and places a guard around the tree of life. I assume this business is mostly symbolic, that God is actively showing Adam and Eve that death is the result of their sin. And now to survive even a little while requires physical labor.

And the question that must now follow them is whether this knowledge, this understanding of acting against God, was worth it. Sure, I can’t see a situation in which they would not have taken from the fruit, but having taken, they might now become repentant. We all sin, we do. But can we lay down our godhood, repent, and follow Jehovah’s path to returning to his presence? Can I accept the sacrifice of the spotless lamb Jesus, admitting my complete dependence on God?

Genesis 3:17-19

2006.Jul.06 22:53

Curse C

Read Genesis 3:17-19 | Full Chapter

Then to Adam He said, “Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree about which I commanded you, saying, ‘You shall not eat from it’;
Cursed is the ground because of you;
In toil you will eat of it
All the days of your life.
Both thorns and thistles it shall grow for you;
And you will eat the plants of the field;
By the sweat of your face
You will eat bread,
Till you return to the ground,
Because from it you were taken;
For you are dust,
And to dust you shall return.”
(Genesis 3:17-19)

What constitutes the alienation of labor?

Firstly, the fact that labor is external to the worker – i.e., does not belong to his essential being; that he, therefore, does not confirm himself in his work, but denies himself, feels miserable and not happy, does not develop free mental and physical energy, but mortifies his flesh and ruins his mind. Hence, the worker feels himself only when he is not working; when he is working, he does not feel himself. He is at home when he is not working, and not at home when he is working. His labor is, therefore, not voluntary but forced, it is forced labor. It is, therefore, not the satisfaction of a need but a mere means to satisfy needs outside itself. Its alien character is clearly demonstrated by the fact that as soon as no physical or other compulsion exists, it is shunned like the plague. External labor, labor in which man alienates himself, is a labor of self-sacrifice, of mortification. Finally, the external character of labor for the worker is demonstrated by the fact that it belongs not to him but to another, and that in it he belongs not to himself but to another. Just as in religion the spontaneous activity of the human imagination, the human brain, and the human heart, detaches itself from the individual and reappears as the alien activity of a god or of a devil, so the activity of the worker is not his own spontaneous activity. It belongs to another, it is a loss of his self.

(Marx, Karl, Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844, “Wages of Labor”, http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844/manuscripts/wages.htm [Actually, I don’t remember how to correctly site an internet source and am too lazy to find out]).

To me, this quote from Marx is what the curse on Adam is about. Adam ate of the fruit, and now, instead of being able to gather of the fruit God placed in the garden, Adam and Eve are cast out. They must labor to meet their basic needs, a process which leads quite inevitably to the industrial age (okay, maybe that was a jump). If I can visit my gender roles discussion one more time, here the “husband” gender role created by Jehovah as punishment is that of laborer who must provide for self and family through breaking and unfulfilling labor, against an environment which will always make that labor more difficult. As Eve sacrifices her freedom to her husband, Adam sacrifices his freedom to his toil. Don’t even try to tell me this does not yet hold true.

I don’t intend to add much discussion, because I think the quote from Marx too well represents the feelings I have when I read this passage. But I want to dwell a moment on that issue of freedom. I know freedom is a loaded term right now, and I doubt the validity of some of its contemporary uses. In any event, one verse in the Bible has long amazed me by what I consider its inexplicable simplicity: "It was for freedom that Christ set us free" (Galations 5:1a) (For what it’s worth, Galatians chapter 4 introduces some fascinating ideas about Jerusalem being our mother). Freedom, for itself, is a huge theme through God’s Word: freedom of the Israelites for slavery in Egypt, freedom in Christ, and here, in Genesis 3, the cessation of freedom, because the one Law was broken.

There is a wonderful hope for me, as I look at Eve and Adam’s sin and the curses upon them, the curses still operating in our day, our culture. "If you continue in My word,” says Jesus, “then you are truly disciples of Mine; and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free" (John 8:31-32, NASB) . "Therefore,” Paul expounds, “there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death" (Romans 8:1-2, NASB) . That’s right, Christ offers freedom from these curses. In Christ, we have great hope, "For the anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly for the revealing of the sons of God. For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God" (Romans 8:19-22, NASB)

The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me,
Because the LORD has anointed me
To bring good news to the afflicted;
He has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted,
To proclaim liberty to captives
And freedom to prisoners;

(Isaiah 16:1, NASB)

Genesis 3:16

2006.Jun.29 20:22

Curse B

Read Genesis 3:16 | Full Chapter

To the woman He said,
“I will greatly multiply
Your pain in childbirth,
In pain you will (A)bring forth children;
Yet your desire will be for your husband,
And he will rule over you.”
(Genesis 3:16, NASB)

Jehovah says that woman’s pain in childbirth will be multiplied greatly. First, this may imply that childbirth would be painful anyway, which is very interesting, but now it becomes an particularly powerful pain. Childbirth is used in the Bible, to represent great pain or agony, and often associated with a feeling of helplessness in constrast to a perceived power. For example: "The king of Babylon has heard the report about them [a people from the north], And his hands hang limp; Distress has gripped him, Agony like a woman in childbirth" (Jeremiah 50:43, NASB) . How does such a wonderful thing as giving birth become a simple of the worst gut-wrenching feelings we can have? That’s the curse. That which is beautiful is made ugly. That moment in which we could be like Jehovah, giving birth to new life, is despised. Why’s abortion such a big debate (and it’s not a new thing)? I’d guess it’s because of this paradox, this curse.

There’s another issue with this childbirth and husband-clinging thing, particularly related to gender roles. Up to the point of the sin, it’s not necessary that Eve have children. It is sin which forces Eve into the gender role of “mother”, in order for the human species to survive on this Earth. If “femininity” is connected with motherhood–and I have no doubt that it is–the moment of sin turns Eve from a person with a choice–will she have children–to a person whose roles are defined for her. If the inherent choice for Adam is whether to desire a helpmete, for Eve it is whether to give birth. Jehovah makes Eve’s choice uglier but more clear. She must have children or the species dies. Childbirth will be super painful. She will allow her husband to rule over her (because she now believes she must have children?). It’s almost haunting how God must have picked these curses, must have known that millenia later we would divide ourselves between those who can give birth and those who cannot, without realizing that this was never intending to be a dividing rod between us, but a joyful illustration of how two can become one, can share in abilities and friendship; it became a painful division when we as a species chose to die.

I want to note how these roles are due, at least in part, to a curse. Some Christians seem to think because these roles seem to them “natural”, that is how God intended it. While he made it part of his plan (and the plan brings a lot of ugly things into this world), it was the part of the plan that brought curses onto humanity when we separated ourselves from God in order to humble us–much of these roles, and the separations caused by them, are not what God wants for us, but are rather part of his punishment on us. At least, all that is what I find myself believing more and more. Again, I realize I’m making a lot of assumptions, and again, much of this has been my thoughts, and while I pray and believe that God is increasing my understanding and wisdom, I certainly concede that some of these points may be way off.

In any event, I am amazed (I suppose I should expect it) how the decisions made by the first humans affect our cultures today. Jehovah’s ability to understand and work with this is awesome. I know he’s all-powerful, all-knowing, etc, but I am amazed. More awesome is that he is willing to work us through our sinful nature and all the times we hurt him, with much patience and love, so that we might return to walk by his side.

Genesis 3:14-15

2006.Jun.24 22:45

Curse A

Read Genesis 3:14-15 | Full Chapter

Previously on Battlestar Gallact..aca..icki…erm, whatever, Jehovah created humanity, along with a bunch of other stuff. Jehovah told man and woman not to eat of one particular tree. They eat from it, with a serpent’s deception as catalysing agent. Jehovah finds the woman and man, despite their attempts to hide. They admit to eating from the tree.

Now follow, in my opinion, six of the most fascinating verses in the Bible. These are the original curses. God makes statements to each of the serpent, the woman, and the man, which include curses (I’m not sure the full statements are curses), in response to their sins.

Jehovah speaks first to the serpent:

Because you have done this
Cursed are you more than all cattle
And more than every beast of the field
On your belly you will go
And dust you will eat
All the days of your life
And I will put enmity
Between you and the woman
And between your seed and her seed
He shall bruise you on the head
And you shall bruise him on the heel.
(Genesis 3:14-15, NASB)

Beyond the accuracy of the curse in regards to snakes, I take particular notice that God “put[s] an enmity” between the woman and the serpent, and their descendents. I can’t think of anything else in the Bible that quite strikes me this way. Merriam-Webster’s website defines enmity a “positive, active, and typically mutual hatred or ill will.” This is the beginning of the first feud. This is the frame for the Capulets and Montagues, a deceit of the past which breeds continuing destruction.

That God curses the serpent is not surprising considering the serprent brought a break in the relationship he had with humanity. What is less immediately understandable is that he acknowledges a continuing power by the serpent against humanity, that the serprent “shall bruise [the descendents of Eve] on the heel.” Once the man and woman had accepted the serpent’s influence, they accept it for the generations. We too often give great power where we meant to give only a little. Any time we accept deception rather than obedience to God’s word, we allow the deceiver a continued power in our lives, that can only be broken (I think) by the power of Jesus Christ.

Genesis 3:6-13

2006.Jun.18 22:04

And they saw they was naked. And it wasn’t so good.

Read Genesis 3:6-13 | Full Chapter

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 desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loin coverings.
(Genesis 3:6-7, NASB)

The woman, convinced by the serpent’s Harvard-level education (har har), takes from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and eats. She then gives some of the fruit to her husband, who also eats of it. Beyond the fruit’s looking good and tasty, the humans’ main reason for eating of it appears to be that is desirable to make one wise (or maybe the main reason is that they haven’t eaten from it.) And boy do they get wisdom. The knowledge comes flooding in. The realize…wait for it…they’re naked!

Stars and garters, what will we do?

What they do is cover themselves with fig leaves and hide from Jehovah. Jehovah calls out to them, the man answers, stating he hid himself because of his nakedness, leading Jehovah to ask if they ate of tree of knowledge, and Adam, setting a precedence that lives on today, promptly blames the whole thing on his wife. Eve, sensing a conspiracy afoot, blames the serpent. The humans display a process of sin, but do one thing pretty unique, aside from it being the apparent first human sin. In this process, they sin, leading to shame (evidenced by their concentration on their physical nakedness), and then they try to justify their sin. The odd thing is that they’re actually pretty open about this to God.

The sin itself is the eating of the tree from which God commanded them not to eat. It is important to note that eating from a tree is not something we see as inherently bad, despite many Christians’ desire to prove that sin is bad for society–or at least “the children”. The sin is disobedience of God, regardless of whether the humans understood why God had so commanded. They disobeyed God, and in doing so, their eyes–as are all of ours–were opened to a world where they could challenge God and disobey him. This must have brought tons of images to their minds, all of which would have made their daily walk with Jehovah a bit uncomfortable, for now they could think of him as an adversary.

They are apparently ashamed by these thoughts, and hide themselves from God. The man and woman focus on their physical nakedness, both hiding behind trees and covering their loins (a word which could, I suppose, be used outside the context of clothing–though I can’t think that I’ve ever heard it used as such) with fig leaves. This is a pretty spectacular display, considering they’ve not seen clothing (unless Jehovah wore some). I can only suppose they are comparing themselves to the furry animals, and the level of their shame is such to compel them to find any sort of covering up they can. The fact that they have something to hide testifies to their sin. It is the woman and man who, having sinned, actively separate themselves from God. This is the essence, to me, of shame: We realize that we have done something that ought to offend another and actively separate ourselves from that relationship.

The humans, when questioned by God, admit to the sin, but do not take ownership of it. I do acknowledge their immediate confession, which I believe is the result of their having walked regularly with God. When we are in close relationship with God, we tend to be much quicker to admit the truth to him, knowing both that he is already aware and that he is kind and loving–perhaps best said: we are more comfortable with him. However, they also pass the blame. To say I did that action is one step, but it must, in the case of sin, be followed with the admittance that the action was a sin on my part. Adam and Eve, rather, pass the buck. And, so, sin enters into this world.

« 1 2 »