A Closer Look at Genesis 3-4

Unsealed World News ^ | 6/14/17 | Jeff E.

[amessenger4god]

         It's Sunday morning and a throng of churchgoers file into the biggest building on the block. The stadium-style seating in the sanctuary surrounds an elevated stage, indicating a culture accustomed to entertainment and a hands-off approach to the preaching and teaching of God's word. No pulpit or Bible is in sight...only a stool and a large video screen.

         The fliers had already been sent out into the neighborhood, and today the church is starting yet another topical sermon series—this time on marriage and family. The praise band finishes their last song and the advertisements are displayed on screen. Then the pastor takes the stage and launches into his message:

        "We are going to focus on marriage and family today. This is for all you husbands and wives out there, and those who are yet to be married. Let's look at Genesis, chapter 3, and see where all the strife began..."

         Occasionally, a verse flashes on the screen. More often than not, it's only there as a casual reference. It's anyone's guess if the verses being presented are accurate and faithful to the surrounding biblical context...as far as the audience is concerned, the pastor's commentary is the surrounding context. On the brighter side of things, at least he's getting some Bible in there. The rest of the sermon, however, sounds more like a pep-talk with some additional steps on how to have a more successful marriage and a happy life.

         By the end of "the talk," ears had been tickled. The "flesh" had been satiated, and there was even a passing mention about Jesus and a decision to accept him into the heart. But no further details were given beyond that.

         It was a typical Sunday...

***

         Sadly, the scenario described above is a common occurrence these days. How many pastors today are leading their flock through the Bible, verse-by-verse, book-by-book, and faithfully preaching what the Holy Spirit-inspired author intended? Why does it always seem like the Bible is being used more like a how-to manual on life rather than the magnificent story of the Lord Jesus Christ and God's gracious invitation to fellowship with Him by the power of the Spirit?

         The situation in our post-modern churches today is tragic. Many who teach or preach the Bible would do well to imitate Jesus as He instructed the two disciples on the way to Emmaus:

He said to them, 'How unwise and slow you are to believe in your hearts all that the prophets have spoken! Didn't the Messiah have to suffer these things and enter into His glory?' Then beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, He interpreted for them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures" (Luke 24:25-27, HCSB).

          If our sermons were more Christ-focused than man-centered, maybe then more hearts would come alive and burn with delight as they grow in their knowledge and understanding of the Savior (Lk. 24:32). It is my intent in this post to take you on a similar journey in the Old Testament, perhaps even covering the same ground Jesus did with the two disciples.

          Not surprisingly, Jesus first directed their attention to Genesis, "...beginning with Moses..." Likewise, we're going to revisit some familiar passages of Scripture etched in the foundation of God's written word. Taken together, the links in this prophetic chain should present you with a clear picture of Christ—an image once veiled but now unsealed for all of God's people to cherish and treasure in their heart.


The First Link: Genesis 3:15

         Dr. Michael Rydelnik (Professor of Jewish Studies at Moody Bible Institute) writes in his book The Messianic Hope that Genesis 3:15 is "the first specific messianic prophecy of the Bible," and adds, "[w]hile not predicting the virgin birth of Messiah, it does promise that Messiah will descend from humanity and that He will destroy the evil force that tempted Eve, humanity's ancient enemy later revealed as Satan. Moreover, in defeating this enemy, the Messiah himself will be struck, bringing victory over the enemy of our souls through His own death" (pg. 145).

         The so-called protoevangelium [first-gospel] about the coming Christ (the ultimate seed of the woman) overcoming the enemy (and, eventually, his ultimate seed), is pregnant with significance. One cannot overstate the importance of this verse and its implications for the rest of the biblical story. For more on the echoes of Gen. 3:15 in the rest of Scripture, please see James Hamilton's paper entitled "The Skull Crushing Seed of the Woman: Inner-Biblical Interpretation of Genesis 3:15.

...He will strike your head, and you will strike His heel" (Gen. 3:15b).

         According to the elements of narrative, there is more going on in the early chapters of Genesis than the occasional encounters of mankind and venomous snakes—the plot thickens and the battle lines have been drawn. God would reveal more details about the Messiah as the centuries unfolded, but one thing is clear about the LORD's requirement for our salvation: You must have faith in the promised Redeemer based on the revelation of His word (Gen. 15:6; Rom. 4:16; Gal. 3:19).

         While the Hebrew term translated as "seed" can be understood in both singular and plural forms [see Paul's play on this in Gal. 3:16], and we've seen how the conflict of the ages has involved, not just one, but multiple human casualties—the 3rd person, singular, masculine pronouns in Gen. 3:15b seal the deal. With post-Pentecost lenses, we can see clearly that these masculine pronouns refer specifically to Jesus, the long-awaited Messiah:

...from the moment God uttered his judgment against the serpent, the seed of the woman (the collective of those who trust in God) were hoping for the seed of the woman (the man who would achieve the ultimate victory over the serpent)" —Hamilton, The Skull Crushing Seed of the Woman, pg. 43.

         Reminder #1: Genesis 3:15 is not about mankind's occasional encounter with snakes...
       

The Second Link: Genesis 3:16

         Most of you have no problem seeing Christ in 3:15, but here's where things get interesting. Keep an open mind as I propose an alternate translation to 3:16. I pray that you will be blessed to know what this verse is really promising, especially you ladies out there.

         Immediately after the revelatory prophecy about the coming Redeemer in 3:15, the LORD provides further insight about the woman's ultimate Seed in the following verse. Curiously, most English translations obscure the reference to Christ in the second line of 3:16. Here's a sample, word-for-word, English translation of this verse:

To the woman He said, 'I will greatly multiply your sorrow and your conception; in pain you shall bring forth children, yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you" (NKJV).

         And here's a representative English paraphrase:

To the woman He said, 'I will greatly increase your labor pains; with pain you will give birth to children. You will want to control your husband, but he will dominate you" (NET).

         Ok, at this point many pastors (through no fault of their own, because they are dependent on English translations) will wax eloquent about wives trying to commandeer the lead role in their households. Inevitably, one might think of Paul's words in Ephesians 5:22-32 and find a New Testament application to prove that wives must take a backseat (wait, I thought we were co-heirs and co-rulers with Christ? 1 Pet 3:7; c.f. Gal. 3:28-29; 4:7). However, getting on a marital soap box here is a big mistake.

         As you can see from the above examples, the English translators shift the focus from bearing children in pain/sorrow (3:15 + 3:16a) to an ongoing marital struggle (3:16b). According to the immediate context of the Redeemer, the ultimate seed of the woman (3:15), I believe we have missed the true intent of this verse. First shown to me by Dr. Charles Baylis, professor of Bible Exposition at Dallas Seminary, here is a suggested re-translation of Gen. 3:16:

To the woman He said, 'I will greatly multiply your sorrow and conception; in sorrow you will give birth to children [lit. sons]; yet your desire will be for your Man, and He will rule over you."

         This re-do translation may not sit well with some, but investigate for yourself and see that the Hebrew allows for this reading—one that I think makes much more sense (...and makes a pastor's job a little easier when it comes to application). Here's an explanation for the above translation:

         A. The two Hebrew terms often translated "pain" can also be translated as "sorrow." The sorrow relates to the woman's uncertainty as to whether her seed will follow God, or the serpent. This could also be a play on words, because there is no doubt about the painfulness of labor and delivery—I've been present for the birth of my two daughters and seen it for myself!

         B. The same Hebrew term translated "desire" is also used in Song of Solomon 7:10 in a positive sense. Note that most English translations assume a marital conflict and interpret "desire" in a negative sense. More accurately, in contrast to the sorrow and pain experienced by the woman in giving birth and raising her children in a fallen world (negative), she will be desiring and longing for "her Man," the promised Redeemer of Gen. 3:15b (positive).

         C. The Hebrew term "husband" is also the word more commonly translated as "man." This is also true in the Greek language, where one term is flexible, and depending on the context, it can be either "man" or "husband." Here in Gen. 3:16b, "your Man" points back to the masculine, singular "seed" mentioned in Gen. 3:15b (a.k.a. the One who will strike the serpent's head yet receive a counter-strike to his heel).


         Reminder #2: Genesis 3:16 is not about singling-out and shaming wives for being too controlling...


The Third Link: Genesis 3:20-21

         The next link in this chain of early messianic prophecy should be fairly straightforward for those with eyes to see. Have you ever wondered why Adam chose to name his wife "Life" instead of "Death?" I mean, a minute ago he was blaming her for enticing him to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Gen. 3:12). Why the sudden change of heart, naming her Eve, a Hebrew word that sounds like "Life?"

         Because, the LORD God had mercifully intervened and promised to send a Redeemer (Gen. 3:15-16)! The woman will be the one to deliver the hope of all mankind—a Son who would later be revealed as "the Life" (Jn. 1:4; 11:25; 14:6).

         Additionally, the LORD's act of clothing Adam and Eve in Gen. 3:21 implies the necessity of a blood-atoning sacrifice for their sin. This is yet another prefiguring of Christ, one that is understood by scholars and Spirit-led believers alike. Warren Wiersbe, for example, acknowledges that Gen. 3:21 foreshadows the coming of the ultimate Seed of the woman—one who would later be called "the Lamb of God" (Jn. 1:29; Rev. 5:6; 22:3). I also appreciate his cross-references to Isa. 61:10 and 2 Cor. 5:21.

       
         Reminder #3: Genesis 3:20-21 is not about keeping warm in the garden during the "cool of the day..."


The Fourth Link: Genesis 4:1

         Don't let the chapter division fool you. This verse relates entirely to the preceding narrative, especially the first messianic prophecies discussed above in Gen. 3:15-16. The serpent-crushing Seed is now the greatest hope and expectation of fallen man, and that excitement intensifies immediately upon the news of Eve's first conception and delivery.

         Here is another curious case of often creative but misleading English translations. For an extensive commentary on this issue, see Dr. Baylis' online notes here. It is best to take the Hebrew text at face value, because even the LXX (Greek translation) appears to smooth out a difficult reading.

         Three times in this one verse, the Hebrew particle et comes before the direct object—in this case all three names: Eve, Cain, and YHWH (the LORD). This marker of the direct object is primarily left untranslated (see here), even though there is the possible option of translating it as "with" (see here). If we leave it untranslated, maintaining consistency with how this particle is used throughout the chapter (see also Gen. 4:25-26), then here is how the Hebrew of Gen. 4:1 reads literally:

And Adam knew [et] Eve, his wife, and she conceived and brought forth [et] Cain, and she said, 'I have acquired a man [et], YHWH (the LORD)." 

         This suggested translation requires less creativity on the part of the translator and fits with the surrounding context. Eve declares that she has "acquired" (could also be translated "bought, or created," a term which is a play on the name 'Cain'), and the name of the LORD is in apposition to the direct object, "a man."

         Remember back in Gen. 3:16b, where YHWH told Eve, "...your desire will be for your Man? Yep. That's why Eve says what she says. Eve rejoices in the hope that her son, Cain, is the desired "Man," the serpent-crushing Redeemer of 3:15-16. Dr. Baylis in his commentary references Jer. 23:5-6, which later confirms that the ultimate Seed of the woman would also be called "the LORD, our righteousness." The alternative translation of 4:1 above may also add a richness and depth to Paul's declaration in Rom. 10:9, "If you confess with your mouth, 'Jesus is Lord...' " Not just any "lord," but that Jesus is YHWH!


         Reminder #4: Genesis 4:1 is not about the origin of babies and where they come from...

The Fifth Link: Genesis 4:7

         The final link and foreshadowing of Christ in Gen. 3–4 will take more legwork on our part, but the end result will be worth the endeavor. If you're willing to continue this trek of challenging assumptions about familiar passages, then let's dig into another thorny textual issue.

         I don't want to get too technical here, so for the gritty details, please see a well-researched paper written by Chris Burnett on Gen. 4:6-8 (here). I stumbled upon his work surfing through online articles one day (bored, I guess...but always learning!), and I was amazed that there was a possible, alternate translation to this verse. It's not just a minor tweak, either. His proposal completely flips the script—in a good way. I really think he's on to something and brings more clarity to the surrounding context, which, as it turns out, coheres perfectly with what we've been tracking so far.

         Briefly, the context of this section in chapter 4 has Cain and Abel bringing sacrificial offerings to God, but only Abel is approved. Cain is furious and his status as "the Man" of Gen. 3:16 and 4:1 is in serious jeopardy. Is he the ultimate Seed of the woman? Only one way to find out, and YHWH knows how to test the heart. Here is Burnett's translation of Gen. 4:7:

Surely, if you do well, won't there be a lifting up? On the other hand, if you do not do well, a sin offering is lying at your door. It's will is yielded to you, but you must rule over it."

         Wait? Who's at the door? I thought sin was at the door ready to pounce on Cain like a wild beast, if he wasn't willing to master it. Well, maybe not. Again, I encourage you to study Burnett's argument, because we may have missed the big picture as a result of faulty English translations. Here are a few points to consider:

         1) "Sin" is never personified in the Bible as being outside of a person, it's always in the heart. The Hebrew word often translated abstractly as "sin" in 4:7 is also the same word translated frequently as a literal "sin offering" (c.f. Ex. 29:36; 30:10; Lev. 16:6).

         2) The masculine participle often translated "crouching" is a Hebrew term mainly used in contexts where flocks are lying down peacefully (Gen. 29:2; Isa. 17:2; Ps. 23:2). It would be rare, indeed, to find this term used of a beast lurking around, ready to seize its prey. Burnett notes that the term "sin offering" is feminine, while the modifying participle "lying" is masculine. Instead of posing a hopeless grammatical issue, what if it was by design to imply that a male animal was brought by God to rest at Cain's door? Remind you of any future revelation in God's word regarding a male sacrifice from the flock? Try Ex. 12:5-7 (the lamb's blood was to be placed at the door)!

         3) The apparent link between Gen. 3:16b and 4:7b has baffled even the sharpest of scholars. Many reasons have been offered in the commentaries, and most see the literary connection between sin's desire for Cain (negative) with the woman's desire for her husband (also negative). However, upon further consideration of Burnett's insights and what I have presented above, the current theories don't tell the whole story. Messianic connection, anyone?

         Take a look for yourself and see the striking similarities between these two texts:

         The Hebrew in both verses is virtually identical (even if you cannot read Hebrew, the visual similarities and patterns should be evident). This is not by accident. It is an intentional move by the author (and Author) to highlight Cain's obligation to submit to the original mandate to rule for YHWH and trust in God's word, especially regarding a blood-atoning sacrifice for his sins (c.f. Gen. 3:21); Cain's failure to heed God's word reveals his heart of unbelief and identity as a seed of the serpent. However, where Adam and his progeny failed to rule for YHWH, the ultimate Seed of the woman will succeed and eventually rule over all creation along with His chosen, redeemed co-rulers (Gen. 1:26-28; 3:15-16; 49:10; Ps. 2; Rev. 2:26-27; 22:5).

         *Bonus: The same Hebrew phrasing of subject + verb (mashal) + preposition (bet) + direct object in 3:16b and 4:7b is also found in Gen. 1:18, where it is the sun and moon who are instructed to rule over the day and night.

          In addition to the messianic prophecies of Gen. 3–4 previously discussed, this suggested retranslation of Gen. 4:7 makes so much sense in light of biblical theology as a whole. There are those who would like to make this about righteous works vs. unrighteous works as a litmus test for being a child of God. On the contrary, many also stumble through 1 John for the very same reason—they misunderstand that works are useless without first having a regenerated heart (a.k.a. eternal life, Spirit baptism, being born of God).

         Cain's rejection of God's revelation and gracious provision exposes his true character, and we learn that he is not the One—much to the sorrow and dismay of his mother, Eve, who would continue to desire and long for her Redeemer to come (c.f. 1 John 3:10-15; Jd. 11). Burnett summarizes this understanding of Gen. 4:6-8, explaining its profound theological significance:

Yahweh has provided a male animal in Cain's doorway which waits in obedient submission for the offender to slay it for the purposes of atoning for his sin...[this] passage is a theological treasure house, displaying divine condescension toward a sinner with otherwise no recourse for restoration. At the opportune time, God Himself extended grace by means of a 're-do sacrifice.' Cain, however, would not accept this grace by slaying the animal. Ultimately he rose up and killed the wrong object—his brother, Abel" (pg. 54-55).

         Reminder #5: Genesis 4:7 is not about works-righteousness, or trying to tame our sin nature...


The Completed Picture Coming Together

         Keep seeking Him, brothers and sisters. The full picture is coming together beautifully. Like those disciples who walked with Jesus on the way to Emmaus, I pray that your hearts will be ablaze with love toward our Father, His Son, and the indwelling Holy Spirit. All five links listed above provide us with the beginning pieces of the tapestry of Christ as revealed throughout the Scriptures.

         Without the obstruction of cultural and language barriers, we can see how God graciously revealed information about the Messiah, little by little, as the ages progressed. The early picture of Christ looked like this according to the five links:

         (1) The Messiah to come would be born of the woman and conquer the serpent, though he would lose his life in the process; (2) The Messiah to come would be the Man whom the woman desired most—He would be both her Son and her Lord; (3) The Messiah to come would be a blood-atoning sacrifice, removing man's shame [nakedness]; (4) The Messiah to come would be YHWH's representative and head of a redeemed humanity; (5) The Messiah to come would be a blood-atoning sacrifice, like a male lamb submissive to the will of God, slain before the foundation of the world [Rev. 13:8].

         One last thought: The Desired One is coming back. In my study of Gen. 3–4, I noticed that a couple of other Scriptures opened up in light of Gen. 3:16b. The first is Haggai 2:7:

And I will shake all nations, and the desire of all nations shall come: and I will fill this house with glory, saith the LORD of hosts" (KJV).

         The second is Daniel 11:37:

He [the antichrist] will show no regard for the gods of his fathers or for the desire of women, nor will he show regard for any other god; for he will magnify himself above them all" (NASB).

         Hang in there. Though hope deferred makes the heart sick (Prov. 13:12), our longing and deepest desire is about to be fulfilled. Like the apostle John, those who truly love Him will proclaim, "Come, Lord Jesus!" Hold fast. Our God of peace is about to crush the serpent under our feet (Rom. 16:20; Rev. 12:7-9)!

[metmom]

Ping

[Luircin]

Ah, marriage.

Sad to see that everything has gone so wrong, but I suppose it’s a microcosm of sinfulness in our world. Everyone has gone to his own way.

[SaveFerris]

I possibly know where this happened at.

[SaveFerris]

[ The Desired One is coming back. ]

Wow, somebody actually gets it right. I’m shocked.

[RegulatorCountry]

I’ve known many who assume Daniel 11:37 means that the antichrist will be homosexual.

[metmom]

I find that interpretation a bit of a stretch, but just based on how the world is going, I would not be surprised at all to find that to be the case.

The world is certainly ripe for following an openly homosexual leader, like I don’t think we’ve ever seen before.

[Elsie]

I find that interpretation a bit of a stretch...

I was left wondering, "Why?"

What does EITHER (or more) differing 'interpretations' got to do with my salvation?