Bible Studies In The Word of God

GENESIS 3

 

Verse 1. Subtle. This is from ARUWM and Is defined as "cunning." Beast. This Is from OHAY which has a wide variety of renderings in the A.V. Its outstanding idea is, a living creature. The passage might read "than any living creature of the field." He is here seen to be able to talk with man’s lan-guage. He is here used as agent of the devil because of his cunning manner. 

 

The devil has possessed superhuman power in the past. See Ex. 8:18, 19. Here the magicians failed to produce the lice even after having performed the two previous signs. And when they i'aiied this time they explained It by saying "this is the finger of God." Now it is evident that the word "this” refers to the transaction as a whole about the lice and In which they failed. If their failure to produce the lice while Aaron succeeded and if their explanation is that the finger of God accounts for it, then they are acknowledging that their work was not by the finger of God. And if not, and since man alone could not have done what they had been doing at two previous plagues, then it had to be by the finger of the devil. God has at different times suffered evil characters to accomplish the superhuman in order to accomplish some special end of His. See the case of the woman of Endor with Saul in 1 Sam. 28:12, The behavior and expressions of the woman showed that she had not previously been able to perform the deeds she professed to perform, hence her shock at the happenings on this occasion. This shows that God used this evil woman this time to work a certain result and for that purpose suffered her to have this evil power. And so all the above ts to account for the power of the devil exerted through the serpent.  

Verses 2, 3. Here the woman truthfully repeats the law that God gave her as to the trees of the garden. This shows that her disobedience afterward could not be laid to any misunderstanding or failure of memory as to what God had said. And yet Paul says the woman was deceived. (1 Tim. 2:14.) Therefore her deception came by allowing the devil to distract her atten¬tion to a one-sided consideration, as follows:

Verse 4. By adding the word "not" to what God had done the meaning of the whole statement was changed. And this was not wholly untrue as will be seen, and that is wherein lay the deception. Since a person can die in one sense and still live in another that gave the devil an opportunity to deceive by playing on the word. See next.

Verse 5. Shall be as gods knowing good and evil. See verse 22 where God himself stated the same thing which shows the devil stated some truth. And since a person who is like a god would not be considered as dead, the devil got through with his deception on the woman.

 

Verse 6. When the woman saw. This expression shows that the woman had not taken any special notice of the tree before. Evidently, when God had warned them in such strong terms about the tree, even not to even touch it, she had abstained from interest in the tree as far as possible and thus was taking a safe course. But the wiles of the devil had awakened in her an interest in the forbidden thing and then it was that she saw what had escaped her notice before. Food, eyes, wise. See 1 John 2:16. The apostle says that the lust of the eyes, the lust of the tlesh and the pride of life are all that there is in the world. Those three points of temptation are present in this case. They had the effect desired by Satan. He tried the same three points on Christ in Matt. 4:1-11 but failed. The record states that the devil then left him. We ask why? The answer is because he had no other points of temptation to use since he had used these three which John says are all that are in the world. Notice that nothing is said about the deception of Adam here. And this is as stated by Paul in passage cited at verses 2, 3 above. He ate merely on the effect of association.

Verse 7. Opened. This is from PAQACH and defined by Strong “a primitive root; to open (the senses, especially the eyes); figuratively, to be observant." Knew. This is from YADA and in 18 places is rendered “perceive." So the passage as a whole means that they had their attention called to the conditions and perceived or took notice that they were naked. This caused their feeling of shame and their use of fig leaves to cover their nakedness. In last verse of previous chapter it is stated that the man and woman were not ashamed even though naked. But that was because they had not had their attention called to it as it is in the verse here under consideration.

Verse 8. Since a voice does not walk we must take this verse to mean that, as God was walking in the garden, they heard his voice. Hid themselves. Since according to Psa. 139:7-13 and other passages It is impossible really to hide from God, we must take this to mean that Adam intended and tried to hide. But the writer speaks as if he did so. This teaches the principle that a man will be charged with bis evil desires and attempts whether he succeeds or not. It is as bad in God's sight to desire and think evil as to perform it. See Mark 7:20-22. 

 

Verses 9-11. There could not have been any fault found against the man and woman for being naked for that was the way God left them when created. But the knowledge of their being so indicated that something was wrong. That they had obtained such knowledge unlawfully since God did not intend for them to have it. Hence the question that was asked of them.

Verse 12. It may be said that it was like the nature of a man to blame his sin on some one else. But that is just as true of woman. The reason in both cases is that it is according to human nature to Justify one’s own conduct by hiding behind another.  

 .
Verse 13. In this verse we have the truthful statement of the woman. But while it was the truth she was not ex-cused for her conduct. She was des-tined to be punished for her act as will be seen below.

Verses 14-15. Much speculation has been done on this noted passage. But one of the accepted principles of interpretation of language is that all state-ments are to be interpreted literally when the factual context will permit To force a strained and figurative meaning into a passage in order to establish a cherished theory is as much to be regretted as is any other false teaching. To begin with, this is not a "star of hope” offered to man as is popularly preached, because God was not talking to the man at all when he said these words. As far as we know Adam and Eve never knew God had told these words. He was talking to the devil and it was a threat and not a “promise." Well, it is literally true that a special enmity exists between mankind and serpents. It is also true that the serpent once used his feet for traveling and under certain conditions, such as being exposed to heat, those feet In a reverted condition may be seen. And as part of his punishment he was to lose the use of these organs and be compelled to get down into the dust. See Micah 7:17. Josephus was the celebrated Jewish historian and certainly understood the significance of their language. This is what he says about this circumstance. "He also deprived the serpent of speech, out of indignation at his malicious disposition towards Adam. Besides this, he inserted poison under his tongue, and made him an enemy of man; and suggested to them that they should direct their strokes against his head, that being the place wherein lay bis malicious designs toward men, and it being easiest to take vengeance on him that way. And when he had deprived him of the use of his feet, and made him go rolling all along, and dragging himself upon the ground." Josephus, Ant. 1-1-4. Another thing to be noticed, God said "I will put enmity," etc. Now according to the popular speculation on this circumstance God did not mean the woman and the snake at all, but meant Jesus and the devil. But that will not do. If It were said that a man "will put” a fence between himself and his neighbor that means that no fence is there at present. And if the statement that God “will put" enmity between the devil and Christ be the proper con¬clusion, then the enmity had not yet existed. But that would not be true because that very enmity did al¬ready exist. See Rev. 12; 9 and Luke 10:18. This shows that the devil was already at enmity with Christ before this scene with Adam and that was the very reason he wished to get in his evil work against God's work, And so it would be out of harmony with the sense and facts to speak of "putting" enmity, using the future tense, when that enmity already existed and had for some time. If a speaker wishes to make his own comparisons from this circumstance in order to have a subject for discourse he may do so, but he should not offer it as the meaning Moses had in the passage.

Verse 16. To begin with in discussing this, another noted passage, let it he remembered that the whole verse is on the subject of reproduction and the necessary factors of sexual relations pertaining to it. God said he would greatly multiply. One cannot multiply with only a multiplier. There must be something to multiply and that something must already be in existence. That something in this case consisted in sorrow and conception. The first of these words is from a Hebrew word that means pain. So that the expression means that her pain and conception was to be multiplied. This shows that a certain amount of pain and discomfort was to accompany childbirth as the original plan of God. But now it Is to be multiplied. Incl dently, this makes us know that all modern so-called painless methods of childbirth are attempts to set aside the declaration of God. Now we are not told just what means God was to use in bringing about this increase of conception. That is, we do not know all of the means. But we can assuredly point to one fact that resulted in such increase. That is the fact set forth in verse 21. The covering of the man and woman and the continuous requirement of God all through the ages regarding the subject of modesty, is related to this subject of increase of human reproduction. The reader is here requested to read the account of David and Bathsheba in 2 Samuel 11. Here is an account of one child that was conceived and born that would not have been had woman always been unclothed. It says the woman was “beautiful to look upon.” But had woman always been unclothed previously, the fact of seeing her taking a bath would not have affected his sex nature. The sexes, having always lived in that unclothed manner would have been so accustomed to the appearance of each other that nothing would have been left to the Imagination to stir the sex impulse. In that case the only condition that would have urged the male to approach the female would have been the physical accumulation of the male seed that would call for outlet in the mutual relation. But with the female form kept covered, the imagination of the male reacted upon his nature and thus caused his desire for the relation. And hence, further, in the intimacies of married life, the privilege of carrying out these imaginations results in the more frequent desire for the reproductive relation. Thy desire shall be to thy husband. Since this verse is all on the same subject we must conclude this to mean that the woman's sexual desire must be subject to that of the husband. It does not affect this conclusion any to say that man is thus given an opportunity to abuse his privileges. One wrong does not condemn the authority of law. The New Testament gives special attention to husbands who abuse this law, but that does not release the woman from the consequences of the scene in the garden.

Verses 17-19. Since God here punishes man with thorns and thistles it is clear that such plants were not created at the start. See notes at 1:29, 30. Without wishing to speculate on this place it is enough to say that while man would have been required to work the ground for his living even had he not sinned, yet it would have always been a success and no hindrance. Now he must toll in the face of obstacles which would bring the sweat out on his body. Dust thou art. The word for dust here as also In 2:7 and other places is from APHAR and defined by Strong thus: "Dust (as powdered or gray); hence clay, earth, mud." So we are not bound to think of it as the dry grains of the earth as is the common idea, hut think of it as something of fine grain and also suitable for plastic use. Of this material the man was formed but made to he alive according to 2:7. Very logically then, when the life leaves the body it will return to its former state and become this dust of earth again.

Verse 20. At the time this occurred no one was living but Adam and Eve. But since we have seen that Adam was enabled to name the other living creatures and that he must have had inspiration to do so (see 2:19, 20), we can understand how he could here have given to his wife the name appropriate to her destiny as the first mother.

Verse 21. This Is explained at verse 16.

Verse 22. In this verse the Lord made the same statement the serpent made in his conversation with the woman as seen in 1:26. Not that the man had become equal to his Creator in all respects, but in the matter of this knowledge that was unlawful for him to have. Eat and live forever. Had man been permitted to eat of the tree of life even after his sin, he would have lived forever, but in sin. It would have been tragic to live forever in sin, hence God is going to prevent that.

Verses 23, 24. Man Is now sent forth to till the ground and thus begins the sentence imposed on him in verses 17-19. Drove out the man. This explains the statement In Romans 8:20. In that passage the “creature” is mankind in general but specifically applying at first to the first man. Since God drove the man out Paul says he was not going out willingly. The "vanity” in Romans means "frailty” and refers to his being subject to death after having been separated from the tree of life. And by placing the cherubims In service the guard would be perpetual since these creatures do not die. Keep. This Is from SHAMAR and defined “a primitive root; properly to hedge about (as with thorns), i.e., guard; generally to protect, attend to.”— Strong. Way. This Is from DEBEK and Strong defines it “a road (as trodden)”; And notice it says God placed the guard at the east of the garden, not merely at the “gate” of the garden as is so commonly stated. But, while the garden was in a place described as delightful, yet there was a way or road leading to it and this entire road was thus guarded.