Prime Minister Stephen Harper met this week with representatives of Canada’s first nations communities. In an effort to repair generations of conflict and mistrust, they met in Ottawa to improve communications and come to agreements on some crucial issues. The Chiefs warned that a failure to do so, would most likely result in a rebellion on the part of Canada’s Aboriginal population.
To experience God in a meaningful relationship, there needs to be trust of Him and His word. When difficult external situations stir up internal doubt, we must guard against a desire for autonomy, thereby becoming a law unto ourselves. This rebellion means separation from God. Unchecked, the separation becomes eternal.
What causes conflict between people? People can function together for a time, but when a situation of external doubt arises, and trust is not existing between them, communication breaks down, and bad intentions become assumed. The result is separation.
Genesis presents a picture of warning showing the threats to a harmonious experience of fellowship with God. In Genesis 3:1-9 we see: 1)The Tempter (Genesis 3:1a), 2) The Target (Genesis 3:1b-3), 3) The Tactic (Genesis 3:4-5), and 4) The Tragedy (Genesis 1:6-9)
1)The Tempter (Genesis 3:1a),
Genesis 3:1a [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’?") (ESV)
The word serpent means “snake.” The apostle John identified this creature as Satan (cf. Rev. 12:9; 20:2) as did Paul (2 Cor. 11:3). The rebellion of Satan had occurred sometime after 1:31 (when everything in creation was good), but before 3:1. He was a beautiful angel originally, rejoicing at God’s Creation (Job 38:4–7), but he sinned and was judged by God (Isa. 14:12–17; Ezek. 28:11–19) God is not the author of sin, nor does He tempt people to sin; this is the work of the devil (James 1:13). (Wiersbe, W. W. (1993). Wiersbe’s expository outlines on the Old Testament (Ge 3:1–6). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.).
The serpent is indicated as "more crafty than any other beast of the field/wild animal that the LORD God had made,”. Explicit characterization of actors in the story is rare in Hebrew narrative, so it seems likely that in noting the snake’s shrewdness the narrator is hinting that his remarks should be examined very carefully. He may not be saying what he seems to be saying. Perhaps we should not take his words at their face value as the woman did. The author wanted to draw a (parallel) between the Fall and man’s quest for wisdom. Man’s disobedience is not so much depicted as an act of great wickedness or a great transgression as much as it is an act of great folly. He had all the “good” (tôḇ) he would have needed, but he wanted more—he wanted to be like God. The forbidden tree is the tree of the knowledge of “good and evil” (ṭôḇ wārāʿ, 2:9). When the woman and the man took of the tree and ate, it was because she “saw that the tree was desirable for gaining wisdom [lehaśkîl]” (v.6). Thus even the serpent is represented as a paragon of wisdom, an archetypical wiseman (ʿārûm). However, the serpent and his wisdom (ʿārûm) lead ultimately to the curse (ʾārûr v.14) (Sailhamer, J. H. (1990). Genesis. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Volume 2: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers (F. E. Gaebelein, Ed.) (50). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.).
Please turn to 1 Corinthians 1
Wisdom is a central motif of the Genesis account. From how things are created, to how things should run, there is a plan and purpose through God’s wisdom. Folly, is the relentless desire to contradict God, denying His word, intentions, and actions. Originated from Satan himself, it desires at every turn to supplant Godly wisdom with a false substitute. The result is always the same, sin leading to death.
1 Corinthians 1:18-31 [18]For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. [19]For it is written, "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the discernment of the discerning I will thwart." [20]Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? [21]For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe. [22]For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, [23]but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, [24]but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. [25]For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men. [26]For consider your calling, brothers: not many of you were wise according to worldly standards, not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth. [27]But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; [28]God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are, [29]so that no human being might boast in the presence of God. [30]And because of him you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, righteousness and sanctification and redemption, [31]so that, as it is written, "Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord." (ESV)
The term describing the serpent is “Crafty/Shrewd” ערום. On the one hand it is a virtue the wise should cultivate (Prov 12:16; 13:16), but misused it becomes (sneakiness and deviousness) (Job 5:12; 15:5; cf. Exod 21:14; Josh 9:4). The choice of the term עָרוּם “shrewd” here is one of the more obvious plays on words in the text; for the man and his wife have just been described as עֵרֹם “nude” (2:25). They will seek themselves to be shrewd (cf. 3:6) but will discover that they are “nude” (3:7, 10). (Wenham, G. J. (2002). Vol. 1: Word Biblical Commentary : Genesis 1-15. Word Biblical Commentary (72). Dallas: Word, Incorporated.).
The implication seems to be that the perpetrator of the Fall, the serpent, tempts the original human pair to try to find wisdom without God. The “tree of the knowledge of good and evil” was a temptation because they thought they could become wise through eating of it. There is a further wordplay with the word “curse”: “Thus even the serpent is represented as a paragon of wisdom, and archetypal wise man (˓arum). However, the serpent and his wisdom (˓arum) lead ultimately to the curse (˒arur, v. 14).”
Regarding the serpent’s origin, we are clearly told that he was an animal made by God. This information immediately removes any possibility that the serpent is to be viewed as some kind of supernatural, divine force. There is no room here for any dualistic ideas about the origins of good and evil. (Hamilton, V. P. (1990). The Book of Genesis. Chapters 1-17. The New International Commentary on the Old Testament (188). Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.).
The serpent is a creature which the LORD God had made. A creation of the LORD himself rebels against his created purpose and leads humanity along with him in that rebellion.
Illustration: In the movie Patton there is a scene in which for the first time the American general encounters the tank corps of Germany’s North African army under command of the brilliant German war strategist Rommel, the “Desert Fox.” Rommel’s tanks have been destroying the western armies. But Patton out thinks him and is waiting for Rommel with an ambush. The “Desert Fox” is routed, and Patton, who has succeeded by studying Rommel’s writing, is jubilant. He laughs and says, “Rommel, you son-of-a-gun, I read your book.” Patton defeated Rommel because he knew his enemy. In the same way, although Satan has not given us a war manual, God has; and we are therefore forewarned against Satan and his strategies (Boice, J. M. (1998). Genesis : An expositional commentary (155). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.).
2) The Target (Genesis 3:1b-3),
Genesis 3:1b [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’?" [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.’" (ESV)
In the second half of verse one, we hear that The serpent approaches Eve, He said to the woman. She had only received the commandment of God at second hand. The command to not eat of the tree was given to the man prior to the creation of the woman. What is often lost on contemporary readers is that the man was there with the woman during the entire conversation and does not utter a word. Hebrew (unlike English) distinguishes between the singular and plural in the second person. The serpent uses the plural “you” in addressing the woman throughout this narrative. It is only in verse 6 that we discover what we should have suspected, Adam was there silently watching all the time.
• Adam did the wrong thing in more ways than one. He failed to do the right thing, by proclaiming the truth, and he stood idly by while the wrong thing was done in his presence. He had a responsibility for leadership and failed to act when he should have.
• Our repentance should not only be for things we did, but also for things we failed to do.
The serpent poses a question “Did God actually/really say, ‘You shall/must not eat of/from any tree in the garden’?”. The question sounds innocent enough, doesn’t it? “Eve, are you sure you got that straight?” Is it possible that a loving God would deny his highest creatures the pleasure of eating any kind of fruit in the garden? Satan’s question was, however, not an innocent one. His purpose was to raise doubt in Eve’s mind—doubt as to exactly what God had said as well as doubt about the fairness of God’s prohibition. The first thing we note about Satan is that he operates in disguise. He pretended to be interested in Eve’s well-being. He didn’t say to her (and he doesn’t say to us), “Come, I’ll teach you how to sin.” What he does say is this: “Let me help you to a happier, more exciting life. Surely God wants you to be happy. ( Jeske, J. C. (2001). Genesis (2nd ed.). The People’s Bible (43–44). Milwaukee, Wis.: Northwestern Pub. House.)
The questioning of the LORD’s graciousness is the first step down the path of rebelling against His will. Scripture always presents the indicative before the imperative Who God is, and what He has done, is always presented before what should be done about that.
The serpent refers to the LORD God merely by the generic word “God,” a term which while theologically accurate does not include the connotations of personal commitment and involvement by the LORD God who personally made the man and the woman. God is treated as a third person. God is not a party to the discussion but is the involved object of the discussion. This is not speech to God or with God, but about God. God has been objectified. The serpent is the first in the Bible to seem knowing and critical about God and to practice theology in the place of obedience.
• The purpose of any discussion about God, His works and expectations, is to turn that fact into praise and obedience. If it is mere knowledge, it is hollow. If it is praise without obedience, it is hypocrisy. If it is a drive to act without understanding or praise, then it is religion, which is empty.
In verse two we hear the response where the woman said to the serpent, "We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden. Once again the woman speaks, and the man remains silent. He has received the commandment directly from the LORD God; she has not. But when it comes time to explain and defend the gracious character of God, the man remains mute.
• As men, how many activates do we pass off to our wives. Most often it is not a formal abrogation, but in terms of leadership, spiritual instruction of children, sharing Christ with family and neighbors, we can easily focus on the task of earning a living, while neglecting our other callings.
In Genesis 3:2, the woman responds in a fashion that is technically accurate, but one which loses the generous spirit behind the LORD’s original command to Adam. In 2:16 the freedom to eat from any tree is emphasized, and the expectation is there that humankind would avail themselves of that generous freedom.
• So often in communicating God’s truth, especially it seems to the “next generation of believers,” our passion for the generosity and grace of God, which led us to him to begin with, is lost. What began as “raging holy fire” is now seen as a pilot light merely fulfilling a duty.
Just as the serpent referred to the LORD God as merely “God,” in verse three, so the woman here adopts the perspective of the serpent and refers to him merely as “God.” Once, again, the woman’s version of the command differs from the original version given to the man in several ways. She adds a restriction to the commandment to Genesis 2:17 not even touching it. The woman’s version does not necessarily come from her. She could well be repeating with great care and accuracy the version which the man had communicated to her. That the man remains silent and does not correct her version argues in favor of the subtle distortions.
The woman’s version also softens the emphatic character of the penalty for disobedience. The LORD God’s “you will surely die” becomes a more tepid “lest you die.” She also may be being portrayed as having a level of confusion about just which tree is prohibited.
• The human tendency is not only minimize his word, but exaggerate what we do not like by adding to his word. His commands become absurd caricatures that no one can be expected to obey. And we count ourselves off the hook. Then our minimizing and adding to his word leaves us free to subtract from his word. The Scripture’s teaching on sensuality is said to be culturally bound and unrealistic for today’s urbane man and woman. And thus it is jettisoned. The same is done with the Bible’s teaching on materialism and business ethics. Ultimately such minimizing, adding, and subtracting leaves us without the word—and free-falling into temptation (Hughes, R. K. (2004). Genesis : Beginning and blessing. Preaching the Word (71–72). Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books.).
In some senses this narrative functions as a meditation on how human beings should respond to and apply the word and will of God. When we add to God’s word, we ultimately risk being unfaithful to it. Likewise when we convince ourselves that the consequences of rebellion are not as severe as God’s word warns, we are prone to disobey his word. When we distrust God’s motives and project onto him our own tendencies, we often do so in order to find justification for rebellion. When we discuss God’s word without talking with him, we often miss the mark and suffer the consequences. When we are confused and unclear about exactly what God’s word says, we set ourselves up for failure. When we know God’s word and see it being deliberately violated and do not speak up, we also set ourselves up for failure as well as encouraging failure in our faith communities.
Illustration: In a classic episode of All in the Family, Archie Bunker was arguing about Christianity with his atheistic son-in-law Michael because Archie wants to get Michael’s son baptized and Michael will have none of it. They argue about a number of unessential things. But at last Michael asks, “Tell me this, Archie, if there is a God, why is the world in such a mess?”
Archie is dumbfounded. He stands stock-still for a moment. Then he tries to bluff his way through. He turns to his wife, Edith, and says, “Why do I always have to give the answers, Edith? Tell (Michael) why, if God has created the world, the world is in such a mess.”
Edith answers, “Well, I suppose it is to make us appreciate heaven better when we get there.” The exchange is entertaining. But there is a touch of sadness too, for it apparently never occurred to Michael, Archie, Edith, or any of the writers that the mess in the world might just possibly be our fault rather than God’s. (Boice, J. M. (1998). Genesis : An expositional commentary (166). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.).
3) The Tactic (Genesis 3:4-5),
Genesis 3:4-5 [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." (ESV)
The serpent made three counterclaims: First, they will not die. Second, “your eyes will be opened,” a metaphor for knowledge, suggesting a newfound awareness not previously possessed ... And finally, they will gain what belongs to God, “knowing good and evil.” Essentially he is contending that God is holding her back—a claim that is sometimes echoed today (A. Ross, “Woman after the Fall,” Kindred Spirit 5 (1981): 11.).
• We must be careful in our presentation of Christianity not to just put it as a bunch of restrictions. Biblical faith is a trust in God through an understanding of the way between life and death and the joy through life.
At one level, the serpent speaks the literal truth. The man and the woman do not immediately physically die at the moment they eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Their eyes are opened. They have experiential knowledge of both good and evil. But they are not like God. In fact, after eating they are afraid of God. The serpent here directly contradicts the word of the LORD God. While he uses the plural “you” in this text, he only directly speaks to the woman, who has shown real confusion over exactly what the LORD God had said and had already come over to his perspective in some small ways. The serpent does not directly contradict the word of the LORD God until this has happened, and this demonstrates his shrewdness as well as the naïveté of the original human pair. This lie actually led her and Adam to spiritual death (separation from God). So, Satan is called a liar and murderer from the beginning (John 8:44) (MacArthur, J. J. (1997). The MacArthur Study Bible (electronic ed.) (Ge 3:4). Nashville: Word Pub.)
• It is a misnomer that those who accurately and directly quote scripture engage in more battles than those who give generalities. In fact, it is when we are unclear about scripture that we are most vulnerable to attack and the disastrous consequences.
It is striking that in contradicting the LORD God’s warning the serpent quotes him far more exactly than the woman had. The LORD God warned in Genesis 2:16, “You will surely die,”. The serpent uses the exact same emphatic construction in his contradiction of the LORD God’s word. The only difference is that the serpent uses the plural form of “you” while the original command is singular since only the man existed at that time. The serpent is better at quoting God’s word than the woman is.
Please turn to Matthew 7
The most difficult lies to detect and refute are the ones that contain true elements of scripture. It is only through the attention to detail that we assertion the correct path to righteousness.
Matthew 7:15-20 [15]"Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. [16]You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? [17]So, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit. [18]A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit. [19]Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. [20]Thus you will recognize them by their fruits. (ESV)
Once again in verse five, the LORD God who had given the beautiful garden and its abundance, who is referred to by his covenant name Yahweh, is here called merely the generic “God” by the serpent. The serpent entices the pair to suspect God’s motives for placing a prohibition on them. He does not want you to eat because in eating you will be just like him, knowing good and evil in a personal way. The implication is that it is only God’s insecurity at creating a rival and his stinginess that led to the command. The man and woman’s trust in God’s goodness, despite all the evidence to the contrary all around them in their daily experience, is lost; and when trust in God’s goodness and love is lost, sin and its terrible consequences follow as night follows day. It is an oversimplification, then, to say that Eve’s sin was disobedience. Her sin was unbelief. She refused to believe what God had said about himself. She doubted his love, choosing rather to believe Satan’s lie (Jeske, J. C. (2001). Genesis (2nd ed.). The People’s Bible (46). Milwaukee, Wis.: Northwestern Pub. House.).
• If you were to ask people at large why Christians proclaim standards like the ten commandments, people would most likely say that it is from instructional religion that wants to control people and get their money.
• Whether evangelizing, instructing children or in learning truths ourselves, it is most important to first understand the character of God before learning of His commands. Only after we come to see His graciousness, love and desire for our wellbeing, can we understand why he wants to protect us with boundaries and then begin to properly follow His directives.
The serpent is once again, in a twisted sort of way, telling the truth. When you eat of it/On the day of the eating of the fruit their eyes will be opened. Here it was designed to be ambiguous; like all Satan’s oracles, suggesting to the hearer the attainment of higher wisdom (The Pulpit Commentary: Genesis. 2004 (H. D. M. Spence-Jones, Ed.) (59). Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.)
• One of the most common ploys for those who wish to deceive is to say that you are missing something: The promise of this missing higher wisdom (gnosis) is similar to the ploy to find the additional revelation in missing books of the Bible, or a transcendental experience etc.
The lie also held out the lure of moral autonomy—“you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” By taking the fruit she would become wise. Equal with God, she would autonomously decide what was right and wrong. How intoxicating! She would make the rules. She would do it her way. That promise still intoxicates. (In modern funerals) among the unbelieving population Frank Sinatra’s “My Way” is in first place as a funeral favorite: "But best of all I did it my way". ...But the truth is, “My Way” is the dirge of death, marking the implosion of the autonomous self. But what deadly magnetism it carries (Hughes, R. K. (2004). Genesis : Beginning and blessing. Preaching the Word (69–70). Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books.).
They would “know” good and evil, or at least “evil,” in a personal, experiential way. But they would not be like God at all.
• So often those things which tempt us do so by promising both things they can deliver and things they cannot deliver. During the process of temptation the consequences are often minimized or ignored.
• The reason for examining stories of failure is to see how sin always takes away and does not give what we deceive ourselves into thinking it will.
Quote: Dietrich Bonhoeffer describes in his little book Temptation how temptation works: "With irresistible power desire seizes mastery over the flesh.… It makes no difference whether it is sexual desire, or ambition, or vanity, or desire for revenge, or love of fame and power, or greed for money.… Joy in God is … extinguished in us and we seek all our joy in the creature. At this moment God is quite unreal to us, he loses all reality, and only desire for the creature is real.… Satan does not here fill us with hatred of God, but with forgetfulness of God.… The lust thus aroused envelops the mind and will of man in deepest darkness. The powers of clear discrimination and of decision are taken from us. The questions present themselves: “Is what the flesh desires really sin in this case?” “Is it really not permitted to me, yes—expected of me, now, here, in my particular situation, to appease desire?”… It is here that everything within me rises up against the Word of God". (Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Temptation (London: SCM Press Ltd., 1961), p. 33.).
4) The Tragedy (Genesis 3:6-9)
Genesis 3:6-9 [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. [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?" (ESV)
When set in the larger context of the story, the serpent’s words are shown to be both true and false. They proved true in that the man and woman did not immediately (physically perish). Their eyes were indeed opened (v. 7), and they obtained knowledge belonging to God as the serpent had promised (v. 22). However, the serpent’s half-truths concealed falsehood and led the woman to expect a different result altogether. The serpent spoke only about what she would gain and avoided mentioning what she would lose in the process. The man and woman (began to deteriorate physically and experienced spiritual death). Furthermore, they experienced expulsion from the garden.... Although their eyes were opened, they were rewarded only with seeing their nakedness and were burdened with human guilt and embarrassment (v. 7). Although they became like God in this one way, it was at an unexpected cost. They achieved isolation and fear. The couple was cut off as well from the possibility of life, the one feature of divinity for which otherwise they were destined. (Mathews, K. A. (2001). Vol. 1A: Genesis 1-11:26 (electronic ed.). Logos Library System; The New American Commentary (236–237). Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers.).
• One of the most important questions in considering an action is not just what appears to be a temporary gain, but what is lost. Sin always seems to promise immediate benefits and conceal real, long term loss.
It is interesting that in verse six the woman sees that "the tree was good for food and a delight/pleasing to the eyes.” That is the same description of the other trees in the garden in Genesis 2. The woman wanted something that she thought she did not already have. But there God had provided it already. This seems to imply that the woman has succumbed to the temptation to doubt God’s goodness. She certainly has ignored His generosity.
While she ignores God’s generous provision of many trees which are good for food and a delight/pleasing to the eyes.” The words used in Eve’s reflection are significant. First, the words taʾăwâ (“pleasant”) and neḥmād (“desirable”) are cognate to the Hebrew verbs translated “covet” in the Ten Commandments ... Strong desire such as Eve’s, or coveting as the commandment prohibits, is usually followed by an unlawful taking (Ross, A. P. (1998). Creation and blessing : A guide to the study and exposition of Genesis (136). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.)
The tree of the knowledge of good and evil also has the potential of giving her a type wisdom without regard to her relationship with God. The theme verse of the book of Proverbs reads, “The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom.” The woman succumbs to the serpent’s twisted account and seeks a wisdom that is independent of a respectful, reverent, and, yes, fearful awe of the LORD God.
John wrote:
1 John 2:16 [16]For all that is in the world--the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride in possessions--is not from the Father but is from the world. (ESV)
• “The desires of the flesh”—that is, the tree was good to eat. “The desires of the eyes”—the tree was good to look at. “The pride in possessions”—the tree was to be desired to make one wise (McGee, J. V. (1997). Thru the Bible commentary (electronic ed.) (Ge 3:6). Nashville: Thomas Nelson.).
What was this fruit: [T]he fruit of the tree in this passage has for almost 2,000 years been painted, sculpted and described as an apple. But the text speaks only of an undefined “fruit.” How did we get to the apple, of all things, which was unknown in the Near East until a century ago? In Jerome’s fifth-century Latin translation of the Bible, known as the Vulgate, the word for “evil,” with which the snake’s speech ends (Genesis 3:5), is malum. Malum can also mean apple, and so this false apple was projected back three lines, to end up ultimately in Eve’s hands, where it never was in the first place (Lapide, “Touching,” p. 43.).
In the statement that Eve "gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate" explicitly and clearly states that Adam was present, but was strangely silent.
While the complete consequences of the man and woman’s sin will be displayed throughout the book of Genesis and the book of world history, the first result described in verse seven is the distorted way in which they begin to look at themselves and each other. Gone is the transparency which knew no shame. The realization that they were naked now brought them shame and the desire to hide it. Suddenly the focus of the man and woman is on themselves and not on the task of working and guarding the garden. The prohibition of 2:17 is violated. The permission of verse 16 is perverted. The vocation of verse 15 is neglected.
The couple’s solution to this new enigma is freighted with folly. Having committed the sin themselves, and now living with its immediate consequences, i.e., the experience of shame, the loss of innocence (they knew/were aware that they were naked), they attempt to alleviate the problem themselves. Rather than driving them back to God, their guilt leads them into a self-atoning, self-protecting procedure: they must cover themselves (Hamilton, V. P. (1990). The Book of Genesis. Chapters 1-17. The New International Commentary on the Old Testament (191). Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.)
That "they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loincloths" is a clear indication that when we as men and women try to fix our problems by ourselves which our sins against God have brought upon us, our remedies are just as pitiful. Fig leaves will serve as clothing no better than our own self-help strategies. It is possible that for the imagined audience fig trees had sexually suggestive connotations and that they might see a critique against the fertility cults of Canaan.
The next manifestation of the fallen condition of the man and the woman in verse eight is when they are confronted with the possibility of direct interaction with the LORD God. They hear him walking in the garden. Instead of being drawn into fellowship with him, they hide themselves.
• One of the main reasons why people do not want accountability is so their sins may not be confronted. It is the reason why people want to fashion their own spiritual lives on their own terms and no one better dare say anything to the contrary.
The trees of the garden were created by the LORD to provide food for humanity. They are now turned into the means of trying to hide from the LORD!
• All sin in essence is using what God had provided for the opposite purpose
intentioned.
That the LORD God was walking in verse eight pictures fellowship. At this point the LORD is still seeking the intimate fellowship with the man and the woman that he has always enjoyed.
Finally in verse nine, the LORD God seeks out humankind in the garden, and he has been seeking ever since. Even when we would prefer to hide from God, He seeks us. He does not merely speak to the man, but He “calls” to him because man is not where he should be. Presumably the LORD does not ask “Where are you?” because he needs information; he wants the human pair to realize where they really are. His question is addressed to the man in particular since he bears primary responsibility for obedience to the commandment since he, and not the woman, was given it directly. Man has broken away from God, but God will not leave him to his lost condition. This is the great marvel of the Scriptures; God does not abandon the creature to his just deserts. In this question God reveals His love; for the purpose of interrogating Adam is to cause him to see where his disobedience has brought him, to contemplate his present status and give an account of why he is in the condition in which he finds himself (KJV Bible commentary. 1997 (21). Nashville: Thomas Nelson.).
Please turn to Psalm 139
Shame, remorse, confusion, guilt, and fear all led to their clandestine behavior. There was no place to hide; there never is (MacArthur, J. J. (1997). The MacArthur Study Bible (electronic ed.) (Ge 3:9). Nashville: Word Pub.).
Psalm 139:1-10 [139:1]O LORD, you have searched me and known me! [2]You know when I sit down and when I rise up; you discern my thoughts from afar.[3]You search out my path and my lying down and are acquainted with all my ways. [4]Even before a word is on my tongue, behold, O LORD, you know it altogether. [5]You hem me in, behind and before, and lay your hand upon me. [6]Such knowledge is too wonderful for me; it is high; I cannot attain it. [7]Where shall I go from your Spirit? Or where shall I flee from your presence? [8]If I ascend to heaven, you are there! If I make my bed in Sheol, you are there! [9]If I take the wings of the morning and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea, [10]even there your hand shall lead me, and your right hand shall hold me. (ESV)
• Although it can be intimidating to consider God’s omnipresence, His gentle hand is one to comfort and guide. We need not fear His correction and we would be foolish to spurn His guidance.
(Format Note: Outline from Wiersbe, W. W. (1993). Wiersbe’s expository outlines on the Old Testament (Ge 3:1–6). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books., Some base commentary from Kissling, P. J. (2004-). Genesis. The College Press NIV commentary. (179–199). Joplin, Mo.: College Press Pub. Co.)
