The Foundations of the Faith

Studies in Genesis 1-11

Sermon Number Eighteen: The Doctrine of the Fall (part 3)

Jim Bordwine, Th.D.

Introduction

REVIEW

As we have seen in the past two sermons on the doctrine of the fall, Adam was placed in the Garden, given a two-fold assignment and then given a specific and easily understood order. He was allowed to eat from every tree except one. This is the condition under which Adam had to operate. I noted that, as we are taught throughout God’s Word, there must always be some negative consequence for not keeping the duty made known by God. And so it is in this passage. We find a corresponding penalty threatened if Adam failed to do what God commanded: “ 17 ... but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you shall surely die.”

In time, Scripture records the failure of our first parents to abide by this condition. In that passage, found in Gen. 3, I called attention to six important elements. First, we noticed the description of the serpent. He is called “crafty,” meaning that his goal was to influence this circumstance to his advantage. The second element was the serpent’s question to the woman. He did not immediately challenge the condition established by God, but asked an “innocent” question designed to engage the woman in conversation. Third, we considered the woman’s answer. I stated that some have implied a dissatisfaction on Eve’s part with God’s prohibition because she quotes God as saying, “You shall not eat from it or touch it...” Her addition, “you shall not touch it,” definitely represents an overstatement of the fact, and perhaps a bit of interpretation on her part, but to what degree she was at that point being motivated by sinful impulses is hard to say. That is why the text emphasizes that the eating of the fruit would constitute the failure to obey.

The fourth element was the serpent’s undisguised contradiction of God: “You surely shall not die!” He attacked the prohibition by directly repudiating the warning issued by God. Immediately, therefore, two mutually exclusive perspectives were set in opposition to one another. What was being decided at that moment was the identification and nature of ultimate authority in the reality where the woman found herself. The fifth element in the story was the woman’s decision. The Creator, I noted, did not make the fruit on this tree repulsive to guarantee that the woman would not go near it. The only significant factor in this situation was God’s word. And the sixth element was an immediate recognition of a disruption. Adam and Eve had a sudden and uncomfortable awareness of one another in this new context of having disobeyed the Creator.

END OF REVIEW

This brings us to the third section of the story of the fall, which is the result of Adam’s failure to abide in the condition established by his Creator.

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 Then the LORD God called to the man, and said to him, “Where are you?” 10 And he said, “I heard the sound of Thee in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid myself.” 11 And He said, “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you not to eat?” 12 And the man said, “The woman whom Thou gavest to be with me, she gave me from the tree, and I ate.” 13 Then the LORD God said to the woman, “What is this you have done?” And the woman said, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.” 14 And the LORD God said 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 shall you go, and dust shall you eat all the days of your life; 15 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.” 16 To the woman He said, “I will greatly multiply your pain in childbirth, in pain you shall bring forth children; yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you.” 17 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 shall eat of it all the days of your life. 18 Both thorns and thistles it shall grow 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, because from it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return.”

The consequences of Adam’s sin unfold in these verses. I will specify six results. First, notice the reaction of Adam and Eve when God appears in the Garden. We are so used to reading and hearing this story that the magnitude of this description might fail to register. When Adam and Eve heard the sound of the LORD God walking in the Garden, they hid themselves from His presence. (v. 8) They hid themselves from God. There is no single element in this whole story which more shockingly illustrates the nature of the fall than this statement. This is what disobedience to God brings—it brings alienation from Him, it brings dread of His mere presence. Creatures who came from the hand of God, creatures who knew nothing but goodness from their Maker, are now hiding from Him. What else could be said which would more convincingly tell us that a change has occurred?

After they disobeyed, Adam and Eve could not face their Creator, the One who had been nothing but loving and kind. What could possibly motivate such behavior? What could lead to this circumstance where the creatures are hiding from the Creator? The text tells us. When God called to them, Adam said that he was afraid because he was naked. (v. 10) Fear is what motivated Adam and Eve to conceal themselves from God. Here, by the way, we have a picture of human history, as far as redemption is concerned: fearful man, fallen man, recognizing that he can no longer meet with God face to face, is pursued by the Creator.

The next logical question, of course, is: why did they fear God? The word used here (yawray), which is translated “afraid,” combines both fear, in the normal sense of the term, and reverence. Both notions arise from one’s apprehension of the object in question—in this case, the Creator. Something about God caused Adam and Eve to fear Him in the two senses indicated by this word, that is, in the sense of expecting punishment and in the sense of homage. Adam and Eve were expressing a post-transgression reaction to the presence of God. Something about God produced in them this state of alarm. But, let me emphasize, Adam and Eve had no fear of God previously. Clearly, then, their disobedience has changed their natures so that now, as God calls to them, they cannot respond. Now, the Creator’s countenance sends them fleeing instead of bringing them comfort. Now, God’s character represents a direct contradiction of their own; what God was in His nature, exposed them as rebellious creatures.

Second, there is the attempt to mitigate the sin, first by Adam and then by Eve. As I pointed out in a previous sermon, the awareness of nakedness was indicative of a change in perception for Adam and Eve. Now, after finding Adam and Eve hiding in the Garden, God asks: “Who told you that you were naked?” (v. 11) Before I get to Adam’s response, let me emphasize that this question shows that the change in perception was not natural; something happened to Adam’s mind. Somehow, he came to perceive his nakedness as a shameful thing. God knew, of course, that Adam had not been created with such a perception, so something must have happened.

You’ll notice that God does not wait for the answer to the first question before adding a second: “Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you not to eat?” In this second question, of course, is the answer to the first. The only way that Adam could have developed a shameful perception of his nakedness is if he had somehow violated the condition which God established; and the only way that could have happened was if he ate from the forbidden tree. So, again, the second question contains the answer to the first. God gets straight to the point of the transgression.

Now, notice Adam’s attempt to mitigate his sin: “The woman whom Thou gavest to be with me, she gave me from the tree, and I ate.” (v. 12) He is asked a straight-forward question, but his answer is anything but straight-forward. Adam attempts to make his transgression look less serious by pointing to Eve as the cause of his action. If he could implicate Eve, Adam figured that this would make him look less guilty. He reasoned that by spreading the blame around, his sin would be less noticeable. So, Eve becomes a barrier between Adam and the Creator, at least Adam is hoping that this will be the case.

And, of course, Eve does exactly the same thing when God turns to her and asks, “What is this you have done?” She says: “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.” (v. 13) It was too late for her to blame Adam—Adam had already pointed the finger at her. The only other party involved in this mess was the serpent, so Eve points to him. In this case, of course, she is correct that he had deceived her, but that is no more of a legitimate excuse than Adam blaming his wife. God is asking them both to confess their transgression and both do so, but only after making excuses so as to lessen their guilt. They try to “take the edge off” their admissions that they did, indeed, do exactly what God told them not to do.

It’s as if Adam declared: “I never would have eaten that fruit if it had not been for that woman.” And as if Eve declared: “I was doing just fine until that serpent showed up.” There’s a bit of truth in both statements, but that doesn’t matter because God said do not eat from that tree! He did not say, “Don’t eat unless Eve offers you the fruit, Adam.” And He did not say, “Don’t eat unless some crafty critter comes along with a good argument, Eve.” These attempts to mitigate their sin only compounded it. They acted even more shamefully and more rebelliously by seeking to explain the circumstances.

We might even say that these responses to God come close to a denial of wrong-doing. If, as Adam implies, it was Eve’s fault that he ate from that tree, then God should not hold him responsible. And if, as Eve implies, it was the serpent’s fault that she ate from that tree, then God should not hold her responsible. Yes, there were other factors involved; Eve did give the fruit to Adam and the serpent did deceive Eve, but God’s command stood. No matter what the reason, no matter what the temptation, this issue was whether Adam and Eve would live according to God’s word alone.

Also coming from vv. 11-13 is the third result, which is the abdication of covenant headship. This result overlaps the previous and seeing it depends largely upon later revelation, but it is one of the most significant. Throughout Scripture, from this point forward, who is cited as chiefly responsible for the fall of man? Who is singled-out as having failed to remain obedient? And whose actions are we told resulted in death and misery entering history? The answer is Adam, not Eve. The only way to explain this, since Eve ate first, is that Adam held some special position in this relationship, a position which made him accountable for the actions of both parties, not just his own. This is the first illustration of covenant theology that we find in the Bible. In a covenant, representative parties act on behalf of others. The Scripture teaches that Adam was acting on behalf of all those who would come forth from him, that is, all humanity.

Like I said, though, this result of the fall is not immediately apparent until much later when God gives us an interpretation of this event and explains how it relates to our redemption. Nevertheless, since we have that revelation and since we know that Adam was covenantally responsible for the actions of his wife, as well as his own, it is worth mentioning here in this study. Adam failed to act properly as the head of this relationship. Somehow—and the details are not given to us—Eve found herself reasoning with the serpent. Of course, this was part of the serpent’s plan. He engaged the one under authority instead of one with authority when he chose to speak to Eve instead of Adam. Ideally, Adam would have engaged the serpent—it was his task, you will recall to tend to the Garden and keep it secure. He did not do what he was supposed to do. As a result, I believe that he left Eve vulnerable and the result is what we have before us.

But that is not all which is involved here. Once Adam had failed to protect the Garden and had failed to protect Eve and had, in fact, joined her in sin, he does not do the responsible and honorable thing by admitting his failure directly and without reservation when questioned by God. He responded: “The woman whom Thou gavest to be with me, she gave me from the tree, and I ate.” That answer was woefully insufficient, as we know. Adam still is identified as the head of the relationship and, in fact, the head of our race, who failed and who plunged us all into moral chaos. Abdicating responsibility is not the same thing as being free of responsibility.

The fourth thing to notice is the curse of the serpent. Here, at the beginning of history, the adversary of God and the opponent of all that is good and righteous is cursed by the Creator. He henceforth lives a cursed existence without the possibility of escape. In time, the serpent must face the end of the curse, which is his destruction. The word translated “cursed” (arar) is interesting. The way it is used here, it means that God separates the serpent from all other animals so that he alone bears the burden of having led Adam and Eve into sin; the word does not mean that all animals are cursed, but that the serpent is really cursed. The language means that the serpent is forever stigmatized as the enemy of the human race.

God’s curse, in other words, is condemnation. One manifestation of this curse is the serpent’s banishment to the dust. Another manifestation is God’s promise to “put enmity between [him] and the woman, and between [his] seed and her seed.” (v. 15) Again, based upon later revelation, we know that this is the protevangelium, the first declaration of the gospel. I’ll have more to say about this when we consider the development of the doctrine of the fall at a later time, but for now, let me call attention to the fact that God not only curses the serpent, but also specifies the nature of history from this point forward and the nature of the defeat which ultimately will come to Satan.

The rest of the Bible is about the unfolding of this word from God. The trickery of the serpent introduced sin into God’s world. From this point forward, there will be a struggle waged between God and the serpent or between those who follow God and those who follow the serpent. This is a defining point in human history because it explains the presence of unrest, hatred and rebellion in the world. God indicates that these two lines would be mutually exclusive and, therefore, everlasting enemies.

The passage implies that the serpent and his line will attempt to destroy the woman and her seed, but God’s curse on the serpent, as I mentioned, includes his defeat. What is predicted, therefore, is a gradual, but certain triumph for the seed of the woman. So, here, the story of the fall picks up a hopeful, optimistic element. In the midst of God’s curses, He declares the eventual restoration of His creatures and the accompanying permanent destruction of the enemy. This is, as stated, the first mention of the gospel. The gospel plainly says that Christ came to destroy the works of the devil. That destruction was promised by God when He cursed the serpent. It was inevitable from the very day God spoke.

The fifth result of Adam’s failure is what was introduced in v. 7, namely, the disruption of the relationship between Adam and Eve. When God turns to the woman, He says: “I will greatly multiply your pain in childbirth, in pain you shall bring forth children; yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you.” Two things should be noted in this verse. First, the very thing for which Eve was made and for which she was uniquely qualified, now becomes the source of intense pain. The experience of giving birth, which was essential to the fulfillment of God’s command to Adam to subdue the earth and rule over it, and which, presumably, would have been a blessed and thrilling experience, will henceforth be accompanied by great discomfort. The fall of man has this immediate consequence among others—the woman will no longer be able to fulfill her God-assigned function apart from pain. Something has happened to the Adam and Eve relationship. Eve’s role in this relationship is now going to be unpleasant.

Second, and this is even more significant, God says “your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you.” A great deal has been said about this statement. Biblical feminists, for example, say that here we have an indication that male headship is a result of the fall because God says, “and he shall rule over you”; therefore, they reason, when we are redeemed in Christ, there should be no male headship in the marriage and home. There are two primary problems with this interpretation, one minor and one major. The minor problem is that God also says, “your desire shall be for your husband.” So, is a woman’s desire for her husband also a result of the fall? Did Eve have no desire for Adam prior to the fall and should women stop having desire for their husbands once they are redeemed?

The major problem with the interpretation of Biblical feminists is much more serious. Without going into detail, I will say that their explanation of this text is completely indefensible. Previous revelation has made clear that Adam was created to be the head of his wife, authoritatively speaking. Later revelation in the New Testament supports this view overwhelmingly. So, before the fall, Adam was Eve’s authoritative head and that is how God created men and women to relate to one another. Headship did not originate with the fall.

What, then, does God mean? Let’s remember that He is still speaking words of judgment and He is still, in a manner, describing the effects of Adam’s sin. God is declaring that the natural association of Eve, the helper, to Adam, the head, has been compromised. As a result of the fall, Eve will have an unnatural desire to usurp Adam’s authority; nevertheless, God makes plain, “he shall rule over you.” The word translated “desire” (teshookaw) means “yearning, craving or desire.” It’s use in Gen. 4:7 helps us arrive at the proper understanding here in 3:16. In Gen. 4, God is speaking to Cain about his rejected offering. He says to him: 7 “If you do well, will not your countenance be lifted up? And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door; and its desire is for you, but you must master it.”

In this particular case, the NIV has a good translation when is says: “[sin] desires to have you, but you must master it.” This is basically the same construction we find in our passage. God tells Eve that she will, from this point on, want to rule over her husband or, at least, she will resent his authority. But, in keeping with what God already revealed prior to the fall, Adam is to retain his authority and rule over his wife. In the act of the fall, Eve already had stepped beyond the protective headship of Adam when she listened to the serpent and was convinced by his reasoning to do what God commanded her not to do. That tendency becomes a permanent part of the female constitution which must be subdued. It is the opposite problem which Adam had—he abdicated his responsibility and now his male descendants must struggle to function properly as heads in a marriage relationship. (If you doubt this interpretation, by the way, you must not be married.)

Finally, we come to the sixth result of Adam’s fall, which is the cursing of creation. This consequence is introduced with the phrase, “because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree...” (v. 17) God specifies that Adam obeyed his wife rather than obey his Maker. The Hebrew word rendered “listened” (shama) means “to hear and give heed” or “to hear and consent.” The point is that Adam was persuaded by Eve to do exactly what God had forbidden. This is why God equates this action to eating from the forbidden tree. Adam’s assent to Eve’s suggestion constituted disobedience to God. So, just as Eve would be affected by the fall in that area for which God had uniquely prepared her, so Adam now hears similar news.

God curses the ground which Adam was supposed to subdue and rule over. His labor from this point on would be characterized by “toil” (itstsabone, meaning “hardship or sorrow”). Adam’s existence will be one of much suffering, much hard labor and much frustration as the creation over which God placed him now “fights” against his dominion (v. 18). What Adam would have done in a joyful and harmonious environment now will be done in a distressing and hostile environment. Man’s purpose now will be realized only in misery. And, of course, God makes mention of the ultimate penalty which had been threatened for disobedience: “by the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground, because from it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return.” (v. 19) Here is pictured the experience of every man—long years of labor, attempting to subdue even a small portion of God’s creation, followed by death.

Man’s banishment from Eden testifies that he is now estranged from God and must go forth in his fallen condition to experience all that God has declared (vv. 22-24). He can no longer have access to the tree of life, which before symbolized Adam’s peaceful relationship with His Creator but now symbolizes what man, on his own, will never know again.

02. Development of the Doctrine

To follow later...

03. Application of the Doctrine

For our application, I’ll return to the six consequences of Adam’s transgression. The first consequence was the reaction of Adam and Eve when God appeared in the Garden. The first human beings hid themselves from their Creator once they disobeyed Him. As I said, nothing better illustrates the nature of the fall and the nature of sin than this attempt to avoid God. At the most fundamental level, sin separates us from God. Every instance of sin, every sin which we permit or which we commit, brings discord to our relationship with God. We need to keep this in mind because one of the deceptive influences of sin is that it causes us to forget about the real consequences of sin. The story of the fall is a much needed reminder of first principles. Sin always has and always will bring disruption; sin always has and always will separate us from God. Therefore, armed with this knowledge, we should be all the wiser when it comes to dealing with sinful impulses. We do not go blindly into temptation; we go with our eyes wide open, knowing that if we sin, our relationship with God will suffer, knowing that if we sin, our fellowship will be disrupted.

The second consequence was the attempt to mitigate sin. Both Adam and Eve tried to downplay their transgression by pointing the finger of blame at someone else. Adam, for example, attempted to make his transgression look less serious by pointing to Eve as the cause of his action; if he could implicate Eve, I suggested, Adam figured that this would make him look less guilty. If this isn’t typical human behavior, I don’t know what is! This is the very first thing children do when confronted for misbehaving—they try to mitigate their wrongdoing by pointing to other factors which they hope you will take into consideration; and, in most cases, it is the very first thing adults do when confronted with sin—they offer excuses designed to make their sin less serious. Our fallen natures are committed to self-preservation and if that means implicating someone else or if that means trying to pass responsibility to something else, then so be it.

The lesson for us here is this: sin is not properly dealt with when there is a half-hearted or half-truthful confession! The way to get past sin and the way to be restored to fellowship with God and one another is through an honest, unqualified admission of our guilt. It’s that simple. If we try to excuse our conduct as children or if we try to find a way to at least partly explain why we have sinned as adults, we are only compounding the problem. Confession must be complete with nothing held back. That is the first step in true repentance. You are not truly sorry for your sin until you are willing to take responsibility for it.

The third result of the fall was the abdication of headship on Adam’s part. Here we come face to face with one of the primary problems to be found in the modern Church and that is the failure of husbands and fathers to bear the responsibility given to them by God. In regard to Adam, I stated that abdicating responsibility is not the same thing as being free of responsibility. This is a lesson which every husband and father needs to hear. We may not like the arrangement, we may not like being responsible for the welfare of our wife and children, we may not like being the one who determines the direction for our home, but, like it or not, that’s the way it is. This is God’s design and we all will be held accountable according to God’s design. We can either complain about it or we can accept it and equip ourselves to fulfill this responsibility in an acceptable fashion. No one is going to do this for us—no one can do it for us. And, in the end, God will look to us only.

The fourth consequence was the cursing of the serpent. We’ve been reminded in a previous sermon about the defeat of the serpent and how this sure knowledge should give us hope and optimistic expectation as history unfolds. I’ll only add here that this is where a Biblical view of history begins. The modern Church would not be infected with pessimism if we simply read the Bible instead of the sensational writings of some men. You cannot read the story of the fall and the curse of the serpent, then read the unfolding of this curse in later Scripture and conclude that God’s people are to be outnumbered and outgunned increasingly until, at the very last minute, poor Jesus sneaks back to earth, gathers us up and scrambles back to heaven. The curse of the serpent is his doom and this is a doom which is to be seen here on this earth.

The fifth consequence was the disruption of the relationship between Adam and Eve. Here, again, we are not discovering anything new to us. Marital problems top the list when it comes to the issues which the Church must handle. The lesson for us is simple: we need to recognize that in our fallen natures, we will not automatically relate to one another properly as wives and husbands. We have to work at establishing a marriage according to God’s original intention. But this is not an impossible task if we are armed with the knowledge of what the fall did to our perceptions of ourselves and our spouses.

If it is difficult for a wife to let her husband lead in the home, then she needs to understand that she is dealing with sinful impulses. And if it is difficult for a husband to lead in the home, then he needs to understand that he, too, is dealing with the results of sin. Contrary to what some say, it is not easy for a woman simply to submit to her husband and it is not easy for a man to step up and provide Christ-like leadership for his wife. In both cases, we are going against tendencies which are at work in us because of the fall. Both parties have to subdue their flesh in order to achieve God’s design for a marriage.

The sixth consequence was the cursing of creation. As we labor at our callings, whatever they happen to be, we should remember that the frustration which we experience, the hardships which we endure and the sorrow which sometimes comes in this life are consequences of the fall. This is not how God created us to live. Adam’s sin brought this upon us and now we live out our days in a cursed world, one which fights against us and one which is filled with misery. The bad news is that when Adam fell, we lost what we once had as a race. The good news, however, is that God has taken steps to restore us in Christ. If it were not for this truth, the story of the fall would only compound our woe and drive us further into despair.

Conclusion