Given what I said in my previous post in regard to the way we should understand Genesis 3, I think it needs to be pointed out that such a view should also clarify something else about Christ and salvation. To the point, salvation in Christ was never God’s “Plan B.” We need to put away this idea that (A) God created a perfect world with perfect people, but then (B) they somehow rebelled, sinned, and “fell” from their perfect state, and as a result (C) God had to come up with a “Plan B” in Christ in order to set things right. Now don’t get me wrong, the Gospel is clear: in Christ, God does indeed set things right. But we need to see it was God’s singular plan all along to bring all things in heaven and earth under the lordship of Christ. Christ is no “Plan B.” He is the Alpha and Omega. It was always God’s plan to save the world through Christ and to bring all creation to fullness in Christ.
What Salvation is…
In fact, the very word “savior” carries with it the notion of a sanctifier, namely someone who offers something up to God and makes it holy. And that is precisely what Christ does: He takes the natural man (i.e. Adam), saves and sanctifies him, and thus brings him into the supernatural. Now the thing to realize is that all of that original child-likeness and immaturity is inherently natural, it’s part of what it means to be a created being. To be created inherently means that we are not like God. He is uncreated perfection, whereas we are created as imperfect creatures, but with a purpose: to relate to God in obedience and trust so that we can forever grow into further likeness of God—and the one who makes that possible is Christ, our Savior and Sanctifier. Again, as Irenaeus puts it:
“God having predestined that the first man should be of an animal nature, with this view, that he might be saved by the spiritual One. For inasmuch as He had a pre-existence as a saving Being, it was necessary that what might be saved should also be called into existence, in order that the Being who saves should not exist in vain” (Against Heresies V.22.3).
If I can put it another way: the whole purpose of humanity and creation itself was to give something to Christ to save and sanctify.
I wanted to spend some time explaining the significance of Genesis 3 because it is so vital for our proper understanding of the purpose of creation, humanity itself, as well as salvation in Christ. It is, I believe, a much richer understanding of Genesis 3 than the standard Sunday School version. Personally, the Sunday School version was always remote to me. I couldn’t relate to it, and I sort of blamed Adam and Eve for the reason I sinned—it was their fault. Of course, the irony is that as soon as we have that view, we are doing the exact same thing that both Adam and Eve do in the story: it’s not my fault, it’s the woman’s fault; it’s the serpent’s fault! “No,” God says, “it’s your fault, but don’t worry, I’ve got a plan.” So now let’s get a first glimpse in Scripture as to what that plan is.
Curses and Consequences: The Curse Upon the Serpent
After Adam and Eve listen to the serpent and eat the fruit from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, God shows up and confronts them, much like a parent confronting their children. Genesis 3:14-24, thus details the consequences of Adam and Eve’s sin. Simply put, it includes a cursing of the serpent, consequences for Adam and Eve, as well as a glimmer of hope and salvation. There are a couple of things to note about what God says to the serpent: “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring; he will crush your head and you will strike his heel.”
First off, what does “enmity” mean? Simply put, it means that God has declared war on the serpent, and that war is going to be fought between the serpent and humanity (i.e. the woman and her offspring). This is important, for it shows that as soon as God confronts the sin that Adam and Eve commit, the first thing He says is that He is going to crush the head of sin and death.
The second thing to note is the idea of the woman’s offspring. As I just said, the “war” that God declares on the serpent is going to be fought between the serpent and humanity. It is going to be through humanity (i.e. the woman’s offspring) that God will eventually defeat the serpent. The question, of course, becomes, “Well, who is the woman’s offspring?” Ultimately, we see the woman’s offspring finding fulfillment in Christ. In fact, in Revelation 12, the Apostle John alludes to Genesis 3 in his description of Christ: He is the “ultimate offspring” of the woman who will defeat the dragon.
That being said, we can’t get too far ahead of ourselves. For in Revelation, we are told that the dragon goes off to make war with the rest of the woman’s offspring. In the New Testament, the identity of “the rest of the woman’s offspring” is the Church. But if that’s the case, who did the Jews understand “the rest of the woman’s offspring” to be? That’s simple: they viewed the woman’s offspring as Israel. We actually see this “war of offsprings” play out, not only in those curious genealogies that come later in Genesis 1-11, but also throughout the Old Testament.
In any case, God is promising that somehow, through the woman’s offspring, through Israel, He would crush the head of the serpent. That also explains the significance of the depiction of the offspring as “he” will strike your head. Again, the ultimate “he” is Christ, but in the Old Testament, the “he” was Israel personified. In addition, the indication that the serpent would “strike the heel” of the woman’s offspring is significant in that it is saying that although God would indeed crush the head of the serpent through the woman’s offspring, it would come at a price.
The Consequences of the Woman
Turning to the woman, we need to see that God doesn’t curse the woman. Instead, He declares what the consequences of her actions will be: (1) she will have pain in childbearing, and (2) her desire will be for her husband, but that he will rule over her. These two things describe the basic situation in life that women face. First, the thing we need to see with the pain in childbearing is this: new life will still come about, but it will involve pain. God has not rejected His creation or mankind, but the element of pain and suffering becomes part of the equation of life.
Secondly, we need to understand just what “desire for your husband means.” We have a good idea what this means because the same phrase is used in Genesis 4:7, when God warns Cain that sin was “crouching at his door,” and that its “desire” was for him, meaning, its “desire” was to rule over him. The same applies here: one of the consequences of sinning is that, not only is humanity’s relationship with God strained and broken, but also the relationship between men and women/husbands and wives suffer strain and brokenness. Or in other words, it is because of sin that we have a “battle between the sexes.”
Not only that, but in the case of the woman, the consequence of sin is that her husband will rule over her. This should put our common understanding of “roles” between husbands and wives in a slightly different light. When God created the woman, He created her out of the man’s side, and she was to be an equal partner and ally to him. Yet, because of sin, she becomes subservient, and suffers inequality.
The Consequences of the Man
When we look at the consequences of the man, we actually see that his consequences are similar to that of the woman’s. First, we are told that the ground (the Hebrew word is adamah) is now cursed and will produce thorns, and that it will only be through painful toil that the man (Adam) will be able to bring forth produce. Just like the woman will suffer pain as she brings forth the new life of a baby, so will the man suffer pain as he brings forth new life from the ground. Secondly, we are then told that since the man came from dust, that he would eventually die and return to the dust. Note that just earlier, God curses the serpent and says that the serpent will eat dust all the days of its life. And here we are told that Adam, the “dust man” will return to the dust—he will die, because death will rule over him, just as he will rule over the woman.
In both cases with the woman and the man, we see similar consequences: (1) Pain and suffering is introduced, yet new life will still come about; and (2) Each one will suffer oppression in some form. Ultimately, because of their sin, pain, suffering, oppression, and death come to dominate the human experience. Nevertheless, God is quite clear that He will not leave them in that state, and that salvation will indeed come. The first indication is found in the promise He makes to the woman, about her offspring eventually crushing the head of the serpent. Yet there is another indication as well.
Further Promises of Salvation
The next indication of salvation is seen in Genesis 3:21, when we are told that God made garments of skin for Adam and Eve. Because of their sin, they became ashamed of their nakedness; they realized how helpless and vulnerable they really were. And so, the picture of God clothing them is the sign that God is willing to cover their shame. Indeed, that is what atonement is: a covering over of sin.
Yet there’s more—and it’s something that some might think is a punishment, but it really is a grace. In Genesis 3:22-24, we are told that God drives Adam and Eve from the garden, so that they would not be able to eat from the Tree of Life, and thus live forever. He even sets an angel at the entrance to the garden to prevent anyone from coming back in. Sounds like a punishment, right?
Consider this, though: if Adam and Eve were now sinful, if they then ate from the Tree of Life and lived forever in that state, wouldn’t that essentially make sin eternal as well? Simply put, the reason why God banishes them from the garden was so that He could deal with human sin before they were allowed back in to eat from the Tree of Life. This is precisely what we see in Revelation 22: after Christ, the ultimate offspring, defeats sin and death, John is given a glimpse of the heavenly Jerusalem, and in that heavenly Jerusalem, he sees the Tree of Life is there, and its fruit is for the healing of the nations: once sin and death are defeated, access to the Tree of Life is restored.
Conclusion to Genesis 1-3
Understanding Genesis 1-3 is extremely important if one is going to understand how the rest of the Old and New Testaments eventually unfold. But let’s be clear: the purpose of Genesis 1-3 is not to give specific historical or scientific details about exactly how or when God created the world, and it is not to give specific details about the first literal couple in history, and how they screwed it up for the rest of us.
Rather, the purpose of Genesis 1-3 is to provide us with clarity concerning certain metaphysical truths. When it comes to God: (1) there is one God, not many; (2) He is the Creator God, completely transcendent from His creation, but still intimately involved with His creation; and (3) He is good and holy and just.
When it comes to creation: (1) it is orderly and good, and not the chaotic result of warring gods; (2) it is created to be God’s cosmic Temple, where He dwells and communes with man whom He made in His image.
When it comes to mankind: (1) we have inherent worth and dignity; (2) we are made in God’s image, and therefore have the task of ruling over God’s creation as His vice-regents and image-bearers; (3) we have a vocation to be God’s priests who tend to God’s creation and offer it up to Him; yet (4) we are naïve and childish, and because of that we inevitably sin, and thus suffer the realities of pain, sin and death; and still yet (5) God is committed to our salvation; somehow He will work through us to bring about salvation.
These are the basic truths we are to take away from Genesis 1-3. They will shape our entire understanding of the rest of the unfolding story in the Bible.
First of all, Irenaeus’ trinitarian theology is clearly defective, as the Son would NOT “exist in vain” if no creation had taken place! (BTW, this line of reasoning shows the error of the Palamist reification of the divine energies, as they would exist in vain if no creation had taken place).
Secondly, within Roman Catholicism at least it is orthodox (small “o”) to hold that the Son’s Incarnation was inconditional on human sin while the Incarnate Son’s passion, death and resurrection was “Plan B”. So, the supernatural gift of participation of divine nature aka theosis which Adam and Eve (and the angels) were infused when they were created was granted by God in view of the future Incarnation of the Son.
Third, contemporary genetic anthropology is fully consistent with the Roman Catholic doctrine, implied by Trent and fully stated by Thomas Aquinas, that the sin that matters is Adam’s, not Eve’s, as all extant human beings descend patrilineally from a Homo Sapiens that lived around 300,000 years ago (“Y-chromosomal Adam”). Just make Biblical Adam be Y-chromosomal Adam or a patrilineal ancestor thereof.
Fourth, the previous point is consistent with the need of the Incarnate Son to be virginally conceived, because if He had been a patrilineal descendant of Adam He would have been a potential target of the propagation of original sin (just as St. Mary was in Roman Catholic theology) and would have needed to have the foreseen merits of his Passion and Death applied to Himself at the time of his conception (just as they were applied to St. Mary at the time of her conception).