Tag: Genesis 3

The place of Laban

Posted on by jovial_cynic

וַיַּשְׁכֵּ֨ם לָבָ֜ן בַּבֹּ֗קֶר וַיְנַשֵּׁ֧ק לְבָנָ֛יו וְלִבְנוֹתָ֖יו וַיְבָ֣רֶךְ אֶתְהֶ֑ם וַיֵּ֛לֶךְ וַיָּ֥שׇׁב לָבָ֖ן לִמְקֹמֽוֹ׃

Early in the morning, Laban kissed his sons and daughters and bade them good-by; then Laban left on his journey homeward.
Genesis 32:1 (The Contemporary Torah, JPS 2006)

Note: In the Hebrew bibles, Genesis 32:1 is the same as Genesis 31:55 in English bibles.

In this passage, the commentators point out that the phrase at the end is a little unusual. Laban didn’t just “go home.” He “returned to his place.” And this phrase, according to the Haamek Davar, this “… foreshadowed the ascendance and subsequent decline of all the nations that hosted and then expelled the Jewish people.”

In the interpretation that views Laban as a symbol of wickedness, likening him to Egypt and other conquering nations, Laban appears to slink back into the depths, as though he is brought up for this purpose, and then returns to his right place of lowness.

This concept of “place” is very interesting, because it makes me think of the Jewish teaching about God calling to Adam. When God says “Ayeka,” (where are you?), God is not asking a question. God is making a declaration, stating that Adam is not where he is supposed to be; he is not where God placed him. This can be viewed as a statement about the relationship, not Adam’s specific GPS coordinates.

This tells me that there *IS* a place where we are meant to be in our relationship to God. If God walks through the garden, we are meant to walk with God, and not hide in the bushes.

But Laban? And the empires that enslave God’s people, rooted back to the original hissing trickster that enticed and enslaved us all? Perhaps “returned to his place” describes a place of outer darkness, where one day he will remain separated from us forever.

It’s after Laban “returns to his place” that Jacob goes on his way, and is met by God, and where Jacob declares, “This is God’s camp.”
Here, perhaps we see a glimpse into the Kingdom, where our lived reality and heavenly truth come together in a living parable.

The Irrevocable Decree

Posted on by jovial_cynic
One of the recurring themes in Scripture is the instances of various kings making an irrevocable decree that someone wicked uses to lead the people of God into doom.
The primary example: “Whoever doesn’t bow down and worship will die.”

Each time, the people of God are spared. Either the king makes a subsequent decree (Esther: the people may defend themselves) or a miracle happens (Daniel: the 4th man in the furnace; the lions den).

The whole Bible is set up this same way:

But you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.”
Genesis 2:17 (NIV)

The Irrevocable Decree: “Do not eat from the tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil. In the day you eat it, you will surely die.”

Humanity eats the fruit and is doomed to die. Like the advisors/governers of the kings, the serpent brings the people of God into death.

But like the people of God who cry out for rescue, Adam cries out for Life by naming his wife Eve, which means life.

Like the Kings, God leaves the decree of death in place.

But God makes a new decree: the Resurrection.

Good and Evil

Posted on by jovial_cynic
When you read through Genesis 1-3, it doesn’t appear that the text presents us with a cosmic battle of good verses evil. It appears that Good and Evil — the fruits from the tree similarly named — are inside of us, and that the “bad guy” in the story is merely one who whispers and makes us feel ashamed. But the whispering one is ultimately cursed and doomed to die by having its head crushed.

Perhaps this makes the little cartoons of the devil-and-angel on your shoulder (as versions of yourself) a good metaphor of our day-to-day lives.

To Play

Posted on by jovial_cynic

Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the Lord God as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and they hid from the Lord God among the trees of the garden.
But the Lord God called to the man, “Where are you?”
Genesis 3:8-9 (NIV)

If you don’t picture God angry at your transgression, but instead like a father who just wants to play with his child, this is perhaps the most heartbreaking set of verses in the Bible.

God Among the Trees

Posted on by jovial_cynic

Now 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.
Genesis 3:8 (NASB)

The word “tree” appears so many times in the first three chapters of Genesis, I can’t help but notice that the last part of Genesis 3:8 can be read this way: “YHWH, God among the Trees of the Garden,” not as a position or locator for God, but as a whole name.

“God among the Trees.”

The Story of the Woman

Posted on by jovial_cynic

But God said, “No, but your wife Sarah will bear you a son, and you shall name him Isaac; and I will establish My covenant with him as an everlasting covenant for his descendants after him.
Genesis 17:19 (NASB)

There is something so sneaky and subversive about the way Genesis talks about women, you miss it if you read it too quickly.

For starters, while Abraham is the “father of our faith,” the story about the miraculous birth is really Sarah’s story, not Abraham’s.

Sarai was unable to conceive; she did not have a child.
Genesis 11:30 (NASB)

Remember, the inability to have children wasn’t Abe’s problem. He was able to have a son with Hagar, which meant he was perfectly capable of having children.

But Sarah was barren, and there is a sense of grief and desperation that surrounds her.

Though she is abusive towards Hagar, she reacts from a place of hurt and shame. It isn’t excusable, but it is understandable. She feels diminished and small, but God elevates her and changes her name.

The thing is, the name change for Sarah seems a bit subtle. Some translations (the NASB, for example) say that the words Sarai and Sarah are the same, but just in different dialects. But most translation commentaries state that going from Sarai to Sarah is going from “my princess” to “princess,” so there’s at least a sense of enlargement or increase in scope of her princessly responsibilities, whatever those may be. But what is a “princess,” exactly?

As it turns out, it has nothing to do with being the “daughter of a king,” but it does have everything to do with royalty and authority.

Both versions of her name are the feminine version of a word that means ruler. Chief. The one in charge. The shot caller.

I. prince, ruler, leader, chief, chieftain, official, captain
1. chieftain, leader
2. vassal, noble, official (under king)
3. captain, general, commander (military)
4. chief, head, overseer (of other official classes)
5. heads, princes (of religious office)
6. elders (of representative leaders of people)
7. merchant-princes (of rank and dignity)
8. patron-angel
9. Ruler of rulers (of God)
10. warden
Strongs: H269 (שַׂר): sar

Now, if you have gender-roles and leadership expectations in your head that precondition you to place a man in higher authority than a woman, you might think that Abram was wrong for listening to his wife in Genesis 16:6, but consider Genesis 21:12. Who tells Abraham to listen and heed his wife? It is God.

But God said to Abraham, “Do not be distressed because of the boy and your slave woman; whatever Sarah tells you, listen to her, for through Isaac your descendants shall be named.
Genesis 21:12 (NASB)

And actually, any statement about the consequences of men “listening to women” fall rather flat when you realize that nothing Eve said was wrong back in the Garden of Eden. Look at Eve’s words!

The woman said to the serpent, “From the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat; but from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, ‘You shall not eat from it or touch it, or you will die.’”
Genesis 3:2-3

Perhaps Adam should have listened more closely, actually.

Sarah is elevated from being royal leadership with Abram to being royal leadership with Abraham: the leadership and authority tied to the father of nations. She is, in a way, wisdom, personified.

By me kings reign,
And rulers decree justice.
By me princes rule, and nobles,
All who judge rightly.
Proverbs 8:15-16 (NASB)

(In Hebrew, “by me” can also be read “with me.” It’s a connective preposition.)

And to make it even more clear how much Sarah is elevated, God says it twice in one verse!

I will bless her, and indeed I will give you a son by her. Then I will bless her, and she shall be a mother of nations; kings of peoples will come from her.”
Genesis 17:16 (NASB)

So blessed!

And why not? God made it clear that the Son of the Promise will be through her. Yes, through Abraham, but *also* through Sarah. Because God does not view her lower than him, or higher than him, but with him.

And that’s how it is meant to be.

Listen to Eve

Posted on by jovial_cynic
If you think God said “because you have listened to the voice of your wife” to mean what we should not heed the voice of our wives, you have misunderstood.

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;
With hard labor you shall eat from it
All the days of your life.
Genesis 3:17 (NASB)

Look more closely!

The woman said to the serpent, “From the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat; but from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, ‘You shall not eat from it or touch it, or you will die.’”
Genesis 3:2-3 (NASB)

Go back to the start of the chapter and look at exactly what Eve said. What are her words? What would have happened if Adam had listened to her and heeded her words?

Can you see it? The problem isn’t that Adam listened to his wife’s voice and obeyed her. The problem is that Adam did NOT heed his wife’s voice.

Look at it more closely: The charge against Adam was not that he obeyed his wife, causing him to eat the fruit. The charge is that he HEARD his wife speak the truth and he STILL ATE THE FRUIT ANYWAY.

He heard her. Her words were true.

The problem is that after hearing God tell him not to eat it, and then hearing his wife say that they were told not to eat it, Adam disobeyed God and ate it anyway.

Fear Not

Posted on by jovial_cynic

He answered, “I heard you in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid.”
Genesis 3:10 (NIV)

After this, the word of the Lord came to Abram in a vision: “Do not be afraid, Abram. I am your shield, your very great reward.”
Genesis 15:1 (NIV)

If you study it from the beginning, you’ll see that Genesis 15 is speaking directly to the things of Genesis 3.

These are the first two instances of this word “afraid” in scripture.

The Power to Forgive

Posted on by jovial_cynic
Suppose you have all the power in the world to address those who have wounded you.

1. You can forgive them and teach them how to live rightly.
2. You can harm them, exacting vengeance on them so they experience your pain.

Which do you choose?

This is a story of Noah.

Here is the setup:
There are Four Characters
There is Deception
There is Nakedness
There is Shame
There is a telling (Who told you that you were naked?)
There is Curse and Covering / Covering and Curse

Genesis 3 and Genesis 9 include these same elements in almost the exact same order

In Genesis 3 we have FOUR CHARACTERS: God, Adam, Eve & the serpent. There is DECEPTION, causing disobedience which leads to seeing their NAKEDNESS. They are ASHAMED. There is a (TELLING OF NAKEDNESS: who told you?). God CURSES the serpent & the ground, and then COVERS Adam & Eve.

In Genesis 9, we have FOUR CHARACTERS: Noah, Shem, Japheth & Ham. There is DECEPTION (Proverbs 20:1 links deception to wine) which leads to seeing Noah’s NAKEDNESS. He is SHAMED by his son Ham to his brothers as there is a (TELLING OF NAKEDNESS). The brothers COVER Noah, and then Noah CURSES Ham’s son.

Rabbi Marty Solomon, quoting Rabbi Fohrman sees a clear link here. He suggests Noah was familiar with the story of Genesis 3, and he could have learned the lesson: God cursed a wicked thing and forgave the ones who disobeyed.

Instead, Noah curses the one who shamed him, even after the brothers cover him.

In this view, Noah is even reminded about the covering by his sons before he launches into vengeance. He had every opportunity to stop and remember God’s handling of Adam and Eve. He could have forgiven them and covered their shame.

But he choses violence instead.

I’m tempted to fault Noah here, but given the power to forgive, taking the pain on myself or the chance to exact vengeance where I can inflict my pain back on them (7-times? 77-times?), how often do I fail to forgive?

This is a story about all of us. And here, we are shown the consequence of what happens when we fail to forgive.

By cursing Canaan, an entire people are subjected and enslaved. This curse is so great that Israel’s suffering is largely because of the generations of Canaan that live in the Promised Land.

Perhaps generational curses are the result of unforgiveness.

Perhaps forgiveness changes the world.