Albert Barnes Commentary Genesis 3:8-21

"And they heard the voice of Jehovah God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of Jehovah God amongst the trees of the garden. And Jehovah God called unto the man, and said unto him, Where art thou? And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself. And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat? And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat. And Jehovah God said unto the woman, What is this thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat. And Jehovah God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, cursed art thou above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life: and I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed: he shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy pain and thy conception; in pain thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in toil shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; in the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return. And the man called his wife`s name Eve; because she was the mother of all living. And Jehovah God made for Adam and for his wife coats of skins, and clothed them." — Genesis 3:8-21 (ASV)

1. שׁוּף shûp “bruise, wound.” τηρεῖν (= τερεῖν ?) tērein ἐκτρίβειν ektribein (Job 9:17), καταπατεῖν katapatein (Psalms 139:11), συντρίβειν suntribein (Romans 16:20).

2. תשׁוּקה t^eshûqâh “desire, inclination.” αποστροφή apostrophē — ἐπιστροφή epistrophē (Song of Solomon 7:11).

3. חוּה chavâh Eve, “the living, life, life-place, or village.”

This passage contains the examination of the transgressors (Genesis 3:8–13); the sentence pronounced upon each (Genesis 3:14–19); and certain particulars following subsequently (Genesis 3:20–21).

(Genesis 3:8–9) The voice, we understand, is the thunder of God’s approach and His call to Adam. The hiding is another sign of the childlike simplicity of the parents of our race under the shame and fear of guilt. The question, “Where art thou?” implies that the Lord was aware of their attempt to hide from Him.

(Genesis 3:10–12) Adam confesses that he was afraid of God because he was naked. There is an instinctive hiding of his thoughts from God in this very speech. The nakedness is mentioned, but not the disobedience from which the sense of it arose. To the direct questioning of the Almighty, he confesses who made him acquainted with his nakedness and the fact of his having eaten of the forbidden fruit: “The woman” gave me from the tree, and “I did eat.”

(Genesis 3:13) The woman makes a similar confession and a similar indication of the source of her temptation. She has now found out that the serpent “beguiled her.” The result has not corresponded to the benefit she was led to anticipate.

There seems not to be any dishonesty in either case. Sin does not take full possession of the will all at once. It is a slow poison; it has a growth. It requires time and frequent repetition to sink from a state of purity into a habit of inveterate sin.

While it is imperceptibly gathering strength and subjugating the will, the original integrity of the moral nature shows a long but fading vitality. The same line of thought does not always occupy the attention. When the chain of events linked with the act of sin does not force the mind’s attention and compel the will to act selfishly, another sequence of thoughts comes before the mind, finds the will unaffected by personal considerations, and therefore ready to be guided by reason.

Therefore, the consciousness of a fallen soul has its lucid intervals, in which the conscience gives a verdict and guides the will. But these intervals become less frequent and less decisive as the entanglements of ever-multiplying sinful acts wind around the soul and aggravate its bondage and its blindness.

(Genesis 3:14–15) Here begins the judgment. Sentence is pronounced upon the serpent, undoubtedly in the presence of the man and woman. The serpent is not examined for two reasons:

1. Because it is a mute, unreasoning animal in itself, and therefore incapable of judicial examination; and it was only the serpent that was perceptible to the senses of our first parents in the temptation.

2. Because the true tempter was not a new, but an old offender.

This sentence has a literal application to the serpent. The curse (Genesis 9:25, see the note) of the serpent lies in a more groveling nature than that of the other land animals. This appears in its going on its belly and eating the dust. Other animals have at least feet to elevate them above the dust; the serpent tribe does not even have feet.

Other animals elevate their heads in their natural position above the soil; the serpent lays its head naturally on the ground and therefore may be said to eat the dust, just as the wounded warrior bites the dust in death. The earthworm is probably included in the description given here of the serpent group. It goes upon its belly and actually does eat the dust. Eating the dust, like feeding upon ashes, is an expression for signal defeat in every aim. The enmity, the mode of its display, and the outcome are also uniquely characteristic of the literal serpent.

It is the custom of Scripture jurisprudence to impose certain judicial consequences on brute animals for injuries they have been instrumental in doing to man, especially if this has arisen through the design or neglect of the owner or other responsible agent (Genesis 9:5; Exodus 21:28–36). In the present case, the injury done was of a moral, not a physical nature. Hence, the penalty consists in a curse; that is, a state of greater degradation below man than that of the other land animals. The serpent, in the extraordinary event recorded here, exercised the powers of human speech and reasoning. And it is natural to suppose that these displays of intelligence were accompanied by an attitude and a gesture above its natural rank in the scale of creation.

The effect of the judicial sentence would be to return it to its original groveling condition and give rise to that enmity which was to end in its destruction by man.

However, since an evil spirit must have employed the serpent—the animal whose organs and instincts were most adapted to its purpose, and which has accordingly derived its name from the serpent as presenting the animal type most similar to its own spiritual nature—the whole of this sentence also has its higher application to the real tempter.

“Upon thy belly shalt thou go.” This is expressive of the lowest stage of degradation to which a spiritual creature can be sunk. “Dust shalt thou eat.” This is indicative of disappointment in all the aims of being. “I will put enmity.” This is still more strictly applicable to the spiritual enemy of mankind.

It suggests a hereditary feud between their respective races, which is to end, after some temporary suffering on the part of the woman’s seed, in the destruction of the serpent’s power against man. The spiritual agent in the temptation of man cannot literally have any seed. But the seed of the serpent is that portion of the human family that continues to be his moral offspring and follows the first transgression without repentance or refuge in the mercy of God. The seed of the woman, on the other hand, must signify the remnant who are born from above and therefore turn from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God.

Let us now mark the lessons conveyed in the sentence of the serpent to our first parents, who were listening and looking on.

1. The serpent is described as a mere brute animal. All, then, that seemed to indicate reason as inherent in its nature or acquired by some strange event in its history is thus at once contradicted.

2. It is declared to be lower than any of the other land animals, being destitute of any limbs corresponding to feet or hands.

3. It is not questioned as a rational and accountable being but treated as a mere dumb brute.

4. It is degraded from the airs and attitudes it may have assumed when possessed by a serpent-like evil spirit, and falls back without a struggle to that place of debasement in the animal kingdom for which it was designed.

5. It is fated to be disappointed in its aims at usurpation. It shall bite the dust.

6. It is doomed to ultimate and utter defeat in its hostile assaults upon the seed of the woman.

All this must have made a deep impression on our first parents. But two things must have struck them with special force. First, it was now evident how vain and hollow were its claims to superior wisdom, and how miserably deluded they had been when they listened to its false insinuations. If, indeed, they had possessed mature reflection and taken time to apply it, they would have been strangely bewildered by the whole scene, now that it was past.

How the serpent, from the brute instinct it displayed to Adam when he named the animals, suddenly rose to the temporary exercise of reason and speech, and just as suddenly relapsed into its former bestial state, is, to the mere observer of nature, an inexplicable phenomenon.

But to Adam, who at that time had too limited an experience to distinguish between natural and preternatural events, and too little development of the power of reflection to detect the inconsistency in the appearance of things, the sole object of attention was the shameless presumption of the serpent and the overwhelming retribution that had fallen upon it. Consequently, his attention was also on the deplorable folly and wickedness of having been misguided by its suggestions.

A second thing, however, was still more striking to the mind of man in the sentence of the serpent; namely, the enmity that was to be put between the serpent and the woman. Up to a certain point, there had been agreement and alliance between these two parties. But, at the very opening of the heavenly court, we learn that the friendly connection had been broken. For the woman said, “The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.” This expression indicates that the woman was no longer at one with the serpent. She was now aware that its role had been one not of friendship, but of guile, and therefore of the deepest and darkest hostility.

When God, therefore, said, “I will put enmity between thee and the woman,” this revulsion of feeling on her part, in which Adam no doubt joined, was acknowledged and approved. Enmity with the enemy of God indicated a return to friendship with God and presupposed incipient feelings of repentance toward Him, and reviving confidence in His word. The continuation of this enmity is here affirmed, concerning not only the woman but also her seed. This prospect of seed, and of a godly seed, at enmity with evil, became a fountain of hope to our first parents and confirmed every feeling of returning reverence for God which was beginning to spring up in their hearts. The word heard from the mouth of God produced faith in their hearts, and we shall find that this faith was quick to show itself in actions.

We cannot pass over this part of the sentence without noticing the expression, “the seed of the woman.” Does it not mean, in the first instance, the whole human race? Was not this race at enmity with the serpent? And though only that part of the seed of the woman which eventually shared in her present feelings could be said to be at enmity with the serpent spirit, yet, if all had gone well in Adam’s family, might not the whole race have been at enmity with the spirit of disobedience? Was not the avenue to mercy hinted at here as wide as the offer of any other time? And was not this universality of invitation at some time to have a response in the human family?

Does not the language of the passage compel us to look forward to the time when the great mass, or the whole of the human race then alive on the earth, will have actually turned from the power of Satan to God? This could not be seen by Adam. But was it not the clear meaning of the language that, unless there was some new revolt after the present reconciliation, the whole race would, even from this new beginning, be at enmity with the spirit of evil? Such was the dread lesson of experience with which Adam now entered upon the course of life, that it was to be expected he would warn his children against departing from the living God, with a clearness and earnestness which would be both understood and felt.

Still further, do we not pass from the general to the particular in the sentence, “He shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel”? Is not the seed of the woman here individualized and matched in deadly conflict with the individual tempter? Does not this wording point to some pre-eminent descendant of the woman, who is, with the bruising of his lower nature in the encounter, to gain a signal and final victory over the adversary of man? There is some reason to believe from the expression, “I have gotten a man from the Lord” (Genesis 4:1), that Eve herself had caught a glimpse of this meaning, though she applied it to the wrong party. The Vulgate also, in what was probably the genuine reading, “ipse” (he himself) points to the same meaning.

The reading “ipsa” (she herself) is inconsistent with the gender of the Hebrew verb, and with that of the corresponding pronoun in the second clause (his), and is therefore clearly an error of the copyist.

Lastly, the retributive character of the divine administration is remarkably illustrated in the phrase. The serpent, in a cunning but cowardly spirit, makes the weaker sex the object of his attack. It is the seed of the woman especially that is to bruise his head. It is remarkable to find that this simple phrase, coming in naturally and incidentally in a sentence uttered four thousand years, and written at least fifteen hundred years, before the Christian era, describes exactly and literally Him who was made of woman without the intervention of man, that He might destroy the works of the devil.

This clause in the sentence of the tempter is the first dawn of hope for the human family after the fall. We cannot tell whether to admire more the simplicity of its terms, the scope and comprehensiveness of its meaning, or the precision of its application to the far-distant event which it mainly contemplates.

The doom pronounced here upon the tempter must be regarded as special and secondary. It refers to the malignant attack upon man and foretells what will be the outcome of this attempt to spread disaffection among the intelligent creation. Furthermore, it is pronounced without any examination of the offender or investigation of his motives.

If this had been the first offense against the majesty of heaven, we humbly believe a solemn preliminary examination of the case would have occurred, and a penalty would have been judged adequate to the magnitude of the crime and similar to the punishment of death in man's case. The primary act of defiance and apostasy from the Creator must have been committed without a tempter and was, therefore, incomparably more heinous than the secondary act of yielding to temptation.

Whether the presence of the tempter on earth suggests that it was his dwelling place in a state of innocence, or that he visited it because he had heard of the creation of man, or that he was there for some altogether different reason, is a vain and unprofitable inquiry.

(Genesis 3:16) The sentence of the woman (Genesis 3:16) consists of three parts: the first two concern her as a mother, the last as a wife. Sorrow is to be multiplied in her pregnancy and is also to accompany childbearing. This sorrow seems to extend to all the mother’s pains and anxieties concerning her offspring. With what solicitude she would long for a display of right feeling toward the merciful God in her children, similar to what she had experienced in her own heart! What unutterable bitterness of spirit she would feel when the fruits of disobedience would appear in her little ones, and in some of them, perhaps, gather strength from year to year!

The promise of children is implied in these two clauses. It also came out incidentally in the sentence of the serpent. What a wonderful conception is presented here to the minds of the first couple! Even to us today, the subject of race is involved in a great deal of mystery. We have already noticed the unity of the race in its head. But the personality and responsibility of individuals involve great and perplexing difficulties. The descent of a soul from a soul is a secret too deep for our comprehension. The first man was potentially the race and, as long as he stood alone, was actually the whole race for that time.

His acts, then, are those not merely of the individual, but of the race. If a single angel were to fall, he falls alone. If the last of a race were to fall, he would similarly involve no other in his descent. But if the first of a race falls before he has any offspring, the race has fallen. The guilt, the depravity, the penalty—all belong to the race. This is a great mystery. But it seems to follow inevitably from the constitution of a race, and it has clear evidences of its truth both in the facts and the doctrines of the Bible.

When we come to view the sin of our first parents in this light, it is seen to entail tremendous consequences for every individual of the race. The single transgression has involved the guilt, the depravity, and the death, not only of Adam but of that whole race which was in him, and thus has changed the whole character and condition of mankind throughout all time.

In the instructions preceding and following are found the means of raising these children for God. The woman has learned that God is not only a righteous judge but a forbearing and merciful Father. This was enough for her for now. It enabled her to enter upon the journey of life with some gleams of hope amidst the sorrows of the family. And in the experience of life, it is amazing what a large amount of what is pleasant is mingled with the troubles of our fallen race. The forbearance and goodness of God ought in all reason and conscience to lead us back to a better feeling toward Him.

The third part of her sentence refers to her husband: “Thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.” This is evidently a piece of that retributive justice that we constantly encounter in the administration of God. The woman had taken the lead in the transgression. In the fallen state, she is to be subject to the will of her husband. “Desire” does not refer to sexual desire in particular (Genesis 4:7). It means, in general, “turn,” determination of the will.

“The determination of your will shall be yielded to your husband, and, accordingly, he shall rule over you.” The second clause, according to the parallel structure of the sentence, is a climax or emphatic restatement of the first, and therefore serves to determine its meaning. Under fallen man, woman has been more or less a slave. In fact, under the rule of selfishness, the weaker must serve the stronger. Only a spiritual resurrection will restore her to her true place, as the help-meet for man.

(Genesis 3:17–19) The keyword in the sentence of the man is the “soil.” The curse (Genesis 9:25, see the note) of the soil means a longing for the fruit trees with which the garden was planted, and for that spontaneous growth that would have made human labor unnecessary. The rank growth of thorns and thistles was also a part of the curse that it caused for man when fallen. His sorrow was to arise from the labor and sweat with which he was to draw from the ground the means of subsistence.

Instead of the spontaneous fruits of the garden, the herb of the field, which required diligent cultivation, was from then on to form a main part of his support. And he had the dreary prospect before him of returning at length to the ground from where he was taken. He had an element of dust in him, and this physical body was eventually to decay when apart from the tree of life.

It should be noted that here is the first allusion to that death which was the essential part of the sentence pronounced on the fallen race. The reasons for this are obvious. The sentence of death on those who should eat of the forbidden fruit had already been pronounced and was well known to our first parents.

Death consisted in the privation of that life which lay in the light of the divine countenance, shining with approving love on an innocent child, and therefore began with the first act of disobedience, in the shame and fear of a guilty conscience. The few signs of earthly discomfort which the sentences reveal are merely the workings of the death spoken of here in the present stage of our existence. And the execution of the sentence, which becomes apparent in the following passage, is the formal fulfillment of the warning given to the transgressor of the divine will.

In this narrative, the language is so simple as to present no critical difficulty. And, on reviewing the passage, the first thing we have to observe is that the event recorded here is a turning point of transcendent importance in the history of man. It is no less than turning from confidence in God to confidence in His creature when contradicting Him, and, moreover, from obedience to His express and well-remembered command to obedience to the dictates of misguided self-interest.

It is obvious that, for the moral character of the transaction, it is of no consequence who the third party was that dared to contradict and slander his Maker. The guilt of man consists simply in disobeying the sole command of his beneficent Creator. The only mitigating circumstance is the suggestion of evil by an external party. But the more insignificant the only apparent source of temptation, the more inexcusable is man's guilt in giving way to it.

This act fundamentally altered man's position and character. He thereby descended from innocence to guilt in point of law, and at the same time from holiness to sin in point of character. Tremendous was the change, and equally tremendous the consequence. Death is, like most scriptural terms, a pregnant word, and here to be understood in the full scope of its meaning. It is the privation, not of existence, as is often confusedly supposed, but of life, in all its fullness of meaning. As life includes all the gratifications of which our human susceptibilities are capable, so death is the privation of all the sources of human enjoyment, including physical life itself, while the craving for ease and the sense of pain retain all their force in the spiritual part of our nature.

These poignant emotions reach their highest pitch of intensity when they touch the conscience, the tenderest part of our being, and forebode the meeting of the soul, in its guilty state, with a just and holy God.

This event is real. The narrative expresses its reality in the strongest terms. The event is one of the two alternatives that must follow from the preceding statements concerning the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and it provides an explanation of their nature. It is no less essential to account for what follows. The problem of the history and condition of man can only be solved by this primeval fact. Conscience still remains an imperishable monument, on the one hand, of his having been formed after a perfect model, and, on the other, of his having fallen from his high estate. And all the facts of his history trace his fall as far back as the traditions of human memory reach.

And the narrative here is a literal record of the details of this great event. As far as God and man are concerned, the literal nature has never been questioned by those who acknowledge the event to be real. Some, however, have taken the serpent to be not a literal but a figurative serpent; not an animal, but a spiritual being. The great dragon, indeed, is identified with “the ancient serpent called the devil and Satan.” And hence we know that a being of a higher nature than the mere animal was present and active on this occasion. And this spiritual being was very appropriately called the serpent, both from its serpentine qualities and from choosing the serpent as the most suitable mask under which to tempt our first parents. But we cannot infer from that that a literal serpent was not employed in the temptation.

The serpent is said to be “more subtle than any beast of the field.”

1. The obvious meaning of this is that it was itself a beast of the field. Thus, Joseph, whom Israel loved “more than all his children,” was one of his children (Genesis 37:8). He that was “higher than any of the people,” was himself one of the people (2 Samuel 9:2).

2. If the serpent here is figurative and signifies a spirit, the statement that it was subtle above all the beasts of the field is feeble and inadequate to the occasion. This is not how man is distinguished from the other animals. In much more forcible language ought the old serpent to be distinguished from the unreasoning brute.

3. We have seen a suitability in a being of flesh—and that not superior, or even equal to man—being permitted to be employed as the medium of temptation. Man was thereby put at no disadvantage. His senses were not confounded by a supersensible manifestation. His presence of mind was not disturbed by an unusual appearance.

4. The actions ascribed to the tempter agree with the literal serpent. Wounding the heel, creeping on the belly, and biting the dust are suitable to a mere animal, and especially to the serpent. The only exception is the speaking and, what is implied in this, the reasoning. These, however, do not refute the presence of the literal serpent when accompanied by a plain statement of its presence. They only indicate, and that to more experienced observers than our first parents, the presence of a lurking spirit, expressing its thoughts by the organs of the serpent.

It may be thought strange that the presence of this higher being is not explicitly noticed by the biblical writer. But it is the way of Scripture not to distinguish and explain all the realities which it recounts, but to describe the obvious phenomena as they present themselves to the senses; especially when the scope of the narrative does not require more, and a future revelation or the exercise of a sanctified experience will at the proper time bring out their interpretation. Thus, the doings of the magicians in Egypt are not distinguished from those of Moses by any disparaging term (Exodus 7:10–12). Only those of Moses are greater and thus indicate a higher power.

The witch of Endor is consulted, and Samuel appears; but the narrative is not careful to distinguish then and there whether by the means of witchcraft or by the very power of God. It was not necessary for the moral training of our first parents at that early stage of their existence to know who the real tempter was. It would not have altered the essential nature of the temptation, of the sentence pronounced on any of the parties, or of the hopes held out to those who were deceived.

This brings into view a system of analogy and mutual relation pervading the whole of Scripture as well as nature, according to which the lower order of things is a natural symbol of the higher, and what is near is a symbol of what is more distant.

This law displays itself in the history of creation, which, in the creative work of the six days, represents to our minds and, as it were, lays out in the distance those other preceding processes of creative power that have occurred since the first and absolute creation. It is also displayed in the nature of man, which shows on the surface the animal operations in wonderful harmony with the spiritual functions of his complex being. Furthermore, it is seen in the history of man, where what is nearer in history, in prophecy, in space, in time, in quality—matter, life, vegetative and animate—foreshadows what is more remote.

All these examples of the scriptural method of standing on and starting from the near to reach the far are founded upon the simple fact that nature is a rational system of things, every part of which has its counterpart in every other.

Therefore, the history of one thing is, in a certain form, the history of all things of the same kind.

The serpent has a crafty instinct and, accordingly, finds its legitimate place at the lowest step of the animal system. Satan seeks the opportunity of tempting Adam and, appropriately, turns to the serpent as the available means of his assault upon human integrity. He was limited to such a means. He was not permitted to have any contact with man, except through the senses and in the way of speech. He was also forced to resort to the serpent, as the only creature suited to his purpose.

The place of the serpent in the scale of animals was consistent with the crookedness of its instinct. It was cursed above all cattle, since it was inferior to them in the lack of those limbs which serve for rising, moving, and holding, such as legs and arms. This meaning of cursed is familiar to Scripture. “Cursed is the ground for thy seed” (Genesis 3:17). It needed the toil of man to repress thorns and thistles, and cultivate plants more useful and necessary for man. “This people who knoweth not the law are cursed” (John 7:49). This is a relative use of the word, by which a thing is said to be cursed because it fails to serve a particular end. Therefore, the serpent’s condition was a suitable emblem of the spiritual serpent’s punishment for its evil actions concerning man.

Through the inscrutable wisdom of Divine Providence, however, it was not necessary, or may not have been necessary, to change for the most part the state of the natural serpent or the natural earth in order to achieve the purposes of justice. The former symbolized very strikingly the helplessness and disappointment of the enemy of man. The latter demanded that labor of man which was the just consequence of his disobedience. This consequence would have been avoided if he had continued to be entitled to the tree of life, which could no doubt have been spread beyond its original limits. But a change in the moral relation of the heart toward God brings along with it, in the unsearchable ways of divine wisdom, a change as great in the impact of the events of time on the destiny of man.

While the heart is with God, all things work together for good to us. When the heart is estranged from Him, all things as inevitably work together for evil, without any physical change in the system of nature.

We may even ascend a step higher into the mysteries of providence; for a disobedient heart, that forms the undeserving object of divine compassion, may be for a time the unconscious slave of a sequence of circumstances, which is bringing about its recovery from the curse as well as the power of sin through the teaching of the Divine Spirit. The series of events may be the same in which another is floating down the stream of perdition. But to the former, these events are the turning points of a wonderful moral training, which is to end in reconciliation to God and restoration to His likeness.

A race, similarly, that has fallen from communion with God, may be the subject of a purpose of mercy, which brings about, in the providence of God, the return of some to His home and love, and the wandering of others away further and further into the darkness and misery of enmity with God.

And though this system of things is simple and consistent in the eyes of the only wise God, yet to human view parts of it appear only as special arrangements and retributions, exactly fitting man’s situation and serving for his moral education. No doubt they are so. But they are also parts of a constant course of nature, pursued with unwavering regularity, yet ordered with such infallible wisdom as to accomplish at the same time both general and special ends. Therefore, without any essential change in the serpent’s natural instincts, it serves as a striking monument of the defeat and destruction of the devil and his works. The ground, without any change in its inherent nature, but merely by the removal, perhaps, of the tree of life, is cursed to man, as it demands that toil which is the mark of a fallen race.

The question of miracles, or special interventions of the divine will and power which go against the laws of nature, is not now before us. By the very definition of miracles, they transcend the laws of nature; that is, of that system of events which is known to us by observation. But it does not follow that they transcend a higher law of the divine plan, which may, partly by revelation and partly even by a deeper study of ourselves and things around us, be revealed. By the investigations of geology, we seem compelled to acknowledge a succession of creations at great intervals of time, as a law of God's way of working on our globe.

But, thousands of years before geology was conceived, one such creation, subsequent to the original great act by which the universe was called into existence, was made known to us by divine revelation. And besides periodic miracles, we find recorded in the Book of Revelation a series of miracles, which were performed in fulfillment of the divine purpose of grace toward the fallen race of man. These are certainly above nature, according to the largest view of it which has ever been held by our philosophers. But let us not therefore imagine that they are above reason or grace—above the resources and decisions of the divine mind and will concerning the development of the universe.

(Genesis 3:20) This verse and the next one record two very significant acts following the judgment: one on the part of Adam, and another on the part of God.

The man here no doubt refers to two expressions in the sentences he had heard pronounced on the serpent and the woman. “He,” the seed of the woman, “shall bruise thy head.” Here it is the woman who is to bear the seed. And this seed is to bruise the serpent’s head; that is, in some way to undo what had been done to cause man's death, and so restore life to him. This life was therefore to come by the woman. Again, in the address of the judge to the woman, he had heard the words, “Thou shalt bear children.” These children are the seed, among whom is to be the bruiser of the serpent’s head, and the author of “life.” And in a simpler, more immediate sense, the woman is to be the mother of children, who are the living, and continue the life of the race amidst the destruction that death daily causes to its individual members.

These glimmerings of hope for the future make a deep impression upon the father of mankind. He perceives and believes that through the woman, in some way, salvation for the race is to come. He gives permanent expression to his hope in the significant name which he gives to his wife. Here we see to our unspeakable satisfaction the dawn of faith—a faith indicating a new beginning of spiritual life, and exercising a beneficial influence on the will, faintly illuminating the dark heart of our first parent. The mother of mankind has also reached a better state of mind. The high and holy Spirit has in mercy withdrawn the cloud of misconception from the minds of both, and faith in the Lord and repentance have sprung up in their new-born souls.

(Genesis 3:21) As Genesis 3:20 records an instance of humble, understanding faith in the divine word, so here we have a clear act of mercy on the part of God, indicating the pardon and acceptance of confessing, believing man, rejoicing in anticipation of that future victory over the serpent which was to be accomplished by the seed of the woman. This act is also suitable to the present circumstances of man, and at the same time strikingly significant of the higher blessings connected with restoration to God's favor. He had discovered his nakedness, and God provides him with a suitable covering.

He was to be exposed to the variations of climate, and here was a durable protection against the weather. But far more than this. He had become morally naked, lacking that peace of conscience which is an impenetrable shield against the shame of being blamed and the fear of being punished; and the coats of skin were a faithful symbol and a clear guarantee of those robes of righteousness which were later to be provided for the penitent in the absence of that original righteousness which he had lost by transgression. And, finally, there is something remarkable in the material out of which the coats were made.

They were most likely obtained by the death of animals; and as they do not appear to have been slain for food yet, some have been led to speculate that they were offered in sacrifice—slain in foreshadowing of that later effective sacrifice which was to take away sin. It is the safer course, however, to leave the origin of sacrifice an open question. Scripture does not suggest that the skins were obtained in consequence of sacrifice; and apart from the presumption derived from these skins, it seems to trace the origin of sacrifice to the act of Abel recorded in the next chapter.

This leads us to a law, which we find frequently shown in Holy Scripture, that some events are recorded without any connection or significance apparent on the surface of the narrative, while at the same time they indicate a greater amount of spiritual knowledge than we are accustomed to attribute to the era in which they occurred. The bare fact which the writer states, being looked at with our eyes, may have no significance. But regarded, as it ought to be, with the eyes of the narrator, aware of all that he has to record up to his own time, it becomes pregnant with a new meaning, which would not otherwise have been discovered.

Even this, however, may not exhaust the meaning of a passage contained in an inspired writing. To arrive at the full sense, it may need to be contemplated with the eyes of the Holy Spirit, conscious of all that is to become part of revelation to the end of time. It will then be revealed in all the fullness of meaning which its relation to the whole body of revealed truth gives, and under the guise of an everyday occurrence will convey some of the most exalted aspects of divine truth. Therefore, the subsequent scripture, which is the language of the Holy Spirit, may aid us in penetrating the hidden meaning of an earlier part of revelation.

God is the Prime Mover in this matter. The mercy of God alone is the source of pardon, of the way in which He may pardon and yet be just, and of the power by which the sinner may be led to accept it with penitence and gratitude. In the brevity of the narrative, only the results are noted; namely, the intimation and the earnest of pardon on God’s side, and the feelings and actions of faith and repentance on the side of the parents of mankind. What indications God may have given by the significant symbol of sacrifice or otherwise of the penalty being paid by another for the sinner, as a necessary condition of forgiveness, we are not informed here, simply because those for whom a written record was necessary would learn it more fully at a subsequent stage of the narrative.

This suggests two remarks important for interpretation:

1. This document is written by one who omits many things done and said to primeval man, because they are unnecessary for those for whom he writes, or because the principles they involve will appear more clearly in a future part of his work. This practice suggests that Moses was not the mere collector, but the composer of the documents contained in Genesis, out of such pre-existing materials as may have become available to him or occurred to him.

2. We are not to read into the narrative a doctrine or institution in all the development it may have received at the latest period of revelation. This would be contrary to the manner in which God was accustomed to teach man. That concrete form of a great principle, which suited the undeveloped state of the early mind, is first presented. The germ planted in the opening, fertile mind, springs up and grows. The revelations and institutions of God grow with it in scope and magnificence. The germ was truth suited for babes; the full-grown tree is only the same truth expanded in the progressing development of people and things.

They are equally mistaken who stretch the past to the measure of the present, and who judge either the past or the future by the standard of the present. Well-meaning but thoughtless critics have gone to both extremes.