A few weeks ago, in a sermon on Genesis 3:8–13, I made the case that the events of Genesis 3 took place on the seventh day of the creation week, not some undefined time after the creation week. Instead of seeing Adam and Eve having days or weeks of communion with God in the Garden of Eden, I argued that Adam and Eve sinned against God on their very first day.

Just as Genesis 2 expounds the events of Day 6 (Gen. 1:24–31) in the creation week, so Genesis 3 develops the events of Day 7 (Gen. 2:1–3). At the end of the seventh day, God came down from heaven onto his mountain in order to rest on his holy hill. Yet, because he found two unclean sinners hiding in the garden, and a serpent standing there triumphant, God’s response was one of covenantal judgment, with an eschatological promise of salvation.

Genesis 3:14–19 is the centerpiece of the chapter, where God issues a curse on the serpent and on creation. And as a result, the first week of creation ends with the need of a new creation. Indeed, just as the eighth day, which is the first day of the week, will become in redemptive history the day of new creation, so Genesis 3 ends looking for this new creation. Or, at least, that is the implication of reading Genesis 3 as the seventh day of the creation week.

Yet, it may take some convincing to prove that Genesis 3 is the seventh day. After all, many commentators imagine a backstory to Genesis 3, which includes a series of “daily chats” occurring in the Garden before the Serpent arrives. Yet, such a backstory cannot be found in the text of Genesis 1–3.

Instead, what is found is the immediate entrance of the Serpent in Genesis 3:1. There is no “intertestamental period” between the union of man and woman (Genesis 2:24–25) and the arrival of the Serpent (3:1). And to create such an apocryphal tale is to go beyond the text. Nevertheless, the absence of backstory doesn’t automatically prove that Genesis 3 is the seventh day, unless there are others evidences in the text. And that is what I aim to argue in the seven points below.

Today, I will argue that Genesis 3 occurs on the seventh day of the creation week. And next week, I will return for at least four more reasons related to understanding the “Spirit of the Day” for proving the same point.

Seven Reasons Genesis 3 Occurred on the Seventh Day

First, there are no time stamps denying this proposition.

Arguments from silence are not sufficient to prove a point of interpretation, but the absence of any time stamp at the beginning of Genesis 3 means that there is no stated alternative to the thesis I am offering. While the story of Cain and Abel begins with a time marker (Gen. 4:3), which can rendered “In the course of time,” or more literally, “at the end of days,” no such time marker introduces Genesis 3:1. Instead, it comes immediately on the heels of the creation of Adam and Eve on Day 6.

Second, there is no textual support for daily chats in the garden.

If there is no time stamp in Genesis 3, there is also no record of daily communion. Nevertheless, many faithful scholars offer a picture of such daily conversation.

For instance, Ken Mathews writes, “The anthropomorphic description of God “walking” (mithallēk) in the garden suggests the enjoyment of fellowship between him and our first parents” (Genesis 1–11:26, 239). In this interpretation, Mathews takes Genesis 3:8 as something that God did with Adam and Eve prior to the fall, instead of seeing the arrival of God walking in their midst as a singular event coming after the fall.

Yes, the language of “walking” is something God would do in the camp of Israel (see Lev. 26:11–12), but that later application of God’s walking repeatedly in the camp does not prove that God did the same before Genesis 3:8. And more, when we come to the nature of God’s arrival in the Spirit of the Day, we will have great reason to question such a peaceful stroll into the garden.

Nevertheless, Mathews is not alone. Gordon Wenham offers a similar reading. In his otherwise excellent commentary, he writes, “It seems likely that it was not unusual for [God] to be heard walking in the garden “in the breeze of the day,” i.e., in the afternoon when cool breezes spring up and the sun is not so scorching. Maybe a daily chat between the Almighty and his creatures was customary” (Genesis 1-15, 76).

This translation of “in the breeze of the day,” matches most English translations of l’ruach hayom. The ESV renders it “in the cool of the day.” Yet, in my estimation, this translation misrepresents how we should see (and hear) the passage before us. The word for “cool” or “wind” is the same word “Spirit.” The word is ruach, and as it is translated in Genesis 1:2 as “Spirit,” so it should be here. I will offer an alternative approach to Genesis 3:8 in the next blogpost. For now, it is enough to say that Mathews and Wenham, and countless others, create a backstory to Genesis 3 based upon something not present in the text.

Consequently, this interpretation misleads the reader and eliminates any consideration of Genesis 3 as the seventh day. But if this interpretation is rejected, then it raises the question: When did Genesis 3 take place?

Third, the first three chapters are carefully structured around the seven days of creation.

If time stamps and daily backstories are not in the text, what is in text?

In a word, Genesis 1, 2, and 3, each have a weekly calendar. As is evident from Genesis 1:1–2:3, the creation is ordered by seven days. However, was is less evident is the way that Genesis 2:4–24 and Genesis 2:25–3:24 are also ordered by these seven days. As I have demonstrated here, Genesis 2, which clearly expounds Day 6, and Genesis 3, which I am arguing expounds Day 7, are both highly structured.

That is to say, there is nothing accidental about the shape of these texts. Instead, patterned after the creation week, these two chapters—or, what we know as chapters—continue to carry and develop themes found in Genesis 1. Again, this does not prove that Genesis 3 is the seventh day, but it does encourage the thought that Moses is carefully developing the history of creation. And specifically, if Genesis 2 is an exposition of Genesis 1:24–31, then it would make sense that Genesis 3 is an expansion of Genesis 2:1–3.

Or at least, the idea is plausible, and worth exploring.

Fourth, there is implicit evidence that Adam awoke “on the Seventh Day” to meet Eve.

Consider how the text unfurls. In Genesis 2:18, God tells Adam that it is not good that he is alone and that he will make a helper suitable for him. In comparison to Genesis 1:27, we know that the formation of mankind as male and female occurs on the sixth day (Gen. 1:24–31). Therefore, as man is made early on the sixth day, woman is made late in the same day. Or, perhaps at night? Here is how the text presents it.

So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh. And the rib that the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man. (Genesis 2:21–22)

After naming the animals, the man grows in wisdom, as he discovers that a suitable helper would not be found from the beasts of the field (Gen. 2:20). Rather, his helpmate must come from God himself, and so the Lord God puts Adam to sleep, so that when we awakes he is greeted by the woman who will be his covenant-partner in ruling the earth and raising children. Genesis 2:23 recounts the joy of the man, as he calls her name woman, for she was taken out of man. And then Genesis 2:24 explains the way that this first pair is the pattern for every marriage thereafter.

In Genesis 2:18–25, therefore, we have a pattern for men and women, marriage, and the foundation of the creation mandate. But what about time? What time is it when Adam wakes up to discover Eve?

Admittedly, the answer to this question, and the point that follows, is more tentative than any of the others, but I would suggest that when Adam woke up, it was the beginning of the seventh day, or better, the end of the sixth day. If we let the plain meaning of “caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man,” to mean that he went to bed on the sixth day and God formed the woman as he slept, then clearly both the man and the woman were created on Day 6, just as Genesis 1 indicates.

Yet, because the typical pattern of sleeping and waking coincides with night and day, it is best in my estimation to see Adam waking in Genesis 3 as happening on the seventh day. Or again, because the pattern of Genesis 1, puts evening before morning (see 1:5, 8, 13, 19, 23, 31), they do awake on the sixth day to receive God’s commands to be fruitful and multiply (Gen. 1:28–31), but this command is given in the morning daylight, where the sixth day is ending and the seventh day beginning.

If this is so, then the command to be fruitful and multiply is given to the man and the woman (Gen 1:28–31), while the covenantal command to not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was only given to the man (Gen. 2:15–17). This would reinforce the covenantal headship of the man, all the while affirming the shared responsibility of ruling creation together, along with their offspring.

This was the very good world that God set before the man and the woman, if only they would keep covenant with him and enjoy the presence of his return at the end of the seventh day.

Fifth, Genesis 3 is the seventh day of judgment.

Before God could bless Adam and Eve, however, the man and the woman would be faced with a test—namely, the approach of the serpent who would enter the garden in Genesis 3:1.

For his part, the Serpent, who is Satan (Revelation 12), sought to steal, kill, and destroy the very good world that God had made. Seeking to dethrone Adam and his offspring, Satan approached the woman and proceeded to use creation to deceive her and to lead Adam to disobedience. As we know all too well, the plan worked. But it could work only because the Spirit of God was not in the garden. And God’s absence from the garden would only last one day. (See below).

In other words, when God finished making Adam and Eve on Day 6, a task that brought him into the world, he returned to enjoy his rest in heaven. As we know, the creation that took place on Days 1–5 were spoken into existence by God, as he ruled by fiat from heaven. Day 6, however, is unique in that God took direct action to form the man and the woman. This is what Genesis 2:4–25 record. And in keeping with Genesis 2:1–3, once the man and woman were complete, God rested. But importantly, that rest took place in his heavenly throne room.

Thus, at the end of the sixth day, which was in the morning, God’s Spirit departed the garden, leaving the man with his holy word to serve and guard and not to eat from the tree (Gen. 2:15–17). Indeed, God had made a covenant with Adam, a covenant that would be quickly tested. For indeed, just as God would send his Son into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil (Luke 4), and just as Israel, who was also God’s Son (Exod. 4:22–23) would be tested by snakes in the wilderness (Numbers 21), so Adam, the first son of God (Luke 3:38), would be tested by a serpent who the devil himself.

As God intended, the serpent would come to test Adam. And if he obeyed the word given to him, the man would have protected his wife and God’s garden-temple. Accordingly, when God would return, he would have rendered a different judgment than he did.

As it has now happened with the Second Adam, the serpent would have been cast down and the man would have been raised up. Indeed, even if the serpent had killed the man and the woman, God would have raised him to life, because of his obedience. We know this, because this is what God did with Jesus. And this gives us reason to believe that Adam’s obedience at the tree of the knowledge of good and evil would have resulted in eating from the tree of life. Indeed, this is the logic of Genesis 3:21–22.

Yet, this is not what happened. Instead, the serpent succeeded in his plot. And yet, he succeeded also because God was not on the mountain. Instead, he was enthroned in heaven. Indeed, Meredith Kline and others have noted, the rest of Genesis 2:1–3 is a “royal resting, an enthronement on the judgement seat” (Images of the Spirit, 111). On the seventh day then, this is what God did. He returned to heaven and sat down as king over his creation. And from his throne, he permitted the events of the garden to occur.

Sovereign and omniscient, God knew what would happen in the garden, but the predestination of all things does not deny the fact that God waits on high and watches for his decree to unfold. And unfold it did, as the serpent led humanity to rebel against their creator. And thus, when God came down the mountain, he did so to judge his creatures. And this act of judgment is critical for understanding when Genesis 3 occurred.

Indeed, judgment is the theme of Genesis 3, and it is a judgment that matches every other day of creation. In other words, when God spoke the world into existence, he rendered a judgment at the end of every day. Six times across six days, Genesis 1 repeats, “And God saw that it was good” (1:5, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25, 31). And then on the sixth day, the seventh judgment is this, “And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good” (1:31). So, the theme of God’s judgment is not introduced in Genesis 3; rather, Genesis 3 follows an established pattern of judgment. Every day in God’s creation week comes with God’s judgment. And for six days, the judgment was good and very good.

And yet, in Genesis 3, we have a different judgment. Because of sin, the world is not good. And thus, we do not have a full week of goodness, we have only six days of goodness. Accordingly, there remains the need for a new creation week. Indeed, the fact that the seventh day does not have a judgment of very good, or blessed, or holy is another indication that Genesis 3 took place on the seventh day.

For in fact, even in the sixth day, there was pronounced by God a “not good.” It was not good that man was alone (Gen. 2:18). Yet, by days’ end, the Lord had resolved this judgment and made the “not good . . . very good.” Just the same, it could be said that it was not good that a serpent entered the garden. Yet, if Adam had done what God had told him, the “not good” would have resulted in a “very good.” It didn’t, however, and thus the judgment of this day is negative, not positive.

For our consideration, therefore, the fact that God rendered a judgment on all the events of Genesis 3 suggests that judgment of God on this day, although enlarged from the other days of creation, should be seen as the close of the creation week and judgment on the seventh day. Put into a syllogism, here is my argument.

1. God rendered a judgment on every day of creation (1:5, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25, 31)[1]
2. God does not, in any other place, render a judgment on the seventh day.[2]
3. God does render a judgment for the events of Genesis 3.
   ∴    Genesis 3 is the judgment of Day 7.

At this point, I offer this syllogism loosely, because I can imagine someone maintaining that Premise #2 is an argument from silence. Nevertheless, this syllogism helps us see the way Genesis 3 works with Genesis 1–2. In those chapters, every day had a judgment. And now, if Genesis 3 provides that for Day 7, then the week is complete, even as it tells us we need a new seven-day creation to remake the world—a need that leads us to Christ and his new creation.

Sixth, the return of the Lord in Genesis 3 comes at the end of the seventh day.

If you have made it thus far, you know that God created mankind on the sixth day and then returned to heaven to rest on his heavenly throne. But such resting is only how the day began. How would it end?

In my reading of Genesis 3, I believe the arrival of the Spirit in Genesis 3:8 is the Lord bringing his royal rest from heaven to earth. In other words, as he sat on high in Genesis 2:1–3, enjoying the blessedness of his creation, he returns at the end of the seventh day to share that blessing with his people. Only, when he comes to judge the day, he does not pronounce a blessing on his obedient children. Instead, he must pronounce a curse.

If we understand that the garden is God’s sanctuary, where God put the man to work as a priest, and that this is the place where he would meet with this people, then it is fitting that God would return to rest on his temple-mountain. Indeed, as the rest of the Bible aims to bring heaven to earth, so it is in the beginning. And more, as the tabernacle and the temple both enjoyed the presence of God’s Spirit dwelling on them when they were finished (see Exodus 40 and 1 Kings 8), so here it is fitting that God would also bring his Spirit to rest on his mountain.

In other words, the arrival of the Spirit in Genesis 3:8 is another evidence that this is Day 7. Yes, Genesis 3:8 would be the end of the seventh day, not the beginning. And perhaps it is even the dawn of the seventh day (which would soon lead to the eighth), but as the seventh day is associated with judgment—a theme I will develop next week—it makes sense that the arrival of God’s Spirit is coming to rest on the mountain and to render blessings and curses.

Comparison with the rest of Scripture is needed to confirm this point, but suffice it to say, that just as Genesis 1:24–31 is expounded in Genesis 2:4–24, so Genesis 2:1–3 is expanded by Genesis 3. And specifically, the coming of the Spirit to God’s mountain is a theophany that is often associated with the Day of the Lord and the completion of the temple. Knowing that the garden-temple of Eden was completed in six days, it makes perfect sense that God who reigns in his heavenly throne room would not wait for undetermined length of time to dwell on his mountain. Instead, he would come on the seventh day, so that what he does in heaven (royal resting) would be mirrored on the earth.

Seventh, the serpent entered the garden at the only time available—the time between God’s rest in heaven and his rest on the earth.

One final implication of this reading is that if God was going to rest on his mountain, as he did in the later tabernacle and temple, then the serpent would have to make his move before this happened. Again if God’s arrival on the mountain was not an intermittent visitation, but something akin to dwelling in his house, then the Serpent would need to move quickly, for later the man and his family would literally dwell under the shadow God’s wings (see Psalm 90:1; 91:4).

As a priest, Adam would have worked in the garden, going out to subdue the earth. And, by his obedience, he would have grown in wisdom, which would have given him standing to eat of the tree of life, to rule as king, and be a high priest who would climb the mountain of God. Indeed, these are all facets of blessed life later detailed in Israel and fulfilled in Christ. And for Adam, this is what would have begun to happen as soon as he, righteous as he was, was communing with God. Equally, if Eve had shared such “daily chats” with God and her husband, then her own wisdom would have grown. But as it was, if Satan came on the first day, then he would have caught them in their greatest vulnerability.

For all of these reasons, I believe Satan came when God was not on the mountain and before he would rest on his holy hill. Equally, he came when Adam and Eve were still naked and unashamed, a description that speaks of their innocence but also their immaturity. Thus, these children of God had not had the chance to grow in wisdom, when they were offered full knowledge of good and evil, by the evil one himself. Instead, Satan taking the only day he could to approach the man and woman without God’s presence on his temple mountain, he came in between God resting in heaven and God resting on the earth.

What Is the Benefit of This Reading?

In the end, we can ask: What is gained by understanding Genesis 3 this way? Let me offer three reasons.

First, if this reading is correct, then it gives a better understanding of God’s Word. This, by itself, is always worth pursuing, as it makes us better readers of the Bible.

Second, it better captures the nature of Genesis 3 as a day of judgment. God did not simply come strolling down the mountain for an undefined period of time before Satan arrived. Rather, he came in Genesis 3, as he did on Mount Sinai. Such a difference in imagery makes us appreciate God’s judgment and salvation all the more.

Third, it helps better understand the nature of God, Satan, Christ, and the cosmic warfare that stands between them. Indeed, we are awaiting a new seven-day creation, and this is patterned after the first. Therefore, if we misread the first seven days of creation, we are liable to do the same with the new creation.

Accordingly, seeing Genesis 3 as the seventh day of the creation week attunes us to the beginning and the end of God’s redemptive plan—a plan which God devised before the foundation of the world. Indeed, this is why we read the Bible—to know God and the Son who has come to redeem the world. I believe that this reading of Genesis 3 helps us to do that, and so I offer it here. And next week, I’ll return to consider how a better understanding of the Spirit in Genesis 3:8 does the same.

Soli Deo Gloria, ds

Photo by Brett Jordan on Pexels.com
______________

[1] Technically, he rendered no judgment on the second day, but as I argued in my sermon, this is because it was not good that heaven and earth were separated. The double

[2] This has led some to conclude that the seventh day continues without end. My reading would deny that explanation, and it would make Genesis 4 the beginning of a new week.