Bible

The First Day of the Lord (Genesis 3): Seven Reasons the Fall Occurred on the Seventh Day

/ davidsschrock

close up photo of bible

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. Continue reading →

A Consolation in the Curse: Reading Genesis 3:16b as Good News

/ davidsschrock

silhouette of newly wedded couple

Somewhere below the rim of the Grand Canyon, at some time during the week I spent rafting there last summer, I heard an interpretation of Genesis 3:16 that didn’t sound right. Sitting down each evening to discuss the age of the earth, the creation of all things, and the text Genesis, Bill Barrick (professor emeritus at Master’s Seminary) made the off-hand comment at some point that “The curse upon the woman in Genesis 3:16 was good, actually.”

What?!?

If you are like me, the idea of calling a curse ‘good’ is on par with calling the blessing of marriage ‘evil.’ In our modern world, defining marriage as being between one man and woman has been called evil, because it is hateful to the LGBT+ community and anyone else who doesn’t feel committed to a Christian view of sexuality. For years now, we who live in America have been in a struggle to define good and evil. Proclaiming themselves to be wise, the world has become enslaved to one folly after another. And so, as Christians, we are on guard for any interpretation that might confuse the categories of good and evil. And rightly so!

Hearing this new interpretation of a familiar passage (Genesis 3:16), therefore, was confusing and not a little shocking! And yet, the more that I have looked at this verse, the more I am convinced that Dr. Barrick is correct: Genesis 3:16b is a gracious consolation granted to the woman. Instead of reading this verse as one that enjoins opposition, competition, or even enmity at the heart of marriage, it seems better to see God’s word to the woman as a genuine kindness. Marriage is not a common curse, but a common grace.

This is what I argued in my sermon on Sunday, and in what follows, I want to show from Scripture why Genesis 3:16b is best rendered positively, not negatively. That is to say, while most interpreters offer a negative reading of the verse—either stating that God subordinated the woman to the man at this point (egalitarianism) or that he exacerbated the fallen condition of men and women (complementarianism)—I will be arguing from a generally complementarian position that this verse should be read positively as God granting protection to the woman, even after she rejected and ignored the protection of the man when she encountered the serpent (Gen. 3:1–6).[1]

My position does not deny the way that men can abuse their authority and use their strength to harm those under their charge; nor will it deny that women can refuse to submit to their husbands or embrace the all-wise autonomy offered by the serpent. Both of those realities threaten marriage today. Nevertheless, as I will attempt to show, the nature of marriage after the fall is a place of consolation, protection, and natural goodness. Instead of being a place of natural conflict, should be seen as a place of natural comfort. Yes, sin still destroys the world and every marriage it ensnares, but importantly the nature of marriage is one of common grace. And that is what is at stake in this question of interpretation.

To maintain the goodness of marriage as an institution requires seeing the woman’s desire for her husband as an intrinsic good, as well as the man’s responsibility to rule over her. Today, such a reading is difficult to accept—not only because it flies in the face of a century of feminist ideology, but also because translations like the ESV suggest a negative reading of Genesis 3:16. Put differently, if we are going to rightly understand the consolation of God’s word to the woman in this verse, we must go back to the passage and to see what is there. And in particular, we need to see how a proper reading of Genesis 3:16 depends upon a proper interpretation of Genesis 4:7.

In what follows, then, my aim is to demonstrate why a positive reading of Genesis 3:16 is the best option, based on a comparison of Genesis 3:16 and Genesis 4:7. As multiple authors have attested, how one reads Genesis 4:7 will be determinative for our reading of Genesis 3:16. Knowing that, I will spend a great deal of time addressing the latter text, showing why “desire” (tesuqah) and “rule” (mashal), the two overlapping words, are best seen positively in Genesis 4:7, not negatively. From there, we can see how the dominoes fall. If Genesis 4:7 is positive not negative, then it follows that Genesis 3:16b is also positive, which best corresponds to the literary structure of Genesis 3:14–19 and the emerging theology of marriage as an institution of common grace.

So, that’s my argument, and it will proceed in five parts.

  1. I will show three common positions related to Genesis 3:16b.[2]
  2. I will consider how Genesis 4:7 should be read as a “sin offering” provided by God not some personification of “sin” crouching at the door waiting. From this, I will show how the words “desire” and “rule” are good in Genesis 4:7.
  3. I will introduce two authors who provide a positive reading.
  4. I will outline the text itself and attempt to provide a better reading.
  5. I will explain the cash value of this reading.

Continue reading →

A Dangerous Calling (pt. 4): Embracing Obscurity and Seeking a Received Ministry

/ davidsschrock / 2 Comments
young shepherd leading herd

So far, in this practical exposition of 1 Kings 1–2, I have made four points concerning seeking the kingdom of God righteously and serving the Lord wisely. Those four points include

  1. We should not seek positions in ministry; we should seek the righteousness to receive such a place of service. Instead, . . .
  2. We should abide by the word, and wait for an invitation to serve.
  3. When kingdom-seekers exalt themselves, their ambition follows a discernible pattern.
  4. When you see false ‘kings’ exalting themselves, humble yourself and seek the true King.

And now, I want to consider a fifth point, namely, that

5. Until the Lord calls us to serve him, we should embrace obscurity and wait upon the Lord.

More completely, we should serve the Lord where he plants us and beware of pining for something larger, greater, or more visible. Instead, we should master the imperatives of the Bible, be mastered by the truths of the Bible, and grow in a knowledge of our Master, the Lord Jesus Christ. Indeed, there is no better way to prepare for ministry than humbly submitting to the Lord and learning to wait on him. This is something we all must learn, as the Lord matures us in Christ and prepares us for ministry. Continue reading →

The Test of Wisdom: Which Path Will You Take?

/ davidsschrock

alex-shute-QnRDKNbKl9k-unsplash6 Go to the ant, O sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise.
7 Without having any chief, officer, or ruler,
8 she prepares her bread in summer and gathers her food in harvest. 

In Proverbs 6, the Word of God tells us to go to the ant and find wisdom. In the ant, we learn principles of initiative, preparation, and hard work. Indeed, by looking at this little creature, an insect found everywhere and anywhere, we are told to look and learn her ways.

In fact, Proverbs 6 is one of many places where we find wisdom from the animals. In Proverbs 30, we find four animals in direct order: there is the ant, the rock badger, the locust, and the lizard. And from each we can gain insight into the way we ought to live.[1]

If we go further, the whole Bible teaches us to gain wisdom from nature. From the sparrows who fall from the sky, to the sheep who follow their shepherd, and from the lions who prowl the hills, to the Leviathan who roams the sea, all of these animals were created by God to give us wisdom.

And in Genesis, we have already seen the way that animals are used to teach Adam. For in Genesis 2:19 we find this report, “Now out of the ground the Lord God had formed every beast of the field and every bird of the heavens and brought them to the man to see what he would call them. And whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name.”

God tasked the man with naming the animals, but he also tasked these animals to teach the man that no suitable helper would be found for him among their ranks, as verse 20 indicates. Indeed, the man would need God to make a helper suitable for him, and that is what the rest of Genesis 2 reveals—the glorious formation of the woman and the establishment of the first marriage.

As Genesis 2:24–25 concludes the chapter, “Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed.” Continue reading →

From Creation to New Creation: A Seven Day Pattern in Genesis 1–3

/ davidsschrock / 2 Comments

time lapse photo of stars on night

Both James Jordan and Alistair Roberts have made a case that the literary structures of Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 mirror one another.[1] As evidenced in Genesis 1:1–2:3, creation took place over the course of seven days—six days of work, one day of rest. Equally, Genesis 2:4–25 follows a similar pattern, as observed below, as does Genesis 3, which Jordan develops in his book Trees and Thorns: Studies in the First Four Chapters of Genesis.

If this reading is correct, then the first three chapters of Genesis give us three parallel events—three weeks that speak of the same creation week. To put it in temple terms, Genesis 1 gives us the creation of the macro-temple, the cosmos; Genesis 2 gives us the formation of the micro-temple, the garden; and Genesis 3 gives us the defilement of the garden which leads to the de-creation of the cosmos, what I might call the massacred-temple.

If this approach is correct, then it not only stresses the seven day pattern of creation, with each chapter following the same basic pattern (see below). But it also situates the first three chapters as following.

  • Genesis 1 outlines the full, seven-day creation week (Gen. 1:1–2:3),
  • Genesis 2 returns to Day 6 to detail how God created man at the beginning of the day and woman at the end of the day (Gen. 2:4–22),
  • Genesis 2:23–25 develops the glory of God’s good creation, as the woman comes to the man when he awakes on Day 7. But it continues to watch that glory turn to shame, as the rest of Day 7 follows the tragic sin of humanity to believe the serpent, eat the fruit, and rebel against God. As a result, man’s first disobedience results in him being cut off from the Tree of Life (Gen. 3:1–24; cf. Rom. 5:12, 18–19).[2]

Following Jordan and Roberts, therefore, I offer the following seven day outline of Genesis 1–3. Let me know what you think and how it might be improved. At the end, I’ll share why reading these chapters in this way matters. Continue reading →

A Dangerous Calling (pt. 3): Humble Yourself and Seek the True King

/ davidsschrock / 1 Comment

timothy-eberly-wnrxQGBhbh8-unsplash

Be still before the Lord and wait patiently for him;
fret not yourself over the one who prospers in his way,
over the man who carries out evil devices!
— Psalm 37:7 —

But seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness,
and all these things will be added to you.
— Matthew 6:33 —

When I was in college, ministry became an idol. I had come to faith when I was 17, at a time when the kings of the court (Magic, Bird, Jordan, et al) were my gods. In college, those kings were replaced by the King of Kings, and Matthew 6:33 became my guiding light. To this day, seeking first Christ, his kingdom, and his righteousness, is the theme of my song. And yet to seek him truly, the Lord had to crucify many layers of ambition in my own heart. To various degrees, he had to do such work during my twenties, my thirties, and still today.

Encouragingly, I have learned along the way that God does this with all his saints. For Moses it was 40 years in the wilderness; before him Joseph rotted in a jail cell for thirteen years before his service as vice-regent in Egypt; for David it was years being chased by Saul that prepared him for the throne; and for the other Saul it was fourteen years before he began his missionary work. All in all, there is a pattern in Scripture of men waiting years before arriving at their appointed place. Just the same in the church, many fruitful saints have gone through years of barrenness, pruning, or pain before God planted them in the place of their greatest fruitfulness. And why would we think God has changed his methods with us?

So, when I come to the subject of seeking ministry, I am not unbiased. I have seen how God uses decades of obscure service to prepare men for faithfulness in the light. Equally, he has thwarted the vain efforts of earnest Christians in order to prepare saints the ministry that God wanted to give them.

And thus, in Scripture and church history, there is ample evidence for the way the Lord uses time to replace ungodly motivations for ministry with godly ones. In my own life this is certainly true, and I have seen it up close in the lives of others, too. But for today, I want to return to Adonijah and another lesson we can learn from his life. For review, here are the first three lessons, outlined in two parts of this series (one and two).

  1. We should not seek positions in ministry; we should seek the righteousness to receive such a place of service. Instead, . . .
  2. We should abide by the word, and wait for an invitation to serve.
  3. When kingdom-seekers exalt themselves, their ambition follows a discernible pattern.

And now, here is a fourth lesson that relates to those who see others exalting themselves falsely.

  1. When you see false ‘kings’ exalting themselves, humble yourself and seek the true King.

Continue reading →

Situational Awareness: Restoring Fellowship with Truth and Love (A Sermon on 3 John)

/ davidsschrock

Unknown

Situational Awareness: Restoring Fellowship with Truth and Love
(A Sermon on 3 John)

In 3 John, we move from the universal church of 1 John, to the local church of 2 John, to an individual Christian by the name of Gaius. Interestingly, if we titled 3 John the way we title 1–2 Timothy and Titus, this letter would actually be called Gaius, not 3 John. And though I don’t think we need to rename this letter, recognizing this name change helps us see how personal this letter is.

In fact, across its 15 verses, there are four individuals named (the Elder, Gaius, Diotrephes, and Demetrius), plus a group of traveling evangelists, who serve as faithful reporters to John, who in turn writes this letter to encourage Gaius and to communicate his intentions to come and address Diotrephes.

Long story short, this letter is filled with personal relationships. And as we think about fellowship, it is necessary to get into the specific details of such relationships. For in truth, not all relationships are equally good, healthy, or true.

Just the same, with fellowship focused on the Lord and his church, there are questions that Christians must ask about the relationships they form. How do we decide with whom to spend time? What is a healthy relationship? What is harmful? And how can we tell the difference?

On Sunday, I addressed those questions and more, as we finished our mini-series on “Restoring the Right Hand of Fellowship.” You can find the sermon here, and below are the twelve points of application I drew from 3 John. Continue reading →

Forgive One Another: A Simple Introduction to a Challenging Command

/ davidsschrock / 3 Comments
winding road warning sign near the forest

Forgive. One. Another.

Those three words are easy to say; less easy to understand; and sometimes nearly impossible to practice. Truly, for as simple as forgiveness should be, seeking and receiving forgiveness is often the things that brings us to our knees.

Who knew that sins forgiven in heaven could be so difficult to forgive on earth?

Yet, that is often the case. Forgiveness is often a misunderstood doctrine, as well as a misapplied practice. Therefore, Christians who seek forgiveness, demand forgiveness, or seek to help others forgive, often find that the Christian practice of peace-making is more difficult than they might first imagine.

In response, genuine believers may grow frustrated—with themselves, with others, with God, or with the church. How can the cross of Christ not have its full effect? It seems so simple.

And yet, I might offer a different perspective. Continue reading →

Who is in Charge? Two Competing Visions of Church Authority

/ davidsschrock

pexels-photo-272254.jpeg

In recent years and hours, lots of discussion has been given to the subject of authority. Who has authority to close the Southern border? Who has authority to mandate vaccines? Who has authority to teach children about the birds and the bees? Who has authority to close churches or constrict their practices? And in the church, who has authority to rule the congregation (1 Tim. 5:17). Is it the congregation? The elders? One elder? The most vocal or influential members? Or some combination?

Who has authority?

Of all the books I have read on the subject, the one that is most promising (I’m still reading it) is David Innes’ book, Christ and the Kingdom of Men: Foundations for Political Life. In a section on understanding differing spheres of authority, Innes describes authority in the church. He writes,

[C]hurch government has its authority from Christ. The apostles of Christ appointed the original elders in the first churches. The apostle Paul instructed his legate Titus to “appoint elders in every town” (Titus 1:5). They are ministers of Christ who must give an account to Christ (Heb. 13:17). In the first centuries of the Christian church, civil governments were pagan, as they are today in many lands where Christ has gathered his people, and so they could not have had an organizing or overseeing role in the formation of the churches. (32)

Underscoring the source of church authority coming from Christ, Innes turns to the way churches should not receive their authority from the state. “Over many centuries, churches have had to resist civil authorities’ attempts to exert control over church leadership” (32). Indeed, in our day this is a lesson we have had to relearn. As Western civilization has rejected Christ, other gods have filled the void. And we have already seen how the god of statism is rising to power.

At the same time, however, challenges between church and state are not the only place we have a conflict in authority. We also find difficulty in understanding how the church and the self are to be related. Interestingly, Innes includes the “individual person” in his list of spheres. He explains,

It is odd to think of each individual person as a sphere of authority, but there is a God-given authority that one has over oneself. God’s creation mandate for everyone without distinction of rank or role to exercise dominion in vice-regency communicated God’s moral expectation that people would govern themselves and their personal affairs in righteousness. Self-government at this level is the moral responsibility of every human being and thus the moral right of every adult. (30)

While we mostly think about authority at the level of institutions (e.g., family, church, state), self-governance, or what Scripture labels “self-control,” is a sphere of sovereignty. God has given each image-bearer a body, and those bodies can be used as instruments of righteousness or wickedness (Rom. 6:12–23), and thus we must learn to glorify God with our bodies (1 Cor. 6:20). Such glorification certainly includes sexual purity (1 Cor. 6:12–20), but it would also include the way we use our tongues (James 3), minds (Rom. 8:7; 12:1–2), shoulders (Ezek. 34:21), and fingers (see all the bodily features of sin in Romans 3:10–19). Long story short, we must learn to govern ourselves and to say no to the sinful impulses that rise up within us (James 1:13–15). Yet, this is exactly where the modern church is struggling. Continue reading →

Four Loves: The Path to True Fellowship

/ davidsschrock

Unknown

Four Loves: The Path to True Fellowship (A Sermon on 2 John)

In 2020, ESPN published a ten-part series call The Last Dance. The series followed the 1998 Chicago Bulls, the team led by Michael Jordan. This was the sixth and final championship series, the one that ended the dynasty.

As a basketball player growing up in the 1990s, this series was pure nostalgia. Every episode brought back memories and added backstories. It was the best of the old and the new. It returned me to a period of basketball glory, and it scratched a prevalent modern itch—the need to know all the details of what happened behind the scenes.

It’s funny a thing that today we live at a time when people think they need to know everything. Undercover surveillance, tell-all documentaries, and best-selling books by whistle-blowers are all uber-popular, and all of these feed the belief that we deserve all the facts.

Yet, such a god-like desire to know everything is confronted by the fallout of The Last Dance. That is to say that by bringing everything out the open, The Last Dance did untold harm. For not only did it reveal tensions and troubles from the 1990s, but it also started new fires. Continue reading →