| Back | Contents | Next |
“And the Lord God planted a garden in Eden, in the east, and there he put the man whom he had formed. And out of the ground [adawmaw] the Lord God made to spring up every tree that is pleasant to the sight and good for food. The tree of life was in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil” (Genesis 2:8–9).
We are forcefully reminded of how much things have changed due to Adam’s fall; trees of life and of knowledge of any kind are not only now absent, but we have no concept of how they might have operated. This example should teach us to be extremely cautious about attempting to apply presently existing “natural laws” to the events of creation, or indeed to any other event where God was miraculously at work such as the fall of Adam and its consequent curse or to the flood of Noah.
“A river flowed out of Eden to water the garden, and there it divided and became four rivers. The name of the first is the Pishon. It is the one that flowed around the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold. And the gold of that land is good; bdellium and onyx stone are there. The name of the second river is the Gihon. It is the one that flowed around the whole land of Cush. And the name of the third river is the Tigris, which flows east of Assyria. And the fourth river is the Euphrates” (Genesis 2:10–14)
From this description, we see that there were abundant natural resources, including gold, in lands at some distance, far or near, from Eden.44 Now, that gold and other resources were not there by accident; God deliberately put them there to be used. It would seem that Adam had not gotten around to learning goldsmithing before his fall, but the gold does indicate that God did not originally intend people to live a primitive, almost animal-like existence as some imagine. Also, the meaning of the geographical descriptions are a matter of continuing debate as the given configuration of the rivers does not exist today.
“The Lord God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to work it and keep it. And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, ‘You may surely eat of every tree of the garden, but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.’ Then the Lord God said, ‘It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him” (Genesis 2:15–18).
There is much theology in this passage, but it is not only outside the scope and purpose of this book, but many other, much more able, commentators have thoroughly analyzed it. The use of yome in for in the day that you eat of it, could refer to Adam’s spiritual death in one calendar day or to the time period of Adam’s remaining and suddenly mortal life, or both.
“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” (Genesis 2:19 ESV, underlining added).
This verse has a trap in it for the unwary since we are way beyond the literary transition. As mentioned above, Hebrew does not have the sophisticated system of tenses English has, and a single verb form in Hebrew may cover many English past tenses, such as he did or he had done. Genesis 1:25 describes God’s creation of land animals. The next verse, Genesis 1:26, begins with Then God said, and goes on to tell of God’s creation of mankind. Thus, the sequence in the narrative of the previous chapter is that God created animals, then mankind. Coming back to our present verse, Genesis 2:19, the ESV correctly uses the English past perfect tense had formed (first dotted underline added above) to indicate that the formation of the land animals had already occurred before God brought (second dotted underline added above) them to Adam. Brought is in the English simple past tense, indicating that the action of the verb occurred after the verb in the past perfect tense (had formed). Unfortunately, few versions make this distinction in order to translate so as to be consistent with Genesis 1:25–26. Failure of most versions in this regard does not change what happened, but it can lead to confusion because it could appear that Genesis 2:19a has a time frame back to the creation of the land animals. It also obscures the fact that God had already fully made the land animals and Adam earlier. God was now interacting with these creatures (Adam and animals)45 that were fully made and able to interact with one another and God.46
If I may be permitted a conjecture: Could the Garden in Eden not only have been not only a plant garden, but a plant and animal garden? That is, just as God populated the garden with desirable plants, might He have populated it with desirable animals also? Pets are popular today, and many children seem to be naturally attracted to animals. But the present situation is different: sin has entered the world. And perhaps that is the reason pets are so popular: whatever they may do to the furniture or carpet, they are just being animals, but they are not sinning against us as do humans.
“The man gave names to all livestock and to the birds of the heavens and to every beast of the field. But for Adam there was not found a helper fit for him. 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. Then the man said, ‘This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.’ 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” (Genesis 2:20–25).
God clearly tells us that He made Eve out of one of Adam’s ribs. There is no natural process whereby the small mass of one rib, biologically incapable of reproduction or the production of other organs, can be increased to the mass and complexity of a full-grown adult woman.47 Let those who believe in long-day creation or evolution reconcile their ideas with this plain statement by the God who did it Himself.
Again, there is much rich and valuable theology here, but it also is beyond the scope of this book. To properly expound on all the theology of these first two chapters would convert this small book into a large tome. At the same time, it is my hope and prayer that this limited exposition has more fully opened these first two chapters of Genesis to your understanding. My hope and prayer also is that your strengthened understanding will be used by the Holy Spirit to “inoculate” you against the diseases of Framework Hypotheses. More than that, it is my hope and prayer that you will give God the glory due His Name and recognize in your mind and heart the great power, wisdom, and goodness God displayed during His work of creation. Please do not rob God of His glory by ascribing any of His work to “natural” causes.
Our study in Genesis is finished, but Genesis does not stand alone; there are other places in Scripture that instruct us concerning creation. A very significant example is one of the miracles our Lord Jesus performed, a miracle that superficially seems more minor than some of His other miracles.
44The locations of Eden and Havilah have not been determined definitively.
45Colloquial English tends to limit creature to animals, often with no thought of God. But biblically, anything that God has made is a creature.
46Both of the verbs in question and the said at the beginning of verse 18 use the prefixed imperfect sequential form, common in narratives and used frequently in these first two chapters. This form is used to connect verbs to add a sense of connectedness and sequence to them, either in time or thought. Based on Genesis 1:25–26, this author (and presumably the ESV translators) chose to treat the verbs as being in thought sequence, in which case, the use of the English past perfect tense fits nicely. But if one ignores Genesis 1:25–30 and assumes that the sequence is in time, then we have the implication that Adam named animals as God created them, which makes little sense in the overall flow of the narrative and is difficult to reconcile with Genesis 1:25–30.
47It is clear that God’s designed natural method of mammalian reproduction is by specialized reproductive organs and a period of maternal care. Eve’s creation from a man is thus indisputably part of the miraculous process of creation. The existence of modern artificial biological manipulations does not change this fact. Rather, the technically demanding nature of such manipulations vividly demonstrates God’s wisdom, skill, and manufacturing prowess and shows the foolishness of ideas of creation by time and chance.
| Back | Contents | Next |