The mark of human corruption: not sex but violence

When I think of human beings’ wickedness, I doubt I’m the only one who often thinks of sexual sin. But at the Flood, the problem was not sex, but violence. “I am going to put an end to all people, for the earth is filled with violence because of them.” (Genesis 6:13). This seems to be a punishment that fits the crime.

God's grief

God was grieved that He had made man because of man’s pervasive wickedness. (Gen. 6:5-11). A couple of questions arise: did God make a mistake when He made man? That He is grieved by his own creation seems to suggest a flaw in the Creator: unless God intended to be grieved. And this should be intuitively understandable to all of us who like stories that make us sad. And many of us particularly like sad stories that turn out happy. Similarly, we like to see our sports teams in danger of losing, only to win. God also likes this kind of contrast, as Paul writes that God made some people for wrath so that he could off-set them against those people He showed mercy (Rom. 9:20-23).

This is a hard teaching, but not one beyond our intuitive understanding.

Crazy Noah (Genesis 6:5-14)

So Noah is living in a generation of great wickedness, but Noah himself was a righteous man. God decides to destroy the earth, and tells Noah to build a boat. Much is often made of how people would have thought Noah was crazy for building this boat, and how he would have been ridiculed by them. But this wouldn’t have been the first time Noah had been persecuted. He was the one righteous person out of a generation; he was accustomed to being an outsider, and perhaps his years of being an alien in the world made it that much easier for him to obey God when asked to build the Ark. It’s a thought for all believers: our daily obedience now may be necessary for us to be able to take larger steps of faith in the future.

Genesis 6:1-6: The Nephilim, man's wickedness, God's judgment, the book of Enoch

Genesis contains some stories that are fantastic by any measure. Genesis 6, contains the story of the Nephilim, who are the children of the “sons of God” and human women. The Nephilim were extraordinary: “they were the heroes of old, men of renown.” (v. 4).

It’s hard to know what to make of such a passage. Humorously, Matthew Henry’s commentary does not even refer to the Nephilim. He must have simply decided it was too bizarre to exegete.

The story of the Nephilim is more fully detailed in the Book of Enoch. Enoch is an interesting book because although it is not canonized, it is quoted in the NT book of Jude. Several early church fathers considered it inspired. Enoch says that 200 fallen angels came to earth, took human wives, and had children who were “giants.” The giants ultimately turn on mankind and begin killing humans and animal life.

God ultimately intervenes, sending angels Michael, Uriel, Raphael, and Gabriel to earth. Michael and Raphael bind up the fallen angels and imprison them to await the judgment, and Gabriel destroys the Nephilim.

Apparently, the fallen angels had also been teaching mankind all sorts of warfare, magic, and corruption. And it appears that the earth must be destroyed because of all of this. Uriel is sent to Noah to warn him about a coming apocalypse.

Genesis 6:5 “The LORD saw how great man’s wickedness on the earth had become…”

Cain and his offspring build civilization (Genesis 4:17-24)

Cain and his offspring give birth to civilization. He’s the first to be seen building a city. His direct descendant Jabal seems to be a rancher or farmer. Jabal’s brother, Jubal, is the first musician. And another descendent of Cain, Tubal-Cain, is a blacksmith.
Lamech, the father of Jabal, Jubal, and Tubal-Cain, kills a young man, committing the second recorded murder (4:23). But then he goes beyond Cain’s misdeed by becoming presumptuous and arrogant about his crime. Cain concealed his murder (4:9), presumably feeling at least some guilt about it. But Lamech calls together his two wives (he’s our first polygamist) and announces that he’s committed murder. And this is no act of contrition; it’s his opportunity to mimic the words of God (4:15) when he says “If Cain is avenged seven times, then Lamech seventy-seven times.” Who proclaimed the punishment for harming Cain? God. Who proclaimed the punishment for harming Lamech? Lamech. Lamech is an arrogant murder who does not hesitate to take the place of God as an avenger.

It’s suspicious that civilizations springs up among the descendents of muderers.

You must master sin (Genesis 4:7)

When God rejects Cain’s offering, He warns him that “…if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you but you must master it.” (4:7).

We must master sin, and this is the only attitude any biblical writer ever takes toward the subject. Yet, sometimes we get complacent or even comfortable with our sin. Most evangelical churches, praise God, preach strictly “grace alone.” But when we hear this message, aren’t we sometimes relieved that the preacher does not go further and insist that we master our sin? Don’t some of our teachers fall into the temptation of preaching the crown but not the cross? But we cheapen grace when we do this, using our spouse’s unconditional love as license to commit adultery. If “grace alone” has come to mean for us “and don’t worry about sin” then we’re misunderstanding the Gospel. The merciful touch of God is always followed by His telling us to “go and sin no more.” Sin desires to have you but you must master it.

The Second Curse, mercy on a murder, the message of a non-literal Genesis

Cain’s punishment for killing Abel is that the ground will no longer yield its crops to him. It was bad enough that Man’s work was cursed, that he was to labor in pain and eat by the sweat of his brow. But now the ground will no longer produce anything at all for Cain, sweat or no. Furthermore, Cain will have no home, and he will be a restless wanderer.

The notion that exile from one’s home is the greatest punishment is attested to by Homer, Socrates, and Shakespeare—and before these men said it we see it here in Cain’s curse. Only a chapter ago, Adam and Eve were banished from the Garden. This gets to be a pattern, as we will eventually see the Jews driven from Jerusalem. This is the cursed condition of human beings: we are not at home. Instead we are in a cursed world where even inanimate objects like the ground oppose us. Perhaps all fantasy for the past or the future, heaven or utopia, is rooted in this basic human condition of homelessness. We all ache for a place not like this one. One of our greatest quests in life is to find a “home.”

God is so merciful that even His curse of Cain, the first murderer, is accompanied is tinged by mercy. Cain despairs that as he wanders the earth, other people will kill him. But God proclaims that this shall not be allowed, and God gives Cain a protective mark. What kind of God has mercy on the first murderer? A God who sees human beings, even the most sinful, as his wayward children. God did not hesitate to kill an animal (3:21), but God protects the life of a human murderer.

From passages like these we can see that the Bible portrays human life as sacred. And it’s based on passages like these that may Christians to this day reject abortion, embryonic stem cell research, euthanasia, and the like.

Also, note another non-literal moment in Genesis. Cain is worried about others in the world who would kill him. Who are these others? It’s not clear, and to this point Genesis has not suggested there were any others. However, who these others are or where they came from is largely beside the point. And I use “non-literal” here loosely, only to suggest that Genesis does not ask us to read it like a news article or a passage from a modern history textbook. If it did expect this, then it is a very poorly written book—leaving such a gaping hole in its facts. But we know that it is not a poorly written book—therefore we should surmise that Genesis does not ask us to be too concerned about who the other people about whom Cain is worried, or where they came from. Genesis does not purport to be history or journalism in the modern sense. Rather, Genesis wants us to know about the fundamental human predicament: we are the creations of a good and loving God, but we are alienated from God by our sin.

Cain's Anger

The LORD asks Cain why he is angry, and there appear to be two reasons. First, Cain is angry because God has rejected his efforts. This attitude is common today. Many people are angry at God because God rejects what the person has done. This is particularly evident in sexual ethics and among ethical people. Some people are angry that God would impinge upon their sexual desires. Other people are angry that God would not think they were good people, because by their own lights they are good people. In short, these people are angry at being called sinners, and most of us—Christian and non-Christian alike--have the same reaction when we feel accused of sin.

Cain is also angry that he has been rejected, but Abel has been accepted. Being found wanting as compared to another person is something we human beings find insufferable. In part this has to do with our insecurity in the universe: in a world where resources are scarce, where we play a zero-sum game – another person’s success could mean our failure. If someone gets a job, we can’t get it. If someone else is the center of attention, we are ignored. We’re often jealous for people’s affection, and if someone loves one person, we worry that he or she cares less for us. Perhaps Cain feels that he’s competing with Abel and losing.

But God assures Cain that there is enough love to go around: “If you do what is right, will you not be accepted?” (4:7). Cain’s problem is not that Abel has usurped his place with God, but that he has not acted acceptably. But God assures Cain there is no impediment to being accepted except changing his ways. The decision lies with Cain; it does not hinge on Abel.

As Christians we should particularly keep this in mind, since our jealousies are most likely to be aroused by our fellow Christians. We often live in closest proximity to our fellow Christians, and so it is easy to begin comparing our lives to theirs. We can compare our lives to theirs in standard terms (who has a better this, that, or the other thing), but we can also add a “spiritual” dimension to our jealousy, and to some extent begin to see other Christians’ blessings as proof that they have a better relationship with God than we do. But God’s statement to Cain suggests that God would not have any problem accepting all of his children—the only issue is whether they will conform their ways to God’s ways.

Unfortunately, Cain is unwilling to change his ways.

Cain’s works leading to death; Christ's conflict with the Pharisees foreshadowed (Gen. 4:1-8)

We next meet Adam and Eve after the birth of their sons, Cain and Abel. Cain works the soil, but Abel kept flocks.

It is said that Man will work the ground, from which he is taken (3:23), and “for dust you are, and to dust you will return.” (3:19) In this, there’s a sense of the futility of Man’s efforts at works-based self-sufficiency. It’s futile because even though he labors painfully to keep himself alive, he will still die. Ultimately, Man will not be able to sustain himself by his working the ground. This image is like Man’s attempt to justify himself before God by his own works of righteousness, which we will see more fully in the life of Cain.

Cain, in accordance with the Curse, works the soil. (3:23, 4:2). But notably Abel does not work the soil, but instead keeps flocks. This becomes significant because when they bring sacrifices from their respective professions, Cain’s fruits are rejected while Abel’s fat portions are accepted.

Again, the produce of the soil is an image of Man’s works, and here they are presented as an attempt to please God. But God is not pleased with Man’s works of self-sufficiency.

Instead, God is pleased with Abel’s fat portions—offerings which do not come from Man’s cursed efforts at self-sufficiency. Rather, they involve the sacrifice of a living being.

This sacrifice of an animal and conflict with Cain appears to be a foreshadowing of Christ and his conflict with the Jewish religious establishment. The Pharisees, like Cain, are said to believe that they were justified before God by their own efforts, but God required the sacrifice of Christ. The parallels between Cain and Able and the Pharisees and Christ is even more striking when we see what Cain does to Abel. Cain’s sacrifice is found wanting particularly when compared to Abel’s sacrifice, and this angers Cain and so he kills Abel. In the same way, the Pharisees conspired to have Christ killed because Christ exposed their efforts at religious observance as godless self-reliance.

Banished (Genesis 3:23-24)

This scene is so sad, as God dresses his children before banishing them from the Garden. It looks like a parent who is forced to put their rebellious teenager out of the house—it’s a tragedy for all involved. Then the door slams: God is on the inside; Adam and Eve are on the outside. They are prevented from returning by the flashing sword of the cherubim. Man is now alienated from God.

The Curse: the Man

Man’s work is cursed and he will die. (Genesis 3:17-19)

In eating from the Tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Man showed that he wanted to rely on himself for knowledge and judgment, not God. In this sense, Man’s sin is like Satan’s because it shows a desire to displace God. However, in Man’s Emersonian self-reliance, he will die (‘return to the dust’). This curse is fitting because it is exactly what God warned would happen. And it also shows that Man cannot rely on himself, cannot be literally self-sufficient, cannot be God. And as Man’s work has been made painful, so has God’s work been made painful (recall that before God’s work was all “very good”).

It’s sometimes said that men find too much of their identity in their work (e.g., when we meet someone one of the first things we ask is ‘what do you do?’). We find much of our self-worth in our work: status in society can be quickly determined based on your job. Yet few people really like their work (as in, they’d rather be doing something else), and their work often interferes with other aspects of their lives. This predicament can be explained by Genesis. Man’s purpose was to work (1:28, 2:5), but this essential aspect of Man was cursed. So now our labor is painful.

The Curse: the Woman

God curses essential aspects of the Woman, her childbearing and her relationship with Man.

Woman is created with two purposes. She is a companion to Man (2:18), and she is to bear children (1:28). Both are cursed.

1- Her companionship with Man is cursed in that her desire will be for him, and he will rule over her. Men have mostly dominated women throughout history, politically and relationally. This curse particularly fits the crime because it was Woman who led Man astray, but now Man will lead her as a curse. Since it is a curse, women chafe against it, and history is replete with instances of struggle between the sexes.

Although the curse is the status quo, it shouldn’t be taken for the Christian ideal. The Gospel teaches post-curse living, and so Christian men should not abuse their natural dominance over women, but instead should serve them.

2- Woman's child bearing is cursed. Woman, along with man, was told to “be fruitful and multiply,” but women must bear the children. Now her work will be with pain, similarly to how the man’s work will be painful (1:16-17), and this parallels how God’s work in bringing about his children will be painful. Woman wanted to know good from evil, and now she will know the evil of pain.

The Curse: the Serpent

After God determines the Man and Woman ate of the Tree based on the temptation of the Serpent, He curses them all. The Curse fits the crime.

The Serpent’s curse is fitting in two ways: 1) most Christians believe that the Serpent is Satan, who was cast from heaven for his pride in wanting to take God’s place. So Satan attempted to take the highest place and was cursed by being assigned the lowest place. 2) The Serpent sought to kill Man and Woman, but it will be the Serpent that dies.

Verse 3:15 is said to contain the first messianic prophecy: ‘I will put enmity between…your seed and (the woman’s seed),; he will crush your head and you will strike his heel.’ The prophecy is similar to the later notion that Death took Christ for three days (‘you will strike his heel’), but that Christ ultimately defeated Death for all-time (‘he will crush your head’). Christ was injured, but Death was destroyed. The serpent brought death to humanity, but the prophecy describes an battle in which the Woman’s Seed (Christ) is ultimately victorious over Death.

Genesis 3:7-8: lost intimacy with God

When Adam and Eve ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, they’re eyes were opened, and they realized they were naked. They immediately made clothes to cover their nudity.

Clothes conceal our private body parts and our physical imperfections. They also protect us from the heat and cold. Adam and Eve know that something has changed in the universe, and they prepare themselves against the coming changes by getting dressed. It is also a great symbol of our flawed attempts to cover our sin. Adam and Eve become very concerned with being naked – but the problem wasn’t their nudity. It was that they’d eaten of the forbidden tree. Don’t we often do the same thing? Our sin may be wanting to usurp God’s throne or to worship creation rather than the Creator, and our self-fashioned remedy will be to say we’ll pray more or memorize more Bible verses or do more of this or less of that not go to that place again or not do that thing again.

Also, this shows another typical reaction to sin: hiding. Often, our first reaction to our sin is not to repent, but to conceal the sin. Our first concern is not always that we have sinned, but that we’ll get caught and punished. It is almost comical how Adam and Eve go about this: sewing fig aprons seems certain to draw attention to their sin rather than to conceal it. But this too is an accurate depiction of human nature – we often give ourselves away as we stumble about in our sin, like Raskolnikov in Crime and Punishment. Perhaps this is because Man is not meant to lie, and thus looks unnatural and unhappy doing it, just as many sins give themselves away by the misery they create.

Why is their nudity a source of shame? It does not appear that their physical appearance has changed – they haven’t grown scales. Instead, it’s something about what they already were – naked – but had not previously known. Nakedness is a state of vulnerability, intimacy, trust, and safety. However, Man can no longer feel safe with God because of his disobedience. Man, with the serpent’s help, has inserted a distance between himself and God. And we continue to feel this today, that things between us and God are problematic due to who He is and who we are and the things we’ve done.

The serpent’s craftiness (Genesis 3:1-5)

Three tactics of the serpent: 1) question the commandment of God, 2) deny the consequences of disobedience, 3) cast aspersions on the character of God.


The serpent is described as crafty, and his temptation of Woman shows this craftiness.
The serpent’s goal is to get the Woman to defy God and eat from the Tree. However, the serpent does not suggest this directly.

Tactic 1: question the commandment of God

The serpent questions the woman, like a lawyer, charting her understanding of the situation, and perhaps challenging whether God has issued a command at all

It is often suggested to us, either from an external source or even our own minds, that perhaps God did not issue a certain command at all. (“Did God really say ‘don’t look at attractive people’?” “Did God really say that it was wrong to be rich?” “By ‘thou shalt not steal,’ was God really thinking about office supplies or taking overly long lunches?”)

This questioning of the command seems to cause us to begin to deconstruct the commandment, as if it were up to us to judge the edicts of God. Also, stating the grounds for the commandment in this context opens up lines of attack (the serpent will next attack the rationale for the command), particularly if we’ve failed to know or understand the command.

What is the difference between a bad-faith deconstruction of a command and a good-faith inquiry into the nature of a command? Perhaps it is the motivation – if we begin questioning the command during temptation, that may be a sign of a bad-faith motive.

Tactic 2: deny the consequences of disobedience.

The second tactic, the undermining of the consequence of disobedience, is used perhaps even more frequently than the first tactic. The Woman says that if they eat of the tree they will die; the serpent denies this. (Notice that the line of attack was opened up by the initial questioning of the command – the woman explained that if they touched or ate from the tree they would die).

This is done today by believers and non-believers alike. From the non-believer, it often comes in the form of academic and popular criticism, and the most obvious current examples are in the realm of sexual activity, for example:

The command: sex must only occur in marriage. This is because it is good for people (for whatever reason, fill in the blank).

The counter-argument: “sex outside of biblical norms is not bad or harmful. In fact, it is good for you, and you should enjoy it, particularly if it is between two people who love each other.”

Similarly,

The command: lying is wrong. This is because (insert rationale).

Counter-argument: lying is actually often-times good for you and the person you lie to.

The underlying point is that these activities which are prohibited by God, are in fact good for you – and the underlying argument is that you should partake of the prohibited activity.

However, Christians often make this argument to themselves.

The command: do not sin. This is because of (name your negative consequence as described in the Bible).

Counter-argument: God will forgive your sin, so there will be no negative consequence.

However, we know that the Woman did die, even though it did not come to pass exactly as she may have expected.

Sometimes Christians even engage is offering reasons for a commandment, for example Christians will describe the hidden benefits of some of the stranger Levitical commands. We should be careful with this because the serpent may challenge our rationale, and we need to remember that the command is controlling, not the rationale.

Tactic 3: Cast aspersions on God’s motives.

Another tactic of the serpent is to cast aspersions on God’s motives for his command. ‘You will surely not die! The real reason for God’s command is that He knows you will become like him, knowing good from evil.’

This same statement is commonly recited now as ‘the reason for the commands of the church is that certain men wanted to keep everyone under their thumb.’ It was similarly stated that ‘Puritanism is the haunting fear that someone, somewhere is having fun.’

The Woman should have kept in mind the benevolence of God as testified to by the goodness of the garden, and the goodness of God’s treatment of her and Man. Further, she appears to have had access to God, and she should have talked to him about it.

We similarly should keep in mind God’s goodness to us, the goodness of even a fallen creation, and the sacrifice of his Son when we’re tempted to doubt God’s goodness. We should also keep in mind that this is a common tactic of the serpent.

Summary

1) If you see any of these tactics, watch out! There may be a snake nearby.
2) Don’t answer the Devil’s questions; do theology with Christians, not the Devil.
3) Obey the command, regardless of the rationale.
4) Remember God’s goodness; don’t believe lies about his character.

Genesis 1:27-3:1: non-literal, beauty separate from functionality, man's purpose is to work, evil is a mystery

Creation account is non-literal

The Creation account indicates that its style is non-literal because in chapter 1, it is said that plant-life is created on the third day (1:11), but man is created on the sixth day (1:26, 31). But in chapter two, it says man was created before there was any plant-life (2:6-7).
The book of Genesis shows profound wisdom, and if such a story were written by a contemporary author we would call it ‘brilliant’ or ‘genius,’ so it is unlikely the writer was so inept and careless as to not notice this contradiction at the literal level. Instead, it is more likely that descriptions were not meant to be contrasted and interpreted in a literal manner.

Beauty, morality, and utility are separate, but go together.

Beauty and utility are separate, but go together. The trees of the LORD are both “pleasing to the eye” and “good for food.” Evolutionary biology currently teaches that humans find things “beautiful” because they are promote survival, they are ‘good for food,’ so to speak. The same argument is used regarding morality – that morality is only short-hand for what promotes survival for the species. (This view is the impetus for the continual stream of articles explaining why everything from gossip to men's taste for blondes to sexual activity to eating ice cream has an evolutionary survival value).

Moral and aesthetic judgments are similar because they are intuitive and unprovable. They relate to Natural Law, which points to God. The moral and ethical result of the evolutionary-biology view that beauty and morality are only misnomers or short-hand for utility is to make utility the chief good; beauty and morality are not independent values. Then a leap is made, which is that if something can be shown to be functional, it is morally acceptable. Similarly, moral and aesthetic judgments can be put aside as long as their survival-value can be extracted. The result of putting aside the moral and aesthetic judgment leads to sin and the casting aside of the compass, our intuitive recognition of Natural Law, that points to God.

The evolutionary-biology view, however, is not a good enough theory (in what way is a beautiful sunset good for survival?) The Genesis view, instead, offers a fuller and richer view: God makes things that are both beautiful and functional. He is not a narrow, one-dimensional God creating a craven, desperate universe where every living thing simply strives to survive and where there is no such thing as beauty but only utility. Instead, He is like any good craftsman who makes his goods both pleasing to the eye and useful for their user.

Man’s purpose is to work. (Gen. 2:5, 15).

Man is meant to live and work in community. (Gen. 2:18). Woman is portrayed as a distinctly suitable helper for man. After the other beasts and birds are considered as companions and helpers for man, they are found unsuitable, so with that in mind, God creates woman. This must be why it is so common for males and females to become partners.

Evil is both a mystery and a fact of life.

It is difficult not to ask, 'if in Genesis 1 God views all of creation as “very good” (1:31), how in Genesis 3 is there a crafty serpent who tempts Eve?' This is the well-known 'problem of pain.'

On one hand, it seems reasonable and common for humans to ask these questions. On the other, it is better to relegate the answers to these questions to the mysterious ways of God rather than to the lucidity of finite human reasoning. While Genesis purports to tell us what happened in the beginning, it does not purport to tell us everything that ever happened.

Further, human beings are probably incapable of understanding everything that ever happened – in fact, we don’t really even understand the things we claim to know: Who knows every fact of recorded history? Who fully understands quantum physics? Who fully understands himself or his best friend? No one, and yet these are fields of which we claim to have actual knowledge. What then of the deepest questions?

It is often smugly argued that ‘if God is all good, all knowing, and all powerful – then He would not have allowed for evil.’ But what do we humans know about omniscience, omnipotence, omnibenevolence, or the orgin or nature of evil? All we know is the speculation of our finite minds. There is nothing wrong with the speculation of our finite minds, but it’s best to acknowledge that it does not constitute actual knowledge, and probably constitutes incomplete knowledge. To the extent we fail to understand the deepest questions regarding the ways of God, it is better to call the answer a mystery than to presume to know more than we do.

Evil is a fact of life in this world. Evil's mysterious arrival at our door-step is a common experience. Who has not started a day at peace and with the best of intentions and yet ended the day having committed sin and wondering how and why?

Genesis may not give every answer, but it gives a startlingly accurate description of life.

Genesis 1:26 : the dignity of man rooted in God

Man is accorded profound dignity in the beginning: he is a ruler, and he is made like God.

It’s a astonishing fact that man is made in God’s image and likeness. While not losing sight of our sinful condition and many valid reasons for humility, we should also properly marvel that we are wonderfully made, designed like God.

What does it mean to be made in God’s image and likeness? In other words, what characteristics and qualities in us that are also in God? A non-exhaustive list: we are creative (no one does not create – even the least artsy jock re-‘creates’ when he creates a game out of a ball and lines in the ground); we have minds, wills, and emotions; we are moral actors; we can act upon the world.

To see how wonderful this is, simply imagine if a rock said to you 'I have an idea...' or even if your cat or dog came to you with a water-color painting it had made.

As a political, moral, philosophical, and aesthetic matter, our dignity and worth is rooted in being created in God’s image. This is why some argue that our country must acknowledge God – because to do otherwise unmoors us from the very source of our worth. If a man is not made in the image of God, then he is just another beast.

Man is immediately established as ruler over the other animals on earth. Here is one example of God’s establishment of authority (others are government/citizen, husband/wife, parent/child, elder/congregation, Jesus/everything).

Circling back around to man being made in God’s image and likeness, this is something profound and helpful to meditate on. In our cynical, competitive world we do not look upon ourselves and others as God-like. Would we slander each other if we thought of each other as God-like? Would we cut each other off in traffic? Would we kill each other? Would we not love each other more if we considered each other God-like? Would we not enjoy each other and ourselves more? Wouldn’t we be more secure and more happy if we thought of ourselves as a God-like race instead of members of the rat race?

There is a movement in the world to make human beings believe they are nothing but animals, driven by bestial urges just like rats and chimps. This is a lie. You and your neighbor are like God.

Genesis 1: the Bible’s authority, God’s sensibility of abundant life

Children and adults alike wonder at how things, good and bad, came to be. Why is the sky blue? Why do we fight wars? Why am I the way I am? While men grapple with these questions and put forth speculative answers, the Bible answers plainly and clearly: “In the beginning God…”

By this concise assertion, the Bible holds itself out as a primal authority on all things. The first assertions of the authority of the Bible did not come when Paul wrote 2 Timothy 3:16 (…all scripture is God-breathed…). The Bible first asserts its authority in the first sentence of its first page when it purports to speak of the beginning of our existence. When one says anything, one implicitly claims authority to say it and the validity of what is said – or else one speaks nonsense. And the nature and extent of the authority is also implicitly asserted by nature of the thing said. If you say a small thing like “take a right to get to the park,” you assert a small knowledge and authority. If a large thing is said, like “the greatest commandment is to love the Lord,” then one implicitly asserts large authority. Here, the Bible presumes to speak on the primary chronological fact, which can only be based on the knowledge of someone who was there – or at least someone who knows someone who was there. By presuming to tell us what happened “in the beginning” the Bible implicitly asserts great authority.

The first character in the story is God. How important of a truth is that? Yet how often do we forget it. This life, this religion, this Bible, is primarily God’s story. Anyone who attempts to take the starring role other than Him is a usurper, and the story will be full of those. Also, those who attempt to take on the role of God, whether it’s the ego-maniacal Satan or simply you or me, will find the role far more difficult than we imagined, and that we don’t have the strength to carry the burden. The role of God is for God alone, and it is both right for us and good for us to keep that straight. Yet, despite this, God seems willing and eager to share the stage. It is not too difficult to imagine a story about God in which nothing of consequence is ever done by anyone other than God. I bet God did interesting things before any of us came around. Yet we know that this Bible God is more than full of stories of other people, even other people doing God’s work as his co-laborers. And even at the very beginning of the story, we’re about to be introduced to our fore-parents.

Note both from the pages of Genesis and also from a glance out your window the type of things God creates. He has a distinct style, wouldn’t you agree? If anyone has a favorite artist, he knows that each work of art by the singer, painter, writer, or whoever always bears the distinct marks of the maker, whether it’s the subject matter, the tone, the sensibility, etc. So, with God’s creation, for example, God’s inanimate works have a tendency toward the beautiful, the majestic, the spectacular, the bountiful. God is also notable as a creator for His range. Many artists can do only one thing well – but God can do the ocean and the desert, the jungle and the meadow. Yet, despite the range and the contrast, there is coherence. Also, in wildlife, one again notes both consistency and contrast, from the tiger to the duck. All of this probably speaks of God’s personality as one of vast range as well, since it is difficult to imagine a creator who is morbid making a light-hearted comedy or someone who is extremely cheerful and kind making a work of sadism. God is probably as fierce as a bear, strong as a mountain, playful as a puppy, and gentle as a breeze. Of course, one can go only so far with this level of interpretation – but nevertheless it generally seems plausible that the vast range of creation suggests the vast range of God’s personality.

When I consider the wondrous creation with all of its liveliness and beauty, I can’t help but find the view of the universe held by a fatalist or a determinist to be absurd. This is just my intuition, but to imagine that blind fate drove the universe to possess sea creatures that create pearls, sunsets that steal one’s breath, and flowers that thrill the eyes and the nose – it just seems really hard to believe. If a universe is really a grim machine running on ‘cause and effect’ and ‘survival of the fittest,’ it just seems you’d have a grim, ugly universe – perhaps full of gray, beastly monsters, or robots like those from the Matrix. But a Golden Retriever? Yes, I’ve heard that if you gave a group of monkeys an infinite amount of time to bang on type-writers they’d eventually write Hamlet…but if that’s the analogy that encapsulates your view of the universe, doesn’t it seem your thinking has perhaps gone to the circus?

(One scientist, Richard Dawkins, who is very hostile to Christianity compares Christians’ belief in God to a belief in a Spaghetti Monster. I’m saying, however, that the view of monkeys writing Hamlet is much more Spaghetti Monster-esque, than believing in a God who created the incomparable universe we live in.)

Also, notice the bounty of creation, the fertility. “Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the sky. God created the great creatures of the sea and every living and moving thing with which the water teems...God blessed them and said ‘Be fruitful and multiply…’…God said, ‘Let the land produce living creatures…livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals…” Gen. 1:20-24.

Again, note God’s personality and consider it for application to your life. God creates abundant life. God could have been a minimalist, abstract painter. He could have left the earth formless and void. We often fear what God will do to our lives because we think he has something draconian and inhuman in mind. But look what God did at creation: His sensibility is abundant life.