The Messiah in Genesis 3:15

Comments on The Messiah in the Old Testament – Genesis to Deuteronomy

            I look to the first five books of the Bible for creations stories – Adam and Eve; Cain and Abel; Noah and the Flood; the tower of Babel.  This is where we meet Abraham and Noah and read about the Law.  I never thought to look to these books, referred to variously as the Pentateuch, the Law of Moses, and the Torah, for words about the Messiah.  Yet, Kaiser lists two messianic prophecies in the primeval history (Genesis 1-11), two in the patriarchal era (Genesis 12-50), and two in the Mosaic epoch (Exodus-Deuteronomy) (Kaiser, p.36). 

            It begins with what some call the protoevangelium  (first gospel), Genesis 3:15.  After Eve and then Adam disobey God by eating the forbidden fruit, they move from the sparkle of innocence to the stain of sin.  God speaks first to the serpent who tempted Eve.  God says, “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will strike your head, and you will strike his heel.”  Kaiser comments, “The seed/offspring mentioned in this verse became the root from which the tree of the OT promise of a Messiah grew” (p.37-38).

The serpent, he feels, is a title, not a description of a reptilian animal.  He points out something that should be obvious, unmistakable.  And yet, I had not made this connection previously.  God has already created animals that “creep and crawl”.  And God “saw that it was good” (1:25).  If you hate snakes or spiders or sharks or cockroaches or rats, take up your argument with God.  In the opening chapter of the Bible, God declared these animals “good.”  So, by the third chapter, the snake is not by nature evil.  Nor is it endowed with the image of God as humans are (1:26).

Thus Kaiser feels that “serpent” is a title, and the demotion of the one called “serpent” in verse 15 is directly tied to the prophecy that the woman’s offspring will oppose him.  In Revelation 12:9, Satan is associated with the serpent who invaded Eden.  Kaiser also points out verse where Paul makes this connection (Romans 16:20; 2 Corinthians 11:13; see Kaiser’s footnote, p.39).  Kaiser concludes “the identity of the tempter can be none other than Satan” (p.39).

While I understand Kaiser’s reasoning here and his logic makes sense, I am hesitant to go as far as he did in affirming with certainty that the Eden serpent = Satan.  I am hesitant because I think the account of Adam, Eve, and the Serpent is legend, not history.  Now let me be clear.  This is does not mean I don’t think it is true.  I do think the world was created “good.”  I think that one of the major points of Genesis 1-3.  I also think Kaiser demonstrates a masterful hermeneutic in identifying the serpent with the invasion of evil into the good God made.  However, making a certain association with Satan goes too far. 

Maybe the simplest way to elucidate why I can’t just say the serpent is Satan is my acknowledgment that I am not 100% sold on a literal Adam and Eve.  I think evolution is a good explanatory framework offered by science for how God made the world.  At some point, God endowed prehistoric humans with His Spirit.  At that point the creature that had evolved to be what is today called Homo sapiens became God’s image-bearer.  What I am offering here is a theological conclusion driven by faith.  My thoughts here do not strip Genesis 1-3 of truth, but rather set those chapters as a theological statement. 

I think Satan was real and played a role in drawing humans away from God and into sin.  But even our understanding of Satan has undergone change over time.  The idea of a divine council that included a role entitled ‘Hasatan,’ the accuser, is one that developed. 

Originally, this Accuser was an important member of the council.  He is not in opposition to God until 1 Chronicles 21:1 and Zechariah 3:1-2.  In those passages, Satan is unquestioningly opposed to God and is thus evil.  But in Job, it not nearly as clear.  In Job, it appears that Satan is fulfilling the role indicated by his title.  It appears God is the provocateur.  A brief analysis of Job is coming, but I think it might anachronistic to suppose that ancient Israelite communities who lived with Genesis as their book of faith had any concept of Satan and if they did, it is not the understanding we have living in a post-New Testament world as we do. 

This excurses on Satan is necessary to interact with Kaiser.  I find his observation of the serpent as a cipher for the entrance of evil into the good God made as a brilliant explanation.  A lot of people have made the connection, but I am particularly enlightened by the way Kaiser does it and the way he demonstrates that the seed of the woman who crushes the serpent’s head is in fact the Messiah.  I feel like my understanding of God’s story has expanded due to this portion of Kaiser’s work. 

I’ll pick the next identification he makes of a messianic prediction the Pentateuch in my next post. 

Review of "Evolving" by Steve Davis

Evolving by Steve Davis is one of the most refreshing books I have read in a while.  Steve’s approach is confessional and apologetic.  He tells his own story as a Christian and an educated, thinking person.  In doing so, he give an excellent rationale for why Christians can confess the truths found in the Bible and at the same time be sensible in dealing with the findings of geology, physics, biology, and other sciences.  More than common sense, the truly confessing Christian can celebrate science as a means by Christians come to read God’s “other book” or “second book.”

The “two books” mentality for me is the most helpful element of Davis’ book.  Of course one book from God is the Bible.  The other is creation, or nature.  In some works the two terms, creation and nature are set in opposition.  One is either a naturalist or a confessing Christian, but the two worldviews are inherently at odds.  Davis show that the book of nature is a way God reveals God’s self to humankind.  The idea of two books with nature being one of those books stands on Paul’s assertion that people unfamiliar with the scriptures of Israel can know God by observing creation (Romans 1:19-20).

Alister McGrath and the late John Polkinghorne both point to nature in their own writings in which they celebrate nature (including evolution as God’s means of creation) along with confessing Christ.  I have read much of their works and at times struggled to fully understand what they were saying.  Both are theologians who started as scientists and then came to theological writing later in their careers.  Davis’ detailing of his own story helped me make sense of the portions of McGrath and Polkinghorne I previously found confusing or difficult.  Maybe that is my strongest commendation for Davis.  In telling his own story, he’s illuminated mine. 

I do offer this caution in Davis’ work.  The reader is stepping into the middle of a conversation – one Davis is having with himself and with every teacher of fundamentalist, literalist Christianity who has ever influenced him (and continues to try).  He is breaking out of a shell, a specific mode of thinking.  He undergoes a worldview shift and this can be quite dramatic.  Frequently, a page or two after he communicates a thought, he elaborates his thinking including some further development of ideas.  But I wonder is some of what Davis writes comes in “insider language.”

And this leads to my disclaimer.  Steve Davis and I are both evangelical Christians.  We come from the same “tribe” within Christianity.  He is also my personal friend.  His background is more conservative than my own, but the differences are not that dramatic.  I understand his lingo.  I am not saying his terminology is inaccessible to readers who are not evangelical Christians.  I am saying I don’t know.  I often run into this myself.  When I am talking to someone who does have a background reading evangelical literature and hearing evangelical speech, I have to stop myself.  I have to ask if they are hearing what I mean in the words I say.  I truly am not accusing Davis of being too insider-evangelical in his work. 

I am saying he starts in the middle of a conversation.  His style is easy and light yet he deals with a serious topic that has the potential to alter how a lot of evangelicals understand the Bible and God.  I read along, nodded in agreement; paused to consider the implications for my own faith, and often found myself laughing out loud (Steve has that effect).  I just had a few moments where I wondered if people who don’t live in the evangelical Christian world would get the joke.

That said, evangelical Christians are the primary audience for this book.  I agree with Steve that it would be great if scientists read this and respected that not all theists are in opposition to the work of science.  In fact, true loving the Lord with “all the mind” requires the Christ follower to seek God and seek knowledge.  That’s what Davis is doing here.  I hope evangelical Christians, even those predisposed to reject evolution, will read his book with an open mind.

And read with an open heart.  Steve Davis is sharing his own story.  His goal is not to convince you of anything.  He’s saying “this is my journey.”  Go with him on it.  To be invited into someone’s story is a gift and Davis shares this gift with any who will read his book which is whimsical, smart, and helpful. 

I recommend “Evolving” to pastors, church goers, especially to seminarians, and to anyone who wants follow Jesus by reading both the books God has given us.  It is not weighed down with difficult technical language, and it will free you as a reader to go on your own journey wherever it may lead.  Davis and I are both confident that if you read both books, you will grow in faith, you will have a relevant faith, and you will see God.