Where we discuss the Garden of Eden; what it means to be “naked and not ashamed;” and more discussion on Genesis and the life of Christ.

Tim: We’re taking a detour here and considering that the Garden of Eden is representative of the Christian community. That idea has fascinated me for several years. I’ve shifted my thoughts on the Gospel so instead of preaching the Gospel to get people saved from hell and into heaven, I believe the work of Jesus was to establish a community of people devoted to loving one another.

Growing up as a Baptist, John 3:16 was always the go-to verse on preaching the Gospel. There are many other passages and seventy years of history in the New Testament that give us a different perspective. Our men’s Bible study is looking at Peter’s sermon at Pentecost. It is fascinating that when 3,000 people responded to his message, the result was a gathering of people who were all in one mind and one spirit, taking care of one another and selling property to support one another.

This is a far cry from walking down the church aisle and filling out a card. These people were connected to one another and cared for one another. It piques my interest to know what kind of theology produces that kind of community.

Last week we explored the Garden of Eden and speculated that the nature of the Garden and the creation story was a summary of the idea of Christian community. The Garden was a place where God prepared the fullness of blessings to where Adam and Eve needed nothing outside of this Garden. When he created the sun and moon, day and night, the trees and the lush foliage, and the beasts of the fields and the birds of the sky, all of these were considered good in their totality.

The only thing that was not good was for man to be alone. He created the woman as his companion, but does this also speak to the need for community? Is it a type of the Second Adam, which was Christ, and creating a bride for him? So God prepares this place of beauty and blessing, places the man and the woman there with every provision for every need. The only warning was that they not eat of the one tree in the Garden called the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.

So, here is a Garden with abundant sources of food and plenty of water so the man and woman would not go hungry or thirsty. In the teachings of Christ, we are told multiple times where Jesus calls himself the bread of life and if you eat of him you will never go hungry. He calls himself the living water and that if you drink of him, from your innermost being will flow rivers of living water. He is that Garden himself and the Tree of Life.

Ty: And his promise to the woman at the well was that she would never be thirsty again.

Tim: Yes, I don’t think we damage the text if we say Jesus is describing himself in terms of what it was like in the Garden of Eden. The idea is similar with Paul in Ephesians 1:3, “Blessed be the God and father of our Lord Jesus Christ who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus.” This can also reflect in the Garden where everything God had in the Garden was good, it was full of blessing. We could apply that to the nature of the Christian community and say it’s a place where there is no condemnation, or it’s a gathering of people whose consciences are cleansed to serve the living God, or who live in an indescribable freedom in Christ.

In Jesus’ day, there was also the self-righteous religion of the scribes and the Pharisees. In other words, the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, and the serpent. So, we’ll be looking at Genesis from this perspective and studying the narrative that Jesus came to restore what was lost in the Garden.

Valori: I know this is not integral to the story, but do we know how long they lived in the Garden before the fall?

Tim: Those details are not included in the story. There are some who speculate that we’re not just talking about Adam and Eve, but other nations and cultures were around outside of the Garden. In describing the river that flowed out of Eden, there are other nations mentioned like the land of Cush and Assyria (Genesis 2:13-14). I have read other interpretations that equate Eden with a city. This would not be outrageous since when we get to the restored Garden in Revelation 21 and 22, the New Heavens and the New Earth are being described as a city.

Dwight: I’ve read where Adam and Eve were the first government representatives of the first covenant.

Tim: Yes, if you’ve read the book Beyond Creation Science by Tim Martin and Jeff Vaughn, they describe Adam and Eve, not as the first people ever created, but as the first people who ever came into a covenant with God. This requires us to think outside what creationists believe of this being a story of the creation of the physical environment. We are opting for an interpretation of a more spiritual nature.

Heather: So, that goes against everything I’ve heard and I disagree.

Tim: That’s fine. We are certainly approaching the creation story with a different interpretation. Traditionally, this story is taken as being the creation of the first man and woman and the literal beginning of the physical universe. This view is quite popular and there are whole organizations that are devoted to promoting this literal interpretation.

I’m just going to approach this stating that there are different views and different interpretations that don’t take the passage literally as narrating the creation of the universe in seven 24-hour periods. The literalists argue for a young earth while there are creationists who opt for an older earth as in billions of years old. I’ve gravitated to the position Dwight mentioned of this being the beginning of our people in covenant with God. He put these people in a place with every blessing and every need met and they rejected it. I understand it’s different, but it’s not outlandish.

We want to continue looking at the Genesis story. I’m interested in the statement at the end of chapter 2 which states “And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed” (v. 25). The traditional depiction of this state is of course, a garden with Adam and Eve naked with their private parts discreetly covered by foliage. I would like to offer perhaps a less literal explanation. I believe the statement that they were “naked and not ashamed” that Adam and Eve were comfortable with the notion that everything they needed at that time for life and happiness were provided for them in the Garden. It was a state of contentedness where they needed nothing outside of the Garden to enjoy life.

This presents a very poignant expression of the Gospel worldview. The newness of life in Christ Jesus is a life where Christ alone satisfies every spiritual need. We can compare that with Paul’s statement in Philippians 3 where he recounts a list of things that gives him a fleshly confidence; circumcised the eighth day, of the nation of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, the Hebrew of Hebrews, as to the law, of pharisee, and so on (see verses 4-7).

He rejects all these things and rejected them for the sake of Christ. Further, he says he counts all things to be loss in the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus. Could we say that Paul’s attitude was that with nothing more than Christ, he was naked and unashamed? He had stripped himself of every fig leaf that covered him and stood in Christ alone. Could we say that Christ was his Garden of Eden and he found everything he needed right there?

Dwight: Paul also said that he had been in plenty and he had been in want, but in whatever condition he was in he was satisfied in Christ.

Tim: Exactly! So, when Paul mentions all these things of the flesh, have they now become considered as stuff that is outside of the Garden? Are these matters of the flesh the results of eating of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil? In Christ, Paul reentered the Garden and found satisfaction only in the things God created for him, that being Christ himself. He considers all beyond Christ as being garbage. He is stripped of everything except Christ and he is not ashamed!

We are not told of any suffering that went on in the Garden. It seems like it was a place of joy, but, when we look at the life of the apostles, they mentioned suffering and persecution on many occasions. Still, none of that seemed to quench their joy. Having Christ alone seemed to transcend all the arrests and beatings that they took at the hands of the religious institution. They always came away rejoicing and their intimate relationship with God in Christ fueled their joy in life amidst of suffering.

Valori: Wasn’t clothing also a means of protection? When you clothe yourself in Christ you put on the full armor of God and it represents Jesus as your protector.

Tim: There are a lot of interesting insights regarding clothing in the Bible. For instance, it is pointed out in Leviticus and Ezekiel regarding the garments of the high priest that they had to be made out of linen; wool was forbidden. The reason for that was that they were not allowed to wear anything that caused them to sweat during their ministry in the temple. I think that reflects back to Cain who offered a sweat sacrifice from the ground which God had cursed and warned Adam that anything they grew would be “by the sweat of your face” rather than something God provided in creation.

So, the concept of naked and not ashamed is expressed by Paul when he says things like he knows “nothing except Jesus Christ and him crucified.” I would interpret that as the equivalent of Adam and Eve being naked and not ashamed. Notice in the Garden that there are no temples, sacrifices, priesthood, no walls of separation. These all appeared on the outside of the Garden of Eden in the wilderness.

To be “naked and not ashamed” could also be imagery for the cleansed conscience. Remember in Hebrews there is the comparison between the animal sacrifices and the sacrifice of Christ. The blood of Christ was effectual in its ability to “…cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God” (Hebrews 9:14). In other words, the work of Christ put us in the mind of what it was like to walk with our heavenly father in the Garden of Eden.

Dwight: That’s the thing about eating from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. If everything is good as it was in the Garden, then there is no judgment. Once evil is introduced, then it becomes a matter of good versus evil and we begin judging one another. That’s where the conscience gets defiled.

Tim: That’s a powerful insight! In the creation story, everything God created was good. The only thing that wasn’t good was the need for companionship for Adam. Once God remedied that, there was nothing but good and blessings in the Garden. This should be the way it is in the Gospel community. If Christ rules in the Gospel community by his righteousness, and if we regard one another only based on his righteousness given to us, then there should be no condemnation as Paul affirms in Romans 8:1. The first appearance of condemnation was Adam blaming the woman and the woman blaming the serpent. The next step was Cain murdering his brother.

I think the way the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil works is that Adam and Eve looked beyond the Garden and wondered if there were good things outside of the Garden. They were blessed to satisfaction in the Garden, but the serpent led Eve to question whether there may be good beyond the Garden. In the Gospel, we have been given “every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus.” If there is a remnant of the fall, it’s wondering if there is something more we can do that would add to those blessings or improve upon the righteousness of Christ. It is saying, “Christ may be our righteousness, but is there more I could do to make me more righteous?”

Ty: Does evil emanate from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, or is it something that originates with the serpent?

Tim: The serpent is certainly an advocate for the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. He promoted it and craftily nudged Eve in that direction.

Ty: The story starts with Eve talking to the serpent and her agreeing to some of his statements. In doing this, she is making a judgment that what God said may not be true

Tim: Eve was lured into eating of the tree by accepting that the fruit was good for food, it was pleasing to the eyes, and it was able to make one wise. Each one of those traits would be applied in Jesus’ day as he was in conflict with the scribes and Pharisees, whom he called serpents (Matthew 23:33) and vipers. They would see their ministry as feeding the masses for their spiritual well-being. Even Jesus’ disciples commented on the stones of the temple and their beauty.

These three elements also are found in the three temptations of Jesus; it’s good for food so turned these stones to bread, it’s pleasing to the eyes so we’ll give you all these kingdoms, it will impress the crowds if you throw yourself from the pinnacle of the temple. These parallel the serpent’s temptation of Eve. If you equate the scribes and the Pharisees with serpents, which Jesus did, we can argue that these guys have been feasting on the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.

Ty: I think we all have faced temptation like this at one time or another. I think it’s important that the story of Adam and Eve not be taken literally but that we embrace the spiritual aspects of this story.

Tim: We could spend a lot of time on this. I think a literal approach to this story opens some unwanted doors. The literal rendering of this passage in Genesis demands we look at the material world instead of our own spiritual well-being. We come out of an avangelical denomination that equates success with optics. In other words, if you were truly successful in Kingdom work, we would be able to see proof of that in measurable optics.

The model for success in institutional religion is measurable and quantifiable. You are a denominational rock star if you can get people to the altar when you give the invitation or if you can boast of weekly baptisms, or if the pews are packed on Sunday. Our giving envelopes have a grading system where success is measured by checking the five boxes.

This, of course, is more of the pattern in Deuteronomy where blessings are measured in quantifiable terms. If you’re blessed, you’ll be healthy, wealthy, and prospering in all that you do. Your crops will flourish and your livestock breed. By those standards, I am a failure as a minister and the size of our gathering denounces us as unsuccessful. The optics say that God has removed his blessing from us.

In the Gospel, success is defined by what Jesus has accomplished. The beauty of Christ is that we live the New Jerusalem, the city of the living God as we’ve studied in Hebrews. We live in the New Heavens and New Earth which has eradicated the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. We dwell in a relationship with God that is abundantly and eternally successful regardless of what we do. Our success is based on the fullness of Christ, not on the fullness of the parking lot.

We could market ourselves today and say we have a packed building. We could say the parking lot is full. We just leave out the part where we are meeting in a living room and we park on the street. It would be true but deceptive, but if we preach the Gospel where success is nothing more than dwelling in the righteousness of Christ, we are rich beyond measure!

Ty: And this is because we interpret Genesis as spiritual and not literal.

Tim: Instead of looking at the Garden of Eden or a future New Jerusalem to be a literal garden or city, we describe them in terms of the life of the early church. Instead of waiting for something material to appear in the future, we preach a restored Garden which manifests itself as a gathering of people who love one another and demonstrate the qualities of Christ such as compassion, forgiveness, mercy, and patience.

Ty: That’s an aspect of the Gospel. When we gather under the righteousness of Christ, then we don’t have to put on any other righteousness. We don’t have to come in and say, “Yes, I read my Bible this week and I shared Jesus with three people this week.” By coming in “naked and not ashamed,” we enjoy our fellowship with one another.

Valori: So that means Adam and Eve clothed themselves with another form of righteousness to cover up their shame.

Tim: Eating of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil automatically brings shame and drives people to cover up. When Paul reflects on his life before Christ, he makes it a point to list the things he could brag about, the reasons to boast in the flesh. I don’t think we would be too far off base to say these were his fig leaves, the things he relied on cover his shame.

Valori: There is more than one form of righteousness. There is the physical righteousness that Paul had in the flesh and there is the righteousness of Christ which compelled him to abandon the physical righteousness.

Tim: I believe it’s in Romans 10, the first few verses, where he makes a division between these two kinds of righteousness. He notes the righteousness of the Jews who were seeking their own righteousness in contrast to the righteousness of God which came by Christ. So, talking about two kinds of righteousness is legitimate. They go along with two different covenants.

I wanted to dwell a little more on the concept of “the knowledge of good and evil.” In Deuteronomy 1:39-40 Moses is speaking to the people and says, “Moreover, your little ones who you said would become a prey, and your sons, who this day have no knowledge of good or evil, shall enter there, and I will give it to them and they shall possess it. But as for you, turn around and set out for this wilderness by the way to the Red Sea.”

I find this interesting because it describes the children of those escaped from Egypt and had spent forty years in the wilderness. Remember that those who escaped to Egypt we’re continually grumbling and complaining about how good they had it in Egypt despite the slavery. At this point, they were the old timers who would regale their kids with stories about how great things were in Egypt with the flesh pots, leeks, and onions. They would complain about how all they had was that manna they had to get out and gather from the ground. They might eat quail, but they would still fondly lament, “Oh those meat pots back in Egypt!”

God is telling the children of these post-Egypt boomers that, because they have no knowledge of good and evil, they would inherit the promised land. That older generation feasted plentifully on the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. For them, the promise of a land filled with milk and honey could not erase their fondness for the place of slavery.

We see this in John’s Gospel, chapter 8. Jesus presented the crowds with his Gospel and stated that if they embraced the truth, this truth would liberate them. They responded by saying, “We are Abraham’s descendants and have never yet been enslaved to anyone; how is it that you say, ‘You will become free’ (v. 33)?”  It’s odd that these Jews would not bring up the slavery in Egypt, but I guess it’s no odder than the older generation in the wilderness to not mention their slavery.

The younger generation had no knowledge or experience with the bondage of the life in Egypt. They were the futurists who had the promise of the land of milk and honey. I see this as a picture of the Gospel life in Christ, meaning that we have to leave the ritual of self-righteous religion based upon works in order to enter that New Jerusalem in Christ. We can see this too in the life of the apostles, who didn’t seem to mind the sufferings of persecution so long as they walked in Christ.

Let me give one more illustration. I’ve already shared my study about John’s Gospel being a New Covenant version of the book of Genesis. The opening words are “…in the beginning,” it has the motifs of light and darkness, the first two chapters recount seven consecutive days. There is much more but I am going to hold off on the details for now.

In John 2:14-15, we are told: “And he found in the temple those who were selling oxen and sheep and doves, and the money changers seated at their tables. And he made a scourge of cords, and drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and the oxen; and he poured out the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables; and to those who were selling the doves he said, ‘Take these things away; stop making my father’s house a place of business’.”

I find this passage interesting because some of the language reflects back to the story of Genesis where they ate of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. I’m looking that the life and ministry of Jesus as being the human personification of events in Genesis. Jesus represents life in the Garden, walking in harmony with God. The scribes and the Pharisees represent the serpent who advocated and advanced the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. Their resistance to Jesus lead to murdering him like Cane murdered Abel.

In the chapters following Adam and Eve’s banishment from the Garden, we see the rise of altars and sacrifices. We see a system growing that is not satisfied with God’s gracious provision in the Garden but working to build towers on earth that will reach to heaven. I believe this defines what it means to eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.

When Jesus confronts this corrupted system in the temple, we see him emulating God from Genesis 3. Notice the language when we are told that Jesus drove out those who were selling. It is the same language when God drove Adam and Eve out of the Garden rather than agree that blessings can be manufactured by man rather than by God.

We would not be out of line to associate those selling the oxen and the money changers with those Jesus condemned for looking holy on the outside and then foreclosing on the houses of widows. If they exploit sincere worshippers for their own gain, it’s not hard to believe they would evict a widow. And if they are so corrupt as to evict widows, it’s not a stretch to see them justifying the execution of Jesus to stop him from exposing their racket.

I think what Jesus saw was these religious leaders emulating the craftiness of the serpent. Whereas sheep and oxen were for the benefit of people and man was supposed to have dominion over them, the religious leaders were using them to exploit and enriched themselves off of their fellow man. Sheep and oxen were supposed to be blessings, not merchandise to fill the pockets of the religious leaders.

When we look at the optics here, Jesus is taking on the part of God in the Garden and confronting those who promote dissatisfaction with God alone. Jesus, in hostile opposition to the serpent, drives these people out of the House of God and closes down their business of self-righteous religion. Their religion that was “…good for food, a delight to the eyes, and desirable to make one wise…” Jesus condemned with extreme prejudice.

Ty: “You brought a dove that was unacceptable and for a fee we will sell you a good one.”

Tim: Right! “I have blessed you with a very good deal today!”

Valori: I’m guessing they would then resell the bad ones.

Tim: the religious leadership then asked him what sign he gave for his authority. He said, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” Their thinking was that he was talking about Herod’s temple being destroyed but we are told he was speaking about the temple of his body. It’s interesting that John notes the disciples later remembered he said this. I think the point is that our joy and happiness comes from something that has been destroyed and raised again. It had to be that way because the Garden of Eden can’t be rebuilt in the wilderness.

Valori: And blocking off the gate of the Garden with the cherubim was God’s way of saying he wasn’t available to them anymore.

Tim: While the sweetness of fellowship was broken, he still spoke to them. He spoke to Cain about sin crouching at the door.

Ron: It changed from being good to something evil.

Tim: It’s not easy explaining how this manifests itself. I suppose the best way to describe it is that we understand the gospel in such a way that we walk in this world “naked and not ashamed,” that is to say, “I need nothing but Christ and I have no condemnation. I am the object of God’s infinite love and I don’t have to wait to die before I can know that love.”

Ron: We can believe that we’re saved and blessed by God, but the difficult part is understanding the evil that is just outside the gates. That’s hard to understand.

Tim: I think it helps when we consider the church or the Kingdom as a community, Christians bound together as a community.

Ron: So inside the community there is love and the evil is outside the gates. That’s a good way to think about it.