There’s A Kind of Love

Bible Pages in Shape of Heart Love.jpg

By Steven Barto, B.S. Psych.

LOVE. IT’S MORE THAN A four-letter word. At its basic, love is a noun meaning “strong affection for another arising out of kinship or personal ties,” such as a mother’s love for her child. Of course, it also means “attraction based on sexual desire: affection and tenderness felt by lovers.” It can mean admiration, benevolence, warm attachment, devotion, a term of endearment. However, love is not merely a noun.

Love is also an action verb. In other words, it’s not about something, it’s about doing something. Something selfless at the very least. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary indicates it is a transitive verb that means “to hold dear: cherish.” It can also implicate a lover’s passion, tenderness, amorous caress, copulation. Its etymology is from the Old English word lufu, which includes, “feeling of love; romantic sexual attraction; affection; friendliness; the love of God.” The Germanic word is from the Proto-Indo-European (PIE) root leubh, meaning “to care, desire, love.” It is “the love of God” I wish to talk about here.

There are seven types of love in Greek:

  • Eros—sexual or passionate love; the type most akin to our modern construct of romantic love.
  • Phileo—brotherly love; friendship; shared good will.
  • Storge—familial love; natural or instinctual affection, such as the love of a parent for his or her child.
  • Agape—a Greco-Christian term referring to “the highest form of love; charity; the unconditional love of God for man.”
  • Ludus—this form of love includes game-playing, manipulation, lying; the purveyor of ludic love has “conquests” but no commitments.
  • Pragmaalso known as “pragmatic” love, it is the most practical type; convenient love that involves “being of service” to another out a sense of duty.
  • Philautia—this type of love is within oneself; essential for any relationship because we can only love others if we truly love ourselves. One of the key lessons on a spiritual journey is learning to love unconditionally. In many ways, this type of love is a stepping stone to grasping agape love.

WHAT OF THIS THING CALLED “UNCONDITIONAL LOVE?”

I’ve heard it said that unconditional love is easy. You probably find that hard to believe. I did. There would be no boundaries to loving someone unconditionally. No matter what they’ve done or not done. One blogger posted an article titled “Unconditional Love: Is it Real or Just a Romantic Illusion?” The post analyzes relationship love. It notes that when love is unconditional nothing can tear it asunder. This is the “we are one in our new relationship” love that is ageless, timeless, and infallible. The writer states, “But here’s what you have to know: unconditional love is a romantic illusion, and one that reflects love that is immature.”

In the introduction to his book, Real Love, Greg Baer, M.D. describes his struggle with emotional problems and addiction to tranquilizers and other narcotics. One evening he took a handgun and went into the woods intending to end his life. He put the barrel against his head, ready to die. Instead, he realized something had to change. He sought treatment at a rehab, but said when he returned home clean and sober he was still at the same place that took him down the dark path of addiction: alone and empty. He was missing the profound happiness he’d been longing for his entire life. Reading Baer’s introduction, I saw myself on the pages.

Life for me has always been an emotional roller coaster. I was a little hellion who could not behave no matter what my father tried. His go-to answer seemed to be corporal punishment. This made me hate him and despise myself. I came to fear his very presence; to feel unloved and unlovable. In my heart, I wanted to please him and make him proud. But in my flesh, I wanted nothing but numbness and escape. As each year passed, I became increasingly sullen and doubted I’d ever amount to anything. Why couldn’t I stop lying, stealing, cursing, trashing my room, getting sent to the principal’s office? As my anger grew, I started hating everything and everyone. I got good at deception. After all, who wants to be in trouble all the time? This was the perfect breeding-ground for alcohol and drug abuse. Finally, I could feel euphoric, happy, invincible. I could escape.

As you can imagine, this was not a very sound solution. I ended up right back at the same place every time. Clean and sober for a short time, but lost and alone. Empty. Without friends. Estranged from my family. So I went back out there, drinking and drugging. Numbing the pain and hiding from the world. Withdrawing behind drawn curtains. I was convinced that I was one of those that Jesus couldn’t save. I drifted further from my Christian roots. My high school friends all left for college. I stayed home and hung out with the party crowd. Out until three, sleeping until noon. Just like the shampoo bottle says, “lather, rinse repeat.” I no longer believed God cared about me. It wasn’t long before I doubted the existence of God.

After four decades of active addiction and numerous relapses in my forties and fifties, I found my way back to the church. I started teaching Bible study at two local prisons and did a lot of studying and writing. You’d think my life improved, right? That I finally reached my happy ending. That there was nothing left but to love and be loved; to be clean and sober and help others find their path to sobriety. Sadly, that was not the case. Chronic and ever-increasing pain from a back injury, degenerative disc disease, severe arthritis, and fibromyalgia taunted me and drove me to opiate addiction. I knew better. I just couldn’t decide better. I was letting my physical pain dictate my behavior.

Even after returning to the church of my youth where I accepted Jesus as my savior; despite attending a Christian university and graduating with a bachelor’s degree in Psychology; regardless of years of research, writing, and blogging about addiction and spirituality, I continued to mess up and kept helping myself to narcotic painkillers of family members. Again, I was shunned. They were back to believing I will never change. I’d work my way back into their lives to only repeat my selfish and deceptive behavior.

So what is this all about?

It might sound too simple, but I’m wrestling not against flesh and blood, but against powers and principalities, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places (Ephesians 6:12). But it’s true. This is exactly what Paul means in Romans 7 when he says, “For I know that good itself does not dwell in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. For I do not do the good I want to do, but the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it” (verses 18-20, NIV). Although this is instrumental in helping me learn to crucify my flesh and walk instead in the Spirit, it does not alleviate the hurt, disappointment, and anger my family feels toward me. Their utter disgust and inability to trust me.

THE KIND OF LOVE ONLY GOD KNOWS

I recently discovered an incredible song by the Christian group For King and Country, called “God Only Knows.” Although the entire song cuts me to the core, several lines really stand out. Wide awake while the world is sound asleepin’, too afraid of what might show up while you’re dreamin’… Every day you try to pick up all the pieces, all the memories, they somehow never leave you. God only knows what you’ve been through, God only knows what they say about you… You keep a cover over every single secret, So afraid if someone saw them they would leave. God only knows where to find you, God only knows how to break through, God only knows the real you…

LOVE FROM GOD’S PERSPECTIVE

What happens when we look at love from God’s perspective?

The love of God is central to His relationship to the world. We cannot grasp His kind of love through our own intellect. Certainly, there are many paradigms, worldviews, and theological interpretations for God’s kind of love. Theologians consider divine love to be an overriding component of God’s character, if not the very essence of God. Conceptions of divine love vary widely. This is due, in part, because man has a tendency to split hairs over metaphysical matters. The result is theories and definitions which are often cemented in denominational, doctrinal, or other theological differences.

But here are some basic features of God’s love:

  • We can trust in God’s love. First Corinthians 13:4-8 provides an excellent description of God’s (agape) love. It is patient, kind, does not envy, does not boast, is not proud, does not dishonor others, is not self-seeking, is not easily angered, keeps no record of wrongs, does not delight in evil (but rejoices with the truth), always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails. Clearly, there is a powerful and unrelenting component to God’s love. We see evidence of this in His covenant relationship with His people. Even in our sinfulness, He demonstrates patience, showering us with unmerited grace and mercy.
  • Our salvation is an expression of God’s love. God loves us enough to have established a plan for our redemption before the foundation of the world; before man’s first sin of disobedience. He provides access to that redemption through His Son, Jesus Christ, who died in our place (see John 3:16). God did not send Christ as a reward for those of us who can keep the Law; rather, He provided Jesus as a solution to the sin problem by making Jesus a ransom for our disobedience. Although we were bought (redeemed) with a price, redemption is much more than being set free from the wages of sin. The crucifixion of Christ restores our fallen status by making peace between us and God. It takes away our shame. It provides for our physical healing. It provides for our spiritual rebirth and restoration.
  • God’s love serves as an exemplar for us. Truly, God has restored us to Him through Jesus Christ. It is up to us to work at restoring our relationships with others. We can only do this by being rooted in God’s love—striving to understand its depth and implications. God asks us to emulate this behavior.
  • The Holy Spirit produces love in us for others. The link between Christ’s love for us and our love for each other is found through the Holy Spirit. We see Christ’s love for us to the point of obedience unto death.

Paul writes, “…that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith; that you, being rooted and grounded in love, may be able to comprehend with all the saints what is the width and length and depth and height—to know the love of Christ which passes knowledge; that you may be filled with all the fullness of God” (Ephesians 3:17-19, NKJV). By accepting the full measure of God’s love, we are able to begin practicing unconditional love toward others. We will by no means measure up to this divine attribute. This “no limits” love cannot be achieved through human endeavor. We become able to love this way only through yielding to the Holy Spirit. We can only accomplish it because God first loved us. What connects us with Jesus is faith—trusting His forgiveness; banking on His promises; cherishing His fellowship; desiring to fulfill His Greatest Commandment: to  love the Lord God with all our heart and with all our soul and with all our mind; and to love our neighbor as ourselves (see Matthew 22:36-40).

LOVE—PART OF THE FRUIT OF THE SPIRIT

Galatians 5:22-23 reminds us of what is achieved in us through the Fruit of the Spirit. Eugene Peterson translates it like this: “But what happens when we live God’s way? He brings gifts into our lives, much the same way that fruit appears in an orchard—things like affection for others, exuberance about life, serenity. We develop a willingness to stick with things, a sense of compassion in the heart, and a conviction that a basic holiness permeates things and people. We find ourselves involved in loyal commitments, not needing to force our way in life, able to marshal and direct our energies wisely” (MSG).

The late Billy Graham said, “This cluster of fruit should characterize the life of every Christ-born child of God. We’re to be filled with love, we’re to have joy, we’re to have peace, we’re to have patience, we’re to be gentle and kind, we’re to be filled with goodness, we’re to have faith, we’re to have meekness, and we’re to have temperance. But what do we find? In the average so-called Christian today we find the opposite.”

True love—the unconditional agape love of God—always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres (1 Corinthians 13:7). Jesus tells us in John 15:12, “My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you” (NIV). Paul reminds us in Romans 12:9-10, “Love must be sincere. Hate what is evil; cling to what is good. Be devoted to one another in love. Honor one another above yourselves” (NIV). When we expect this kind of undying love from our friends or family, we set ourselves up for disappointment. Further, as in my case, we’re at risk of living in the sin of offense because we become unforgiving of their unforgiveness. Rather, we must look to God for this kind of love. A love that culminated in the crucifixion of Jesus Christ.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

Each of us, before coming to Christ, is dominated by one nature—the “old man.” We’re controlled by our ego, our self. We are selfish at best; deceitful at worst. No one likes to be wrong. That’s human nature. Repeated mistakes—especially the ones that continue to break the hearts and spirits of those we love—are the hardest for us to let go. I loath myself when I cannot seem to do that which I want to do, and keep doing that which I wish not to do. I have to remember I am in good company, as the apostle Paul wrote of this very struggle in his life. 

The moment we receive Christ as our Savior, self is put down. We identify with His death, burial, and resurrection through backward-looking faith. Accordingly, we are to crucify our flesh daily. No amount of human power can relieve us of our habits, hangups, or addictions. But when we walk in the Spirit and not in the flesh, we put Christ on the throne in our lives. We dethrone ourselves. The Spirit of God is in control. It is only through realizing this and living it every day that we can ever hope to love unconditionally.

References

Baer, G., M.D. (2003). Real Love: The Truth About Finding Unconditional Love in Fulfilling Relationships. New York, NY: Avery.

Peterson, E. (2003). The Message//Remix: The Bible in Contemporary Language. Colorado Springs, CO: NavPress.

Skinner, K. (December 16, 2013). “Unconditional Love: Is It Real or Just a Romantic Illusion?” Retrieved from: https://www.yourtango.com/experts/kathe-skinner/unconditional-love-it-real-or-just-romantic-illusion

 

 

These Pesky Grapes of Wrath

I stumbled.
Turning, I looked in the
Bathroom and saw the
Evidence.

Shower curtain torn,
Laying on the floor
In a pool of vomit.
Not again!

Powerless.
Not my favorite word
To say the least.
Sounds like, failure.

Small.
Sweet.
Fermented.
Steeped in brokenness.

Killer of relationships
Thief of dreams.
The mortar of excuses,
Able to destroy.

Yet impossible to
Resist
No matter the cost.
Regardless of consequence.

I know where it leads,
Yet I have no human capacity
To resist
These pesky grapes of wrath.

©2019 Steven Barto

The Importance of Prevention in Addressing the Opioid Crisis

NIDA Banner Science of Abuse and Addiction

From the Blog of Dr. Lora Volkow
Director, National Institute on Drug Abuse

June 27, 2019

As our communities, healthcare systems, and government agencies join in the effort to reverse the epidemic of opioid overdoses and solve the opioid crisis, it is not enough to focus all our resources on treating people who are already addicted to opioids. Keeping people who do not have an opioid use disorder from becoming addicted is an equally important task [italics mine]. Addressing over-prescribing of pain medications through improved pain management and prescription monitoring has been one important prevention approach; and as illicit opioids like heroin and imported fentanyl become more prevalent, reducing the supply of those substances through law enforcement efforts is also crucial. But reducing the demand for opioids by addressing the reasons people turn to them and become addicted in the first place is just as vital and fundamental to ensuring that a new drug epidemic does not follow once the opioid crisis is contained.  

Research on preventing drug use by addressing vulnerability factors that increase the risk for substance use disorders is an important component of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) HEAL (Helping to End Addition Long-Term™) Initiative. Specifically, the HEALthy Brain and Child Development (HBCD) study being partially funded by HEAL will examine how the human brain develops in the transition from infancy into early adolescence. Evaluating the effects of fetal drug exposures, adverse environments, genetics, mental illness will provide knowledge to help us understand how these risk factors operate in conferring vulnerability for substance use disorders.

Abundant research by NIDA-funded investigators over the past few decades has shown that positively altering a child’s life trajectory by reducing various risk factors, strengthening protective factors, and increasing access to resources can reduce or delay later drug use as well as minimize other adverse outcomes like criminality or other mental illness. Risk factors addressed by early childhood interventions can include poor self-regulation, aggression, or insecure attachment to parents. Those addressed in family and school prevention interventions at all ages through the teen years include lack of parental supervision, exposure to drugs at home or at school, and stresses from poverty, neglect, or abuse.

Prevention programs can take many forms, but all in one way or another address these risk factors and/or bolster factors like self-control, peer relationships, or other age-appropriate skills. These forms of resilience may make all the difference in the young person’s life when faced with the opportunities and temptations to begin smoking, drinking, or using drugs when they are adolescents, despite whatever adversity they may have experienced when younger. Effective prevention can even begin as early as the prenatal period: For example, an intervention in which trained nurses visit and provide guidance to first-time mothers during their pregnancy and in the first two years of their child’s life was shown to be effective at improving various cognitive and behavioral outcomes into adolescence, including reduced substance use and involvement with the juvenile justice system.

The stresses of impoverished environments negatively impact brain development, but a striking finding from prevention research is that interventions can protect against or reverse some of these neurobiological impacts. For example, a family-focused intervention with poor families in rural Georgia protected against poverty-associated neurobiological changes to brain areas involved in learning and stress reactivity. And maltreated children in foster care who received a prevention intervention for preschoolers were better able to regulate stress, as measured by cortisol levels.

Because risk factors for drug use are common to other behavioral problems, most prevention interventions do not focus solely on preventing drug use or on preventing a single type of drug use. A wide range of problems can be addressed or averted by addressing core risk or protective factors. A few programs, however, such as a middle-school intervention called PROSPER, have shown specific benefits at preventing nonmedical use of prescription drugs.

An important research priority is finding out how to widen the adoption and effective implementation of evidence-supported prevention programs. The menu of such interventions is diverse, but few of the options are widely used. Part of the problem is that high-quality intervention programs are costly, and communities may be reluctant to invest the needed resources when the payoff may be years or more in the future. However, studies have strikingly shown that many programs more than pay for themselves. Like other investments—saving for retirement, for instance—primary prevention of substance use and addiction requires long-term thinking and balancing the short-term costs in money and time against the long-term benefits of a healthier society down the road.

The HEAL initiative will also prioritize research on developing interventions targeted towards the transition from late adolescence into adulthood, the age where there is the largest increase in initiating opioid use. NIDA will be funding research to create an evidence base for new strategies and interventions to prevent opioid initiation and opioid use disorder (OUD) in older adolescents and young adults in healthcare, justice, and other settings.

In a new Commentary, Targeting Youth to Prevent Later Substance Use Disorder: An Underutilized Response to the US Opioid Crisis, in the American Journal of Public Health, colleagues at NIDA, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) highlight the importance of research on primary prevention for helping to address the opioid crisis. Such research will provide us not only with scientific solutions to address the current opioid crisis but will provide us with the knowledge and tools to protect us from future drug crises.

The following website can help you find substance abuse or other mental health services in your area: www.samhsa.gov/Treatment. If you are in an emergency situation, people at this toll-free, 24-hour hotline can help you get through this difficult time: 1-800-273-TALK. Or click on: www.suicidepreventionlifeline.org. We also have step by step guides on what to do to help yourself, a friend or a family member on our Treatment page.

The Sea of Forgetfulness.

 

sea-of-forgetfulness.jpg

Written by Steven Barto, B.S. Psych.

The phrase Sea of Forgetfulness is not actually in the Bible. When people use this colorful phrase, they’re usually referring to several passages in Scripture that talk about God’s forgiveness, and our justification in Christ through accepting His death, burial, and resurrection. They’re banking on the great promise from God the Father that if we confess our sins He is faithful and just to forgive those offenses and never hold them against us again. He acts as if those offenses never happened.

It is doctrinal that God forgets our sins so completely it’s as if they had never occurred. Micah 7:19 says, “You will again have compassion on us; you will tread our sins underfoot and hurl all our iniquities into the depths of the sea” (NIV). Verse 18 indicates that God pardons sin and forgives transgression. It is worth noting that all sin (yours, mine, your neighbor’s—past, current, or future) have been placed on Jesus Christ as He hung on the cross. Accordingly, when God looks upon us as born-again believers He sees the righteousness of Christ and not a lifetime of our iniquities. This is confirmed in Isaiah 43:25: “I, even I, am He who blots out your transgressions for My own sake; And I will not remember your sins” (NIV).

God is omniscient. He knows all things. So He does not really “forget” anything. Although it is beyond human capacity to grasp, He encompasses all knowledge of the universe past, present, and future. I have come to understand that God is not constrained by time in any fashion. Time (whether it’s told by a wall clock, wrist watch, calendar, or sun dial) is merely a human invention. God is able to see everything that ever was, is now, and will be, all in the same instance. The word “omniscient” comes from the Latin words omnis (signifying all) and scientia (signifying knowledge). When we say that God is omniscient it means that He has perfect knowledge of everything there ever was and will be, including our works. It is impossible for God to fail to “remember” our sins. Rather, He chooses not to remember our sins. Moreover, He creates a void between us and our sins (Psalm 103:12).

Let’s take a closer look at Isaiah 43:25. God tells us He “blots out” our transgressions. The idea of blotting out sins is taken from the custom of keeping accounts and canceling or blotting out the charge when the debt has been paid. God had a plan for our redemption before the foundation of the universe. Because of the ultimate sacrifice of Christ, our debt has been paid. Old Testament saints had a forward-looking faith in Jesus as the Messiah; New Testament believers have a backward-looking faith that Christ in fact died on the cross as our Sacrificial Lamb. When Christ said, “It is finished,” the debt was satisfied for all sins. No punishment can be exacted for those who are washed in His blood. We are pardoned.

As Far As East From West

Looking at Psalm 103:12, we see that God removes us from our transgressions as far as the East is from the West. This is equivalent to blotting our our sins. Acts 3:19 says, “Repent therefore and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, so that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord” (NKJV). God reminds us in Isaiah 44:22, “I have blotted out, like a thick cloud, your transgressions, and like a cloud, your sins. Return to Me, for I have redeemed you” (NKJV). In each instance, the verb is given in past tense. He has blotted. He has redeemed.

The Glory of the Gospel is That Our Sins Are Already Dealt With!

WHEN BROUGHT INTO THE LIGHT

When our sins are set before us in the light of God’s glory, our first reaction is (naturally) that they are altogether unpardonable. We may not be willing to voice this fear to others, but it is quite real. This sense of dread comes from the conviction that we can never earn salvation through “doing good.” But there us no pardon under the Law because the Law knows nothing about forgiveness. Rather, the Law says, “Do this and you shall live; disobey and you shall die.” The Law can only convince us of our inability to obey and condemn us for the failure to do so.

After we become awakened in Christ, we are made aware of our litany of sins. Of course, there is no awakening if we remain in the dark—lacking honest assessment and humble surrender. Paul noted in his first letter to the Corinthians that he gave no credence to how man might judge him, or whether the court might condemn or sentence him. Further, he did not see any benefit to judging himself. Although his conscience was clear, he remained concerned about the judgment of God. His advice was, “… judge nothing before the appointed time; wait until the Lord comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will expose the motives of the heart…” (1 Corinthians 4:5, NIV).

Typically, this so-called awakening involves five distinct stages, which Dave Ferguson aptly explained in his article at Christianity.com titled “5 Stages of Spiritual Awakening.” In his research and analysis, he noted that the story of the Prodigal Son applies to nearly every believer who has drifted away from the Father only to find his or her life wanting and miserable. Invariably, they determine (as did the Prodigal) that loss of “sonship” is not worth any amount of riches or physical comfort. Indeed, even the “father’s” servants have it better than the child who has walked away. 

The following steps are critical to achieving a spiritual awakening:

  1. Awakening to Longing. Everyone eventually begins to question the value of his or her existence. It is not unusual to exclaim “there’s got to be more to life!” Each of us longs for love, a sense of relevance or purpose, and some degree of meaning to life. This is often the first of basic longings and is what goads us to set out on a journey. Although these yearnings are given to us by God, we often search for fulfillment everywhere but from Him.
  2. Awakening to Regret. Because we tend to seek fulfillment of primitive longings without God, we end up alone, directionless, and confused. I cannot count the number of times I’ve expressed the desire to start over. It’s worth noting that many individuals often get caught up in a loop between longing and regret.
  3. Awakening to Help. When we break out of the loop between longing for a sense of meaning and regretting the mess we’ve created, we have the potential to acknowledge that something needs to change. This amounts to coming to the end of ourselves. Finally, we throw up our hands and say, “I can’t do this on my own.’ In recovery, this is often referred to as hitting bottom. We realize we need help.
  4. Awakening to Love. At this point, we come to believe that Jesus is the One who leads us back to God. As we make our prodigal journey back to the Father, we encounter grace. We begin to recognize God’s unconditional love. He is waiting for us with open arms. Unfortunately, many of us still have to deal with the shame and guilt that follows us home. If we give in to these emotions, we tend to doubt that we are loved and accepted just as we are.
  5. Awakening to Life. Finally, we are in a place where we understand when Jesus said, “I came so that they can have real and eternal life, more and better life than they ever dreamed of” (John 10:10, MSG). The Greek word for life in this passage is zoe, meaning “of the absolute fullness of life, both essential and ethical, which belongs to God.” We simply cannot reach this level of life without a spiritual awakening.

THE END OF ME

Jesus tells us the way up is down. In other words, we can only achieve greatness through humility. Admittedly, this is a quality I have been sorely lacking in for most of my life. My life has frequently been rather difficult and complicated as a result. I’ve heard it said that we can only change when we become coachable. I did not necessarily believe there was nothing wrong with me or my life. My difficulties came from thinking my problems were unique; that I was different and the tried-and-true solutions proposed to me by addictions counselors or 12-step sponsors. In addition, I was often in denial and tended to hide my feelings and actions through deception. Before I could ever hope to grow, I needed honesty and humility.

The evil companion to humility, at least in my instance, was pride. My knee-jerk reaction to advice from a fellow 12-stepper was usually, “You’re not going to talk to me that way!” I’d look at their “cheap” clothes, rusty old car, long hair, tattoos, piercings, and whatever else I decided made them “less than” me and decide they had nothing to offer. Pride. Pure and simple. It made me defensive and unwilling to hear what others had to offer. Even if it would save my life. This smacks of some imaginary hierarchy where I “outranked” the other person. Thankfully, I have put that rather glaring character defect at the foot of the cross. The minute I did so I began to notice others for who they were—children of God. I remembered something an oldtimer told me at a 12-step meeting years ago. He said, “Never look down on another alcoholic. You never know if that person will save your life.” Of course, I also had to admit my life needed saving.

Pride will often keep us from realizing how much we need God!

Pride is the ultimate issue of the human condition—not just one of the “deadly sins,” but the mother of all offenses. The late Billy Graham said, “…pride can be a very dangerous thing, blinding us to our faults and cutting us off from others. Pride also can lead us into doing things that are wrong, because we think they’ll make us greater or more powerful. The Bible warns, ‘Pride goes before destruction, a haughty spirit before a fall’ (Proverbs 16:18).

There is an amazingly powerful antidote for pride expressed by the apostle Paul that gives me goosebumps every time I read it. “In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage; rather, he made himself nothing by taking the very nature[fn] of a servant, being made in human likeness” (Philippians 2:5-7, NIV). This is Jesus, the Messiah, equal with God the Father and God the Holy Spirit, co-creator of the entire universe. I cannot fathom a better example of humility.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

Here’s what I’ve learned: There is a real danger in making anything or anyone but Jesus a foundation for our confidence. This includes putting our self before Jesus, attempting to solve our own problems or “work” out a deal for our success. Unfortunately, being humbled is something we think of as a passive activity—that is, somebody or something humbles us. We are humbled by unemployment, by a failed marriage, by getting hurt on the job and having to rely on disability, by having to move back home with our parents. A shattered dream. But Jesus told us about a humility that is active—in this instance, we are the humblers. Jesus said, “Humble yourselves.”

It all starts with being honest about who we are in Christ and admitting we had nothing to do with our standing. It’s all Jesus. This attitude is something beyond humility. Meekness is closer to what Jesus is suggesting. Essentially, this amounts to submissiveness, without which we cannot hope to recover whatever the habit, hangup, obsession, or addiction. From a biblical viewpoint, meekness is synonymous with righteous, humble, teachable, patient when enduring suffering, forgiving, willing to follow Christian doctrine—attributes of a true disciple.

 

The Dust of an Old Era

I sat at my old high school desk,
smelling the lingering aroma
of another time,
pulling me backward.

My name was still there,
scratched on the inside
next to a crusty old piece
of Bazooka.
Who would have expected it
to still be there?

I closed my eyes and heard
the joys and sorrows
of twelfth grade
(teenage angst still palpable at fifty).
I was lost in memories
of her, my first true love.

I heard her voice
echoing off the
paint-peeled walls
of home room.
If only I could go back
for a season;
just for a moment.

Things seemed simple then, yet
somehow complicated;
Unsure.
I feared this joy would
never last; that I would never feel
love again. Surely all this
would vanish, leaving
nothing but an inkling
of what could have been.

She was twenty-two when
she left for Europe
with our daughter—never coming back,
she said. Leaving me to my
faults and failures.

Did she ever love me?
I wondered.
Probably.
I smiled and
wrote her name on
the filthy top of my
school desk
covered in the
dust of an old era.

© 2019 Steven Barto

A Quick Study in Biblical Exegesis

By Steven Barto, B.S. Psych.

WHAT IS EXEGESIS?

Whether you have picked up the Holy Bible for the first time, you’re a college student studying biblical interpretation or theology, or have been reading Scripture since early childhood, there will be passages you think you understand but which your pastor, instructors, classmates, fellow church members, or family members interpret quite differently. Such incidents occur when people read any kind of literature, but we become particularly aware of them when we read religious literature—i.e., writings that make claims regarding who we are, where we come from, where we go when we die, and whether our lives have any relevance in the whole scheme of existence.

Not to worry. Although there are many approaches to the Bible, there is also a decent amount of common ground among responsible readers of the Bible. As you can imagine, atheists tend to look for seeming contradictions and inconsistencies in Scripture in an attempt to defeat the claim that the Bible is the inerrant Word of God. Regardless, it is critical that we read, think about, and write about the Bible carefully and systematically. This can only be accomplished by sticking to common strategies. Exegesis can be useful for understanding an entire text—indeed, it is important to see the commonalities in a publication—but is typically applied to a smaller section such as a brief narrative, psalm, lament, prophetic utterance, speech, parable, vision, or chapter-length exposition. The technical term for this careful study and analysis of a biblical text or passage is exegesis, from the Greek verb exêgeisthai, meaning “to lead out.”

EXEGESIS AS INVESTIGATION

Exegesis may be defined as careful historical, literary, and theological analysis of a text. We could describe it as “scholarly reading” that ascertains the sense and vitality of the text through complete, systematic recording of the intrinsic meaning of the text. Exegesis requires “close reading,” which is a term quite familiar to students of literature. This exercise describes the deliberate word-by-word and phrase-by-phrase consideration of all the parts of a text in order to determine its overall meaning as a whole.

It is worth noting that many people over the decades have come to realize the goal of exegesis is to discover the biblical writer’s purpose or meaning in the original text. This is what scholars refer to as the “authorial intention,” which can be rather difficult to ascertain. Many biblical scholars believe this is not the only goal of exegesis. When I write an original poem, I am sometimes hard-pressed to determine where the idea and the words came from. Some writers have a hard time expressing their intentions for something someone else has written. It is even more difficult to understand the meaning behind the writings of another person from another time and culture. A more modest and appropriate goal would be to arrive at a credible and discernible understanding of the text on its own merits within its own context.

Exegesis is an investigation: An in-depth look at the many levels or composition of a particular text. To engage in exegesis is to ask historical questions about a text, including the situation or occasion. It also means asking literary questions of the text, such as what is its theological or philosophical aim? Furthermore, exegesis includes asking questions about the religious or theological dimensions of the text. Productive exegesis requires us not being afraid of difficult questions, such as “Why does this verse, phrase, or text seem to contradict that one?” Occasionally, exegesis leads to greater ambiguity rather than a clearer understanding. If you experience this, do not give up. Press on in prayer and meditation.

EXEGESIS AS CONVERSATION

Exegesis involves conversation as much as it does analysis and investigation. It is a dialog with readers (living and dead, more educated and less educated, absent and present). It’s a conversation about about texts and their inherent meaning; about sacred words and what they claim to be true—and what others who have analyzed them claim as their meaning. Beneficial exegesis entails listening to others, even others with whom we disagree. Dissent just might lead to a deeper conversation and a clearer answer. For the sake of universal understanding, exegesis simply cannot take place in a vacuum. It’s a process that needs to occur in the company of others through reading and discussing with them—carefully, critically, and creatively—about the text. Those who like to read and study in isolation would not be an ideal biblical exegete.

Many Christians read the Bible alone, which is perfectly fine. Especially when the object is devotional. I often spend time by myself with Scripture. I will find a collection of verses, for example, that teach who I am in Christ and pray and meditate on those passages. In addition, I like to read Eugene Peterson’s interpretation of Scripture, The Message. It is essentially a paraphrase of Scripture, and is an excellent version for reading the Bible in common language.

It is not wise, however, to attempt exegesis alone. Certainly, ministers, students and biblical scholars spend a lot of time examining Scripture prior to preparing for a paper, sermon, or lecture. They often do this in their private study or office. It is critical that whatever translation they use that they become well-prepared to have an ongoing conversation about the text they’ve consulted for their work. Accordingly, they need a proper exegetical method. In this instance, method should not be considered on equal terms with “scientific” or “historical” analysis. Good reading—just like good conversation—is an art more than a science.

Although there are certain principles that must be followed in order to properly read, analyze, and report on Scripture, exegesis is an art. An acquired skill. The key is learning what to look for, what questions to ask, and how to put your exegetical analysis together for public discourse. This can never be done with complete certainty or with only a “method” in mind. Instead, an exegete needs not only have principles, rules, hard work, and research skills, but also intuition, imagination, sensitivity, and the ability to listen for the leading of the Holy Spirit.

Exegesis is Investigation, Conversation, and Art

According to Michael J. Gorman (2009), good exegetical practice must involve understanding the unique setting (historical context) in which the text was produced and how it fits within the book or text being studied (literary context). We can understand a text only if we pay careful attention to both the whole and the parts (details)—like the proverbial forest as well as the trees. In addition, there are several options which can be applied to the work. Exegesis is typically a rather technical and challenging undertaking.

Interpreters of the Bible systematically use a number of general approaches and specific methods to help them engage with the text they are examining. Some of these methods are called criticisms. The use of the term criticism, as in redaction criticism, does not necessarily imply negative judgment; the primary meaning is analysis as it applies to the historical, literary, or theological value of a text.

The Synchronic Approach

One approach to exegesis is called synchronic (meaning “within time,” or “same time”). However, this method looks only at the final form of the text as it stands in the Bible. It is not concerned with the “long view” or “prehistory” of the text—including any oral traditions, earlier versions, or possible collateral sources. Instead, this approach uses methods designed to analyze the text itself and the text in relation to the world in which it first showed up as a text. This method is not unlike narrative-critical, social-scientific, and socio-rhetorical. To take a socio-rhetorical approach typically involves integrating the ways people use language in their everyday existence.

Types of Criticism in a Synchronic Approach

  • Literary Criticism—the quest to understand the text as literature by employing either traditional or more recent models of literary criticism that are employed in the study of literature generally; corollaries of literary criticism are genre and form analysis, the quests to classify a text as to its type
  • Narrative Criticism—as a subset of literary criticism, the quest to understand the formal and material features of narrative texts (stories) or other texts that have an implicit or underlying narrative within or behind them
  • Rhetorical  Criticism—the quest to understand the devices, strategies, and structures employed in the text to persuade and/or otherwise affect the reader, as well as the overall goals or effects of those rhetorical elements
  • Lexical, Grammatical, and Syntactical Analysis—the quest to understand words, idioms, grammatical forms, and the relationship among these items according to the norms of usage at the time the text was produced
  • Semantic or Discourse Analysis—the quest to understand the ways in which a text conveys meaning according to modern principles and theories of linguistics
  • Social-Scientific Criticism—the quest for the social identity, perceptions of the world, and cultural characteristics of the writers, readers/hearers, and communities suggested by the text; usually divided into two distinct sub-disciplines, social description and social-scientific analysis

It is worth noting that the above approach is often used in the study of literature as well as Scripture. Taking a synchronic approach to the text is quite similar to the technique used by literary critics analyze a poem or other short text. When explicating a poem, for example, they may consider the following features of it:

  • Genre and implied Situation—the type of literature the text is, and the life situation implied by the text
  • Intellectual Core—the topic and theme (the “slant”) of the text
  • Structure and Unity—the arrangement of the text
  • Literary Texture (e.g., poetic)—the details of the text
  • Artistry—the beauty of the text

Let’s look at an example from Scripture by taking a synchronic approach to the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7). An exegete might ask questions such as the following:

  • What are the various sections of the Sermon, and how do they fit together to make a literary whole?
  • What does the narrator of this Gospel communicate by indicating the setting of the Sermon, the composition of the audience before and after the Sermon, and the audience’s reaction to it?
  • What is the function of the Sermon in the Gospel’s portrayal of Jesus and of discipleship?
  • How would a first-century reader/hearer understand and be affected by this Sermon?

The Diachronic Approach (The Historical-Critical Method)

The second approach to exegesis is the diachronic (meaning “across time”) approach, and it focuses on the origin and development of a text, employing methods designed to uncover these aspects of it. It takes the “long view” of a text and may be considered a longitudinal perspective. This approach is often referred to as the historical-critical method, and it was the approach of choice by many, if not most, biblical scholars of the twentieth century.

Types of Criticism in a Diachronic Approach

  • Textual Criticism—the quest for the original wording of the text and the ways later scribes might have altered it
  • Historical Linguistics—the quest to understand words, idioms, grammatical forms, and the relationships among these items, often with attention to their historical development within a language
  • Form Criticism—the quest for the original type of oral or written tradition reflected in the text, and for the sort of situation in the life of Israel or the early church out of which such a tradition might have developed
  • Tradition Criticism—the quest for understanding the growth of a tradition over time from its original form to its incorporation in the final text
  • Source Criticism—the quest for the written sources used in the text
  • Redaction Criticism—the quest for perceiving the ways in which the final author of the text purposefully adopted and adapted sources
  • Historical Criticism—the quest for the events that surrounded the production of the text, including the purported events narrated by the text itself

A diachronic analysis of the Sermon on the Mount, for example, might involve the exegete asking the following questions:

  • What written or oral sources did the evangelist (writer of the gospel) adopt, adapt, and combine to compose this “Sermon?”
  • What are the various components of the Sermon (beatitudes, prayers, parables, pithy sayings, etc.), and what is their origin and development in Jewish tradition, the career of the earthly Jesus, and/or the life of the early church?
  • What does the evangelist’s use of sources reveal about his theological interests?
  • To what degree do these teachings represent the words or ideas of the historical Jesus?

It is very important when studying biblical texts that we consider not only our own preconceptions, biases, and presuppositions, but also those of the writer of the original text or sources used. For example, there are practitioners who deny the current operation of miracles or the role of the Holy Spirit. These individuals are called cessationists. They believe that spiritual gifts such as speaking in tongues, prophecy, and healing ended with the last apostle. Consequently, they also do not support a modern-day office of apostle. I do not support this conclusion.

Scripture tells us that Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever (Hebrews 13:8). Eugene Peterson, in his translation The Message, puts it this way: “For Jesus doesn’t change—yesterday, today, tomorrow, he’s totally himself.” How can we limit Jesus to certain “dispensations” relative to the works of the Holy Spirit, especially in isolated or developing countries where the Gospel has yet to be preached? Besides, in John 14:12-14 Jesus says, “Very truly I tell you, whoever believes in me will do the works I have been doing, and they will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father. And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it” (NIV).

The Existential Approach

There is a third approach that is often applied when practicing exegesis, but it does not seem to have an official or commonly used name. Michael J. Gorman (2009) says this method could be labeled existential. It seems this technique is often criticized. This is true for a number of reasons.

Those who support the existential approach to reading Scripture are predisposed to see the subject text as something to be engaged with. Existential methods are therefore considered “instrumental.” They see the text as a vehicle; a means to an end as opposed to an end it itself. For them, perhaps it is a springboard. The existential approach by its very nature will include elements grounded in a reality beyond the text itself. In other words, metaphysical. With this approach, the text “bears witness” to the subject matter. This “something beyond” may be a set of relations among people, such as a “spiritual” truth beyond the “literal.” I believe this approach may also be categorized as theological or transformative. Remember the precept that God’s Word is alive and is power unto personal or psychic change.

The existential (theological or transformative) approach is by nature self-involving. Exegetes using this method do not see the text as a historical or literary artifact to be examined, but as something to engage with—as something that could or should affect their lives. The text is taken seriously with respect to present-day experience, as it impacts the individual and the community. We see this with the Word of God, which has the potential to create a new self and a new community. It is, therefore, both personal and corporate.

Types of Criticism in an Existential Approach

  • Theological exegesis, missional interpretation, and spiritual reading—exegesis is done in the context of a specific religious tradition and or religious purposes
  • Canonical criticism—exegesis is done in the context of the Bible as a whole
  • Embodiment or actualization—exegesis is done in the context of attempting to appropriate and embody the text in the world.
  • Ideological criticism (including post-colonial criticism), advocacy criticism, and liberationist exegesis—exegesis is done in the context of the struggle against unequal power relations and injustice and for justice or liberation

Interestingly, the existential approach is subjective and leaves a lot open to personal interpretation. This can be both good and bad. The existential approach has been with us in Western civilization since the Enlightenment. Enlightened individuals tend to equate knowledge and education with the procurement of truth. This rather ethereal approach to acquiring knowledge is often limiting as it involves an individual’s ability to apply collective values and intuition to understand others and the world around them. Existential methodology features metacognition, which is the act of thinking about what it is you’re thinking about. The upside is people well-versed in this approach are able to see “the big picture,” and are less likely to get lost in the minutiae.

An existential analysis of the Sermon on the Mount might involve asking the following questions:

  • To what kind of modern-day faith and practice does the Sermon call contemporary readers?
  • How might the text about “turning the other cheek” be a potential source of difficulty or even oppression for the politically or socially downtrodden?
  • Does love of enemies rule out the use of resistance or violence in every instance? What does it mean practically to embody the teachings about non-violence in the Sermon?
  • What spiritual practices are necessary for individuals and churches to live the message of the Sermon in the contemporary (albeit pluralistic, self-centered, reactionary) world?

Scholars who approach a text in this way use diverse methods and have a wide variety of goals or agendas. Both diachronic and synchronic methods can be appropriated, and others may be introduced as well. Practitioners  of existential exegesis judge the adequacy of a specific method on the basis of its ability to assist in achieving the overall goal of exegesis. This goal may be described as something rather fundamental, such as conversion or spiritual maturity, or for something more specific, such as a personal encounter with God.

EXEGESIS VERSUS HERMENEUTICS

Making sense of Scripture is an arduous and sometimes confusing undertaking. Some scholars describe exegesis and hermeneutics as “How to read the Bible for all it’s worth.” There is an appreciable difference between explaining what the Bible says and agreeing what it means by what it says. It seems many in the church today tend to argue over how the Bible should control or impact their lifestyle, if at all. This is in part why each individual who approaches interpretation of Scripture will bring a great deal of subjectivity to the exercise. If you study Scripture intent on finding loopholes to justify how you’re living or what you’re believing, you will likely end up confused, indecisive, and (unfortunately) miserable.

The difference between exegesis and hermeneutics is not as sharp as you might think. It could be said they are two sides of the same coin.

Exegesis is the interpretation of a text by way of critical analysis of its content in order to clarify its true meaning. The main goal in exegesis is to uncover the original intended meaning of a given text through careful, systematic study. When we undertake examination of biblical texts in accordance with exegesis, we are examining the text in order to decode the original meaning and determine how it applies to a current situation. Exegesis, by its nature, includes reaching back into history.

Hermeneutics is the study of the principles and methods used to interpret religious texts and philosophical works. Its main goal is to determine the contemporary relevance of such ancient writings. Specific to the Bible, hermeneutics looks for ways that Scripture applies to the “here and now.” In 1764 French philosopher  Voltaire wrote, “The Bible. That is what fools have written, what imbeciles commend, what rogues teach, and young children are made to learn by heart.” Numerous skeptics of Christianity have attacked the names, dates, events and conclusions in the Bible, often proclaiming that Scripture is riddled with errors. For example, people who accept Darwinian evolution ridicule the claim of Creation as a leftover fantasy from the age of barbarians and illiterates. These early scholars believed that science would ultimately provide concrete answers about the origin of life and the universe. We’re still waiting for that to happen.

Klein, Blomberg, and Hubbard, Jr. (2017) discuss how presupposition can skew what we seek and how we interpret. They write, “We are convinced that the goal of hermeneutics is to enable interpreters to arrive at the meaning of the text that the biblical writers or editors intended their readers to understand” (p. 224). Of course, most Christians hold the presupposition that God’s Word is eternal and will always be relevant. It is inspired and alive, having relevance beyond its original circumstance or intention. It is a living text.

It seems appropriate to take a moment to accept and engage with the fact of presupposition. Here are a few critical elements presupposition that needs to be faced:

  • Admit that you have presuppositions
  • Identify those presuppositions that you bring to the task
  • Evaluate or assess your presuppositions
  • Embrace those presuppositions you believe to be valid
  • Take steps to discard those presuppositions you deem invalid

CONCLUDING REMARKS

If we are going to explain, interpret, or translate Scripture in a manner that preserves its meaning and power, we have to move from mere “rules” for decoding texts to a more far-reaching understanding of how to understand Scripture. It also must include admitting our own presuppositions, biases, and preconceived notions, which may or may not be true. It is important to rely on the Holy Spirit to illuminate Scripture. The Spirit will (i) convince us that the Bible is accurate and true, (ii) instill in us an ability to possess rather than merely comprehend the meaning, and (iii) eventually lead us to conviction in our hearts that enable us to fully embrace and live within its meaning.

References

Gorman, M. (2009). Elements of Biblical Exegesis. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic.

Klein, W., Blomberg, C. and Hubbard, Jr., R. (2017). Introduction to Biblical Interpretation, 3rd Edition. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

 

 

 

 

 

The First Deception

Written by Steven Barto, B.S., Psych.

I had a tough time picking a title for this post. Although I am presenting an account of the first deception in the Bible, there is also an amazing correlation between the punishment God administered for that deception—which is also the first sin—and the torture and torment suffered by Christ on the cross. A lot of deception occurs in Genesis. The Latin root for the word “deception” is decipere, which means to “ensnare.” Accordingly, this indicates man’s tendency to be caught up or carried away.

Deception can be found from Genesis to Revelation. Abraham deceived when he stated that Sarah was his sister. Isaac also stated that his wife was a sibling. Joseph’s brothers informed their father that Joseph had been killed by wild beasts when, in fact, they had thrown him into a pit and left him. Delilah deceived Samson. Herod deceived his men when he asked them to locate the baby Jesus so he might go worship him when he intended to kill him. Paul noted in Romans 3:13 that a man’s tongue practices deceit. The prophet Jeremiah said the heart is “deceitful above all things and beyond cure” (Jeremiah 17:9, NIV). Second Timothy 3:13 tells us that evildoers and imposters go from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived.

How It All Started

Satan beset our first parents, Adam and Eve, drawing them into sin. The temptation proved fatal for them and for the unregenerate man. The tempter was Satan, in the form of a serpent, who slithered in and accosted Eve while she walking near the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil alone. This was intentional, as temptation is difficult to resist when we’re faced with it unaccompanied. Satan’s plan was to drive a wedge between our first parents and God. Satan tempted Eve, that by her he might draw Adam into disobedience. Simply, it is the devil’s practice to send temptation through people we do not suspect and that have the most influence over us.

We know Satan is a liar and a murderer and a scoffer from the beginning (John 8:43-45). He likes to teach men first to doubt, and then to deny. This leaves us rather vulnerable to practice sin. He promises advantages from our disobedience while downplaying the punishment. In fact, he tempts us to seek elevation to a new office or authority—to be like gods. He tempted Adam and Eve with the same desire so he might ruin them as he’d been ruined. Satan ruined himself by seeking to be like God; therefore, he sought to infect our first parents with the desire to know as God knows. He continues today to bring as many of us he can along with him in his eventual doom into the pit of Hell. Simply put, misery loves company.

The Steps of Transgression

Let’s look at the steps of transgression when Adam and Eve disobeyed God in the Garden of Eden. You should note this was a trending down toward the pit, not up toward heaven and eternal fellowship with God.

  1. Eve first saw. Much of our sin comes in through the eyes. We need to avoid focusing on or gazing at that which we are in danger of lusting after (see Matthew 5:28).
  2. Eve then took. It is one thing to look, but once we reach out and take that which we’ve lusted after we have reached a decision that is quite difficult to undo. Satan can tempt us, but he has no power to force us to sin, whether believer or unbeliever.
  3. Eve did eat. When she looked, perhaps she did not intend to take; or when she took, not to eat, but it ended with that. It is wise to stop the first motions of sin and to turn away before it’s too late and we end up in full-blown disobedience.
  4. Eve gave it also to her husband. Those that have done wrong are often willing to draw others in with them to do the same. This is quite prevalent in active addiction where relapse often breeds company.
  5. Adam did eat. In neglecting the Tree of Life, of which he was allowed to eat, he ate from the forbidden Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. Adam chose contempt for God, disobeying God and attempting to have that which God did not see fit to provide for him. Adam chose being like God rather than enjoying fellowship with God. He would have what he wanted when he wanted it rather than wait on God.

Adam’s sin was disobedience. Romans 5:19 says, “For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous” (NIV). Interestingly, Adam had no sin nature within him in the Garden, but he had a free will. Falling to temptation, he withdrew from posterity and paradise into sin and ruin. It was too late when Adam and Eve realized the error of disobeying God. They saw the happiness and joy from which they fell, and the misery they would now experience. They realized that a loving God had provided them with everything they needed through grace and favor. That was all gone now. The contrast must have been overwhelming!

God’s Reaction to the Disobedience of Adam and Eve

In Genesis 3:8-10, we learn that Adam and Eve attempted to hide from God. This is the first incident of loss of fellowship with the Father due to unholiness. God cried out, “Where are you?” (verse 8). I truly believe this was not a question of location. God knew where they were. He is, after all, omniscient. Instead, I believe He meant for Adam and Eve to examine that they were now in a bad place, hiding and afraid to approach God as He was walking in the Garden in the cool of the day. Is this not the first examination of one’s “position” in God as a result of practicing sin?

Where were they? In the midst of broken fellowship with God. Indeed, they were now in bondage to Satan and on the road to certain ruin. They would have wandered endlessly without end, cut of from the sunlight of the Spirit, lost forever, had the good Shepherd not sought them. God always leaves the flock to look for the lost sheep. Bethel Music has produced an amazing song titled Reckless Love. The chorus includes the following lines:

Oh, the overwhelming, never-ending, reckless love of God
Oh, it chases me down, fights til I’m found, leaves the 99

The message of Genesis 3:8-10 is that as sinners we must consider where we are versus where God intends us to be, and to realize that no matter what we do we will not be content until we return to God. However, like Adam, we have reason to fear God when we’ve been disobedient. This is true for two basic reasons: (i) we are ashamed for our offense; and (ii) we are fearful of the punishment or correction. Fortunately, as believers we are saints, covered in the righteousness of Christ. Adam and Eve lacked such a covering when they fell from grace and were expelled from the Garden.

Although God did not leave Adam and Eve without a “covering,” when He made clothing He made it warm and strong—in other words, adequate—but he did not clothe them in long flowing robes of scarlet. Instead, he made coats of animal skin. This clothing was coarse and very plain. It is fascinating to recognize the foreshadowing of such a “covering” for our unrighteousness. When God killed an animal to fabricate clothing for Adam and Eve, blood was spilled. There is, therefore, no covering for sin without the shedding of blood. Let’s look at the clothing Adam and Eve attempted to make for themselves. They concocted a “garment” from fig leaves, but it was too narrow to hide their nakedness. This is like the “rags” of our own righteousness. Isaiah 64:6 tells us, “All of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags; we all shrivel up like a leaf, and like the wind our sins sweep us away” (NIV). God made an adequate covering for Adam and Eve that serves as a precursor to our putting on the righteousness of Christ!

So God kicked Adam and Eve out of the Garden. He said they could “no longer occupy” the space they were in. This is because they were now unclean, mired by the sin of disobedience. Unrighteous at best. Doomed to toil and suffer and die at worst. God knew they’d be unwilling to leave this garden paradise, so He had to chase them out and placed cherubim as guards to the entrance. Why? Because Adam and Eve were no longer eligible to eat from the Tree of Life. That’s pretty heavy. Oh, but it gets heavier. God essentially banned all of mankind from entering the Garden of Eden. Man had fallen from grace. But here’s what this amazing grace looks like. Adam and Eve were not killed for their disobedience. Instead, they were sentenced to live under harsh conditions, to a place of toil, not to a place of torment.

A Ripple Effect

Unfortunately, the place where the Tree of Life was situated was now closed to all mankind. Adam and Eve had been shut out from the privileges of their state of innocence, yet they were not left in a place of despair with no way out. God had planned (since before the foundation of the universe) for a method of achieving salvation. It would, of course, involve the shedding of blood at Calvary. In the meantime, our first parents fell under a covenant of works. The original covenant had been broken by sin. The curse for disobedience was in full force. Man is without hope if he is judged by the Adamic Covenant, for we simply cannot obey the Law to the letter. God showed this to Adam and Eve not to discourage them or drive them into despair, but to quicken them to look for life and happiness and peace through the Promised Seed, by whom a new and everlasting covenant—an unconditional covenant wherein salvation need not be earned through works—would open the door to a better way into the holy presence of God.

We can learn from this first incident of deception and disobedience what dishonor and trouble sin will bring into our lives. It brings mischief wherever it goes, destroying our joy and comfort. Eventually, especially with habitual sin, we will feel shame and regret. This can cause us to end up forgetting our role and begin to experience contempt for God, as if God tempts man. James 1:13 says, “When tempted, no one should say, ‘God is tempting me.’ For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone” (NIV). Verse 14 reminds us that we are tempted when we’re dragged away from God and enticed by our own evil desires.

Not surprisingly,  when we commit deception we are more concerned with getting caught by our fellow man, and care to restore our “reputation” in this life rather than desiring to be forgiven and pardoned by God. We forget to fear the Lord. Much of our striving to cover our sins and offenses is in vain and typically frivolous. This is akin to Adam and Eve attempting to cover their nakedness (indeed, the fallout of their disobedience was shame) with fig leaves. Similarly, we all try to cover up our misdeeds and transgressions as Adam and Eve did in the Garden. Before they sinned, they would have welcomed God’s presence and would not have felt embarrassed to be naked before Him. No doubt, having fallen, they became terrified and ashamed. This is not what the serpent promised. He said they’d be like God, knowing what He knows.

Correlation Between the Wages of Sin in Genesis and the Crucifixion

We know that God passed sentence on Adam and Eve. What we tend to forget—and what today’s New Atheists don’t understand—is that when the First Adam sinned he passed on his fallen sin nature to all future generations. This may or may not sound fair to you, but God’s righteous judgment is just. For example, our willful disobedience and deceitfulness deserves the punishment that Christ accepted on our behalf at Calvary.

The devil’s instruments of deception and temptation are cunning at the very least, and are deserving of the punishment God has planned for him. Under the cover of the serpent (in the Garden), Satan is sentenced to be degraded and accursed of God; detested and abhorred of all mankind. He is to be destroyed and ruined at last by our Great Redeemer, signified by the breaking of his head. War is declared between the Seed of the woman (Jesus Christ) and the seed of the serpent. God gives a foreshadow of the promise of a Savior who will suffer in our stead. What is most amazing is that no sooner had man fallen than the timely remedy was provided and revealed. Ephesians 1:4 says, “He’s the Father of our Master, Jesus Christ, and takes us to the high places of blessing in him. Long before he laid down earth’s foundations, he had us in mind, had settled on us as the focus of his love, to be made whole and holy by his love. Long, long ago he decided to adopt us into his family through Jesus Christ” (MSG).

Jesus, by His death and suffering, answered the sentence passed on our First Parents. Did travailing pains come with sin? We read of the travail of Christ’s soul (Isaiah 53:11) and the excruciating pain He endured on the cross. Did subjection come in with sin? Christ was made subject to the Law (Galatians 4:4). Did the curse come in with sin? Christ was made a curse for us. Galatians 3:13 tells us, “Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree)” (NKJV). Did thorns come in with sin? Christ was crowned with thorns for us. Did sweat come in with sin? He sweat blood for us to the point that He exuded great drops of blood. Did sorrow come in with sin? He was a man of sorrows; His soul was, in His agony, exceeding sorrowful. Did death come in with sin? He became obedient unto death.

Reconciliation

We are told in 1 Peter 1:19-21, “…but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot… He indeed was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you who through Him believe in God, who raised Him from the dead and gave Him glory, so that your faith and hope are in God” (NKJV) [emphasis mine]. In the beginning was the Word, through whom God created the world and everything in it. We’re told that without Him nothing was made that has been made: (see John 1:1-3). Colossians 1:16 tells us, “For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him” (NIV). Jesus is the path by which fallen Creation could be reconciled with God.

The apostle Paul teaches about reconciliation, and describes examples that include siblings, litigants, lost sheep, the prodigal to his father, and man to God. Indeed, reconciliation is exemplified in Jesus’ attitude toward sinners—the truth in Athanasius’s belief that incarnation is reconciliation. He butted heads with Arius, the father of Arianism. This heretical view held that Jesus was begotten by God at a specific point in time, distinct from and not an equal of God. Arius said, “There was a time when the Son was not.” Accordingly, this blasphemy teaches that the Holy Spirit and Jesus did not always exist.

Reconciliation is certainly the central theme in Christianity. It means that God made Christ to be sin for us. 2 Corinthians 5:18-19 says, “All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people’s sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation” (NIV). We are in desperate need for this reconciliation as we have been alienated from God through sin. It is when our estrangement leads us to hit our knees in prayer that we begin to build a bridge back to God. This not only includes reconciliation to God, it also involves reconciliation of man to one another and to life itself. I believe this is the very foundation of restoration.

The New Testament teaches that we are reconciled through “the death of the son,” “through the cross,” “by the shed blood of Jesus Christ,” and “through Christ made to be sin” as our substitute. He was the very propitiation for our sins. It is fascinating to note that in Romans 3:25 the Greek word for propitiation is hilasterion, which refers specifically to the lid on the Ark of the Covenant. The phrase means that Christ took upon Himself the punishment we should have. This is the great work that took place on Calvary so that we might regain fellowship with God. It is important to note that there was truly no other way back to God. This was and is our only hope.

Christianity declares that God reconciled mankind to Himself through Christ. Paul wants us to realize that this action is an established fact. Romans 5:11 says, “Not only so, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received our reconciliation” (RSV). Eugene Peterson’s translation The Message//Remix: The Bible in Contemporary Language states the following: “Now that we are set right with God by means of this sacrificial death, the consummate blood sacrifice, there is no longer a question of being at odds with God in any way. If, when we were at our worst, we were put on friendly terms with God by the sacrificial death of his Son, now that we’re at our best, just think of how our lives will expand and deepen by means of his resurrection life” (vv. 9-10).

Indeed, this amounts to coming full-circle. Adam and Eve sinned and were in need of a “covering” for their sin because of shame and guilt. They tried to hide from God, perhaps hoping He wouldn’t “find” them. Their greatest fear was his wrath. I don’t believe they anticipated that such an “innocent” act of curiosity would lead to being cut off by God and expelled from the Garden of Eden. However, I am not sure whether being armed with such knowledge would have made a difference. They were enticed by the beguiling of the serpent, through his deception and trickery, to disobey God, saying, “You will not surely die. For God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil” (Genesis 3:3-4, NKJV). This sounded good to Eve. After all, would it not be prudent to have an eye for the difference between what is good and what is evil? Where’s the harm in that?

The consequences of that self-delusion and abject disobedience set the stage for the entire Creation to go off track. Nothing is as God intended it to be. Thanks to God we have been given the means to patch things up with the Father and be reunited with Him in fellowship. Indeed, we now have the means to participate with God, Christ, and the Holy Spirit in the redemption and restoration of all of God’s glorious Creation.

References

Cory Asbury, Caleb Culver, Ran Jackson. (2017). Reckless Love [recorded by Bethel Music]. On Reckless Love [CD recording]. Los Angeles, CA: Bethel Music.

Peterson, E. (2009). The Message//Remix: The Bible in Contemporary Language. Colorado Springs, CA: NavPress.