Download How Many Gospels - Let The Bible Speak

Sermon #1030
Q & A: Genesis (2)
We continue addressing Bible questions relevant to our ongoing studies from Genesis as well as other
Bible questions. Our first question: Scripture declares that childbearing is a blessing in Genesis 1:28, but
do the consequences of the sin in the garden make childbearing a curse instead? Clearly, pain (or sorrow)
would be present in childbearing as a result of Adam and Eve’s sin according to Genesis 3:16-17, “To the
woman He said: ‘I will greatly multiply your sorrow and your conception; In pain you shall bring forth
children; Your desire shall be for your husband, And he shall rule over you.’ Then to Adam He said,
‘Because you have heeded the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree of which I commanded
you, saying, ‘You shall not eat of it': ‘Cursed is the ground for your sake; In toil you shall eat of it All the
days of your life.’”
To say, however, that these consequences removed the inherent blessing of childbirth entirely is to miss
the point. Although some of the shine of motherhood is removed because Adam and Eve partook of the
forbidden fruit, this passage teaches that through childbearing mankind through the birth of Jesus would
play a role in unleashing the deathblow upon Satan.
Although those more devoted to modern culture than they are to Holy Scripture, bury the following
passage, it shows that those who honor the Holy Spirit’s message recognize that Eve’s decision in the
garden impacts godly women in the Lord’s church today. Consider the inspired words of 1 Timothy 2:1115, “Let a woman learn in silence with all submission. And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have
authority over a man, but to be in silence. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not
deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. Nevertheless she will be saved in
childbearing if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control.”
All kinds of verbal and grammatical gymnastics by professing Christian are employed to dull the plain
teaching of this passage, but we see clearly how profoundly our decisions may impact others even
generations down the road.
Back to the original question: “Scripture declares that childbearing is a blessing in Genesis 1:28, but do
the consequences of the sin in the garden make childbearing a curse instead?” The Jamieson, Fausset,
and Brown Commentary reads, “….I think it is implied indirectly that the very curse will be turned into a
condition favorable to her salvation, by her faithfully performing her part in doing and suffering what God
has assigned to her, namely, child-bearing and home duties, her sphere, as distinguished from public
teaching, which is not hers, but man's (1 Timothy 2:11, 12). In this home sphere, not ordinarily in one of
active duty for advancing the kingdom of God, which contradicts the position assigned to her by God, she
will be saved on the same terms as all others, namely, by living faith.” We address more of your
questions, but first, we have a song…
Another question inevitably arises when people review the book of Genesis: Where did Cain get his wife?”
We know Eve is “the mother of all the living,” so that eliminates the possibility of Cain marrying the
daughter of some other couple. In addition, we read in Genesis 5:4 that Adam had “other sons and
daughters.” The inevitable conclusion is that Cain married one of his sisters. Some may initially be
repulsed and exclaim, “That’s incest!” But let us take a more deliberate look at this issue. Since mankind
began with one couple, there was no other way to propagate the human race than by family members
marrying family members. The laws forbidding incest as a sin between siblings, etc., did not exist prior to
the Law of Moses in Leviticus 18:7-17. We also know of other Bible characters that married their siblings.
Abraham married his half-sister (Genesis 20:12). Moses’ father, Amram, married his father’s sister,
Jochebed (Exodus 6:20). We now know the great mental and physical risks of incest in our time. No
doubt, this was at least part of the reason behind this legislation. Additionally, we know the genetic risks
we expose ourselves to with incest are great but were not back then.
1
Q & A: Genesis (II) by Brett Hickey, sermon #1030
2 of 5
The next question: “How could Adam live to be 930 years and be able to father children at 500 years old
(Genesis5:32)? In an age where we are in awe of any man or woman who manages to live to be 100, it is
natural for men to be skeptical of the biblical account of men living to be so old. Some well-intended
gentleman proposed a solution, I suppose from his perspective, to rehabilitate these irregularities. This is
one example of the trouble people get into when they believe the Bible needs to be “fixed.” This man
suggested the ages of the men in this age be divided by a factor of twelve to come to the actual age as
we would understand it. Well, this worked fine with Adam. Let’s see, 930 divided by twelve comes to a
little under eighty years and 500 divided by 12 comes to a little over 40. Wonderful! This works with many
other long livers of the period. The ingenious idea, however, breaks down when we come to the birth of
Terah when his father, Nahor, was only 29. Using this formula dividing by twelve, puts Nahor fathering a
child when he was only two and half. No, they lived as long as the text tells us.
In response to the wickedness that prevailed on the earth, the Bible says in Genesis 6:6, “And the Lord
was sorry that He had made man on the earth and he was grieved in His heart.” The question is raised,
“Does God actually change His mind? Doesn’t this go against the unchangeable nature of God?”
I remember being curious as a teenager when I saw a Mormon commercial promoting a free copy of the
King James Version for calling their 1-800 number. I was perplexed because I understood they contended
the Book of Mormon was inspired and more reliable than the Bible. In addressing my questions, the
Mormon representative suggested the superiority of the Book of Mormon and said the Bible was not free
from error. He cited a Scripture that spoke of God “repenting.” Of course, this Scripture did not suggest
God had sinned but that God had changed His mind. After all, the Bible teaches in Malachi 3:6, “I, the
Lord, do not change.”
What about this? Is there a contradiction here? After all, Christians place great confidence in the reliability
in the character of God. Yet we find in Genesis 6 that it grieved or repented God that he had made man.
Doesn’t this contradict our understanding of the immutability of God? How can we reconcile these two
ideas? While Malachi insists the nature of God does not change, this does not mean when God makes a
decision about an individual or nation that He is unwilling to change His mind.
In the story of Jonah, for example, God sent the prophet to Nineveh because of their great wickedness to
proclaim their destruction in forty days (Jonah 3:4). The message we read offered no provision for
avoiding catastrophe. However, after Nineveh repented by fasting in sackcloth and ashes from “the
greatest to the least of them” (Jonah 3:5-6), the Bible says “God relented from the disaster that He had
said He would bring upon them…” (Jonah 3:10).
God changing His mind did not detract from the immutability of His character, but merely shows God’s
unchangeable character involves His willingness to change His disposition towards us based on our
faithfulness. Jesus illustrates this facet of God’s nature in Matthew 21:28-32, "But what do you think? A
man had two sons, and he came to the first and said, ‘Son, go, work today in my vineyard.' He answered
and said, ‘I will not,' but afterward he regretted it and went. Then he came to the second and said likewise.
And he answered and said, ‘I go, sir,' but he did not go. Which of the two did the will of his father?’ They
said to Him, ‘The first. Jesus said to them, ‘Assuredly, I say to you that tax collectors and harlots enter the
kingdom of God before you. For John came to you in the way of righteousness, and you did not believe
him; but tax collectors and harlots believed him; and when you saw it, you did not afterward relent and
believe him.’” God will change His mind toward the sinner, if the sinner will change his mind toward God.
This is a part of God’s character that is unchangeable.
2
Q & A: Genesis (II) by Brett Hickey, sermon #1030
3 of 5
The next question is from Wisconsin: “I was listening to a broadcast by Dr. Alan Cairns speaking about
the book of Judges. In the broadcast Dr. Cairns made comments regarding Dr. John MacArthur preaching
heresy about the blood of Christ. I was very surprised at these statements since I have been listening to
Dr. MacArthur for a long time. I have never heard anything heretical from his broadcast. I would like more
clarification regarding the statements made by Dr. Cairns because I want to follow God’s Word and be
made aware of inaccuracies.”
As I understand the controversy, some take issue with John MacArthur saying it is not the blood (the
literal liquid that coursed through Jesus’ veins) that saves, but the sacrificial death of Jesus in which His
blood was shed. Although I disagree with other doctrinal positions taken by MacArthur, he is on target
here.
The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia explains that “‘Blood’ is used in the NT in a figurative
sense for bloodshed or murder.”
W. E. Bullinger writes with greater precision in Figures of Speech in the Bible: “In the New Testament, the
expression ‘the blood of Christ’ is the figure Metalepsis; because first the ‘blood’ is put (by Synecdoche)
for blood-shedding: i.e., the death of Christ, as distinct from His life; and then His death is put for the
perfect satisfaction made by it, for all the merits of the atonement effected by it: i.e., it means not merely
the actual blood corpuscles…”
Evidence supporting the idea that the word “blood” is used to suggest “death” is plentiful.
•
Genesis 37:26, “So Judah said to his brothers, "What profit is there if we kill our brother and
conceal his blood?”
•
Hosea 4:2, “By swearing and lying, Killing and stealing and committing adultery, They break all
restraint, With bloodshed upon bloodshed.
•
Revelation 16:6, “For they have shed the blood of saints and prophets,”
Those who criticize MacArthur cite the lengthy list of Scriptures on the connection between the blood of
Christ and salvation. We read, for instance, in Matthew 26:28, “For this is My blood of the new covenant,
which is shed for many for the remission of sins.” Jesus teaches that the fruit of the vine represents the
blood of the covenant shed to provide the forgiveness of sins. Those who insist Jesus’ ten pints of
plasma, red blood cells, and white blood cells are what washes the penitent, baptized believer of his sins
would, it seems, also be bound to hold the wooden Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation in which the
Pope claims that the fruit of the vine changes to Jesus’ blood. Both ideas fail to see the Spirit’s use of
figurative language. The emphasis on the death of Christ is seen in the context of the Lord’s Supper in 1
Corinthians 11:26: “For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death till
He comes.”
Another passage MacArthur’s critics emphasize is Romans 5:9, "Much more then, having now been
justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him.” Obviously, we are “justified” (made
righteous) and “saved from wrath” by the blood of Christ. The shedding of Christ’s blood would not have
brought forgiveness had the blood shed not culminated in His death. That Jesus’ blood is used as a
symbol for Christ’s violent, sacrificial death is clear when we put Romans 5:9 back in its context (Romans
5:6-10).
3
Q & A: Genesis (II) by Brett Hickey, sermon #1030
4 of 5
“For when we were still without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly. For scarcely for a
righteous man will one die; yet perhaps for a good man someone would even dare to die. But God
demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. Much more
then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him. For if when we
were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been
reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.” Before the use of the word “blood” in verse 9, the word death or
die is used four times and one time after the word blood is used. One has to try to miss the connection not
to see it.
The emptiness of these attacks on MacArthur is evident to the objective mind. Frankly, they smack of
ministerial jealousy in which men grasp at straws to discredit a preaching peer.
We are saved by the blood of Christ because He shed His blood and died the violent death of the cross.
The question remains, how do we contact the blood or death of Christ? Many fail to see that as important
as faith, repentance, and confession are to salvation, Scripture never links these directly to the blood or
death of Christ. The penitent believer contacts the blood or death of Christ when he is scripturally
baptized. This truth is found in Romans 6:3-4, “Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized
into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into
death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk
in newness of life.” Clearly, we contact the blood of Christ, the death of Christ, when we obey the Lord in
baptism.
The next question is from Washington State: “What is meant in Romans 7:4-5 by “bearing fruit to God?”
The Scripture reads in its entirety, “Therefore, my brethren, you also have become dead to the law
through the body of Christ, that you may be married to another--to Him who was raised from the dead,
that we should bear fruit to God. For when we were in the flesh, the sinful passions which were aroused
by the law were at work in our members to bear fruit to death.”
The metaphor of fruit-bearing is common to Scripture. Consider a few more examples:
Jesus tells us in Matthew 7:16-20, “You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from
thornbushes or figs from thistles? Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad
fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear
good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Therefore by their fruits you will know them.”
Galatians 5:22-23, “But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness,
faithfulness, gentleness, self-control. Against such there is no law.”
We see the same truth in each of these Scriptures. Just as the fruit a tree bears demonstrates
conclusively what type of tree it is, so the words and actions in a man’s life provide incontrovertible
evidence of the kind of a man he is.
A question from Iowa: “What is meant by foolish talking and course jesting? Ephesians 5:3-4, “But
fornication and all uncleanness or covetousness, let it not even be named among you, as is fitting for
saints; neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor coarse jesting, which are not fitting, but rather giving of
thanks.”
4
Q & A: Genesis (II) by Brett Hickey, sermon #1030
5 of 5
After reviewing many scholars on these words, they seem to be quite general. You can review a number
of them below. Perhaps the two best words to describe what is addressed are ribaldry (rude and vulgar)
and scurrility (course and abusive language). It is clear that we need to be careful not to cross the line
since we will be judged for “every idle word.”
Burton Coffman
The smutty story, the foolish jesting, the empty nonsense that passes in some quarters for conversation all of these are proscribed and forbidden…. MacKnight rendered jesting as "double meanings," citing that
as the meaning of "artfully turned discourse" (Greek), specifically identifying these as "chaste expressions
which convey lewd meanings."
Whereas the Puritans went too far in their over-strict interpretation of Paul's words here, it may not be
denied that our own generation has erred in the other direction. This passage condemns much of the
conversation of many Christians, which at best, in many cases, is "borderline." Bruce believed that,
"Above all, all light and irreverent talk about sacred things is to be utterly reprobated."
Stay with us and we’ll tell you how to get a copy of this message, after our song…
If you’d like a DVD of # 1030, “Q & A Genesis (2),” our free singing CD, or our Bible study course to
complete at home, please contact us. When you complete lesson 1 of the Bible Study, send it in, we’ll
grade it and send it back with lesson 2, et cetera, until you complete the course. Please visit
LetTheBibleSpeak.com to watch videos, hear podcasts, and read transcripts of the program. Finally, we
echo the sentiment of the apostle Paul when he wrote in Romans 16:16, “the churches of Christ salute
you.” Until next week, goodbye and God bless.
Are you searching for the truth of God's word and have a sincere desire to learn about the Bible? Do you want to know
what the Bible says about salvation and about Christ and His church? If you are looking for Bible Founded discussion on
these topics and many others, then please accept this invitation to explore "Let the Bible Speak" and then contact us for
additional studies.
We are members of the church of Christ as found in the New Testament. We are not members of a denomination or
earthly religious organization. We are a brotherhood of believers, joined by a common bond, Jesus Christ. We try to live
and worship following the patterns found in the New Testament.
(For manuscripts of other sermons visit: www.LetTheBibleSpeak.com)
COPYRIGHT © Let The Bible Speak. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
IMPORTANT COPYRIGHT NOTICE:
Express permission is granted to distribute any video, audio, or transcript of any broadcast message as long as the
material is: unedited and attribution is given to Let The Bible Speak; a hyperlink to LetTheBibleSpeak.com is included for
electronic distribution; a text reference is included to www.LetTheBibleSpeak.com for printed distribution; and the original
author receives attribution. An irrevocable, world-wide, royalty free license for distribution is granted as long as such
distribution has the intent of: supporting the truth as presented; giving glory and honor to God; and spreading the gospel
of Jesus Christ.
5