The Significance of Eve’s Seed in the Plan of God

The description of the virgin birth of Jesus harkens back to Genesis 3:15.


I am constantly amazed at the “new” things I see in reading the Bible year after year. I read the Bible for the first time in a World Religion class in college in 1978, and I have been reading it ever since. In the last 5 years (6, or 7, I don’t know), I have read the through the Bible from beginning to end – from Genesis to Revelation – in chronological order and in other ways.

At the beginning of this New Year, I am going to try writing some shorter articles, as I have noticed my articles are getting progressively more wordy and lengthy. The Bible is a rich tapestry, but some threads are longer than others, so I am going to try to pull on some shorter threads from time to time.

In this article, I am focusing on Genesis 3:15 inspired by a brief comment in a sermon I heard during the Christmas season. People often credit the following verse in Genesis as a foreshadowing of the coming of Jesus. God speaking to Eve after the fall said:

“And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel.”

Genesis 3:15 niv

I confess that this foreshadowing never seemed crystal clear to me. Jesus is the offspring of Eve, but so are billions of people. Thus, that connection didn’t seem obvious to me. I saw nothing in that verse that seemed to be specifically about Jesus.

I always figured that theologians connect the second phrase of Genesis 3:15 to Jesus: Eve’s “offspring” (Jesus) will “crush” the serpent’s (Satan’s) head, and the serpent will “strike” his heel. Crushing the head and striking the heel is imagery that doesn’t seem to tie in specifically to what happened with Jesus, except in a very general way. It isn’t completely inappropriate (Jesus certainly had the victory!), but the imagery doesn’t closely fit the details of the crucifixion (like Isaiah 53 does, for instance).

Crushing a head is a fatal blow. Striking a heel is not fatal. Satan’s blow wasn’t fatal, though it seemed to be the dramatic end to Jesus. The crucifixion turns out to be more like the striking of a heal, because Jesus rose from the dead! And that “blow” was crushing to Satan and his purposes.

The end!

Mic drop….

While this is generally accurate, the imagery doesn’t remind us of Jesus in the same way that other Old Testament passages clearly foreshadow him, like Isaiah 53 (by his stripes we are healed).

Hindsight helps us see Jesus in these words spoken by Isaiah hundreds of years earlier. Jews before the time of Jesus knew that many passages in the Psalms, the Prophets, and other places spoke of a Messiah to come. Scholars also go back to Genesis 3:15 to see the foreshadowing of the Messiah (an offspring of Eve crushing the serpent that fooled Adam and Eve into sin).

But, there is more in Genesis 3:15 than the crushing of the serpent’s head that may point to Jesus, and it points to Jesus uniquely and poignantly. It also reveals another thread that runs throughout Scripture.

To see the thread I want to pull on today, we need to focus on the first part of the verse:

And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers….

Genesis 3:15a
Continue reading “The Significance of Eve’s Seed in the Plan of God”

The Curious, Mysterious Nature of the Kingdom of God, Its Effects in the World, and Our Place In It

The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed


“Once, on being asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, ‘The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed, nor will people say, ‘Here it is,’ or ‘There it is,’ because the kingdom of God is in your midst.” 

Luke‬ ‭17:20‭-‬21‬ ‭NIV‬

I have been continually impressed by the countercultural and otherworldly nature of the kingdom of God. In response to the question by the Pharisees, Jesus plainly said that the coming of the kingdom of God is nothing we can observe, but it is in our midst.

As I think about his response, I am reminded that the Holy Spirit is like that as well. The Spirit is like the wind: we can’t see it, but we can see the effects of the wind.

The wind, of course, is a bit less of a mystery than the Holy Spirit or the kingdom of God. We can measure the wind, and we can (somewhat) predict the direction and velocity of the wind. (However, imprecise our predictions may be!)

The wind is a natural phenomenon driven by natural forces (no matter how difficult it may be to predict those forces). Natural forces are different than the forces of personal agency. The Holy Spirit (and the kingdom of God) are forces driven by agency – God’s agency. The Holy Spirit is a Person, and the kingdom of God is, presumably, advanced by God in the “form” of the Holy Spirit (and by the agency of believers as well).

We don’t confuse the wind with other effects in nature, though we might be apt to confuse the effects of the kingdom of God with other effects, such as political, cultural, and other worldview effects.

I suspect that volumes could be written on this!

What are the effects of the kingdom of God? We can’t see the kingdom coming, but I assume we can the see effects of the kingdom of God coming just like we can see the effects of the wind (or the Holy Spirit). It seems that we have some confusion about these things, just as the Pharisees were confused in the 1st Century. However, we do have some guidance from Jesus to help us.

Continue reading “The Curious, Mysterious Nature of the Kingdom of God, Its Effects in the World, and Our Place In It”

What Business Do We Have Judging the World?


The title to this blog article is a question that doesn’t come from me. It comes from Paul, the Apostle. The question is rhetorical, meaning that Paul assumed his audience would know the answer, though he doesn’t leave them guessing. He provides the answer.

His audience was the Corinthian church in the 50’s AD. The larger context in which Paul asked this rhetorical question is also instructive. This is that context in which Paul asks the question:

I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people.

1 Corintihans 5:9-11 (emphasis added)

Then Paul asks the question,

What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside.  

1 Corinthians 5:12 (emphasis added)

I am reminded of this passage today because of a comment posted by someone on Facebook about how we should treat people who seem to be “acting against God.” The poster expressed the opinion that something should be done by Christians about the “open immorality … being accepted in society.”

I don’t want to suggest that biblical morality should not instruct how Christians vote and engage politically in the world, but Paul’s question about judging the world should affect how we interact with the world in politics and other ways. At the same time, we need to know how to model Paul’s instruction not to judge those outside the church.

Christians are often accused of “forcing their religion” or morality on others. Simply voting and engaging politically based on biblical values is not forcing religion or morality on others any more than others voting and engaging politically based on their own values is forcing their views on us. We can vote our consciences without judging.

This is where we may need some nuance, however, as some Christians seem to think they have a biblical obligation or mandate to make the world conform to a biblical morality. I have to admit that I have shared this confusion in my past until I began to take seriously what Paul said to the Corinthians in the passage quoted above.

Judging by Paul’s words, I used to view this exactly backward! I judged the world by biblical morality, but I often gave myself and fellow Christians a pass when it came to strict adherence to righteous behavior. After all, we are saved by our faith and not be works, right? If I mess up, I can confess it and be forgiven – even as I demand that the world acknowledge and follow the law.

As I meditate on Paul’s words, I see that Paul’s instruction aligns with what Jesus said about judging. I think you will see that as I unpack what Paul and Jesus said and try to work out why they said it and what it might mean for us in the way we conduct ourselves in the world.

Continue reading “What Business Do We Have Judging the World?”

What Does It mean that the Kingdom of Heaven Is Subjected to Violence, and Violent People Take It By Force?

Does Jesus authorize violent or forceful behavior in defending Christianity?


I engage in many conversations with people of faith on just about any topic. I remember one conversation (on the topic of guns, I believe) in which a fellow believer cited Mathew 11:12 in support of a Christian defense of gun ownership.


From the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven has been subjected to violence, and violent people have been raiding it.” Matthew 11:12 NIV


My friend also mentioned Jesus turning over tables and instructing his followers to buy swords (Luke 22:36, though he tells them in the same chapter to but them down (Luke 22:49-51); “for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.” (Matthew 26:52)). My friend believes that Jesus was saying that force, and even violence, is ok as long as it is used for a good purpose.

I am reminded of his comments as I read through Matthew 12 in my yearly reading plan. I didn’t follow up on his comment then, but reading this passage in context brings it to mind, and it brings clarity to me at the same time.

Does this passage justify violent or forceful behavior in defending Christianity? That is the question

Let’s start with the context. Jesus is preaching in Galilee where John the Baptist has recently been imprisoned for calling out Herod for adultery. John was no shrinking violet. He was bold and forthright, and it landed him behind bars when Herod didn’t take kindly to the criticism.

While in prison, John heard reports of the miraculous things that Jesus was doing. These reports prompted John to send his own followers to ask Jesus, “Are you the one who is to come, or should we expect someone else?” (Matt. 11:3).

I imagine John the Baptist was wrestling with doubt as he languished in prison. In his mind, and in the minds of most Jews at that time, the Messiah was expected to come and take over the world, but it didn’t seem to be happening. The Roman Empire was still very much in charge.

John’s imprisonment must have given him second thoughts about the Messiah stuff. The miraculous signs seemed to mark Jesus as the Messiah, but why was he not wielding the power and the glory of God against the Roman occupation and Roman Empire? John the Baptist may have been hoping that Jesus was just biding his time when he sent for a report.

Jesus sent this message back:


Go back and report to John what you hear and see: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is proclaimed to the poor. Blessed is anyone who does not stumble on account of me.” (Matt. 11:4-6) (quoting Isaiah 35:5-6)


Was that the report John was expecting? Jesus didn’t say anything about driving out Rome and restoring King David’s throne. He didn’t pull from the prophetic messages about a conquering messiah. He pulled a different thread from the Prophets.

When John’s followers left, Jesus praised John the Baptist to the disciples. He affirmed that John the Baptist is the one spoken of in Malachi 3:1 – the messenger sent ahead of the Messiah to prepare the way. He affirmed that he is the Messiah, but the response he sent back to John was about healing, cleansing, and proclaiming good news to the poor.

In this context, Jesus said, “the kingdom of heaven has been subjected to violence, and violent people have been raiding it.”

Jesus seems to be confirming only what John was already hearing about the miraculous signs, but John already knew about those things. Therefore, I think Jesus was doing more than confirming what John already knew. Jesus was tying what he was doing to prophetic passages like the language he quoted from Isaiah when he announced his public ministry (Luke 4:18-19):


The Spirit of the Lord is on me,
    because he has anointed me
    to proclaim good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners
    and recovery of sight for the blind,
to set the oppressed free,
     to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”


These words from Isaiah 61:1-2 with overtones from Isaiah 58:6 were read aloud by Jesus in his hometown synagogue in Nazareth before he sat down with all eyes on him and said, “Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.” (Luke 4:21) These are the words Jesus used to to characterize the purpose for which he came.

We know, of course, that Jesus came to die on a cross, but John and his followers didn’t know that and probably could not have imagined it. Jesus’s followers also didn’t get it even when he tried to tell them.

Jesus pulled passages from Isaiah that alluded to the suffering servant motif to affirm his identity. John the Baptist would have immediately recognized the thread Jesus was pulling, but it wasn’t likely what he was expecting or what he was hoping.

First Century Jews were expecting the Messiah to reestablish the Davidic kingdom “here and now”. The Romans were well aware of that Jewish sentiment and had been putting down factions of zealots who took up the sword to attempt to bring it about.

Imagine Pontius Pilate’s confusion that prompted him to ask Jesus, “Are you the king of the Jews? …. Your own nation and the chief priests have delivered you over to me. What have you done?” This is how Jesus responded to Pontius Pilate:


My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world.” (John 18:36)


With this as the backdrop, let’s turn back to Matthew 12. If we understand the context, and the bigger picture, we see that Jesus is not advocating violence or force: he is doing just the opposite.

Continue reading “What Does It mean that the Kingdom of Heaven Is Subjected to Violence, and Violent People Take It By Force?”

What It Means to Bear God’s Name and the Significance of Not Taking God’s Name in Vain

We who take God’s name are His representatives in the world.


In a previous blog article, I tried to summarize the view developed by Old Testament scholar, Carmen Imes, on what it means that human beings are made in God’s image. I have only summarized her view as I understand it from a conversation on the Holy Post podcast (with some thoughts of my own added in), but she wrote a whole book about it!

The book, Being God’s Image: Why Creation Still Matters, was recently published as a prequel to her previous book, Bearing God’s Name: Why Sinai Still Matters. The previous book on bearing God’s name, in turn, was distilled from Imes’ doctoral dissertation.

Her observations are profound in my book! (Which I don’t have because I am speaking figuratively now.) Having summarized her view on human beings being made in God’s image, I am turning now to the significance of bearing God’s name and not taking His name in vain.

Imes says we don’t bear (take on) God’s image because we are (already made in) God’s image, but we do take on (bear) God’s name if we are His covenant people. The significance of taking on God’s name is what is implicated in the third commandment: thou shalt not take the Lord’s name in vain.

In Carmen Imes’ first book, Bearing God’s name: Why Sinai Still Matters, she explores the commandment not to take the Lord’s name in vain. She argues for what she calls “missional reading”. Thus, she says we should not understand this command simply as a rule to be applied to our speech and how we refer to God verbally. She says the meaning is much broader, deeper and more fundamental than that.


This commandment implicates our whole lives! We who take God’s name are His representatives in the world. We bear or carry His name, so what we do, and who we are, and how we represent God, who’s name we carry, matters deeply!

Every human being is made in image of God, but only God’s covenant people bear His name. Every member of the human race is invited to join the covenant community, but until people join themselves to God’s covenant community, they do not take His name.

Thus, Imes says, “It’s impossible for a nonbeliever to take God’s name in vain.” They haven’t taken His name at all, so they cannot violate the command not to take God’s name in vain. If a person doesn’t take God’s name in the first place, he/she cannot take His name in vain.

Remember that God revealed His proper name, Yahweh, only to His covenant people. Yahweh was not revealed to all people at the time the commandments were given to Moses. The name of God, Yahweh, was only revealed to Israel in the context of the covenant God made with them.

In New Testament verbiage, we are ambassadors of Christ if we have been born again and accepted Christ as our Lord. When we are born again, we take on the “heredity” of God as His children. When we accept Jesus as Lord, we “take his name”: we become identified as Christ followers, traditionally known as Christians.

Because we are followers of Christ who bear his name, everything we do and say is a reflection of Him. We are representatives of the kingdom of God. We carry His flag as we live our lives in the world. (If, indeed, we are not ashamed to be called by His name.)

Continue reading “What It Means to Bear God’s Name and the Significance of Not Taking God’s Name in Vain”