Many believe that the first sacrifice was carried out by God Himself in Genesis 3:21 which says that God made tunics of skin for Adam and Eve so that they could be clothed.
Did God Sacrifice an Animal in Genesis 3:21?
Although the text says nothing about a sacrifice, many believe that a sacrifice is implied.
It is often taught that after the first sin was committed, God wanted to show Adam and Eve that sin has consequences, and so He slew an animal in front of them, and made clothes for them from the hide of the dead animal.
Some have even speculated that the animal was a lamb, thereby presenting a prophetical picture of Jesus, the Lamb of God, slain from the foundation of the world (Revelation 5:6; 13:8).
Furthermore, some have argued that in this death of the animal, God was teaching Adam and Eve the theological principle of substitutionary atonement. He had told Adam that if they ate of the fruit they would surely die, and so after they ate of the fruit, God should have killed them, but instead He killed an animal in their place.
But Did God Really Perform the First Sacrifice?
But is any of this really true? Did God really practice the first animal sacrifice? Was it truly a lamb? Did God intend for Adam and Eve to learn about substitutionary atonement?
Frankly, this seems to be an awful lot to read into one single verse which says nothing other than that “God made tunics of skin, and clothed them.”
The death of an animal is never mentioned.
A lamb is never mentioned.
Substitutionary atonement isn’t even inferred.
So where did God get the skin in which he clothed Adam and Eve?
The text simply doesn’t say.
Maybe he made it.
The word for “skin” that is used can refer to either human or animal skin.
There have been some streams of Judaism and Christianity which believed that prior to the event described in Genesis 3:21, humans did not have “skin” the way we see it today, but existed in some other form. They believed that we were “clothed in light” like God (Psalm 104:2) and that when Adam and Eve sinned, the light left them and they tried to replace the light with leaves (Genesis 3:7), which was an insufficient covering, and so God gave them skin instead.
This view is a little too mystical (or maybe even Gnostic) for most Christians, and yet it cannot be proven or disproven from the text any more than the traditional view that God killed an animal to make clothes for Adam and Eve.
Maybe it was snake skin.
It is interesting to note, however, that one of the more common Jewish explanations of this text is that the skin which Adam and Eve were clothed with was snake skin. The Jewish Targum Pseudo-Jonathan says that the Lord made garments for Adam and Eve from the skin which the serpent in the garden had cast off. This seems pretty far-fetched if you have ever seen the papery skin shed by serpents.
A related view is that since God had said to the serpent, “he will crush your head and you will strike his heel” (Genesis 3:15 NIV), that Adam had taken it upon himself to kill the serpent by crushing its head with his heel, and from the skin of the dead serpent God made clothes for Adam and Eve.
This sounds far-fetched, but it is just as speculative as every other view.
We simply don’t know where the skin came from, or what kind of skin it was.
The simple fact of the matter is that the text simply doesn’t say how God made clothes for Adam and Eve. Therefore, we tread on dangerous ground if we claim that Genesis 3:21 contains the first sacrifice in Scripture, for it says nothing of the sort. All it says is that God gave them skin to wear.
We read substitutionary atonement and the sacrificial system into Genesis 3:21 at our own theological peril.
Though the implications are just that, the bottom line is that whatever God clothes you with and however it is gotten, you are righteous in His eyes (in the grand scheme it was temporary, and symbolic).
In the first murder, which was effectively the first religious conflict, God tried to keep the peace and prevent the bloodshed by saying to Cain, ‘your sacrifice would have been accepted (flesh or not) if you had been walking right’. In the same way, as God always walks right His covering will always be acceptable before Him, flesh or not.
His sacrifice will always be better. The symbolism is that His temporary skin was better than their fig leaf aprons. And later His new covenant would be better than the old one.
Except for the fact that is not what God said. “If you do well, shall you not be accepted? and if you do not well, sin lies at the door. And you shall be its desire, and you must rule over it.”
Emphasis on action not attitude. – If you do well,… if you do not well… It was pretty clear that Cain was in effect offering the first sacrifice of a works based religion to please God. He thought his best was good enough to please God.
The first sacrifice to cover their nakedness was a adequate example. Cain was not obedient to that example. There are lots of ways to get this story wrong, only one way to get it right.
thank you…
Never heard that…I thought it was at the point of the Cain and Abel story…
Yes, that is the traditional view. I will discuss the sacrifices of Cain and Able in posts later this week.
Jeremy I left a comment in somewhere on the comments. Name Calisha. Can you please read and reply? Thank you
You are quite right. The writer is not thinking. The question arising is who incorporated the sacrifice of a lamb into the worship of God? Nothing more. If we say Adam and Eve did, then say who told Adam and Eve to sacrifice a lamb. And “He [God] made Him [Jesus Christ] who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Corinthians 5:21). That garment, from the skin of the innocent lamb, represents the sinner being clothed in the righteousness of Jesus Christ. And the sacrificial system was explained to Adam and Eve who told their children and so it was arrogant of Cain to substitute garden produce for the animal Jesus said should represent Him and flesh and blood did not reveal that to those who believe.
The real question here is, “Was a lamb actually sacrificed?” Where does this idea come from that God killed an animal for Adam and Eve?
It is obvious that it came from the first story of a sacrifice. The murder of Abel by Cain. True worship required obedience. Abel’s sacrifice was accepted. Cain’s was not. Who told Abel how to obey. The right sacrifice required a lamb be slain? Later we see this in the sanctuary sacrifices. Ultimately we see it on Calvary. It goes back to Genesis 3:15. After that and Calvary it goes back to Josephus:
Josephus says the murder of Abel follows “the brothers’ having decided to “sacrifice” to God …” Cain brought the fruits of the tilled earth but Abel came with milk and the firstlings of the flock which was approved by God. The plan of salvation is overlooked by your interpretation. Genesis 3:15 is downplayed.
Hi there. Thanks for keeping balance and no going outside of the Biblical boundaries. Its so sad that people speculate and start adding (things they believe “God has said”) which has not been recorded.
Personally I believe its against God’s nature and character to kill steal and destroy – that is the Devil’s job:
John 10: 9-10 (He is the Good Shepherd / Satan is the MURDER who KILL steal and destroy)
John 8: 44 You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out his desires. He was a MURDER from the beginning, refusing to uphold the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, because he is a liar and the father of lies.
God did not write the 10 commandments to be changed later on – His commandments stands for ever in one word: LOVE : THOU SHALT NOT KILL.
Matthew 12: 7
Hosea 6: 6
If you read the above two scriptures in Matthew and Hosea there is an obvious description of what kind of character our God has. On that is MERCIFUL and one that does not desire sacrifice or killing of innocent creatures.
The killing is that of mankind not animals.
So, why do we celebrate the death of Jesus Chist today ?
Don’t you remember , ” GOD so love the world that he gave his only begotten son ” ?
Ps. The idea that God killed an animal for Adam and Eve to Sacrifice comes from the book of Moses which is one of the books of the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints (Mormons) which we all by now know is a sect that makes up religious ideas as they go on.
I think its called systematic theology… if you take the scripture as a whole you will see the theme of substitutionary atonement written all over it.
Yes!!!! Exactly. You have wisdom.
No Genesis doesn’t say ti was a “sacrifice” per say. But it is extremely interesting to note that up until that point there was no experience of death, let alone killing. There is no reason to believe that the skins were anything other than skins from a regular animal (obviously it was not human). Therefore it is not far-fetched to deduce that God had to kill an animal to get the skins.
It is interesting to note that God said “if you eat of this fruit you will surely die”, and then He most probably killed an animal to make skins for Adam and Eve. So the first death as a consequence of sin came from God’s hand Himself.
Taking that into consideration, it would follow that a parallel could be drawn to Romans 4:25 & 8:32 which clearly state that God Himself delivered up His own Son. (So it wasn’t ultimately the Jew’s or the Roman’s decision to put Jesus to death, but God himself chose death for His Son.)
Thus, it is quite likely that it was at God’s hands that the first death came about in Eden because of man’s sin. And then God also delivered up His own Son to die for our sin. You’re right in saying that there is no definite parallel drawn in scripture. But then again, there is no explicit parallel for Abraham’s sacrifice of Isaac to Jesus sacrifice for sin either. And yet parallels can be drawn.
No the Bible doesn’t say it was a “sacrifice” per se. But like it or not, the implication is that an animal had to be “sacrificed” to make those clothes.
wasn’t God addressing Cain’s elevated emotions? In this case anger. Our Heavenly Father was attempting warn Cain that the problem is the external threat of the serpent. Who was attacking Cain’s emotions. God was attempting to remind Cain of his identity as a child of God and the authority to master the threat with the head stomping faith. However the poison had its affect in Cain’s emotions preventing him from hearing the heart of our Heavenly Father. God heard Ables blood crying out from the ground. Calls out Cain and interrogates him “what have you done? I hear your brothers blood crying out! Then Cain anguished at the punishment of leaving the land and God’s presences. God promised that He would never leave us and forsake us. Our Heavenly Father proved Himself to Cain. However the heel striking serpent thought he won killing Able physically Cain emotionally. God would help Adam and Eve produce Seth and solidify His commitment to Life.
Ha! I recognize that first picture. That’s a display from the Creation Museum where I used to work.
And I agree with your conclusions here. The text says nothing at all about sacrifice or atonement. We have to read that into the text, which is always a dangerous thing to do.
Oh! I had no idea where it came from!
I have come to believe it was Human Flesh that God covered or clothed Adam and the Woman in. This jibes perfectly with immortality “taking off” mortality, or being clothed with an “earthly tent”. God said they would die, or even, literally, “be put to death” I think they went from a state of immortality to a state of being put to death, a state they could only be released from by dying.
Could be! There is some biblical evidence for this perspective.
I find this theory of God clothing Adam and Eve in human skin to be an interesting, logical thought. Being immortal walking in communion with God would lead one to believe man was in spirit form. After reading this post and the comments last night I have been pondering on this theory. I’m in study on the Biblical verses, before the fall. God formed man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life. A rib was taken from Adam to make Eve. These verse lead me to question weather or not man was in spirit for,or different earthly form. Please feed back on translations and theory on my studies. Thank you in advance
Hi, it’s been a working theory for a while for me. But your interest made me look at it a little bit more. Adam says that Woman was “bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh” But when God clothed them in skin it was a different word.
You can find these two different words used together in Job 10:10-11, “Did you not … clothe me with skin and flesh … “? Also in Num 19:5, “Then the heifer shall be burned in his sight; its hide and its flesh and its blood, ”
I can’t tell you the precise difference as I am not a Hebrew scholar, however, they are two different Hebrew words, not just a repeated word.
I think it fits well with all creation being in bondage, subject to decay, until the sons of God are revealed.
It fits with the imagery of taking off an earthly tent. 2 Cor. 5 is often read as mansions in heaven, but read in context, he is comparing our body exteriors now, with our body exteriors when glorified.
2 Cor: 5 For we know that if the earthly tent which is our house is torn down, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. 2 For indeed in this house we groan, longing to be clothed with our dwelling from heaven, 3 inasmuch as we, having put it on, will not be found naked. 4 For indeed while we are in this tent, we groan, being burdened, because we do not want to be unclothed but to be clothed, so that what is mortal will be swallowed up by life. 5 Now He who prepared us for this very purpose is God, who gave to us the Spirit as a pledge.
Do you see that we have a “tent” of skin, and when we finally put on our “eternal house” we won’t be found naked, and at that point will be fully alive. All the word pictures Paul is using here very much, draws from the imagery of the garden.
I’m not a Hebrew scholar either, and don’t know if the text exactly supports the idea, but I love it nevertheless. The flesh is temporary, but we shall receive something better that is not temporary. I hope that means no more doctors visits, pills and aches and pains. Imagine. All of that will be forgotten.
Maxine Armstrong… I would truly like to ask you some questions about this subject.
I know this comment is from 2016, but I just came across this article, and i’ve been doing some research.
I Hope you are still around?
Are you on facebook by chance?
Please let me know, or look me up.
Christy ( Wilson) Todd
You can email me at
so**************@gm***.com
Hi Cristy! I want only to talk to you about your search of the first atonement and sacrifice made. I have read all the above and recognize that many of the comments are theoretical. I am sure The God Most High is pleased with everyone’s effect to know more about him in TRUTH.
Hope you don’t give up your search . . . The process is very comforting and rewarding to me.
So if they weren’t in flesh before the fall then why did God command them to be fruitful and multiply? Where these spirit babies? This sounds like your treading on gnosticisms error that the flesh is inherently evil, when in fact flesh can be immortal and perfect as we see in the body of the risen Christ.
Immortality skin theory unlikely.
As God discusses the idea that if adam and eve ate of the tree of life they would then become immortal so they were mortal like us. gen3:22 It does raise the issue why were they so foolish because the only tree they were told not to eat by God was the tree of knowledge of good and evil and they knew that if they did they would die.God said all the other trees were fine for them to eat that included the tree of life and had they eaten of it they would have become immortal.brentnz
I am in so much agreement of your view, man was clearly made in the image of God as the bible says. Look back on every reference in the bible pertaining to the Creator, God has always been seen as being of magnificent light. Now man lost his immortality when he gain the knowledge of both good and evil , that’s why the serpent said, you shall not surely die, however you will be like gods, knowing both good and evil. Know having this knowledge men realize the brilliance of the light shining from them, in their present immortal state, and they hid from god with leave and being the trees . At this point man did not have skin as yet.
NO skin yet God was commanding them to procreate?
Created in the likeness of The Father and His Son covered with righteousness and immortality. Naturally when choice was made to disobey humanity/flesh replaced that original covering.
I agree Gen 1 Man was created in Gods image spirit. Chapter 2 man was given a soul. Gen 3 man was clothed with flesh Job 10:11 we wete clothed with flesh body soul snd spirit ..not complicated..
Thanks Jeremy. Not to preempt, I take the Cain and Abel story as a struggle to please God through sacrifice (a religious act) where the differences led to conflict, though later it is written that obedience is better than sacrifice, as it ever was. I’ll look out for your blog. Bless!
Mark, Excellent points. I will be discussing the Cain sacrifice in the next few days on my blog. I don’t deal much with the founding murder idea of René Girard in those posts, but I probably should.
Wow. Thank you for this alternative view. I always thought animal sacrifice wasnt Gods heart.
Yes, that is exactly how I take it as well. It was definitely a religious act to try to please and appease God (who didn’t need it).
That’s funny because Genesis 4:4 says that the offering that Able brought from the flock (animal) was respected by God. Whereas the offering by Cain (fruit of the ground) was not. It was the work of his hands, the best he could do, but it was totally inadequate, an affront to God’s holiness, a rejection of His Son. The blood was required. Without the shed blood there is no remission. The requirement of blood was not because of God’s necessity but because of His Will and man’s obedience. To forsake God’s Word is death, to obey is LIFE.
PRECISELY! This is as true as it gets.
I’m surprised that there aren’t some of our brothers and sisters walking around in animal skins because “it’s the way early Christians did it.”
Ha ha ha! So funny! 😉
Wow, Jeremy. A friend and I have been discussing this exact text, with the angle that the “garments of skin” were indeed human, that before, Adam and Eve were something between the fallen human flesh form, and the union of Divine they were invited to partake of.
I’m exploring a further idea, that in our new creation, we have the invitation to realize the redemption of our flesh/skin/body. I think the “temple” of our bodies is so important to God, because He is not only desirous of dwelling with and in us in Oneness in Spirit, but in flesh and Body as well. This has been the design from before time, and is being redeemed and worked out now. We need our eyes opened to the present reality of that Oneness in Body form, now.
I’ll be writing on this soon.
Please let me know what you discover! I am very interested.
If the garments of skin have something to do with the physical flesh, then maybe this is why childbearing will also be with pain for the woman. Maybe before the “garments of skin” there was a different way of “giving birth”???
Jeremy what are you thinking Eve was the first woman to give birth there were no other people on the earth except them? The reasoning is to do with the bloodlines it was Adam and Eve that sinned so only through the blood line of Adam and Eve could we be redeemed by Jesus.Any contamination of other peoples or angels would stop the redemption of the human race that is why God cleansed the earth as the peoples bloodlines had become corrupt by the angelic beings except for noah and his family. Same reasoning why Cain had to marry his sister of relatives.brentnz
I personally theorize that God made Adam and eve After His own Kind. Bible says God is Spirit and wants a people to worship Him in spirit and truth. I believe from my studies that Adam and Eve fell after taking up the knowledge of Good and Evil. They were cast out of the very spiritual Garden with very spiritual trees. And yes once spiritually dead or dying they hid in shame and God clothed them with skin. To me it’s pretty plain that now childbearing causes pain and we toil for food that doesn’t satisfy because we are in encapsulated in flesh. I also think that we’ve been given the Holy Spirit through Jesus and the fruits of the Spirit taste like paradise to me and I am satisfied to eat His flesh and Drink His blood to be one with His body… which seems to be both Spirit and flesh as He reunites the dead and the living.
I have seen the ‘skin’ aspect broken down to the meaning of God wrapping Adam and Eve in the ‘nakedness’ or to be made bare with human skin. When you drill down the root words for skin the following comes up:
H5785 עוֹר `owr (ore) n-m.
1. skin (as naked)
2. (by implication) hide, leather
[from H5783]
KJV: hide, leather, skin.
Root(s): H5783
H5783 עוּר `uwr (oor) v.
1. to (be) bare
[a primitive root]
KJV: be made naked.
Gen 3:21 Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them.
Considering, if they were initially immortal celestial beings, they would have fallen into another state of being = mortality aka flesh. Celestial or immortal beings of light are also not sexual beings, this aspect only came into play after the transmutation or fall. I think there is more in that text than just considering it from a purely literal sense.
Here is the way I see it.The first thing God did for mankind, after they sinned but before He ejected them from Paradise, was to get rid of their fig leaf underwear and make them some new clothing.
The clothing they had made for themselves (fig leafs) was not a sufficient covering as far as God was concerned. I do believe the material from which the new clothes were made was animal skins.
So this was the first shedding of blood in the Bible. In His grace and mercy, God instituted a substitutionary sacrifice for the sin of Adam and Eve, one that clothed them in a temporary righteousness and allowed them to live until the seeds of death planted in them came to fruition some 900 years later. The blood of animals was shed to provide a covering for mankind that was “suit-able” in God’s sight.
From Genesis 3:15 on, Scripture is pointing toward the coming Redeemer. The shedding of the animals’ blood was a foreshadowing of the shedding of the blood of “the Lamb of God,” a sacrifice necessary for God to be able to clothe with His righteousness those who would believe on this Redeemer.
With the sacrifice of animals, and the subsequent clothing of Adam and Eve in their skins, God made temporary atonement for the sin they had just committed. In light of this pattern, we can appreciate that the shed blood of Christ, the “Lamb of God,” made permanent atonement for mankind, and also made it possible for people to be “…clothed with power from on high” (Luke 24:49). No longer is anyone who believes in Jesus Christ spiritually “naked.”
Jesus Christ had to be the Last Adam, a “lamb from out of the flock,” but “without spot or blemish” so that he could die as an acceptable sacrifice. By being both genetically and behaviorally flawless, the Last Adam’s life would be a sufficient sacrifice for the sin nature inherent in all men, as well as for all their sinful behavior in the future.
Emilio,
Thanks. Yes, that is the way I was taught this passage as well. A couple years ago, however, I began to find other Christians (throughout church history) who have not held to the substitutionary atonement view of Christ’s death. They hold to what is called the Christus Victor view, which happened to be the main (only?) view for the first couple hundred years of the church.
Anyway, I was compelled to adopt the Christus Victor view of the atonement and it has been running roughshod over much of my theology and changing the way I read many texts of Scripture, including this one…
In Genesis 2:19 on, God had Adam name the animals the we assume looked like they do today. To give Adam a helper, a rib was taken and closed up with flesh, which means he had flesh. Adam says, when seeing Eve, ” bone of my bones, flesh of my flesh”. Man will leave his father and mother and be united with his wife and they will be one flesh. The man and his wife were naked. All of this shows that Adam always had flesh just as man does today. I believe that Adam and Eve looked like we do. Jesus is in Heaven now sitting at God’s right hand and looks like He did when He left the earth to return to Heaven.
And this is exactly as it is seen throughout the entire scripture. Why we try make it so difficult is man’s pride.
Joel, you are right. It wasn’t. I have several more posts written over the next several days which show this even more clearly from Cain and Abel, Abraham’s sacrifice of Isaac, and the Mosaic sacrificial system.
nice
What about looking at this verse through the “lens” you have been using regarding the entire picture of the violent God of the old testament? … as you stated in another post “By inspiring the human authors to write what they did, God made it look like He was the one responsible for the actions of Israel, the destruction of the flood, the murder of the firstborn males of Israel, and the slaughter of Canaanite women and children. All of these things were going to happen no matter what, but God took the blame for all of them by inspiring the biblical authors to write what they did about Him. God takes the blame. He accepts the guilt.”
So…. how bout this. Adam and Eve covered themselves with fig leaves. God calls them out. They are in hiding despite their fig leave clothing, so they clearly feel that they need better ‘coverage’. Thus, they kill an animal and make clothes from the skin. When God inspires Moses to write this verse, He inspires him to say that He (God) did it.. i.e. God takes the blame.
Just a thought. And consistent with the general theme you have taken on the old testament picture of God.
I agree totally with you that our idea of substitutionary atonement has come from reading so much into God giving Adam and Eve coats of skin. You’re right, there is only an inference that maybe something died and blood was shed for the clothes to be made. Does it matter so much where from or what it was that covered them more than the purpose for it? They were afraid..they hid.. They saw they were naked.. So God made it so they could live with themselves. It was Adam and Eve that had the problem not God. For me, this beautifully shows the grace that has flowed from father’s heart right from the beginning for his creation. He covered his kids to make THEM feel better not HIM!
You might like to pursue another very exciting thought. While the ‘coats of skins’ has been suggested, albeit by inference, as the first shedding of blood, I believe that to be the second.
If there was a first shedding of blood, then it could be said, albeit by inference, it was for the creation of Eve. To open up Adams side and take a rib from human flesh would not be without the shedding of blood. What I love about this is, the awesome thought that blood was shed in this case to birth something rather than in the second instance to supposedly fix the problem of sin. If you follow this trajectory of thinking, Jesus dying on the cross then, was not to fix a problem, it was to birth something, out of his side that was pierced, came THE CHURCH, his bride. What the church is to Christ is what Eve was to Adam, partners working together to produce the Kingdom. Sadly the church has focused on the wrong shedding of blood, albeit by inference, because Augustine got us totally obsessed with sin.
I’ve kept this short and hopefully sweet. There is so much to say on all of this. Hope this whets your appetite. We have been teaching these thoughts at The Rock of York, England for many many years. Check out http://www.rockofyork.co.uk.
I would love to hear what you think. I have commented on your posts before and I’m never quite sure that you get them, especially since some of the existing comments go back some years. Do they get to you?
Chris Chapman
@scandalousgrace Twitter
Bi*********@ao*.com
email
I am super busy and do not get to comments as frequently as I would like to. I do try to read them all though.
I have not heard this idea about the blood and Adam’s side before. I do see the parallel between Adam’s side and that of Jesus though. That seems likely.
Love this!!
I came across this in my search for answers because I recently heard a Messianic Jew saying that they were clothed in light originally and that God did not commit the first murder to make them clothes, but that it was actually human skin he made for them. I had never heard that before. I have found so many different views and theories on this subject since I started to search! I agree, as of right now, that we just don’t know. Some of the explanations are very plausible and even sound very good, but unless it is backed up by scripture, I think it is dangerous to infer something and state it as fact.
One thought or question I have had all along, and am very surprised to see no mention of, is this….is it possible it could have just been the wool or fur from an animal that God created their clothing from? This would not require the death of an animal. Again, I only wonder if it is a possibility and am not trying to infer anything. I mainly wonder if the origional hebrew could be interpreted that way, or if the wording does not allow for that at all.
I suppose it is possible. There is very little we know about what actually happened here, and so it is wrong to be too dogmatic about any interpretation of these events.
Sorry for possibly coming across as dogmatic, but I tend to think that if it looks like a bee, buzzes like a bee, makes honey like a bee, then it probably is a bee, right?
It seems to me that if the answer seems to be actually kind of obvious, then it most probably is. God says that He is the same yesterday, today and forever. He isn’t going to say today and tomorrow that “without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins”, but then yesterday have an alternative sin offering that didn’t involve the shedding of blood. The pattern after all is Christ and Him crucified. Jesus actually died! And God knows the beginning through to the end. So the “type and shadow” in the Mosaic covenant must also include the shedding of blood ie: of something dying.
Mankind is who God in Christ is trying to save here, so animals were the sacrifice for sin leading up to Christ. The Abrahamic covenant must also include the shedding of blood, as would too the sin offering for Adam and Eve and for Cain and Abel. It seems too obvious that by God giving them “long Garments” or “tunics” of skins to replace the fig leaves, that it would not be related to either a sin offering or at the very least related to covering their nakedness. But when you also add to that the fact that Cain’s offering was not acceptable, being of vegetables from tilling the ground, while Abel’s was acceptable (being an animal sacrifice), then there is very strong evidence to support what God considered “right” back then in relation to the offering. God actually said to Cain, Gen 4:6 “Why are you so angry?” the Lord asked Cain. “Why do you look so dejected? 7 You will be accepted if you do what is right. But if you refuse to do what is right, then watch out! Sin is crouching at the door, eager to control you. But you must subdue it and be its master.”
Add to this what the Bible actually says:
Gen 3:21 “The Lord God made tunics of [animal] skins for Adam and his wife and clothed them.” (Amplified – AMP)
Gen 3:21 “and the Lord God clothed Adam and his wife with garments made from skins of animals.” (Living Bible – TLB)
Gen 3:21 And the Lord God made clothing from animal skins for Adam and his wife.” (New Living Translation – NLT)
These are three different translations which all read, “animal skins” or “skins of animals”. I think you would be on shakey ground theologically to not assume some sort of animal sacrifice here, surely?!? And certainly if you though anything else but animal skins were used – shakey. And if it says that God “made” the clothing from animal skins, then that discounts the idea of God merely “creating” skins out of nothing without the sacrifice of an animal being involved. Obviously some translations do not include the word “animal”, but the likelihood that these translations have it wrong and you right would be rather assumptive and again shakey, or that God would replace Adam and Eve’s fig leaves with other vegetation (if vegetation even had “skins”) would raise the obvious question, “How would that then be any different than the fig leaves used, to even need to be replaced by God?”
No, I think it is rather obvious what happened that it probably doesn’t even need stating. But here is my belief anyway, That the fig leaves were not sufficient to cover Adam and Eve’s nakedness (which was the result of their sin – because, without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin), and so God showed Adam and Eve, by performing the first animal sacrifice what mankind must do with regard to the shedding of animal blood to cover his sin, and God also probably showed Adam and Eve at the same time also how to make clothing for themselves from the animal skins that were sacrificed by making the very first ones for Adam and Eve Himself. Then, because God had already shown them the “right” way, He pulled Cain up on his “non-blood” vegetable offering as not doing what is “right”, as it wasn’t shedding the blood of an animal (which was essentially a type and shadow of Christ’s sacrifice, as well as being the pattern already set by God in front of Adam and Eve in the Garden).
Could it have been just wool or fur used? — Not if it says, “Animal Skins”.
If ever you have tried to skin an animal or seen it done, then you will know that there is usually blood involved as you would normally have to kill the animal first. He is not after all, going to just stand around while you skin him alive, is he?
Once again, sorry if I come across as dogmatic, but that is just what I believe, and I believe it is also fairly obvious what happened. Of course, people are entitled to their own opinion. That is just mine.
To add (in agreement) to this, go back to the previous chapter where God says “the day you eat you shall die”. Did God mean what he said in chapter 2? If so, he is teaching that death will come BEFORE SUNDOWN on the very day they eat. That being the case, Death came the same day, before sundown, but someone/something other than Adam/Eve took the penalty. I am convinced substitution and the death of an animal is in view here.
I completely agree with the final comment here. If you look at chapter 2 He states “the day you eat you shall die” I do not think the Lord would ever make such a strong statement without backing it up. They ate from the tree so a sacrifice was made. A punishment was shown. Adam and Eve both had to be clothed and yes the skins of animals are not going to be easily made into an item of clothing. Although He is God who can create anything out of nothing so it’s possible for anything I guess but this statement goes along with my belief with what happened in the story.
Chris Chapman I love the parallel between the rib with Adam and Jesus with the shedding of blood. I’ll have to come read your link.
Craig, everything you say makes total sense!
I have read through most of the posts on the subject dealing with the question of the sacrifice in Genesis 3 and have always believed that the post made by Craig Faulkner is the only one that makes any sense. I guess most that have a different opinion isn’t understanding the implication of what was meant by God clothing Adam’s nakedness. For those who didn’t know, this was not just physical clothing. The nakedness happened as a result of Adam losing the garment of light which represented his righteous covering. The only way that God could cover Adams’s nakedness was with a robe of righteousness and this robe could only be provided by the death of Christ who was the “Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.” This being the case we will see that the coats of skins would have involved the death of an animal representing Christ otherwise none of this would make any sense and neither could it harmonise with the rest of scripture!
My struggle with accepting the view that God killed animals in Gen 3:21 is to make God the author of the shedding of blood in this world. It was then a small step then for Cain to follow this in killing Abel. It promotes the idea that violence is God’s way of overcoming evil, which he manifested ultimately in killing his Son. It is therefore ok for us to use violence in overcoming what we deem to be evil in this world. This seems to be a problem with this line of theology. It promotes violence and shedding of blood since it began with God.
Jeremy, I came back to this post because of a comment. I started looking at it a little more and I took it one further.
Abel gave a “present offering” of the firstlings and the fat thereof. I looked up sacrifice, and offerings and found that throughout Genesis and the giving of the Law to Moses, the word “burnt offering” is used. Except in the instance of Abel’s offering.
Additionally the word “fat” is also translated, the choicest parts, the best.
I find it even more interesting that the first time the words “burnt offering” are used, it is in the story of Noah, which coincides with God allowing mankind to eat meat.
In a world without meat eaters what good is a dead sheep? If I were to give you a present of a wool bearing animal, and you didn’t eat meat, how much of a present is it if I killed the animal first?
This is an excellent point. Did you write up something more about this? I would like to read the results of your study.
No I didn’t write anything out. But this is interesting:
“A meal offering, grain offering, or gift offering (Hebrew: minkhah מנחה), is a type of Biblical sacrifice, specifically a sacrifice that did not include meat. “… “The Hebrew noun minkhah (מִנְחָה) is used 211 times in the Masoretic Text of the Hebrew Bible with the first instances being the minkhah offered by both Cain and Abel in Genesis 4.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gift_offering
So what the Bible uses as an offering in Gen 4 is not associated with meat.
In the burnt offering given by Noah to God in Gen 8, God smells the “soothing aroma”. In Gen 4, there is a “present offering” and no mention of any aroma.
It doesn’t look like an animal sacrifice is a slam dunk in the first chapters of Gen. And it’s a bad hermenutic to say that’s a blood sacrifice for sin is what is happening in Gen. 3. That can only be inferred by reading backward from later in the book. Read chronologically, the book does not teach that.
Chronologically, God who is the all powerful creator of the universe and earth, creates man like him. Man fails and God “puts him to death” and He does it by clothing Man in skin.
This is a precursor to saying creation is “in bondage to decay”.
And later we are told our bodies “long to be clothed with our heavenly dwelling”
Skin can mean;skin of a plant too.Skin means the material which covers any body type; animal or plant.
In the Bible, skin refers to that which covers man or animal …. not plants.
Adam and Eve had bodies of light. When they sinned, they tried to take the leaves from the fig tree (the tree they ate from) to cover themselves. God clothed them with the skin of the Nachash. You won’t find these things in the Bible, but you will find it in the Talmud.
Rich Adam and eve were flesh and blood made from dust the idea that they were light conflicts with scripture.They may well have been surrounded by some form of light as righteousness is referred to as light or as clothing.Which they lost when they sinned But they themselves were as we are physical beings not etheral spirits.brentnz
If these views were found in the Bible they would be considered truth, otherwise they are opinion and tradition. There is no reason to believe that Adam and Eve were created with a body other than like we have.
As far as the clothing or skins that Adam and Eve were given its difficult to confirm what they were.What i thought was important was that it was a covering that God supplied even though his children had rejected him and gone there own way.He never rejected them nor did he lose his love for them and still cared for them.God loves us just the same even when we go our own way just like the prodical son.brentnz
Hello,
It’s correct to say Scripture is not clear as to what the skin may have been. Our Bible often requires us to conclude our own interpretations in Scripture. This is maybe why there are many denominations and religions. However it is a way to have a personal relationship with our Savior. This is a time to think it not correct to say anyone is right or that anyone is wrong in how they believe. And I can only say this is what I see. Thank you for allowing me to comment with my thoughts.
I like to sometimes gather some thoughts from a Hebrew Interlinear. I go on the Internet for a free one. (online Hebrew Interlinear English) Click on Scripture 4 all. Bang there it is.
It seems to read in verse 3 & 4 that when He created light it may have went to Heaven for He says he is becoming light. Maybe Heaven as well as him, “ELOHIM” are becoming Light. We read about the great things that come by knowing and having the light of God to see and understand with. We can be born with an entity from Christ “the Spirit”. However light can be an image and Spirit can be a likeness. Now we should know the earth is a very dark place and will be that way again someday. As we read on we realize God made the sun, moon, & stars for light on the earth.
Without them the earth is as black as can be.
Vs 26: “Let us make man in our image”—. I believe all Heaven is Light and that the Lord is speaking with the Heavenly Host before him, (Let us make). Now in this verse and the next verse Vs. 27 we see image a total of three times. It was at this time I had decided to search out image and looking at the Hebrew I saw it was light. Image can very well be light. This is all in chapter one and it is the beginning, the first, I noticed the last was found in Rev. the last chapter we read there will be no more need for the sun, moon & stars because we will have the light of God. Let me move on to Adam & Eve.
I believe Adam and Eve were imaged with light. If they had a image of light they constantly would be able to see their surroundings and if bright enough would keep animals at bay. It would be difficult to hide especially at night or in other words the cool of the day. It’s interesting when we read Adam & Eve could only hear God walking in the garden as he called to them. CONFESSION time, so they did confess the things they did.
God told the proud one, “the Serpent” that he would be held low on his belly & would eat the dust of the earth as long as he lived. That is what we are made of and that part of us will decay back to dust. Now Eve would have sorrow during childbirth. Eve, Adam said; is flesh of my flesh and bone of my bone.
Now God told Adam the ground was now cursed and that Adam would toil for his food.in thistles and in thorns. Adam would eat the plants of the field. Notice no mention of eating meat here. Also hie face would sweet and he would eat bread.
The Lord God MADE COATS of SKIN for Adam & Eve. Now lets suppose it is just as it reads. God made them coats of skin and relate that being human skin. Look up “human skin” on your computer; it will show you a block of skin. You will see it has different layers or one could say coats of skin are in view. You will see skin has sweat glands, there are blood vessels, hair follicles, touch sensors, just a few things to mention. SUFFERING SUCCOTASH. Coats of skin.
Did you ever wonder why Jesus was born of a earthly virgin whose name was Mary. Well for sure He had skin we also see He could transfigure, He could be a blinding Light but now he was man as well as God for he also had real skin. In his suffering he sweet drops of blood. He felt as if Heaven was betraying him. Thorns on his head, (touch sensors) they pulled out his hair and follicles. They lashed open the SKIN on his back, and pierced his feet and hands and finished with a spear in his side. If we have skin we also have sin and He did pay the price. We are now free to worship Him.
Cliff
Genesis 8:20-21
20 Then Noah built an altar to the Lord and, taking some of all the clean animals and clean birds, he sacrificed burnt offerings on it. 21 The Lord smelled the pleasing aroma and said in his heart: “Never again will I curse the ground because of humans, even though every inclination of the human heart is evil from childhood.
1 Samuel 15:22
22 But Samuel replied:
“Does the Lord delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices
Jeremiah 7:22
22 For when I brought your ancestors out of Egypt and spoke to them, I did not just give them commands about burnt offerings and sacrifices
I’m not sure how agreeing with the initial theory that God provided an animal sacrifice Himself would be to our “theological peril” considering He also provided the animal sacrifice for Abraham and then again with the Lamb of God at Calvary. Sin requires substitution and atonement and blood, and God makes that very clear throughout all of scripture. I think dismissing this from that verse is where the “theological peril” lies because it strips one more piece of majesty away from God’s Word which is masterful in its forethought and in the pictures and shadows we’re told by Paul that it contains.
God simply made the skin as he made the animals.
There is something I need to understand.. Why is there a war between good and evil in the first place, and people have to die ?? For in the Bible it says the War is not ours, and John 1 says; in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God, and in John 1, verse 1 thur 4, it tells me there is nothing unless it came through God.. So, if God is the light of man, who made us, and everything that goes with it, should he have known this from the beginning, and if the war is not ours, WHY TAKE US THROUGH THIS, Should they have took care of this them self’s in stead of involving us ??? Whats good about us going through this ?? We did not make anything, we are the Surrogate… Who is all of this for ??? Thank you, just a thought…
This is a tough question. Not sure my answer will make since but I will try. I do understand pretty well why. But not good at explaining things.
I think it all has to do with sin. Man did not create sin. Man fell into sin. We were made to till the garden and live in the garden of God until we fell to sin. Then we were kicked out of the garden. Sin came from Lucifer who was a cherub angel in charge of worship in heaven and I think also maybe one of the Guardian angels, because he walk amongst the stones of fire which is the heart of God. Well Lucifer’s heart became proud and thought he could be better than his Maker God. This is were sin originated because of his proud heart. Ezekiel 28 11-19. So Michael the arch angel kicked him out from heaven along with the other angels that were following him. This is mentioned in Revelation 12:7-11
That’s where sin comes from and the reason the war in Heaven is going on. But there is so much more.
The fact is that we were created in heaven in the time of creation as scrolls of light (or little spirits) and our destinies were written out for our life and God new the exact time we would be placed in this earth. In Jeremiah it says He knew us before we were placed in our mother’s womb and in psalms it says He planned out our destinies. So we were in Heaven before we were on earth. But we were created to display Gods wisdom to the rulers and authorities ( or the other gods which are also called the sons of God in Heaven in other words Devine beings). Psalms 82 says that Elohim( God) was setting in the counsel of the Elohim( gods).
But God created us as the only species that can carry His Holy Spirit in us and to inherit all the things of Heaven and this made some of Gods other creation upset because of the inheritance that we will get, and they have been trying to steal the inheritance that God has deemed to us. That’s why it says they come to steal kill and destroy. This is the whole purpose to sin or the deception of sin in the garden. But Jesus came to reclaim our inheritance into our kingdom which God has given to us and He says we will be kings and priest to our God. We will be rulers over the principalities in the unseen world and we will rule over galaxies in all of the cosmos. This is kinda of a short watered down explanation, but it would take to much space to explain it all here.
There is a very good book by Michael S Heiser called The Unseen Reslm. Very good book that gives a lot of insight and detail about some of these things.
So happy to find this interesting text. Thanks for your insight and teaching.😊😊
Maybe when Adam and Eve were created in the image or likeness of God they had there glorified body’s since there was no sin in them at this time. And we know that things are made of light in Heaven. Because Jesus blood is actually light. And when you saw Jesus on the mountain with Moses and Elijah they were in there glorified bodies just like Adam and Eve when they were created in eden which is the garden or mountain of God ( heaven – our fathers house). But when they ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil it distorted there bodies or the light with sin. So God made a skin covering to cover up the distorted light (sin). Which is the three layers of skin we now have. No animals had to be killed for this. And just like we will return to our glorified bodies in the end. For what was in the beginning so shall it be in the end. Because of Jesus shedding His blood at the cross and defeating death and the grave and then sending the Holy Spirit to live in us has started a process of transforming us back in to our original bodies and so we will be like Him in the end!
Opened my eyes of thought. Disappointed. Were they spiritual or human beings?
Thank you! Settled my answer🙏
My exact thoughts…text only says God made tunics of skin and clothed them. I heard that was the 1st sacrifice but reading it again it does not mention it. Jus reminded me how important it is to study the Word for urself. Thanks for sharing
Theological peril ? That’s overstating it, a conclusion made from biblical precept is not perilous, for this to be God teaching them animal sacrifice as a result of Sin is in perfect biblical alignment.
Jesus was slain before the foundation of the world.
This action of clothing Adam and Eve is an absolute study of God, this isn’t the same as looking at Adams actions, this isn’t just normal conjecture to assume sacrifice took place , the entire Bible is about Redemption, Adam and Eves shame covered, sacrifice was taught as well as the seriousness of Sin, when studying the Bible the idea of time isn’t the same for God as us, this Lamb that was killed was a foreshadow , how could it not be?? That’s the better question. IMO
We know G-d is all knowing, and since G-d knew man would disobey, He also had a plan of mans redemption. G-d chose a people called Jews, hence (Israel). The main tract of information back then, as today was (parents tell their children “stories” of their ancestrally line. ) Maybe that’s why Able chose the better sacrifice over Cains.
Adam explained to his children, that
G-d showed how to be properly covered (kappor) hebrew for atonement.
I am a Messianic Jew, is why we leave the “o” out on names that refer to the Lord. Actually we spell all names of Adonai (G-d) without the vowels. This is out of respect for our Lord.
Anyway, I really am glad to be able to reply to your note, and l hope l was helpful.
Was the skin provided by God animal’s or trees? What does the original Hebrew text in Genesis 3:21 ascribe to?
Skin is skin. It only exists on living creatures. If you remove all of it from a living creature, that living creature will die. Sounds like you are trying to avoid the obvious truth. God intended for us to apply our logic and reasoning when reading the scripture. Could God have snapped his fingers and created skin? Sure he could have. But Occam’s razor implies a much simpler answer. God killed an animal and took its skin to make clothing for Adam and Eve. It doesn’t really have to say that God killed an animal. The original audience for this text, the Jews, would have understood that inherently.
Absolutely. There’s nothing indicating that God killed any animal to clothe Adam and Eve. Skin could refer to their flesh, since no where is it indicated what their bodies were made of prior to being cast out of the Garden. Light, air, feathers, fur, scales, bark, flower petals! Why did their descendants create the practice of animal sacrifice is an accompanying question. Why wouldn’t they just leave a living offering for God to do whatever he wished?
concerning Genesis 3:21–God can create, so he could have just like the texts says “He made them skins to clothe them” He could have just spoken the skins or coverings into existence. When a person paints an automobile they usually put a skin of clear substance over the paint to protect the paint from weathering
Thoughts on Adam and Havah being covered in the skin that the Nachash (serpent) shed.
When they turned away from the Almighty GODS instructions they had to carry this sin with them.
So by covering them and us in the serpents skin. We then understand that sin is attached to us. And we also are aware of our internal spiritual struggle between the evil inclination and the good inclination.
Also the word Nachash has 3 definitions in 3 forms as a noun it means Snake. As an Adjective Shining One with divine knowledge. As a verb one who practices divination or sorcery attributed to anything that is on the path of evil. Including the Ego, pride and selfish ambition.
But when we learn self control and humility and mercy and compassion and charity and of course when we relinquish the evil inclinations and we prostrate before the Almighty GOD and give him honor and praise and follow what HE instructs. Then we have mastered the crooked serpent. Just as Messiah Yeshua taught.
In jewish Gamatria Nachash equals 358 and Mashiach equals 358 Mashiach is called the Holy Serpent He who conquered the crooked serpent.
Just as Messiah Yeshua said. Just as Moses lifted up the Serpent on the pole so must the Son of man be lifted up.
Maybe the idea is that the crooked serpent is the lowest soul of man. The animal soul. Territorial vicious selfish ego adversary. The carnal man who walks in the flesh.
And the Holy Serpent is the highest spiritual walk. He who controls his flesh and evil inclinations is he who walks in the spirit and the teachings of Mashiach Yeshua who was sent by Almighty GOD the Abba
God made the covering from Skin. The text does not give the details- source, thickness, number of layers, color, protein, or DNA content. He in his wisdom made the covering.
God covered them.
Eve was deceived and gave Adam forbidden stuff and he ate it. They believed the lie of the enemy: You shall be like God. You shall be wise. They ended up holding as it were a basket from which all the supposed contents had slid through the bottom. Sin deceives and leaves us exposed and cold. Their covers made from fig leaves were not effective. Today God alone in Christ and through the Holy Spirit makes the cover we need and if we commit ourselves to Him, he can apply the covering that our souls need!
my view is God set a precedence concerning the offering. Therefore, killing an animal like a lamb will make perfect prophetic sense. The law of first mention according to chapter 4, Abel brought a lamb to God that was his first fruit. Jesus was also Gods first fruit. So from such understanding Jesus was known has the lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world. So killing a lamb could make perfect sense. remember there are two dynamics that is important to understand, one, the animal skin had to have blood in it, which could speak about redemption, and the skin could have been for covering. it could also mean in Christ, which means my spiritual position. The lamb [metaphorically speaking] as suggested, could represent Jesus. This is my view.
Great comments. Way to not force penal substitution with a law minded nonsense carnal rational that creates athiests…
God never said He would kill Adam and Eve if they ate from Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. It says plainly, if they would eat, then death would surely follow. There is no penal substitution or wrath present in the story. Wrath came with the law Romans 4:15. Jesus is, was and will always be the Lamb SACRIFICED for forgiveness, covenant between Father and Son and to defeat Death. Jesus is not a substitute for anyone. The wages of sin is death – not a 1st Century Roman crucifixion. Jesus had to be the eternal lamb slain because love would never be fully manifested on creation unless choice/free will was present… Unless sin actually had the chance to make us weak/dead so He could love us back to LIFE. The command was EAT, and EAT we shall return Rev 22.
Thank you for this explanation. I was told that it was the first sacrifice and now I know what Scripture actually says, or not say, about it. Thumbs up.
They were made tunic of skins. That is clothes, full length garments of skins. Y or N?
Here’s something that set-in motion my thoughts on this topic years ago.
1 Corinthians 15:50
“Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.”
Flesh and blood are a corruption of what we were before the fall. We were created in God’s image with a framework made from the clay (dust) of the earth. How Adam and Eve were covered was lost in the fall and they became naked shedding off immortality and becoming mortal when they ate of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Just as the fallen angels left their first estate (form of existence) to come down to take wives from the daughters of men, Adam and Eve left their first estate (form of existence) in an attempt to become as gods. Whatever covered them before was lost and they became naked. They now found themselves in the predicament of the fallen angels and were in dry places where they could not find rest. Before the fall, the covering we initially had protected us from the environment on earth such as UV light, dry air, hot and cold temperatures, wind, rain, etc. Coverings of leaves are insufficient for protection as they have gaps that allow continued exposure to the elements. I find it interesting that the demons (fallen angels) such as those who identified themselves as “Legion” desire to possess beings of flesh and blood to prevent themselves from being exposed to the dry places seeking rest and finding none as is spoken of in Matthew 12:43-45. When cast out of a human in Mark chapter 5, they fled to the next moist and fleshly creature similar to our flesh and blood manifestation (pigs).
We also know from Exodus 33 that while we are in this flesh, we cannot look upon God’s face and live.
Exodus 33:20-23
But He said, “You cannot see My face, for no man can see Me and live!” Then the Lord said, “Behold, there is a place by Me, and you shall stand there on the rock; and it will come about, while My glory is passing by, that I will put you in the cleft of the rock and cover you with My hand until I have passed by.
But this was not the way it was before the fall. Genesis 3:9-10 we find the change that took place in mankind after the fall.
9And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou?
10And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself.
Before now, Adam and Eve could walk in God’s presence and not hide themselves from Him. But now they knew they had lost this ability and felt naked in His presence. They must have seen the transformation and loss as they looked at each other. And for the first time in their existence, they felt fear as now they possessed the knowledge of good and evil and knew the penalty for acquiring this knowledge. They wanted to block their bodies from God’s sight. I wasn’t there, but I feel they must have felt so lost in their exposure and shame for what they had done. And now they felt the fear that came from the knowledge they gained. They now knew terrible secret that Satan. They would be condemned to death. However, all was not lost. God told them that their seed would give birth to a Savior who would crush Satan’s head as Satan bruised His heel when Christ died on the cross. And as we look at the bodies of Adam and Eve, let’s look at Christ’s transformation after he rose from the dead. Remember what He told Mary Magdalene in John 20 verses 16 and 17.
16 Jesus said to her, “Mary.”
She turned toward him and cried out in Aramaic, “Rabboni!” (which means “Teacher”).
17 Jesus said, “Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’”
For some reason, Jesus did not want Mary to hold on to Him. Was this because her DNA flesh would contaminate His garments through touch transfer? Something to think about.
I know you all are busy, and this thread has been open for years so you may not read this. We are all so beneath God in His ways and understanding that conjecture on the part of all of us in this world will only be that until we shed our flesh and blood and meet God in heaven. I love all my brothers and sisters in Christ, and I will not place my beliefs above any others as I am as yet not made complete but continue to run my race. I just enjoy God’s Word and love a good discussion.
But again, I encourage all my Christian brothers and sisters earnestly seek out the scriptures and learn what God would have you to know and I’m thrilled and joyful to be on this journey with all of you!
Jesus was often in touch with the unclean like lepers without being contaminated so when He told Mary not to hold on to Him could He not be telling her not to detain rather than not to defile seeing it would have been impossible to defile Him anyway now that He was risen and victorious over sin, the flesh and the devil? “I have not yet ascended to the Father” So was Jesus deferring homage from His people until He had received approbation from His father and the assurance that His sacrifice was all-sufficient?
Man is mostly water given form in a mold of earth. Asked and I think to “make” “coats” of skin, Gid blew dust over them to make coats of skin, making them visible. The Lord showed me without man’s teaching, that we were clothed with light we wore a prism or rainbow of colors until sin when darkness took dominion over us as a dark vail blocking us from God’s light. The heavens are brass now prayers blocked swallowed up by minions of darkness interfering with our message. Now we are clothed again in Light, in Jesus who is the Word of God, the vain is removed. I don’t believe God killed. He leaves killing to the one who kills.
Being creatures mostly of water God needed to give the water shape so he gave water the shape of a form created out of the Dust of the Earth Adam was walking in the light that would create a garment of color all around him and his wife like a rainbow or prism so we have the coat of many colors showing up in Scripture many times implying favor with God through relationship to God Dominion of Darkness blocks the light so God as a wind or breath blows the dust on Adam and Eve to create skins because they are now perishable God gave Satan you’re right to eat dead things and he told Satan that he would eat the Dust which would be man’s body
Since God’s love for people is eternal, when Adam and Eve fell, God did not abandon his love or change his purposes. Instead, he resolved to redeem them and their progeny. That is why he killed animals and used their skins as a covering to hide their nakedness (Gen 3:21). The act symbolizes God’s desire to atone for their sins. By means of this proto-sacrifice, God pledged that he would redeem his wayward people by becoming a sacrifice for them. Of course, the actual text in Genesis 3:21 does not say that the killing of the animals by which God provided the skins which became a covering for Adam and Eve was a sacrifice. However, when one reads that passage in light of the redemptive work of Jesus on the cross, a Christian can come to that conclusion. This is an example of reading the Old Testament in light of the Christ event.
Waw! According to the study of God and His relation to man and The At-one-ment it is more appropriate to believe that God would kill an animal, a lamb preferably to represent Christ the sacrifice for sin as is revealed in every part of the scripture. Christ is known as the Lamb of God slain from the foundation of the world. The snake allegory is abominable and ridiculous.
It would make to much sense if God we’re to do that as the first sacrifice to continue on for man to come back into his presence.
Especially sense through-out the entire Old Testament God command the Sacrifice to atone for sin, and Jesus (being God in Flesh) was the ultimate sacrifice for sin. This would mean God is Omniscient.
Good Job guy.!
I think that Adam and eve are made in God image and had a spiritual body mabe the didn’t have a human body and the skin God clothes them in is the skin that we have now our whole body is covered in skin
Interesting to know that the Sacrificial system was not even God’s idea in the first place. It was a man made idea that was derived from Paganism:
Hosea 6:6
Matthew 12: 7
Jeremiah 7: 22
Steven said in Acts 7: 43 (The Israelites carried the Tent of Molech (the Star of Remfan) on their shoulders in the desert when they left Egypt. They did not worship God.
He also said Acts 7: 48-49 (God does not live in man-made temple’s but He sits in the heavens and the earth is his foot stool – how can anyone build Him “anything that can contain Him”
And just like Jesus was murdered for chasing the money changers out of the temple.
So Steven was MURDERED for saying that the Jews “always resisted the Holy Spirit” (Acts 7:51)
Steven also said — Israel’s fathers persecuted the prophets and killed them, they are hard-necked.
THEY ARE MURDERERS
He also said the Jews received the law their angels AND STILL the Jews do not adhere to what it says.
What did Jesus say: Your father is the devil and he was a murderer from the beginning of time. Brood of Vipers.
Oh dear….. if you take a look at the Character of God reflected in the Character of Jesus, the Israelites (Jews) did NOT know God.
Interesting to know that the Sacrificial system was not even God’s idea in the first place. It was a man made idea that was derived from Paganism:
Hosea 6:6
Matthew 12: 7
Jeremiah 7: 22
Steven said in Acts 7: 43 (The Israelites carried the Tent of Molech (the Star of Remfan) on their shoulders in the desert when they left Egypt. They did not worship God.
He also said Acts 7: 48-49 (God does not live in man-made temple’s but He sits in the heavens and the earth is his foot stool – how can anyone build Him “anything that can contain Him”
And just like Jesus was murdered for chasing the money changers out of the temple.
So Steven was MURDERED for saying that the Jews “always resisted the Holy Spirit” (Acts 7:51)
Steven also said — Israel’s fathers persecuted the prophets and killed them, they are hard-necked.
THEY ARE MURDERERS
He also said the Jews received the law through the angels AND STILL the Jews do not adhere to what it says.
What did Jesus say: Your father is the devil and he was a murderer from the beginning of time. Brood of Vipers.
Oh dear….. if you take a look at the Character of God reflected in the Character of Jesus, and the things Jesus said and the things Steven said, the Israelites (Jews) did NOT know God.
What Steven said about Israel was proven when they once again killed another prophet (Steven) and they had Jesus killed.
The lamb sacrifice seems logical for the consequence of sin. GOD knew it would be temporary until HIS only begotten SON would pay the price for the sin of mankind; which would bring us back to the FATHER. GOD is HOLY, sin had to be paid for, either by a substitute ( JESUS) or by the sinner.Praise HIS Holy Name for an escape to all who accept Christ as SAVIOR.
Jeremy
I’ve read a number of the comments and question the idea that Adam and Eve didn’t have a physical body. What about Genesis 2:21-24; where did God get the rib to create Eve? It’s also interesting that men have one rib less than women. This makes me believe that they had physical bodies just as we do.
Randy
I have to disagree with the skin is the carment God gjve to cover their nake. After all you still can saw they still naked. I rather believe that God kill a lamb or animal and make the carment for both. according 1 Peter 1:20, Revelation 13:8.
Remember is physical appearance we talking about. From the man falling he will doing sacrifice ones a year for covering up his sins.
my opinion/theory not if he had to sacrifice a thing but maybe like in today he couldn’t have killed but shave the fur of the animal as in today and donated how we use cotton, wool, silk, or the shed like a hermit crab or snake n used resources to cloth them
Thank you for this read. In the next few passages of scripture, we read the account of sacrifices brought before the Lord by Cain and Abel. While Abels animal sacrifice was accepted Cains sacrifice from the ground (that God Cursed) was not accepted. Perhaps this alludes to the fact that animal sacrifice was now part of human acceptance before God.
Thank you for this article. Although speculative, there is insight. We will know and understand some day. For now, we hold it lightly in our hands. There’s trust it God this way.
Thank you for your explanation of the question about how God provided clothing for Adam and Eve after the fall. You are quite right in saying we read too much into the text, and this is very dangerous. The text doesn’t say more than, God provided clothing for them. Anything more is pure speculation on our part. Let’s just stick to what Scripture says. This is sufficient.
There is not much given in Genesis as to the details regarding God making garments from the skins of animals but:
Looking ahead we know God’s Plan of Salvation was based on the shed blood of the Lamb of God..
The next Genesis account is Abel making an offering to God.. The firstling of his flock (lamb) that God respected… Then later Noah built an alter after the flood and sacrificed clean animals..
God clearly sacrificed an animal to clothe them
thank you for writing this because about every commentary I come across saying it was a sacrifice that God performed the first sacrifice. people read into it what they want to believe and make the scripture fit their belief or doctrine.
It would be obvious that it was a lamb… God the father would have told Adam and Eve how to worship Him…. They would pass it down to their children…. Cain and Able … Ables sacrifice was called pure sacrifice, a lamb…to cover their sins, symbolic for Christ…Cain was symbolic of non believers who will come to God the Father their way not though His Son….they will die in their sins . Jesu stated over and over if you don’t believe in him you will die in your sins…. Which makes sense when John the Baptist said be hold the lamb of God.
if the Lord God “made” the heaven and the earth ex nihlo, out of nothing, could be not have also made the skins ex nihlo for Adam and Eve? Inference and presumption in scripture.
You know that GOD can create something from nothing! HE create ADAM right out of the ground.
HE spoke and it was done. GOD said let the earth bring bring forth beasts after their kind and it was so! GOD made the animals out of the ground! God made coats of skins for Adam and Eve and HE could have spoken them into being. Just like HE will make IMORTAL bodies for the saints at the end of this old world of sin instantly at the blink of an eye
when was first sacrifices in the bible
Point of correction or maybe it skipped you , it says God made tunics of skin not gave them skin to wear as you say in your last sentence. The hebrew word kā·ṯə·nō·wṯ which means Garment . Similar to God made man of dust . I will like you to find the meaning of tunics or coats in other versions and find the meaning of a phrase ‘made of’ . ..
Let’s let Holy Spirit lead us in interpreting the word of GOD .. Remember it’ll guide us to all truth that any other confusion will sound foolishness if you’ve the Holy Spirit.
Thank you please
Hallo Jeremy,
Thank you for this article. I would disagree with you – not from theological point of view, neither from the side of what is written, but from the point of one who believes in Christ. In John 1:45 we read that the One whom Moses was writing about was Jesus. And again in John 5:46-47 (KJV) we read: “For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me.But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?”
Not only that but even Apostle Paul is saying in 1 Timothey 3:16: All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
If this is true, as it is, and as it is true that we call all first five books of the Bible the Torah, of Five books of Moses, then it is clear that – againm from the faith point of view – that Genesis 3:21 points to the substitutionary atonement of Christ in the future and is a type of such sacrifice before a time of the Law (I mean the Law given to Moses at Mount Sinai).
And I see yet another depth to it: The first creation was to the image and likeness of God, right? What is the image and likeness. the body of God? The Spirit. So imagine God created Adam and Eve as spiritual beings. as angels. able to materialise themselves as angels and ONLY AFTER they sinned, He “clothed them” meaning “made them worn” – see Genesis 3:19 as one wh is worn under heavy burden- which sin is. And therefore I believe, they were worn not only by heaviness of the “skin” they were been dressed now, but also in their inner man they were burdened by heaviness of their sin and knowing, someone else had to die in their place as the wages of sin is death. O top of that I think it is a Psalm 105 which says: animals are asking food from God – Satan being preying lion is also asking his “food” from God. So God could let him kill an animal for the sin of Adam and Eve and made a skin dresses for them.
From this perspective i believe, Genesis 3:21 – even if not explicitly – yet is in fact speaking of Chirst substitutionary atonement and abut fact God did not had to kill hiself, but let some animal die for their atonement. For would He not do this and the law of sin and death was already in place, then Adam and Eve had to die instantly for their sin already in the garden of Eden.
But I do not claim I have pattent for wisdom, ok? I just share wth you my faith in the Scripture, the passage you spoke about.
God bless you!
Sorry, it is in 2Tim 3:16: All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
This has always intrigued me! One thing that I don’t think has been mentioned in this thread is the fact that our outer layer of skin – epidermis – is actually dead. It is also our first line of defence from the elements, the environment and disease. Since Adam & Eve were not in any danger in the Garden of Eden, they had no need of a defence system. But the Lord was about to expel them from the Garden and expose them to dangers, so he covered/clothed them with a protective layer (maybe it was the transformative process in the body, brought on by our sin, that would now create the dead layer of skin). Also, I don’t read in the Bible that Abel’s offering was a slaughtered animal … I interpret it as the choicest part … the fat (either the wool or cream or lanolin). I find it difficult to accept that such an act of sacrifice involving shedding of blood, would be left to be implied by either the inconclusive account of the Garden or Abel’s sacrifice. The first account of sacrifice using an altar for that purpose, is recorded in Genesis 8:20. No mention of an altar (which we know is central to the blood sacrificial system – be it made of stone or a cross), is mentioned in the Adam & Eve account, or the Cain & Abel account. Furthermore, there is no account anywhere in the Bible, of God, Himself, shedding the blood of mankind or an animal. All killing is done by human agency, or by the human body’s system (e.g instant death in the case of Ananias & Sapphira = heart attack). Killing by God’s actual is incongruous with his perfect nature. He gives life; He, Himself, does not destroy it.
Well, all you said is true, it does not mention sacrifice or killing, yet it is very much inferred, as the only way to get skins was to kill an animal, something Adam and Eve had never seen. Also, there was no need for clothing with the first two humans God made, for they were covered with Gods glory, since they were Gods children. The whole thing was to show, as you mentioned, that there was consequences to sin, and that was death. Their first attempt to cover themselves was the work of their own hands, a poor cover up, man made solutions for sin and guilt never work, therefore God did it, showing the way grace operates.
All the many on here saying that it was human flesh are not thinking logically. Why would Adam and Eve and God all refer to the word naked if they had no human flesh?
One big mistake the author of this article has made is to hide behind the vail of ignorance, and thereby willfully reject the obvious responsibility placed upon us to “Believe.”
You shouldn’t expect everything to be spelt out to you. There are lots of times when a single word should be enough for you to believe God.
When the Bible says God made skins to clothe Adam, do you then need to be told where, how, when, and why the skin was made? If we keep waiting for every explanation from God, we would never believe the Bible or even understand it.
Therefore I suggest, one must have faith when reading the Holy Book. And remember, it’s a spiritual book.
In this commentary, you are completely ignoring Genesis 4:4. If it were wrong to shed animal blood, why would God accept Abel’s blood sacrifice? Do you not believe Adam and Eve didn’t pass the story on to Abel?
Gen 1 man was created in God’s image John 4 God is a Spirit not a man.
Gen 2 man was given a Soul for a spiritual body
Gen 3 man was clothed with flesh. Spirit soul and body
the word skins means human skins.
if you believe what humans that are clothed with skins, is what was made in Gods image ..Well we were made from the dust and die, was God made from the dust and does He die? if so who made God from the dust?
No we were made in His image Spirit.
not complicated unless a doctrine makes it complicated.