Genesis #06 Ch. 3 — Chuck Missler

Genesis Chapter 3: The Fall and Its Theological Significance

This is the sixth study in the book of Genesis conducted by Chuck Missler. The subject of this tape is Genesis chapter 3.

We have bibliographies tonight, but for those of you that have money to burn, there are 36 references here, and in looking it over I know I left out some. But I'm not recommending them all, I'm listing them just for those of you that hear me make reference to them on the tape.

This will give you a detail that you can use for whatever purpose you might, borrow the books or here and there, there might be something that catches your eye you might want to acquire for yourself. One of the things that you'll find, I think, is fun to do as a serious student of the scriptures to build your own library of references you're comfortable with.

Not all of these references are recommended, they're listed here for just your background. If you're interested in just basic references, the first few are sort of fundamental to a study. We've been leaning fairly heavy on Henry Morris, several of his books.

A very large volume called the Genesis Record is an outstanding commentary, but from a technical point of view. I personally am most fond of Arthur W. Pink's leanings in Genesis, and we'll be leaning on that particular volume more and more in later parts of the study.

The rest of these are pretty straightforward, I might comment on Jameson Fawcett's and Brown's, they have a five volume set that I've had since I was a teenager and I'm in love with. It's one of the oldest, one of the most enjoyable general commentaries and we're leaning on it in Genesis, it's excellent.

Robert Jameson's, it's one of the five volume set. The rest of these in that list are fairly straightforward, Barnhouse, who I really like as an author, I'm disappointed in his Genesis, but I list it for completeness.

I then have listed some of the books we've talked about when we talk about the origin of the universe. The little paperback by James Reid, God, the Atom, and the Universe, I think is very worth those of you that are interested in those things, it's a more timely, more modern rendering of current thinking in cosmology relative to the Bible, the biblical viewpoint.

And Henry Morris is a pretty good one too. And The Early Earth by Whitcomb. We have a couple here, one is by Immanuel Velikovsky, if you haven't read Worlds in Collision and you like this sort of thing, he's not a Christian, it's not a biblical commentary as such, but it's a very creative, imaginative discussion of some early catastrophes and recorded in the memory of man.

He has a theory that originally created an uproar in 1950, was poo-pooed by most of the scientific community, but over the last 20 years has gradually gained more and more standing. Very independent of whether you agree with his theories or not, it's an incredibly creative, very scholarly piece of work, you might find it enjoying.

Patton Hatch and Stan Howard are three engineers, orbital mechanics, computer programmers, that have done a computer model relating to the orbit of Mars, and they deal with the long day of Joshua, and six other things.

And that's mentioned here because that's also, for those of you that like this kind of peripheral reading, that's one that we talked about in great length, the Spiritual State of Joshua. And the Carl Sagan edited package on the Extraterrestrial Intelligence Symposium, I recommend that only for those of you that might have a very deep engineering or scientific background.

But several of you have asked me about it, so I put in the detail. On the Gap Theory, it's generally attributed to Pember, which is the pro. It's a book that I like to own for lots of other reasons, and the rebuttal to the Gap Theory is also listed, Western Fields.

I don't agree with Fields, but it's a very scholarly work, and it's something you might find enjoying, for those of you that want to hear the other side of the story. Theory of Evolution has a long list of things.

The first two are paperbacks, Walter Lammert's, there's a lot of stuff on creation evolution that may need more time than these particular ones. The Flood we haven't gotten into yet, but there's a series of references there, a small paperback by Whitcomb, which is very readable.

And those of you that are more serious students of The Flood, the second reference by Whitcomb and Morris together as a joint piece is one of the most definitive recent works on The Flood. Very scholarly, very technical, it's very scientific, very readable, don't be afraid of it, but a very thorough treatment of The Flood.

And the rest of these are recordings of the Ararat expeditions and some of the findings, and they're quite readable and enjoyable if you're interested in that. There are a few others here in Typology, which is studies of Genesis, particularly with emphasis on types.

The little book by Dehaan was one of my first real introductions to that approach to Genesis, and I enjoy Dehaan anyway, he's very readable. I've listed a couple of scholastic references just for thoroughness, both Lutehold, which is a two-volume set on Genesis, is exhaustive, tedious, dry as dust, you've got to be really interested in it, but your library would be incomplete without it if you're going to be a scholar on the book.

And William Henry Green's book is perhaps the classical refutation, incidentally in 1895, originally published, which is a study in the unity of the book of Genesis, and it's another approach to refuting the so-called documentary hypothesis.

I took the trouble of listing a couple of other things that you may or may not have discovered. Your most inexpensive investment in books is a Bible handbook. I was raised on Halley's, which is outstanding, except it's terrible in the book of Revelation.

So I've listed Unger here, which I also have, I've not used it as much. I think it's as good as Halley on the other stuff, and it's not as confused on the book of Revelation. So Unger's or Halley's, they're both little $3 .95, very compact, but quite thorough companions for Bible study, especially they're nice and small, and they're easy to carry under a pine tree in the mountains or on the beach or whatever, and they're a handy aid or help.

If you're a serious student of scripture, a copy of Strong's or Young's, exhaustive concordance is indispensable. So I listed, I happen to prefer Strong's because it's got other references that key to it.

And I also, after trying, have gone through most of the different cycles, I personally still retreat back to a Schofield reference, although I emphasize the new Schofield, the one that was revised in 1967.

It's vastly superior to the original, but it's the one that I happen to prefer. I went on the New American Standard kick for a while, and several others, but I just find I go back to the Schofield reference as one that I'm comfortable with.

I mention this just as long as you're putting a bibliography together, and I've also got a cassette tape thing in there and so forth. One of the books that I neglected to add, because it's not directly Genesis, but if I was doing, typing this again, under the gap theory, I might also add a book called The Invisible War by Donald Gray Barnhouse.

It's actually a study of the origin of Satan and all of that, but it's a perspective, very, very, one of my favorite books, an excellent book, but he also leads in from a gap theory frame of mind, for what it's worth.

Prayer and the Purpose of Genesis Chapter 3

Let's open with a word of prayer. Heavenly Father, we just praise you and thank you for the privilege of being here tonight. We're conscious, Father, that there are no accidents in your kingdom. We thank you, Father, that you've called us to this hour to share with you.

We ask you, Father, to just open our hearts and minds and understanding to your word and show us those things which you have for us this night. And Father, in all these things, we would just seek to behold and know better the Messiah of Israel, in whose name we pray, amen.

Okay, we're in chapter three, and we touched on it last time, but I'd like to get into it a little deeper tonight. Chapter three of the book of Genesis is probably one of the most awesome chapters in the entire Bible because it's the one chapter from which you could probably build an entire sound theology.

It's sometimes called the seed plot of the Bible. The things that are dealt with in this chapter are absolutely flabbergasting if you really try to detail it out. It is, of course, the famous story of the temptation and fall, but it lays the foundations for all the major doctrines of the Bible.

It begins the drama that Barnhouse talks about as the invisible war. The peak of the chapter, in a sense, is a declaration of war by God himself against the enemy. It is also that very verse that starts prophecy.

If you're going to be a student of prophecy, and again, our study in Genesis is intended, there may not be much evidence of it yet, but it's intended to be a prophetic study of the book. In that sense, we really take our departure from verse 15 of this chapter.

We're going to have in this chapter an explanation for the predicament of mankind. We're going to have an introduction without explanation of our enemy in the form of a serpent. We're going to learn something of his subtle devices.

We're going to also be awed by man's powerlessness and the futility of his attempts to take care of himself. We're also going to see the origin of religion in this chapter. We're also going to see God's attitude and his provision for us.

We might point out that this chapter is the ultimate refutation of Evolution or Darwinism. Because as Darwin would have us progress from the bottom to the top in concept, God's clear revelation is that it's the other way around.

That man started in fellowship with God and has tumbled to the bottom, to the point that his predicament is hopeless as far as man's own efforts are concerned. It's also a refutation, incidentally, to most of the notions you and I grew up with sociologically.

We live in a society in which we ascribe man's behavior to heredity and environment. We're just very preoccupied about that sociologically. It may never have occurred to us that that's got little to do with it in the spiritual sense.

Because Adam had an ideal heredity and an ideal environment, and he blew it. And we're heirs to that. Or someone has said, one of the writers pointed out, this is what we need is a new birth spelled with an I, not with an E, in the sense it's okay.

The Serpent’s Temptation and the Introduction of Sin

Now let's just jump in. I know we covered some of this last time, but to get the continuity, we'll start with verse 1. And it says, Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made.

And we covered some of those, the concept of the serpent earlier, recognizing we don't know what he really was because we only know the serpent after the condemnation, after the curse, what he was. His form and capabilities and role, we have no insight into practically.

But anyway, moving on. And he said to the woman, Yea, half God said, You shall not eat of every tree of the garden. And the first step in his sequence, and this is a sequence that's really worth your study.

If you carry away anything else from these studies, you might really study chapter 3 and study specifically the serpent's approach. His first step is to create doubt. That doubt. That planting of a doubt.

Doubt. Yea, half God said, I mean, did he really mean that? That ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden. The woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden, but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.

Now she adds to that. And we discussed that last time, the entrance in the sense of a form of legalism or extra burden. That was not what God said. He said nothing about touching it. And you can dwell on that whole idea.

She adds to that in Proverbs 30, verse 6, comments on our adding to God's word. He strongly recommends we don't. And I'll leave that as a footnote and we'll move on. He now has gotten the woman to the point where he is at the point where he can openly contradict.

He says, God hath said, Ye shall not, excuse me, and the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die. Now there is the, we've gotten to the stage, dialogue has begun. That's the first mistake.

And he openly contradicts God's word. For the God doth know that in the day ye fear of, then your eyes shall be open, and ye shall be as God, knowing good and evil. And when one saw that the tree was good for food, pleasant to the eyes, and a tree desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also to her husband with her, and he did eat.

Now the rationalization that takes place always fascinates me. And we commented this last time. I'm just trying to get a review so as we go, but it was good for food. Is there anything wrong with something that's good for food?

Absolutely not. It's pleasant to the eyes. Is there anything wrong with something that's pleasant to the eyes? Not intrinsically. It has a tree to be desired to make one wise. That all sounds straightforward.

There's only one thing wrong. It was prohibited by God. That's just the only small footnote on that one. Now almost every trap we fall into, we have the capability to rationalize our way into. Never in your life, ever underestimate the capacity of man to rationalize.

In a trial court, most attorneys know that what you do is you don't really try to convince the judge of your position. What you really try to do is to get him to want to render you a favorable verdict, and then give him a path of law to rationalize it, called precedent and what have you.

It's human nature. And if you're a salesman, what you really end up doing is getting your prospect to want to make a favorable decision to you, and then you build, whether it's economic or what have you, the justification so that it appears to be a prudent decision.

And there's nothing wrong with that. That's just the way man is put together. Never underestimate the ability to rationalize. The rationalization that is here is absolutely irrelevant in terms of what's happening in the sense that it's a violation of God's law.

Very simple law. Only one. And this was the means by which man, Mr. and Mrs. Man, gained experiential knowledge of sin. That was the kind of knowledge God would have had us miss, if you will. It's interesting also that if you look at the food, it was good for food, it was pleasant to the eyes, and it was desired to be wise.

You can, from Proverbs 8 and so forth, speak of wisdom as a spiritual kind of wisdom. And if that's true, then the food is for the body, the eyes for the soul, the beauty for the soul, and the wisdom for the spirit.

You've got body, soul, and spirit involved in a trinity of attack by Satan here. For those of you that are mystics, I'll throw that out. And if you think that's interesting, then take a look carefully at the temptations of Jesus Christ.

Satan attacked that the same way. Command these stones to be made bread. That was appealing to his need for food. Cast yourself down from the pinnacle. A spectacular show that would appear to his psyche or soul or that aspect of it.

And of course, this last final attempt was to claim worship. And we again have the body, soul, and spirit model in that temptation. For those of you that want to chase that down, you can run with that one.

Adam as a Type of Christ

Now, there's one other thing. We talked last time, rather heavily, about a different twist to Adam. And I spoke typologically. We mentioned last time the possibility, or I shouldn't put it that way, the approach or the view that Adam, in a sense, was a type of Christ.

And I sort of gave you the graduate course before the basics because I want to go at that the other way around. We find in the scripture that we speak of Christ as the second Adam. And while I gathered from the questions last time, I may have caused a lot of people some confusion.

There's no question about that Adam sinned. I was not trying to elevate Adam. I was simply trying to show you a model, typologically, of Adam's behavior. Adam sinned. He repudiated God's authority. He repudiated his love for him.

And he repudiated his truth. The second Adam, which is a title of whom? Jesus Christ, revealed God's love in that he came to seek and to save that which was lost. And I could give you, we could think of a dozen other examples of that.

He came to reveal, not repudiate, God's truth. The gospel is full of it. It is written that these things might be fulfilled. The Emmaus Road, where he showed all those things concerning himself, and so forth.

Not one jot or one tittle would pass from the law, that is the Old Testament, the scripture, until all be fulfilled. So Christ was here to reveal his truth. In fact, if you probe for a definition of truth, it's when the word and the deed become one.

And he was that deed of God incarnate. We'll come more to that as we get to verse 15. But finally, of course, he reveals God's majesty, and he does it in a very interesting way, by being obedient as a servant.

So in that sense, Christ fulfills what Adam blew. Adam blew it. The value of the law, Jesus Christ fulfilled the law. And having gotten into all of that, I really got ahead of ourselves a little bit. There's another sentence in which Adam indeed was a figure of him who was to come, as Paul says in Romans chapter 5.

And the whole idea that there's a parallel, mystically, not in actuality, not in the sense of Adam's motivation, because he certainly, he did sin. And in getting at the prophetic or typological aspect of the story, I may have confused some of you.

And if so, good, because, as you know, my motive is not to teach. My motive is to get you to search for yourself. And he says you should be the salt of the earth, and I don't know that salt is intended to be nourishing.

It's intended to make you thirsty. And so my intention is to make you thirsty. And you'll get fed by getting in the Word, and let the Holy Spirit straighten you out from the confusion I leave you with.

Paul’s Teaching on Covering and Spiritual Vulnerability

So okay. One other thing that I touched upon last time, and you might turn with me to 1 Corinthians chapter 11, and this is just a little teaser, but Paul in 1 Corinthians chapter 11 takes off on a tangent about a woman being covered, okay?

Verse 5,. For every woman that prayeth or prophesied with her head uncovered dishonoreth her head, for that is even all one, as if she were shaved. For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn.

For it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaved, let her be covered. For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and the glory of God, but the woman is the glory of the man.

For the man is not of the woman, but the woman of the man. Now just about this time you figure you're getting sort of impatient with Paul because he's off on this kick about the proper conduct, right, except he throws a couple of interesting little teasers in there.

Neither was the man created for the woman, but the woman for the man. For this cause ought the woman to have authority on her head. Why? Because of the angels. Now I'm sorry, that doesn't logically follow.

Now I don't know what you gals think of when you plow your way through 1 Corinthians 11. And so I'm going to leave you with that question, but raise the question further. Would Eve have been exposed to Satan?

Satan was what? A fallen angel. Would she have been exposed to him if Adam had been present? I don't know. I don't know. And I'm not saying it's a valid idea. There are those that make a big thing of the idea of the man's role as covering the woman.

And you'll find Paul picks up on that, not just here but elsewhere, with the idea that a widow is to be covered by the church, the pastor or the fellowship. That as a woman, she is spiritually exposed.

That's a concept you'll run into, whether it's biblically valid or not, you can decide for yourselves. But it starts here with Eve and her stumbling, because Timothy in 1 Timothy 2 makes a big thing out of the fact she was deceived, Adam was not.

And he makes a real distinction in the conduct of Eve and Adam. Paul does in Timothy, in his letter to Timothy. And the implication you get from Paul's view of this passage is that Adam wasn't there originally but came on later.

Just about, you know, maybe after she had actually eaten, and then he joins her in her predicament. You follow me? Now is it possible that Eve, not having Adam's covering, was thus vulnerable to Satan's attack?

Is it possible that a woman, uncovered spiritually, I'm speaking spiritually, I'm not really talking about what kind of hat you choose to wear or not wear, you know, to church. That's another thing, and I'm not going to get into that, I'll just let you get Chuck's tape on those things.

I'm not a sneaky cop, I... But the idea of being spiritually exposed is what some people point to. For example, the emergence of so many of the cults through, in false doctrine, entering the body through a woman who isn't spiritually covered.

Does that mean a woman should not teach? No. But it does mean that a woman is not to have the authority over the man within the fellowship, speaking spiritually. And so, women's livers will stone me on my way out after this evening, but I will consider the noble death.

Nakedness, Righteousness, and the Origin of Religion

Okay. Verse 7. It gets worse, girls, as we go. Genesis 3, verse 7. And the eyes of them were both opened, so that they knew that they were uncovered, uncovered. Naked is the term. And that may be exactly what it means, naked.

Or, it may be a kind of nakedness we're totally incapable of appreciating. If they walked in fellowship with the Lord, they were clothed with what? Righteousness, and in what form might that have been evident?

Light. We find passages in Psalm 104 and elsewhere, and we covered this earlier on the tapes, for those of you that want to dig into it again. Psalm 104, verse 2, and Matthew 17, verse 2, are both places where the idea of righteousness and so forth is being clothed in light.

Jesus in his transfiguration, Matthew 17, Psalm 104, speaking of the Lord, and several other passages give rise to some scholars viewing Adam and Eve as losing some kind of a covering that accrued by their righteousness.

And their sense of needing a covering, not necessarily in the sense of their nudity per se, although that may be part of it, but in the sense of having lost that righteousness because of their predicament.

They knew that they were naked, and so what was their response? They sewed fig leaves together and made themselves aprons, or coverings. Now, this to me is the beginning of religion. All religions, any religion, has as its goal, somehow, trying to reconcile the predicament of man to a righteous God by some kind of act.

Some religions are philanthropic, altruistic. Most of the primitive religions are all kinds of work strips, walking through fire, subjecting oneself to various denials. You can make a list, but the list always involves man's attempt to cover himself.

And that's an idea so fundamental to us. There's a need inside us. Once, if we can get away from the emotional commitment to atheism, which is an attempt to avoid responsibility of a designer and a creator, the next step causes us to be very conscious of a need to somehow repair ourselves.

And we go about busily doing whatever it is that our cultural situation suggests. But that's always religion. That's always what it is. It's in contrast to what God would have us do. And we're going to see that very idea, the faith works kind of idea, a contrast, in Genesis 3.

And we'll see that God has a rebuttal to this. But, okay, let's keep moving in. Verse 8, And they heard the voice of the Lord God walking in the garden. By the way, did you notice the word Lord God? In the English, it shows up, you know, it's a little different construction.

This is a change in construction. Up until now, we've actually been using the Elohim. In the beginning, the Elohim created the heaven and the earth. Here we have the introduction of the Jehovah or whatever, however you want to treat the unpronounceable four letters in concert with Elohim.

And the Jehovah, as we sometimes say, it's incorrect, but we're all used to it, is the, speaks of the covenant relationship. The covenant relationship. And from this point on, you'll see the covenant relationship, because the covenant is going to be established here.

You may not realize that. Because the evidence of the covenant relationship is very subtle. And we'll come back to that. But they heard the voice of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day.

And Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God among the trees of the garden. That's the first step. That's the first thing sin causes you to do, is to flee. Sin is what separates you from God.

He doesn't. Sin does. And it's your response to that sin that puts the gap there. The Lord God called unto Adam and said unto him, where art thou? Now, I love the way Chuck puts it. That's not the interrogation of an arresting officer.

That's the plea, the broken hearted plea of a loving father. Broken hearted. Where is it calling attention to the predicament that his children have gotten themselves into. I have in my Bible a Luke 19 .10 pencil then.

Which in Luke 19 .10 it says the Son of Man has come to seek and to save that which was lost. And what he is seeking and attempting to save is that which was lost in Genesis chapter 3 verse 10. And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden.

I was afraid because I was naked and I hid myself. And he said, who told thee that thou was naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree? Where have I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat? Verse 12. You girls have heard many times.

And man said, the woman whom thou gavest to be with me. She gave of me of the tree and I did eat. So you girls realize you haven't got a chance. That started way back here in chapter 3 verse 12. The woman whom thou gavest to be with me.

Lord God said unto the woman, what is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, the serpent beguiled me and I did eat. You know, we call that today buck passing, right? And we could spend a lot of time getting into this.

But I don't think it's necessary. Most of you are married and you've seen this process occur firsthand. Verse 14. The Lord God said unto the serpent. Notice now, God does not fool around with these feeble, lame excuses.

He doesn't even bother dealing with Adam's passing it on to his wife. In fact, Adam really isn't passing the buck to his wife. Adam's trying to pass the buck on God. That's usually our first step. Is to somehow, you know, pin the rose on him.

But in any case, God doesn't even respond to that one, apparently. Doesn't respond to Eve. Turns to the, in a sense, first cause of it. To the serpent. God says unto the serpent, because thou hast done this.

Thou art cursed above all cattle and above every beast of the field. Upon thy belly thou shalt go and dust thou shalt eat all the days of thy life. Now, from this verse on, is what we're familiar with the serpents as.

And one thing that we should try to bear in mind. Well, put it this way. Genesis, to me, gets easier the further we get into it. Because more and more, especially after chapter 6. We're dealing with a world that we can perhaps relate to a little bit.

What we fail to appropriate to these early chapters. Is the realization that the universe, the world, the ecology they're in. The whole dimensionality of what they're in. Could be quite different than anything we're really acquainted with.

And the serpent being cursed really gives us no insight. As to what he was like before the curse. So another observation that's kind of interesting. There is a period forthcoming called the millennium.

And those of you that study the millennium. From Isaiah 65. Revelation 20 and 21 and so forth. Realize that in that period of the millennium. It's not eternity. It's not a period for eternity. That comes after the second resurrection.

And after the thousand years are finished and all of that. In fact, most of what we know about the millennium. Does not come from revelation. All revelation contributes is the duration of the period. From which it gets its name.

One thousand years. Most of what we know about the millennium. We glean from Isaiah 65. And most of you that have studied that. Know that in that period. It appears that much of what we think of as the curse is relieved.

The lion and the lamb lie down together. A child can play in a den of adders and not be hurt. And we have the whole world ecology. Under the reign of Jesus Christ. Return to a environment. That we seem to relate to the pre-fall Eden.

For reasons that please God. He apparently is going to put the world. Under the reign of the second Adam. Under ideal conditions. Okay. Unless we. And in some respects. The millennium. May be. A final rebuttal.

To Adam's attempt. To pin this rose on Satan. Because after a thousand years. Of the rule of Jesus Christ. We discover there is enough residual evil in man. That when Satan is loosed at the end of a thousand years.

He blows it again. There is a rebellion. And the final act closes. But it is interesting. That even in the millennium. When all these certain things are made right. The curse is relieved. In large measure.

In fact. The Lord himself. Instead of being honored with gold, myrrh and frankincense. It is only gold and frankincense. No myrrh and so forth. There is a lot of interesting things about the millennium.

But the one thing at least. That is not lifted. Out of the curse. Is the serpent. It is interesting to discover. That the serpent. Even in the millennium. Is going to bear this curse. Going on the dust of the ground.

Genesis 3:15 and the Seed of the Woman

You can find that in Isaiah 65. But now we get. To what is regarded by most scholars. As one of the pivotal verses. In the entire scripture. Genesis chapter 3. Verse 15. Very key verse. And this verse.

Is in fact. The origin of all prophecy. Because all prophetic themes and threads. Can start from Genesis 3 .15. It is a declaration. Of war. By God himself. Against our enemy. The Lord God said unto the serpent.

Verse 14. And he is continuing now. Verse 15. And I will put enmity. That is the same word. It is used that way in the Septuagint version. As the word enemy. The word enmity. Is the same essential root and idea.

I will put enmity. Between thee and the woman. That is kind of strange isn't it? A very special. Enmity. Between the serpent. Who is the serpent? Satan. And the woman. And between thy seed. And her seed.

He shall bruise thy head. And thou shalt bruise his heel. What a fascinating riddle. It speaks of the enemy. And the woman. And it speaks of two seeds. And it is from this verse. That we have a title.

One of the first titles. In the scripture. Of Israel's Messiah. The seed of the woman. You will hear that expression. Again and again and again. The seed of the woman. Where does that term come from? From this chapter.

By this verse. The seed of the woman. We will come back to that. I want to get into that a little further. But you will also notice that there is two. We will get into this whole seed of the woman thing.

And of course who is the seed of the woman? Jesus Christ. But we forget that there are two seeds. Mentioned here. And the seed is a person. It says so by the amplifying phrase. After this. Thy seed and her seed.

He shall bruise thy head. And thou shall bruise his heel. You see the personal pronoun used there. Who is the other seed? The seed of the serpent. The antichrist is a term we use. And as many of you know.