God Made Cloths For Adam Eve
In Genesis 3:21, in the midst of telling Adam and Eve the awful consequences of their disobedience, God made clothing for Adam and Eve. What, if anything, is the comfort a sinner today can take from this?
Join Our Christian Chat and Take The Love Bible Quiz
---Geraldine on 12/6/10
Helpful Blog Vote (2)
Legends: Fair enough. I was hoping that you didn't buy into such nutso theories.
---jerry6593 on 12/16/10|
When the first Adam allowed deceptive intelligence to govern their thinking and rationalized disobedience to the Father, Father rather than turning His back on them, lovingly covered their nakedness with the covering of an innocent to cover their shame. Foreshadowing from the beginning how He would lovingly allow for the shedding of the blood of His beloved and innocent Son for the remission of our sin, to graciously redeem us from the penalty of that sin and the resulting shame and guilt, by covering us with His own righteousness and peace.
---joseph on 12/16/10|
AKA, you have made a great point with what you just said. We are left with, "How did God provide the clothes or skins?" Well, He does not tell us He killed an animal, or that someone else did. Only that He provide something for them to cover themselves with. In the Lexical when the word "Or" is used, 44 times is to indicate the skin of an animal, usually after skinning. Job said, "the skin of my teeth" Job 19:20, which probably meant "gums." But here God did not think it important for us to know the details or He would have given them to us. No use speculating, it begins new teachings. Genesis does not give us all a detail of everything. Just an outlook only what God wants to convey.
---Mark_V. on 12/15/10|
Since you were kind enough to say "please"...
My blogs never were meant to address Cluny views about the skins changing whatever he said it changed??? As I'm sure we all do, I often choose not give my opinion in response to certain subjects even when I have no earthly idea what the blogger is talking about as it is with Cluny's view on what the skins were or did.
I think my blog was clear. Cluny was right about God NOT being mentioned as the killer of the animal the skins came from. That's all!
---Legends on 12/15/10|
earlier, i could not think of a better word for murder, but now i think 'slaughter' would be a better word.
in all the examples, God provides the sacrifice. never in Scripture does God do the slaughtering for the sacrifice.
---aka on 12/15/10|
//In order to make clothes for Adam and Eve God killed an innocent animal.
That animal represented Jesus Christ. And that animal,s blood was shed again representing what happened to Jesus Christ. Over and over again the Scriptures points to the importance of the blood.//
in all the examples, God provides the sacrifice. never in Scripture does God do the act of murder for the sacrifice.
---aka on 12/14/10|
\\In order to make clothes for Adam and Eve God killed an innocent animal.\\
Where does the Bible actually say this, mima?
Is there any reason that God could not have created the "clothes of skin" (KJV) ex nihilo? Can you prove He did not?
** that (among other things) bunnies and eggs are somehow connected to the Cross.**
I forgot to mention that eggs feature prominently in the Seder (Passover meal).
Did you know that? Could there be a connection?
---Cluny on 12/14/10|
In order to make clothes for Adam and Eve God killed an innocent animal.
That animal represented Jesus Christ. And that animal,s blood was shed again representing what happened to Jesus Christ.
Over and over again the Scriptures points to the importance of the blood.
---mima on 12/14/10|
Aka, I completely agree with your answers. The Word of God was written to us so that we could understand it and the necessary things that we need to know as believers. It is necessary for us. Everything that God inspired word says is necessary for us. How He begin Scripture, what He did and how the people failed, and what He did again and again, and what He will do in the future. He knew we needed all that information in order that we would know why He did what He did. Very good answer AKA.
---Mark_V. on 12/14/10|
Le t me please direct to to Matthew:
6:25-31 Therefore I say unto you. Take no thought for your life, what you shall eat, or what you shall drink, nor yet for yoour body what you shall put on. Is not the body more than meat, and the body than raiment?............
---Bee on 12/14/10|
\\He doesn't think that pagan practices were introduced by the ECWs, implying, one might suppose, that (among other things) bunnies and eggs are somehow connected to the Cross.\\
Please tell me which of the early Christian writers introduced bunnies and eggs. Be specific, quoting the appropriate writings.
Better ECW than EGW.
---Cluny on 12/14/10|
//You don't think that God IS under any obligation, do you?// cluny
We are all under obligation to keep our word...let your yes be yes and no be no. Fortunately, for us, He is a God full of Grace. Of course, God does not have to keep His Word, but then how does He remain a God full of Grace?
thank you for the Scripture, micha.
---aka on 12/14/10|
Legends: Please tell me that you don't agree with Cluny that "the 'garments of skin' were a change in our physical nature, making it difficult (or impossible in most cases) to have direct communication with demons."
He doesn't think that pagan practices were introduced by the ECWs, implying, one might suppose, that (among other things) bunnies and eggs are somehow connected to the Cross.
Such total trust in the doctrines of men is a dangerous position.
Mat 15:9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
---jerry6593 on 12/14/10|
Geraldine: "What, if anything, is the comfort a sinner today can take from this?"
When toddlers play in the nude, they are not aware of their nakedness. Only when they are aware of their nakedness, they are ashamed.
It is written that lambs are used for clothing. And have you not heard about sheep's clothing? And what about John who was clothed with camel's hair having a girdle of a skin about his loins? And is it not written that you be clothed so that the shame of your nakedness does not appear?
---Steveng on 12/13/10|
Even though I never wrote that God killed the sacrifice, for years I thought He killed the animal(s) to make skins. Cluny correctly(somehow) saw this in what "I" wrote. Whether God killed the animal or not, He was correct about what I had assumed. That's all my last blog was about.
At the same time, my blog did not disagree with you and others that God's plan to send Messiah to the cross was shown by type and foreshadow in this event that happened in Genesis 3:21.
But Jesus wasn't killed by God even though God sent Him to be sacrificially killed.
I give Cluny his due when he's right just as I voice my disagreements. I'm not so caught up in my always right opinions that I avoid saying when I'm wrong.
---Legends on 12/13/10|
\\Cluny, Your line of reasoning here is a little strange (to me) saying God was under no obligation to do anything?\\
You don't think that God IS under any obligation, do you?
**Cluny, there is many examples of the early fathers bringing their pagan customs into the Church. Where do you think they came from?**
And you have not said who brought WHICH customs and when.
When you do, I'll take you seriously.
---Cluny on 12/12/10|
Hebrews 9:16 For where a testament [is], there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
Hebrews 9:23 [It was] therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.
---micha9344 on 12/12/10|
//What parent would sacrifice his child if he didn't "HAVE TO?"//
I agree. If God said that He would not flood the world again and deemed this unnecessary to follow up on His Word because He God, then is He a God of Love?
Let your yes be yes, and your no be no. our Savior taught the necessity of having truth and integrity. don't you think it necessary for our Lord to keep His Word?
---ajka on 12/12/10|
Cluny, Your line of reasoning here is a little strange (to me) saying God was under no obligation to do anything? So it was not "necessary" to have His Son Killed? just a whim? or just to prove a point ? To who?
What parent would sacrifice his child if he didn't "HAVE TO?"
---1st_cliff on 12/12/10|
Cluny, there is many examples of the early fathers bringing their pagan customs into the Church. Where do you think they came from? They came from outside to the inside, carrying their loads of believes. It does not mean they didn't change after they committed to the Church but many became leaders who people listened to. Origin one of the Greek Fathers was excommunicated as a heretic. Tertullian a genius was connected to a fanatic group. Hippolytus could not have been a favorite with either Zephyrinus or Callistus, for he denounced both as heretics. Look it up. There is much more. There can also be no question that the philosophical dogmas came with them, and were a curse to Christianity.
---Mark_V. on 12/12/10|
cluny, again, i will say that the necessity became ours and it was God's choice.
if you want to try to stuff (and re-stuff) words in my mouth that I did not say, you have that freedom, but, i will let you strain on that gnat.
In Gen 3:22-24, the two ways that God used to guard the tree of life was His choice too, but didn't the choice come from a necessity because of man's ambition to be like God?
---aka on 12/11/10|
\\To restore man to His former presence with God, God's choice to sacrifice His own Son became necessary to man.
obviously it was always God's choice to do what became necessary for us.\\
To say that God is under ANY necessity is to say that God is not absolutely free and sovereign.
---Cluny on 12/10/10|
To restore man to His former presence with God, sacrifice of God's Own Son became necessary.
In other words:
To restore man to His former presence with God, God's choice to sacrifice His own Son became necessary to man.
obviously it was always God's choice to do what became necessary for us.
---aka on 12/10/10|
\\To restore man to His former presence with God, sacrifice of God's Own Son became necessary.\\
God is not bound by necessity. He is totally free.
This is how He CHOSE to do things--but God is subject to no strictures.
---Cluny on 12/10/10|
Revelation 13:8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
So skin came from the lamb slain from the foundation of the earth. Those lambs represented christ.
---francis on 12/10/10|
Heb 9:22-23 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood, and without shedding of blood is no remission. [It was] therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.
Gen 3:21 skins-plural
Not that God couldn't make them without sacrifice, but why?
Wouldn't the sacrifice point to Christ?
Of course this is arbitrary- the Bible doesn't say where the skins came from, just that God made them.
---micha9344 on 12/9/10|
But can't assume and teach assumption without more proof than what's in this one verse... Legends on 12/8/10
i've never heard anyone say that God killed any animal to make the covering. however, to make the covering God did require a sacrifice. This theme is consistent through the OT and NT.
To take care of man in the flesh, sacrifice of God's own creation became necessary. To restore man to His former presence with God, sacrifice of God's Own Son became necessary.
The proof is in the witness.
---aka on 12/9/10|
\\No wonder you worship them - maybe they were pagan gods. \\
I do not worship the ECWs with the Latreia owed to God alone, and you slander me when you say that.
||They sure did bring pagan customs into the Christian Church!
---jerry6593 on 12/9/10\\
Please name one, and give the actual NAME of the early Christian writer who did so, saying when and where.
Bet you can't.
---Cluny on 12/9/10|
|Read These Insightful Articles About Software
Cluny: The Bible also does NOT say "the 'garments of skin' were a change in our physical nature, making it difficult (or impossible in most cases) to have direct communication with demons." Such a stupid theory is disproved by Satan's communication with us. Ever hear of temptation to sin? Even Jesus experienced it for forty days. What is the basis of your fascination with these Christian-pagan hybrid ECWs?
---jerry6593 on 12/10/10|
Cluny, I also disagree with you speculation. The verse does not say that God created tunics of skin to clothed them, what it does say is "He made" tunics of skins. In order to make tunics of skins, an animal has to be sacrificed, since He didn't tell us He created them, but that He made them.
As to the answer of the question above,
The comfort I get from that is to later find out that He also sacrificed His Own Son, Jesus to cover our sins. I don't get comfort for the death of Christ, but for the love God had for the sinner.
The first physical deaths should have been the man and his wife, but it was an animal-shadow of the reality that God would someday kill a substitute to redeem sinners.
---Mark_V. on 12/10/10|
\\Cluny: "I'd rather trust ECWs than mere human opinions"
Now the truth comes out! You don't believe that your revered ECWs were mere humans.\\
Jerry, you gave a mere human opinion that God slaughtered an animal to make the skin garments for Adam and Eve, which the Bible does NOT say happened.
Yet you reject what the ECWs said about the matter.
Better ECW than EGW.
---Cluny on 12/9/10|
Cluny: "I'd rather trust ECWs than mere human opinions"
Now the truth comes out! You don't believe that your revered ECWs were mere humans. No wonder you worship them - maybe they were pagan gods. They sure did bring pagan customs into the Christian Church!
---jerry6593 on 12/9/10|
Just like a true father. The comfort is: when we(Gods children) make mistakes and do wrong he(Our Father) still loves us and blesses us. This is what love is,my friend. This is why hugging a child after a spanking is so important. It reinforces our love for the child and lets them know: even though you have disobeyed me, I still love you. That's comforting.
---Robyn on 12/8/10|
"Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them." Genesis 3:21
"Coats" from Hebrew "Kuttoneth"
"skins" from Hebrew "Owr"
Every other time Kuttoneth is used, it refers to animal hydes, Mostly badgers.
BUT... Guessing your point wasn't about coat and skins. I think it was about who killed the animal or even whether an animal was killed.
I looked again. You're right! No reference about the Lord killing anything in this verse. Thanks!
I assumed since God made the coats, He killed whatever animal the skins came from. MAYBE? But can't assume and teach assumption without more proof than what's in this one verse! Thanks Cluny!
---Legends on 12/8/10|
"You need to turn from fallible man's opinion to the ONLY source of truth - the Bible." (Jerry6593)
This is rather ironic. Jerry is a SDA and accept Ellen G White's false opinions and interpretations of Scripture. Now he is telling Cluny to dismiss the private opinions of the Early Church Fathers while he hang to Ellen G White's opinions and interpretations and claim she was a prophetess of God!
You funny Jerry! Hahahahahahahah!
---Ignatius on 12/8/10|
Mima - You are WRONG. The Bible does NOT say just believe and your sins are gone, it says confess and repent. ONLY sins that are confessed and repented of are forgiven are erased, if you do not confess or repent of your sins, they are NOT forgiven or erased, but still there for God to see. Confession and Repentance are the ONLY things that can make the blood cover and erase. Luke 13:3, 1 John 1:9
---Leslie on 12/8/10|
Here is a good example for you of God.
Im sure youve all read Gen 3!
Some will and some wont believe! But all see clearly a vision of Christ!
But instead of understanding, it become did God kill an animal
Did he have to kill? Was it a goat or a lamb?
But blessed are your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear.
Blessed are ye that hunger now: for ye shall be filled. Blessed are ye that weep now: for ye shall laugh.
For I tell you, that many prophets and kings have desired to see those things which ye see, and have not seen them, and to hear those things which ye hear, and have not heard them.
---TheSeg on 12/8/10|
jerry6593, Legends, francis, and others.
Please give book, chapter, and verse where it says that God killed any animal (lamb or otherwise) to provide the "coats of skin", as the KJV puts it, to cover them.
There's nothing about God killing an animal in Genesis 3.
---Cluny on 12/8/10|
\\many below are correct "in my opinion",\\
I'd rather trust ECWs than mere human opinions, including yours, expressed here.
---Cluny on 12/8/10|
I believe the same, Mima. I think rejecting Christ is the sin that brings condemnation now. He has already tasted death for every man (Heb 2:9) and we're sanctified by the offering of his body (Heb 10:10).
The Bible also mentions that those who reject Jesus have treated the blood of the covenant by which they were sanctified an unholy thing (Heb 10:26).
The Bible mentions mens names being blotted OUT of the book of life (Rev 3:5) but I have yet to see where it says they are written into it. The names have been there since the foundation of the world. (Rev 17:8)
It seems as though men are in the book and only blotted out if they reject the gospel of Jesus Christ.
---JackB on 12/8/10|
Genesis 1:21 merely points to the goodness of God in taking care of His creations even after disobeying His command and causing the fall of mankind. Even till today, the heathens and pagans enjoy God's common grace like Adam and Eve did.
But Genesis 1:15 was the covenant of grace, the prophesied Saviour that was to come, "And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed, it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel."
1 Peter 1:20 "Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you," Christ's coming was already in God's plan.
---christan on 12/8/10|
Cluny: Yes, I did see that the ECWs did "opine". I just hope that you don't share this opinion. That there appear many kooky opinions on this website is beyond question, but many below are correct "in my opinion", in that the lamb slain to cover Adam and Eve's sin was representative of Jesus, the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
Trust your Bible, not the ECWs.
---jerry6593 on 12/8/10|
God makes everything just the way it should be, the first time!
He told Adam dont eat from the tree. Well he did!
You know, I wouldnt put a new born behind the wheel of a Porsche, either!
I say this because the first thing he says when he came to the lord.
He said I was afraid, because I was naked, and I hid myself.
I think on things a lot! God never said he was naked!
God ask him. Who told thee that thou wast naked?
Now maybe, its just me. But, this says they were not naked!
But, believed they were!
God will only give you the things you need to grow!
Some should take comfort in this, other cannot!
---TheSeg on 12/7/10|
Leslie you wrote,"When we sin today, when we repent of that sin, God covers us in the blood of Christ, and that sin is washed away and erased."
However based on the Scripturem John 1:29,"The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world." I believe our sins are already taken away. We have but to accept what Christ has done.
---mima on 12/7/10|
When we sin today, when we repent of that sin, God covers us in the blood of Christ, and that sin is washed away and erased - just as when God clothed Adam and Eve in animal skins (representing the blood).
---Leslie on 12/7/10|
The animal, killed to cover their nakedness with it's hyde, shed it's innocent blood for the guilty in order to cover them. Many believe the freshly killed clothing was blood-soaked. As a result from that moment forward in history, blood sacrifice was instituted until Messiah came to shed His innocent blood for the guilty. Blood sacrifice, by faith, pointed directly to Jesus and the authority of His name.
Speaking of names: Note also that God never covered Adam/Eve with skins until IMMEDIATELY after Adam called her "Eve". Godly identity is proper covering. By it's meaning, Eve is a name that looked to future LIFE by faith just as the bloody skins looked forward to LIFE in Jesus by faith.
---Legends on 12/7/10|
\\What an unbiblical crock!\\
Please prove so. Simply labelling it such is NOT proof.
In any case, note I said, "have opined".
Is this opinion any worse than the opinions given here?
---Cluny on 12/7/10|
Geraldine, i have to say, this is the best blog question that i have ever seen on this eterire site!
Adam and eve were perfectly well covered in their fig leave garments.
But no sinner can cover his sin with his own righteousness. There for they had to be covered not by thier own efforts, but by the righteousness of the lamb of God.
The IMPUTED covering/ righteous of Christ.
The beauty of this is that the bible tells us that this very lamb that was killed to clothe Adam and Eve was Christ.
Great great super blog question.
WOW covered by the righteousness of JESUS the LAMB of GOD.
---francis on 12/6/10|
God made a covering for Adam and Eve which He got from sacrificing an animal and shedding its blood.
He made us a covering by sacrificing his only Son and shedding his blood.
In both circumstances it was Gods grace that did what was necessary to remove sin from our conscience.
---JackB on 12/7/10|
Cluny: "Some early Christian writers have opined that the "garments of skin" were a change in our physical nature, making it difficult (or impossible in most cases) to have direct communication with demons."
What an unbiblical crock!
Even if it was the reason for the new clothes, then it didn't work, as a demon did indeed speak to Eve through the serpent, and God's plan would then have been proven ineffectual.
You need to turn from fallible man's opinion to the ONLY source of truth - the Bible.
---jerry6593 on 12/7/10|
Some early Christian writers have opined that the "garments of skin" were a change in our physical nature, making it difficult (or impossible in most cases) to have direct communication with demons.
In other words, it was for our own protection.
---Cluny on 12/6/10|
Lord, to cover our newly 'discovered' physical nature(and to comfort us), You made cover of animal skins and hides. to do that, it took animal sacrifice. You sacrificed Your Creation for us. But, You also knew that this was a temporary fix, and You knew that You needed to shed Your own Blood to give us permanent covering and comfort. thus, replacing animal sacrifice.
You gave the ultimate Sacrifice, and again left us with a shirt on our back with great comfort...the Holy Spirit...the comfort is the Comforter.
(Lord, to You be all the glory. Lord let us stop for a moment...what about the stranger who has nothing while we find different ways to one-up each other over the internet. Forgive me, Lord. Help me to see to hear...to love.)
---aka on 12/6/10|
That once you come into awareness of your sin (nakedness) God can cover you (clothes) and take your sin and shame away. God Bless, Paul
---paul on 12/6/10|
I think it says to the sinner that while God may lay some shame on you for your behavior he's not in any way about writing you off as valueless. While the world may reduce a man to an undignified naked bag of bones God will do no such thing.
It shows a great deal of compassion for him to make provision in something he should rightfully smite the man for. The world will never see it that way thought will they?!
---Pharisee on 12/6/10|