©2011-2026,
David E. Robinson: At the Gates of Yerushalayim Ministries
Lessons from the Wilderness, Volume 70
…The Unencumbered Soul… Part One[i] [ii] [iii]
Genesis
4:1-7
4:1 Now1 the man had marital
relations with2 his wife Eve, and she became pregnant3
and gave birth to Cain. Then she said, “I have created4 a man just as the
Lord did!”5 4:2 Then she gave birth6
to his brother Abel.7 Abel took care of the flocks, while
Cain cultivated the ground.8
4:3 At
the designated time9 Cain brought some of the fruit of
the ground for an offering10 to the Lord.
4:4 But Abel brought11
some of the firstborn of his flock—even the fattest12 of them.
And the Lord
was pleased with13 Abel and his offering, 4:5 but with Cain and
his offering he was not pleased.14 So Cain became very angry,15
and his expression was downcast.16
4:6 Then
the Lord said to Cain, “Why are
you angry, and why is your expression downcast?
4:7 Is
it not true17 that if you do what is right, you will be fine?18
But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching19
at the door. It desires to dominate you, but you must subdue it.”20
[iv]
Before we begin, I would like to add a note. To begin, I am not perfect. I do have my moments where the "old man" inside me sneaks out, and if any have experienced that, please forgive me. I say this to clear the air so to speak, for the subject we are embarking on today concerns this very thing. But I digress. I want to address my blog. The length of each post on my blog may or may not seem excessive. I add verbatim notes, taken from the sources I use, I add sometimes lengthy commentary on the social ills we encounter today, and I try to go into depth of each matter I write about. This may turn some readers off. This might cause some to turn away, because it isn’t easy to “slog” your way through my blogs.
I may speak of things you have never
heard before, but I guarantee you this one thing: they are in your bible, the
one you read. I just want you to become a careful reader, a faithful reader of
His word, I want you to search it for what I am talking about. The Scriptures I
give you are not meant to be proof texts but are starting points in you search.
I encourage you, my readers, to prove me wrong: if anything I say doesn’t align
with the Whole of God’s word, then tell me, for I am teachable and correctable –
but the time and effort I put into these studies I pray are fruitful and correct. Most readers of the bible only read it
superficially; just skimming the surface, never digging in deep, asking good
questions of what they just read, and then take the time to go further and find
the answers God has sprinkled into His Word. Most church goers only follow what
the pastor tells them; most pastors adhere to a playbook written by their
congregational leaders and rarely depart from it. The result is milk, not the
meat of the Word. Brethren, this is not an indictment of your pastors or leaders
of your congregation. They teach what they know, they do the best they can. But
heed these warnings:
Hebrews
5:7-14
7 In the days of his flesh, uJesus1 offered up prayers and
supplications, vwith loud
cries and tears, to him wwho
was able to save him from death, and xhe
was heard because of his reverence. 8 Although
yhe was a son, zhe learned obedience
through what he suffered. 9 And
abeing made perfect, he
became the source of eternal salvation to all who obey him, 10 being designated by
God a high priest bafter
the order of Melchizedek.
11 About
this we have much to say, and it is chard
to explain, since you have become dull of hearing.
12 For though by this time you ought to be
teachers, you need someone to teach you again dthe
basic principles of the oracles of God. You need emilk,
not solid food, 13 for everyone who lives on milk is unskilled
in the word of righteousness, since he is fa
child. 14 But
solid food is for gthe
mature, for those
who have their powers hof
discernment trained by constant practice to distinguish good from evil.
[v]
And also:
1 Corinthians
2:11-16/3:1-3
211 For who knows a person’s thoughts qexcept the spirit of that person, which is in him?
So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. 12 Now rwe have received not sthe spirit of the world,
but the Spirit who is from God, that we might understand the things freely
given us by God. 13 And
we impart this tin words not
taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, uinterpreting
spiritual truths to those who are spiritual.4
14 The
natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are vfolly to him, and whe is not able to
understand them because they are spiritually discerned. 15 The xspiritual
person judges all things but is himself to be judged by no one. 16 y“For who has understood the mind of the Lord so as
to instruct him?” But zwe
have the mind of Christ.
3 But I, brothers,1
could not address you as aspiritual
people, but as bpeople of
the flesh, as cinfants in
Christ. 2 dI
fed you with milk, not solid food, for eyou
were not ready for it. And even now you are not yet ready, 3 for
you are still of the flesh. For while there is fjealousy and strife
among you, are you not of the flesh and behaving only in a human way?[vi]
What I am trying to say is I will always attempt to feed
you the “solid food” of the Word. Only you know whether or not you are able to
digest it. So let us begin our study.
While doing research for our
next teaching series, I got tired. I went to lay down and just for some white-noise
in the background, I went to YouTube and put this video on: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNId110pcW0
Now the title of the video is
what caught my eye: “The One Thing God Wants Every
Elderly Christian to Release Before Death”. By now, if you have
followed me for any time and all, and read my posts, one could notice the
change from 2011 to today. I am a Messianic believer – meaning I follow the
Jewish Messiah, Yeshua, and I am one of those “seasoned citizens” also, so I
was intrigued. My first thought was this only for Christians, or should it have
been titled “The One Thing God Wants Every Believer to Release Before
Death”?
Well,
I believe while the original title was okay – it would have been better to
address ALL believers, for it was that profound. Now, some may wonder or one
might ask what’s the difference, Jesus Christ or Yeshua the Messiah? Same
person or god right? Aren’t we all believing the same thing? Well, it is not a simple “Yes or No” answer
to that assertion. It is much more nuanced than that. I’ll just put it bluntly:
Jesus
(Yeshua) who was, and is, and will always be a Jew, and that changes
everything.
First,
let us get to the heart of the matter. Why the passage from Genesis at the
beginning of our study today? If one properly understands the Word
of God, this passage from Genesis would set you straight up in your chair and
cause you to look carefully at your life. “Why?” you ask. The simple truth is that this
bold little statement above challenges your assumptions and changes the totality of
the narrative of the Scriptures, returning the entire set of God-given words
into what is should always have been understood as: a unified ancient Jewish
document. The Tanakh and the Messianic Writings (for those who do not know the
Tanakh is what we in the west call the “old testament” and the Messianic
writings are the “new testament”) were written by a people called the Hebrews. (More
on this later). So, why the mention of the video? Because it contains
within it something I had hardly ever considered before: what is crouching outside my
door? Or worse, what has already opened the door and taken up residency in my
heart and mind?
Therefore also, as for
us, having so great a cloud of those who are bearing testimony surrounding us,
having put off and away from ourselves once
for all every encumbrance and that sin which so deftly and cleverly places
itself in an entangling way around us,
with patience let us
be running the race lying before us, looking off and away to Jesus, the
originator and perfecter of this aforementioned faith, who instead of the joy
then present with Him endured the Cross, despising the shame, and has sat down
at the right hand of the throne of God. [vii]
What is it that entangles, that lies deep and hidden, dormant in our souls, but always leeching its poison into our heart? Simple things. Unforgiven things. Bitter things. Know ye not that Bitterness and unforgiveness function as spiritual obstacles that damage one’s relationship with God and others in multiple interconnected ways? Bitterness operates like a “root” that spreads trouble and defilement throughout your spiritual life (Heb 12:15). When one holds onto bitterness, it depletes the source of their spiritual vitality, leaving them weakened not only in spirit but also mentally, socially, and physically.[viii] Bitterness distorts ones entire perspective, generating violent emotions, intolerance, and vengeful thoughts.[ix]
The most critical hindrance involves your prayer life and
relationship with elōhiym. Yeshua taught that if you refuse to forgive others, your
heavenly Father will not forgive you (Matt 6:14–15). Unforgiveness blocks your fellowship
with elōhiym—you cannot be right with Him while harboring an unforgiving
spirit toward others. Since bitterness constitutes iniquity, which is
disobedience and/or sin, HaShem does not hear prayers when iniquity is harbored
in the heart; therefore, bitterness directly silences your prayers. Beyond your
vertical relationship with elōhiym,
these attitudes also damage the horizontal relationships of those around you.
Claiming to walk in God’s light while harboring hatred toward others keeps you
in darkness and blinds one’s spiritual vision (1 John 2:9–11). Unforgiveness produces an escalating
bitterness as the soul dwells on offenses, thus creating an infection that
spreads.
Unforgiveness
also provides the adversary an open door into your life: most of the ground the
enemy gains comes through unforgiving attitudes, for when one refuses to
forgive, they then bind themselves to that person and any past event or events
and are unable to move forward or live fully in the present. [x]
Seeing that
these feelings are toxic not only to God but to others around us, we cannot
ignore that they can also hinder our salvation with the Father. Many will say though,
“Are not these things covered by the blood of Messiah?”
This
question cuts to the heart of a tension in Messianic, Christian, and to an
extent, Judaic theology that the Scriptures address directly—and they offer
nuance rather than simple answers.
The blood
of Messiah does cover all sins, including bitterness and unforgiveness; elōhiym released
the holy blood of Messiah Yeshua to make atonement for our sins, and enormous
power is available to us in the blood of Yeshua beyond our initial salvation. However,
we must choose to appropriate that power just as we did when we first came to Messiah—salvation
was available to us, but we were not actually saved until we came to elōhiym and
accepted Messiah.[xi]
The same
principle applies to ongoing sanctification. Understand this though: sanctification
is the process we go through the rest of our lives – it is the process of
becoming like Messiah, of learning holiness. After we have accepted Messiah –
this is justification, but we have to maintain our believing loyalty in the one
True God and His Messiah. The critical distinction is between salvation
itself and maintaining fellowship with God. Scripture states that elōhiym won’t forgive
us if we refuse to forgive others, as was taught by Messiah Yeshua in Matthew 6:14–15. Yet, one other source clarifies the
tension: you may still somehow reach heaven while maintaining bitterness and
unforgiveness in your heart, but you will have to carry unnecessary baggage
from choosing to not forgive. Let us explore what I mean.
Christians
want to go to heaven, not realizing that the entire plan of elōhiym is to restore creation
back to what it was at the beginning: He wants to dwell with us in Eden. This
is the Olam HaBa (the World to
Come)., the Jewish way of looking at the afterlife.
In Jewish theology, the ability to enter Olam Haba (the
World to Come) is not typically viewed as a simple pass/fail test based on a
single action, but rather on a person's life as a whole, focusing on
repentance, moral conduct, and divine mercy. While failing to forgive others is
considered a serious moral failing, the ability to enter Olam
Haba is not automatically revoked for this sin alone, though it
complicates the process of divine atonement.[xii]
We will look at this more in depth in another post in this series.
So then, the deeper issue involves what unforgiveness actually
does spiritually. The power of sin will not be broken if we carry unforgiveness
in our hearts, and any unforgiveness is enough for demonic forces to maintain
their power over us in any given area. Additionally, unconfessed sin in our
hearts will hinder our prayers from being heard or answered. Thus, and more importantly,
pursuing peace and practical holiness are the marks of authentic
conversion—proof that we are new creatures in Yeshua, and bitterness may be
symptomatic of a life that has failed to obtain the grace of God.[xiii]
The blood covers your bitterness when you confess it and release it—but the
ability to forgive others who wrong us is evidence of God’s grace active within
us.
Unforgiveness may or may not nullify your salvation, but it does
block the ongoing work of grace in your life. Why take the chance? Paul
instructs believers to remove bitterness, anger, and malice, replacing them
with kindness and forgiveness as God forgave us in Christ (Eph 4:31–32). Yeshua emphasized through the parable of
the unforgiving servant that YHVH expects forgiveness to flow from the heart (Matt 18:21–35). Remember, we are but wanderers in this
life, sojourners in pursuit of the truth and the ways of our master and King.
Where does this leave us?
The Scriptures say we are created in the “image of God” (צֶלֶם
אֱלֹהִים / tselem Elohim). If we are, this “image of God” -
could we not hinder our entry into the World to Come simply by dragging this
"baggage" I eluded to before along with us? Salvation is but the
start. Do we not have to walk out this salvation to show ourselves approved?
This is precisely the tension Scripture addresses. Salvation, justification, and
sanctification are inseparable, and the trajectory of our spiritual lives
matters profoundly for entrance into God’s presence. We will return to this
idea a bit later, but first we must explore and set the record straight on what
it means to be created in the “image of God” (צֶלֶם
אֱלֹהִים / tselem Elohim).
Let me
explain.
To be created in the image of God is not a resemblance to Him. I
will lean heavily on the thoughts of two modern and contemporary scholars here:
one is the late Dr. Michael S. Heiser and the other is Dr. Carmen Joy Imes.
Both have/had written extensively on this matter. So have others, most notably N.T. Wright, Bruce K.
Waltke, John H. Walton, Christopher J.H. Wright, and Walter Brueggemann, to
name a few. While their approaches are not all identical, they all share a
similar trajectory: ancient-Near-Eastern/covenantal functioning of the image
of God, corporate identity, and the relational, vocational nature of human
purpose in God.
To
be sure, this will be a series with long posts because there is so much we need
to cover. This is but an introduction, and there are topics we will address in
further posts. Hope you stay with me. More to come…
Till we meet again, May The Lord bless you
and keep You,
Amein
[i]NOTICE OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: Unless otherwise cited, all material found on this blogsite (original text, opinions, conclusions, and other material not related to cited sources remains the collected intellectual property of the author of this site, David E. Robinson, Elder, teacher, and minister, and are owned and controlled by myself and are protected by copyright and trademark laws and various other intellectual property rights and unfair competition laws of the United States, foreign jurisdictions, and international conventions. Any errors found within, rest solely upon me; please do not blame the Father for my mistakes. I am teachable and correctable, not infallible. 😊 What I aim to do in this blog is trying to help you study your Bible better, by providing you with notes and explanations that you, my dear reader, may not have the resources available to you.
(end
of): {End Net® Notes}
Breakdown
of the symbols
·
B:
This refers to Codex Vaticanus, one of the oldest and most important
Greek manuscripts of the New Testament. Dating to the 4th century CE, it is a
key witness to the Alexandrian text-type.
·
Ψ
(Psi): This is a standard abbreviation for the book of Psalms, from the
Greek word psalmoi. In New Testament textual notes, it can also refer to
the important 8th-century Greek manuscript Codex Athous Lavrensis.
·
892*:
This is a number assigned to a specific ancient biblical manuscript. The
asterisk (*raised to the * power*) indicates that the reading came from the
original, uncorrected version of the manuscript. The manuscript itself is a
9th-century Greek minuscule manuscript containing the Gospels and Acts.
·
2427:
This refers to another Greek minuscule manuscript, dating to the 14th century,
containing the Gospels.
·
sys:
This is an abbreviation for the Syriac manuscript tradition, which was a
very important early translation of the New Testament into Syriac, a dialect of
Aramaic.
·
For those who wish to take their studies to the next
level, a list of symbols used in textural criticism can be found here: https://www.cob-net.org/compare/docs/reference-charts-ciampa.pdf
That is not to say I should not challenge something I believe, in my humble opinion, might contradict the truth of God’s word; that I will do in the main body of my epistles for that is where my gentle dissent belongs. Most (but not all) of the differences will come when a QUOTED source displays a decidedly Western/Greek mindset, as opposed to one of the Hebraic Perspectives. I must be intellectually honest – I am biased toward the God of Avraham, Issachar, and Yakob, and his son, Yeshua, the Messiah. I pray we all can find common ground as we study the Scriptures. Also, some may be put off by the length or depth of the notes; not everyone has access to the references I do, so therefore, I try to include the notes that come with the material I use, so each can see for themselves the information the originator has pointedly gleaned. I hope you avail yourselves to these inclusions – they help us to understand how the material in scripture is laid out and the thought process of the original writers of Scripture.
2
tn Heb “the man knew,” a frequent euphemism for sexual relations.
3
tn Or “she conceived.”
4
tn Here is another sound play
(paronomasia) on a name. The sound of the verb קָנִיתִי (qaniti, “I have created”) reflects the
sound of the name Cain in Hebrew (קַיִן, qayin) and gives meaning to it. The
saying uses the Qal perfect of קָנָה (qanah). There are two homonymic verbs
with this spelling, one meaning “obtain, acquire” and the other meaning
“create” (see Gen 14:19, 22; Deut 32:6; Ps 139:13; Prov 8:22). The latter fits
this context very well. Eve has created a man.
5
tn Heb “with the Lord.”
The particle אֶת־ (’et) is not the
accusative/object sign, but the preposition “with” as the ancient versions
attest. Some take the preposition in the sense of “with the help of” (see BDB
85 s.v. אֵת; cf. NEB, NIV, NRSV), while others prefer “along with” in the
sense of “like, equally with, in common with” (see Lev 26:39; Isa 45:9; Jer
23:28). Either works well in this context; the latter is reflected in the
present translation. Some understand אֶת־ as the
accusative/object sign and translate, “I have acquired a man—the Lord.” They suggest that the woman
thought (mistakenly) that she had given birth to the incarnate Lord, the Messiah who would bruise the
Serpent’s head. This fanciful suggestion is based on a questionable allegorical
interpretation of Gen 3:15 (see the note there on the word “heel”).
sn
Since Exod 6:3 seems to indicate that the name Yahweh (יְהוָה, yéhvah, translated Lord) was first revealed to Moses (see
also Exod 3:14), it is odd to see it used in quotations in Genesis by people
who lived long before Moses. This problem has been resolved in various ways:
(1) Source critics propose that Exod 6:3 is part of the “P” (or priestly)
tradition, which is at odds with the “J” (or Yahwistic) tradition. (2) Many
propose that “name” in Exod 6:3 does not refer to the divine name per se, but
to the character suggested by the name. God appeared to the patriarchs
primarily in the role of El Shaddai, the giver of fertility, not as Yahweh, the
one who fulfills his promises. In this case the patriarchs knew the name Yahweh
but had not experienced the full significance of the name. In this regard it is
possible that Exod 6:3b should not be translated as a statement of denial, but
as an affirmation followed by a rhetorical question implying that the
patriarchs did indeed know God by the name of Yahweh, just as they knew him as
El Shaddai. D. A. Garrett, following the lead of F. Andersen, sees Exod 6:2–3
as displaying a paneled A/B parallelism and translates them as follows: (A) “I
am Yahweh.” (B) “And I made myself known to Abraham … as El Shaddai.” (A’) “And
my name is Yahweh”; (B’) “Did I not make myself known to them?” (D. A. Garrett,
Rethinking Genesis, 21). However,
even if one translates the text this way, the Lord’s
words do not necessarily mean that he made the name Yahweh known to the
fathers. God is simply affirming that he now wants to be called Yahweh (see
Exod 3:14–16) and that he revealed himself in prior times as El Shaddai. If we
stress the parallelism with B, the implied answer to the concluding question
might be: “Yes, you did make yourself known to them—as El Shaddai!” The main
point of the verse would be that El Shaddai, the God of the fathers, and the
God who has just revealed himself to Moses as Yahweh are one and the same. (3)
G. J. Wenham suggests that pre-Mosaic references to Yahweh are the product of
the author/editor of Genesis, who wanted to be sure that Yahweh was identified
with the God of the fathers. In this regard, note how Yahweh is joined with
another divine name or title in Gen 9:26–27; 14:22; 15:2, 8; 24:3, 7, 12, 27,
42, 48; 27:20; 32:9. The angel uses the name Yahweh when instructing Hagar
concerning her child’s name, but the actual name (Ishma-el, “El hears”)
suggests that El, not Yahweh, originally appeared in the angel’s statement
(16:11). In her response to the angel Hagar calls God El, not Yahweh (16:13).
In 22:14 Abraham names the place of sacrifice “Yahweh Will Provide” (cf. v.
16), but in v. 8 he declares, “God will provide.” God uses the name Yahweh when
speaking to Jacob at Bethel (28:13) and Jacob also uses the name when he
awakens from the dream (28:16). Nevertheless he names the place Beth-el (“house
of El”). In 31:49 Laban prays, “May Yahweh keep watch,” but in v. 50 he
declares, “God is a witness between you and me.” Yahweh’s use of the name in
15:7 and 18:14 may reflect theological idiom, while the use in 18:19 is within
a soliloquy. (Other uses of Yahweh in quotations occur in 16:2, 5; 24:31, 35,
40, 42, 44, 48, 50, 51, 56; 26:22, 28–29; 27:7, 27; 29:32–35; 30:24, 30; 49:18.
In these cases there is no contextual indication that a different name was
originally used.) For a fuller discussion of this proposal, see G. J. Wenham,
“The Religion of the Patriarchs,” Essays
on the Patriarchal Narratives, 189–93.
6
tn Heb “And she again gave birth.”
7
sn The name Abel is not defined here in the text, but the tone is ominous.
Abel’s name, the Hebrew word הֶבֶל (hevel), means “breath, vapor, vanity,”
foreshadowing Abel’s untimely and premature death.
8
tn Heb “and Abel was a shepherd of the flock, and Cain was a worker of
the ground.” The designations of the two occupations are expressed with active
participles, רֹעֵה (ro’eh, “shepherd”)
and עֹבֵד (’oved, “worker”).
Abel is occupied with sheep, whereas Cain is living under the curse,
cultivating the ground.
9
tn Heb “And it happened at the end of days.” The clause indicates the
passing of a set period of time leading up to offering sacrifices.
10
tn The Hebrew term מִנְחָה (minkhah, “offering”)
is a general word for tribute, a gift, or an offering. It is the main word used
in Lev 2 for the dedication offering. This type of offering could be comprised
of vegetables. The content of the offering (vegetables, as opposed to animals)
was not the critical issue, but rather the attitude of the offerer.
11
tn Heb “But Abel brought, also he.…” The disjunctive clause
(conjunction + subject + verb) stresses the contrast between Cain’s offering
and Abel’s.
12
tn Two prepositional phrases are
used to qualify the kind of sacrifice that Abel brought: “from the firstborn”
and “from the fattest of them.” These also could be interpreted as a hendiadys:
“from the fattest of the firstborn of the flock.” Another option is to
understand the second prepositional phrase as referring to the fat portions of
the sacrificial sheep. In this case one may translate, “some of the firstborn
of his flock, even some of their fat portions” (cf. NEB, NIV, NRSV).
sn
Here are two types of worshipers—one (Cain) merely discharges a duty at the
proper time, while the other (Abel) goes out of his way to please God with the
first and the best.
13
tn The Hebrew verb שָׁעָה (sha’ah) simply means
“to gaze at, to have regard for, to look on with favor [or “with devotion”].”
The text does not indicate how this was communicated, but it indicates that
Cain and Abel knew immediately. Either there was some manifestation of divine
pleasure given to Abel and withheld from Cain (fire consuming the sacrifice?),
or there was an inner awareness of divine response.
14
sn The Letter to the Hebrews
explains the difference between the brothers as one of faith—Abel by faith offered a better sacrifice.
Cain’s offering as well as his reaction to God’s displeasure did not reflect
faith. See further B. K. Waltke, “Cain and His Offering,” WTJ 48 (1986): 363–72.
15
tn Heb “and it was hot to Cain.” This Hebrew idiom means that Cain
“burned” with anger.
16
tn Heb “And his face fell.” The idiom means that the inner anger is
reflected in Cain’s facial expression. The fallen or downcast face expresses
anger, dejection, or depression. Conversely, in Num 6 the high priestly
blessing speaks of the Lord
lifting up his face and giving peace.
17
tn The introduction of the
conditional clause with an interrogative particle prods the answer from Cain,
as if he should have known this. It is not a condemnation, but an encouragement
to do what is right.
18
tn The Hebrew text is difficult,
because only one word occurs, שְׂאֵת (sé’et), which appears to be the
infinitive construct from the verb “to lift up” (נָאָשׂ, na’as). The sentence reads: “If you do
well, uplifting.” On the surface it seems to be the opposite of the fallen
face. Everything will be changed if he does well. God will show him favor, he
will not be angry, and his face will reflect that. But more may be intended
since the second half of the verse forms the contrast: “If you do not do well,
sin is crouching.…” Not doing well leads to sinful attack; doing well leads to
victory and God’s blessing.
19
tn The Hebrew term translated
“crouching” (רֹבֵץ, rovets) is an active
participle. Sin is portrayed with animal imagery here as a beast crouching and
ready to pounce (a figure of speech known as zoomorphism). An Akkadian cognate
refers to a type of demon; in this case perhaps one could translate, “Sin is
the demon at the door” (see E. A. Speiser, Genesis
[AB], 29, 32–33).
20
tn Heb “and toward you [is] its desire, but you must rule over it.” As
in Gen 3:16, the Hebrew noun “desire” refers to an urge to control or dominate.
Here the desire is that which sin has for Cain, a desire to control for the
sake of evil, but Cain must have mastery over it. The imperfect is understood
as having an obligatory sense. Another option is to understand it as expressing
potential (“you can have [or “are capable of having”] mastery over it.”). It
will be a struggle, but sin can be defeated by righteousness. In addition to
this connection to Gen 3, other linguistic and thematic links between chaps. 3
and 4 are discussed by A. J. Hauser, “Linguistic and Thematic Links Between
Genesis 4:1–6 and Genesis 2–3,” JETS
23 (1980): 297–306.
1
Greek he
v
Ps. 22:1, 2; [Matt. 27:46, 50; Mark 15:34, 37; Luke 23:46]
w
Mark 14:36
x
Ps. 22:24
y
See ch. 1:2
z
Phil. 2:8
a
See ch. 2:10
b
ver. 6; ch. 6:20
c
[2 Pet. 3:16]
d
ch. 6:1
e
1 Cor. 3:2
f
1 Cor. 3:1; [1 Pet. 2:2]
g
Eph. 4:13
h
Gen. 3:22; 1 Kgs. 3:9; Isa. 7:15
[v]
The Holy Bible: English Standard Version
(Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2025), Heb 5:7–14.
r
Rom. 8:15
s
[1 John 4:4]
t
ver. 1, 4; See ch. 1:17
u
2 Cor. 10:12
4
Or interpreting spiritual truths in
spiritual language, or comparing
spiritual things with spiritual
v
ch. 1:18
w
Rom. 8:7
x
ch. 3:1; 14:37; Gal. 6:1; [Prov. 28:5]
y
Cited from Isa. 40:13; See Rom. 11:34
z
[John 15:15]
1
Or brothers and sisters
a
ch. 2:15; Rom. 7:14
b
[ch. 2:14]
c
Heb. 5:13; [ch. 2:6]
d
Heb. 5:12, 13; 1 Pet. 2:2
e
John 16:12
f
Gal. 5:19, 20; [ch. 1:11; 11:18; Rom. 13:13]
[vi]
The Holy Bible: English Standard Version
(Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2025), 1 Co 2:11–3:3.
[viii] Myles Munroe, Prayer with Purpose and Power: A 90-Day Devotional (New Kensington, PA: Whitaker House, 2023).
[ix] John F. MacArthur
Jr., Philemon, MacArthur New Testament
Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1992), 208–209
[x] Chuck D. Pierce and
Rebecca Wagner Sytsema, Possessing Your Inheritance: Take Hold of God’s Destiny for Your
Life (Ventura, CA: Regal, 2009), 176
[xi] Ibid, pg 201, 202.
[xii]Adapted from: https://www.jewfaq.org/afterlife#:~:text=The%20Talmud%20states%20that%20all,expressions%20of%20approval%20or%20disapproval.
[xiii] Paul Tautges, Bitterness: When You Can’t Move On (Greensboro, NC: New Growth
Press, 2023), 19.
