Fulfillment of Gen 3:15

[mikew]

As a general correspondence with Genesis, the New Testament presents believers as being new creatures in Christ Jesus, that we are not the same creature we were before becoming a believer.

2Co 5:17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. (KJV)

The new creation (and creature) theme appears in Paul's writing wherein he showed that there was the first Adam who brought sin and there was the Last Adam, Christ Jesus. See Rom 5:12ff and 1Cor 15:45

1Co 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit (KJV)

Rom 5:17 For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.) (KJV)

Now even more significant, there are several New Testament ideas that show fulfillment of Gen 3:15

Gen 3:15 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. (KJV)

The first is the virgin birth of Christ Jesus reflected in the fact that Gen 3:15 mentions the "seed of woman" and even if one doesn't subscribe to that detail at least we know this speaks of Christ.

Then in John 8:44 Jesus spoke of the audience as being the children of their father the devil

John 8:44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it. (KJV)

Jesus therefore was saying the equivalent that these people in his audience were seed of the serpent even like John the baptist said
Mat 3:7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his baptism, he said unto them, Ye offspring of vipers, who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? (ASV)

The conflict then was occurring between Christ Jesus, the seed of woman, and then many of that generation who were seed of the devil. Again this idea was reflected in the parable of the Wheat and Tares, Matt 13:36ff (for the explanation of the parable given by Jesus)

13:38 the field is the world; and the good seed, these are the children of the Kingdom; and the darnel weeds are the children of the evil one. 13:39 The enemy who sowed them is the devil. The harvest is the end of the age, and the reapers are angels (WEB)

The devil was yet to be bruised on the head which was an indication of the loss of his political power and influence over man. Christ was bruised on the heal which showed Christ's greater stature. The devil's bruising was shown yet to be future of the time of writing of Romans (about 59AD) as seen in Rom 16:20

16:20 And the God of peace will quickly crush Satan under your feet. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you.

Therefore, if Gen 3:15 is seen in its prophetic sense, the fulfillment quite naturally was to be seen in the first century arrival of Christ and the bruising or temporary removal of Satan from his power to deceive the nations.

Does this all make sense?
Are there other places where the fulfillment of Gen 3:15 has been described?

[psychohmike]

I think your observations are sufficient enough as to conclude that it is a past fulfillment.

[mikew]

Thanks Mike for your response. I'm also curious if this is of interest to people of other end-time perspectives.

Another interesting parallel is that Satan tempted the woman (the first Adam, so to speak) and then tempted Jesus as the Last Adam. The apparent motive of Satan in tempting Jesus would be to stop the fulfillment of Gen 3:15. Satan was trying to circumvent getting his head bruised -- it was purely self interest on his part.

Then Jesus in this situation was taking the proper response by not getting hooked by the temptations. Jesus' proper behavior was indicative of the action to fix what went wrong in the garden.

Even if you (anyone reading this) don't agree with the fulfillment of all of Gen 3:15, do you agree with the idea that Gen 3:15 pointed to the virgin birth of Jesus?

[psychohmike]

Thanks Mike for your response. I'm also curious if this is of interest to people of other end-time perspectives.

Another interesting parallel is that Satan tempted the woman (the first Adam, so to speak) and then tempted Jesus as the Last Adam. The apparent motive of Satan in tempting Jesus would be to stop the fulfillment of Gen 3:15. Satan was trying to circumvent getting his head bruised -- it was purely self interest on his part.

Then Jesus in this situation was taking the proper response by not getting hooked by the temptations. Jesus' proper behavior was indicative of the action to fix what went wrong in the garden.

Even if you don't agree with the fulfillment of all of Gen 3:15, do you agree with the idea that Gen 3:15 pointed to the virgin birth of Jesus?

I think most other views of eschatology are so inconsistent that it is hard to say what they all or each believe.

[mikew]

Mike,

I'm still a partial-preterist (or I say general preterist) at least with respect to the resurrection of the Last Day (John 11:24).

I don't even see this resurrection of the Last Day as a matter of prophecy but this resurrection is just one that people simply were aware of.

And if the popular conception of Egyptian mythology is correct, that the kings were preparing for the resurrection, the knowledge of resurrection extended to multiple cultures.

Even when Jesus rebuked the Sadducees for not holding to the resurrection, Jesus didn't refer to a scripture passage on the topic but rather referred to the implications of references to the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. I'm supposing that if there were a really clear OT reference then such verse would be used instead.
(Maybe Dan 12:2 or Dan 12:13 were not quite appropriate as a response in the situation with the Sadducees.)

[Douglas]

I think John 11: 24 - 26 is very telling.

Martha makes a statement about the resurrection (at the last day) but Jesus "corrects" her as though she did not have the correct understanding. His response was "I am the resurrection and the life....."

Interesting answer Jesus gives regarding resurrectioni on the last day.

[mikew]

My understanding on Jesus' response is that He was not correcting her. What she said was perfectly fine.

Jesus was telling her something that about His resurrection that was not known beforehand. The disciples didn't know about Jesus' resurrection that would soon happen. But Jesus took this moment to share some ideas about the meaning of what would soon happen.

Jesus may have explained some ideas about the born again topic and about resurrection and eternal life, but in John 11 Jesus was introducing the effect His resurrection would have upon believers.

[Douglas]

Mike,

I think Jesus WAS correcting Martha's understanding. He is the resurrection, and if we confirm that Jesus has been raised from the dead, then I think we could conclude that Lazarus has been resurrected WITH Jesus Christ at His resurrection, and NOT "at the last day"...... Unless you believe the "last day" has already come? I personaly think the "last day" is yet to come, as I am not a preterist per say, and I keep waking up to a NEW day every morning still .. hehe... It's just what I believe to be correct today regarding this... Who knows what I will think about this topic tomorrow, but I do know that I will always have Jesus as my saviour and Lord and follow Him until I die. (THE LAST DAY for me atleast.)

[Allyn]

Mike,

I'm still a partial-preterist (or I say general preterist) at least with respect to the resurrection of the Last Day (John 11:24).

I don't even see this resurrection of the Last Day as a matter of prophecy but this resurrection is just one that people simply were aware of.

And if the popular conception of Egyptian mythology is correct, that the kings were preparing for the resurrection, the knowledge of resurrection extended to multiple cultures.

Even when Jesus rebuked the Sadducees for not holding to the resurrection, Jesus didn't refer to a scripture passage on the topic but rather referred to the implications of references to the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. I'm supposing that if there were a really clear OT reference then such verse would be used instead.
(Maybe Dan 12:2 or Dan 12:13 were not quite appropriate as a response in the situation with the Sadducees.)

No offense intended, but there is a certain hypocricy in partial preterism.

These men all say that Full Preterism is heresy. Look at their quotes below regarding the time texts.

Gene Cook Jr. PARTIAL PRETERIST:
"I hold to all of the time texts"

Jonathan Seraiah PARTIAL PRETERIST:
“If a text says something is ‘near,’ then we must accept it as true”

Ken Gentry PARTIAL PRETERIST:
"Evangelical (and reformed) preterists (e.g., R. C. Sproul) take seriously the time texts of Scripture and apply those prophecies to A.D. 70, a redemptive-historical event of enormous consequence." “Think of it: If these words in these verses do not indicate that John expected the events to occur soon, what words could John have used to express such? How could he have said it more plainly?”

I will demonstrate how hypocritical it is to tell people to hold to the time texts, but then say that Full Preterism is heresy.

Partial Preterists who claim to hold to the "time texts" should hold that they are already in the "city" of Revelation 22. There are time texts regarding the city. The city comes in Revelation 21. Therefore: all Partial Preterists should say they are in the city of Revelation 21 and 22.

Revelation 22
1Then the angel showed me the river of the water of life, as clear as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb 2down the middle of the great street of the city. On each side of the river stood the tree of life, bearing twelve crops of fruit, yielding its fruit every month. And the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations. 3No longer will there be any curse. The throne of God and of the Lamb will be in the city, and his servants will serve him. 4They will see his face, and his name will be on their foreheads. 5There will be no more night. They will not need the light of a lamp or the light of the sun, for the Lord God will give them light. And they will reign for ever and ever. 6The angel said to me, "These words are trustworthy and true. The Lord, the God of the spirits of the prophets, sent his angel to show his servants the things that must soon take place." 6 Then he said to me, “These words are faithful and true.” And the Lord God of the holy prophets sent His angel to show His servants the things which must shortly take place.

Revelation 21
1Then I saw a (A) new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea. 2I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband. 3And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, (B) "Now the dwelling of God is with men, and he will live with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. 4He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be (C) no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away."

See A, B, C above and compare to A, B, C below.

Therefore:

(A) This event should be fulfilled according to Partial Preterists hermeneutics.

2 Peter 3
12as you look forward to the day of God and speed its coming. That day will bring about the destruction of the heavens by fire, and the elements will melt in the heat. 13But in keeping with his promise we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, the home of righteousness.

Revelation 20
11Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. Earth and heaven fled from his presence, and there was no place for them.

(B) This event should be fulfilled according to Partial Preterists hermeneutics.

1 Thessalonians 4
17After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever.

1 Thessalonians 5
9For God did not appoint us to suffer wrath but to receive salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ. 10He died for us so that, whether we are awake or asleep, we may live together with him

(C) This event should be fulfilled according to Partial Preterists hermeneutics.

1 Corinthians 15
55"Where, O death, is your victory? Where, O death, is your sting?" 56The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. 57But thanks be to God! He gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.

credit: Michael Bennett

[mikew]

Mike,

I think Jesus WAS correcting Martha's understanding. He is the resurrection, and if we confirm that Jesus has been raised from the dead, then I think we could conclude that Lazarus has been resurrected WITH Jesus Christ at His resurrection, and NOT "at the last day"...... Unless you believe the "last day" has already come? I personaly think the "last day" is yet to come, as I am not a preterist per say, and I keep waking up to a NEW day every morning still .. hehe... It's just what I believe to be correct today regarding this... Who knows what I will think about this topic tomorrow, but I do know that I will always have Jesus as my saviour and Lord and follow Him until I die. (THE LAST DAY for me atleast.)

i still see the resurrection and the Last Day as a future event.

Keep studying on the resurrection. I say this cause the topic of resurrection (as needing to be studied from a broad set of verses, not just passage by passage, and not just the resurrection of Jesus or the resurrection of the Last Day) has not been properly investigated among Christians even though such topic is central to Christianity.

It seems that such study will bring forth a major adjustment in Christianity. I'm glad for example that NT Wright has also started to bring out the importance of resurrection as the prime benefit in contrast to the ideas about heaven -- though I haven't studied his material to see his ideas and arguments.