dsanch1120
Puritan Board Freshman
Hello friends,
This morning I was reading Genesis 3 and something new stood out to me.
"And the LORD God made for Adam and for his wife garments of skins and clothed them." Genesis 3:21
When I read this verse, it stood out to me as a sign of the gospel, and thus the covenant of Grace.
In order for a garment of skin to be made, an animal must have been killed. Adam and Eve were promised death as a result of eating the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, yet it seems to me that an animal was killed in their place.
Their nakedness (and thus shame) was covered by the skin of this animal, which reminded me of the clothing with Christ's righteousness (and indeed the putting on of Christ in baptism) for those who are saved.
While I strongly feel that the Covenant of Grace is best seen in Genesis 3:15, I also feel that this 3:21 shows an incredibly clear picture of the gospel and points to the lamb of God who died in our place and whose righteousness clothes us.
I'm still very much a learner when it comes to covenant theology, and as I read through some commentaries, I not only didn't see this view reflected, but many didn't seem to engage much with this verse at all. I want to make sure that I'm on the right track and not going to exegetical (or worse) errors. I'm a bit skeptical of myself when I come to a conclusion that doesn't seem very present with past saints. Calvin came to a seemingly opposite conclusion - that the animal skin served to show them their own depravity and sinfulness.
This all being said, is this an accurate and faithful understanding of this verse?
Thank you all
This morning I was reading Genesis 3 and something new stood out to me.
"And the LORD God made for Adam and for his wife garments of skins and clothed them." Genesis 3:21
When I read this verse, it stood out to me as a sign of the gospel, and thus the covenant of Grace.
In order for a garment of skin to be made, an animal must have been killed. Adam and Eve were promised death as a result of eating the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, yet it seems to me that an animal was killed in their place.
Their nakedness (and thus shame) was covered by the skin of this animal, which reminded me of the clothing with Christ's righteousness (and indeed the putting on of Christ in baptism) for those who are saved.
While I strongly feel that the Covenant of Grace is best seen in Genesis 3:15, I also feel that this 3:21 shows an incredibly clear picture of the gospel and points to the lamb of God who died in our place and whose righteousness clothes us.
I'm still very much a learner when it comes to covenant theology, and as I read through some commentaries, I not only didn't see this view reflected, but many didn't seem to engage much with this verse at all. I want to make sure that I'm on the right track and not going to exegetical (or worse) errors. I'm a bit skeptical of myself when I come to a conclusion that doesn't seem very present with past saints. Calvin came to a seemingly opposite conclusion - that the animal skin served to show them their own depravity and sinfulness.
This all being said, is this an accurate and faithful understanding of this verse?
Thank you all