Einstein.
The name evokes a brilliant, eccentric and playful scientist who almost single-handedly turned on its head humanity’s understanding of how God stitched the world together. Even now, more than a hundred years after he published his famous equations describing relativity, Einstein’s reputation endures as the standard for intelligence and unusual perception. His name has become synonymous with genius.
Einstein is best known for his theory of relativity. This theory revealed that space, time, matter and gravity are not what they appear to be. Rather than the unchanging entities we assume they are, the theory of relativity depicts them as intertwined, flexible quantities that twist and turn into each other in different situations.
With the publication of his theories of special relativity and general relativity in the early twentieth century, Einstein revolutionized the scientific community’s understanding of matter, space, time and energy. The application of his theories led to the development of nuclear power, lasers, GPS, digital cameras and more. We have Einstein to thank for much of our lifestyle in this information age.
In the ten years that followed the publication of Einstein’s theory of general relativity, the scientific community built on his ideas and began to explore a new arena of science: quantum mechanics. It was as if the world was being rebirthed, and a new and fantastic picture of the world of atoms emerged. Quantum mechanics explains how the building blocks of the universe behave, and it turns out that reality is stranger than fiction here. The scientists who developed quantum mechanics quipped, “If you feel quantum mechanics makes sense, you have not properly understood the theory.”
Einstein was involved in the development of this budding understanding, yet this pillar of the scientific community was not as central to that process as you might expect. In fact, as the field developed, he began to resist some of the conclusions at which the scientific community was arriving. Quantum mechanics was built on a different premise than relativity, one where the sense of causality—the idea that one event triggers another—begins to break down and is traded for a world that bounces around on a sea of unpredictable quantum fluctuations. Randomness is encoded at the core of quantum mechanics, and this was an idea Einstein simply could not get on board with. This tension resulted in one of his most famous statements: “As I have said so many times, God doesn’t play dice with the world.”
For the record, Einstein was not professing faith here. He did not believe in a personal God, and it seems he never landed at much of a belief, other than understanding there must have been some higher force that caused the order we see in the physical world. Rather, Einstein was expressing a profound distaste for some of the central ideas upon which the theory of quantum mechanics hangs.
As the tale of history tells, Einstein began to change directions. He attempted to develop a “unifying theory” that would encapsulate and explain both relativity and quantum mechanics, while removing the unsavory parts of the latter. In undertaking this effort, Einstein distanced himself even more from the mainstream scientific community. While quantum mechanics was gaining tremendous traction through experimental verification and its predictive power, Einstein’s work became theoretical to the point of detaching from reality—the coup de grâce for a scientist’s career. He was unable to accept the world as it was and instead tried to invent the world he wanted in his mind. He never succeeded in his quest and gradually drifted into irrelevance in the scientific community before his death. At the time he passed away, he was respected as a legendary mind, albeit a peripheral one. The ultimate “rock star” of scientific invention was “relatively” left behind before his career was over.
Where did Einstein go wrong? Einstein did not like the core assumptions of quantum mechanics, so he continued along the path that made him comfortable.
Many of us are prone to the same behavior. When confronted with a problem where we do not seem to be making noticeable progress, we assume we must, at least, be heading in the right direction. We believe if we continue along the same path, we will eventually get there; we just have not given it enough effort yet.
This is what makes a person refuse to stop and ask for directions, even though he is hopelessly lost; he assumes he needs to keep going a little farther and he will figure it out. It is also what keeps us in jobs that fit us poorly; even though we may not be good at what we do or may find it unsatisfying, we keep going, hoping the situation will change. And it is what keeps us in relationships that subtract from our lives instead of add to them; we want to believe a turbulent relationship is just about to settle down and become a healthier one. We keep hoping we are “right around the corner” from this change; we just can’t see it yet.
In my experience, trying the same thing, only harder, usually does not lead to drastic progress. Usually, the problem is that I am considering the situation from the wrong point of view. What is needed is not more effort but a different perspective.
For example, suppose someone is stuck in a job that is a poor fit for them. They are not very good at the job, and they do not find it rewarding. They have two ways of viewing the situation. First, they can view the situation through the lens of what they will have to give up if they leave, such as financial security, valued relationships or social status. In this case, they will likely try to make the situation work, possibly even for years, hoping that something will change. They will work hard to make the most of a bad situation.
But what if that person sees the situation not for what they have to give up if they leave but for what they are already giving up by staying? Every week, they give forty-plus hours to something that does not contribute to their sense of significance or tap in to the talents God has given them. Every week, the best of what God has put in them is wasted. This person will probably make the most of the situation for a while and then find a new situation.
Now let’s apply this to what we are after in this book. We have already seen that our traditional approach to the Gospel does not always work the way the Bible says it should. We are meant to live abundant lives, but we do not live them. We are meant to be free from sin’s entanglements, but we are all knotted up inside our bad habits and compulsions. Trying harder has not brought us very far.
Similarly, in the last chapter, we looked at several questions that point out significant problems in our Gospel’s premise. We began to notice holes, and it can be troubling to know which direction to head next.
So, what do we do? Do we go after those problem questions directly?
I suggest we try on a different lens. Rather than beat our fists against the problems we now see, I am going to take us through a process of reexamining our approach. When our answers stop working, it is time to change our questions.
I love questions because they can lead us to new perspectives. So much of what I have learned in faith has come because I have simply asked our Teacher, Jesus, questions. I would encourage you to do the same.
So, let’s start by changing the question. Rather than asking, “What is the sin problem?” or “How do Jesus and Paul fit together?” let’s ask, “If the Gospel is good news, what is the bad news?” In other words, if the Gospel is God’s cosmic answer, what problem did He solve?
To see what God put right, let’s look at what went wrong. And to look at that, we need to return to the beginning.
A Beginning Word
Genesis 1–3 tells the story of the opening of the human drama. The first chapter begins with an explosive symphony of God’s creation process. He speaks light into the darkness and proceeds to create the skies, waters, plants and so forth by speaking them forth. Building block by building block, God declares creation into being, until we arrive at the pinnacle of the process: the creation of man.
At this point, God does something interesting. He changes up the pattern. He does speak, but in a different way. Rather than speak Adam into being, He speaks something into being over humanity:
Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”
Genesis 1:26
God declares His image and likeness over Adam and then assigns him a dominion. Then He sculpts Adam and fills him with His Spirit:
The LORD God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature.
Genesis 2:7
This is so interesting to me. God broke the pattern of creation for humanity. I believe He did this because He wanted to draw our attention to what He actually created in this moment. It was not Adam or Eve. It was something altogether different. God spoke and created an identity and a destiny for humanity.
First, an Identity
The first thing God spoke into being over humanity was a stated identity. He spoke who we fundamentally are. And what was that? God said we were made “in [God’s] image, after [His] likeness.” This is the true essence of humanity, as declared by our Creator. We are images of God.
What does it mean to be God’s image? That is a great question, and I suggest you consult your wallet. No, I am not trying to solicit your money, but pull out any bills you have in there and look at the front of them. You may recognize such faces as George Washington, Abraham Lincoln or other notable former presidents.
Now, let’s suppose you have a one-dollar bill. Take a few seconds to look at George’s face on that bill. Is that the real George Washington on that bill? No, of course not. It is the image of George Washington. In reality, that image is just ink on paper. Yet if George Washington were to miraculously walk into the room right now, I guarantee you would recognize him. Why? Because you have been surrounded by his image. You have never seen the real George Washington, but his image has created your ability to recognize him.
It is the same for us. We were created in God’s image. That means we were created to be “a recognition” of God. The rest of creation was to look at humanity and see not the dust we were made of but who God is through us. Wow, that’s what He’s really like? That was meant to be the response of the animals and even the heavenly realms when they beheld humanity.
I can imagine this idea is hard to swallow. We have become conditioned to see ourselves as anything but what God has said we are. We think dim thoughts about ourselves and overlook who God is and who He created us to be. We allow so much junk to define us that has nothing to do with God’s definition of us at all.
We need to steer clear of this poor view of ourselves, even if we think it is true.
I like to think of it this way. My wife is a musician. She teaches voice and piano to a variety of students, and she has a lovely soprano voice. Sometimes she will sing in other languages—French, Italian or German. And even though I do not understand the words when she sings in those foreign languages, I still enjoy it.
But because I do not know the language, at times I can misunderstand the purpose of a piece as I listen to it. Without the words to guide me, I can mistake the heart of it. Perhaps I think a song of despair is really a song about quiet hope. Maybe a song that sounds vengeful to me is actually a song about the fear of a foreboding war.
When I do not understand the purpose of the song, I do what we all do: I consult the words the artist penned. Why? Because the artist is the one who determines what the song is about. I can think whatever I want about the song, but the artist is the one who created it, and the artist gets to determine its meaning. If I disagree, the conclusion is rather straightforward: I am wrong!
In the same way, if we do not see the original purpose of humanity to be what our Creator said it is—to be the image of God on the earth—then we are wrong. God is inviting us to see ourselves through His eyes.
Second, a Destiny
Along with speaking into being our identity, God spoke into being our destiny. And this makes sense. If we are made in the image of the King of kings, we need to exercise some sort of rule. To that end, God gave humanity rule, or dominion, over everything that came forth from the earth.
Adam immediately set about the business of ruling in God’s image by naming the animals:
Now out of the ground the LORD God had formed every beast of the field and every bird of the heavens and brought them to the man to see what he would call them. And whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name.
Genesis 2:19
I think, in our Western perspective, we can miss what is happening here. Remember that to an Eastern mindset, which was the audience to whom Genesis was written, a name was not just a label that identified someone. It was a person’s nature revealed.
You can see this at play in the way the Hebrews named their children. They gave names that reflected the essence of their child’s nature.
We do not have that same practice. In English, we adopt names from other languages. We might name our children Jonathan, Olivia or Aiden, which are Hebrew, Greek and Irish in origin, respectively. But we lose touch with the idea that these names actually mean something in the original language when they are bestowed on someone. It would be similar to naming a child “Laughter” or “Victorious.” Each time we spoke their name, we would be speaking the meaning of who they are. This is why it was significant whenever God renamed someone in Scripture. It was an anchor point for the essence of the person.
So, when Adam named the animals, he was not calling them any old name. He was assigning them a nature. That’s why it says, “Whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name” (emphasis mine).
Imagine it: God forms an animal and brings it to Adam. While standing there, Adam looks it over and says, “This one will be called Dog.” Bang—the animal begins panting and nuzzling Adam’s leg.
God brings another animal to Adam and waits. “Hmmm,” Adam says. “I think I’ll call this one Cat!” Poof—the cat meows and walks away, never to be seen in the Garden again.
I think it really was like that. (Well, maybe not exactly like that.)
What was Adam doing? The same thing God did in Genesis 1. Rather than “Let there be light,” Adam was saying, “Let there be Dog.” The principle and process were the same. Each one spoke, and something was. God created from nothing, and Adam spoke—and ruled over—what was brought forth from the earth.
A Tumble Downward
As you know, the story does not stop there. The tragic event of the Fall happens. Satan deceives Eve, and Adam and Eve eat the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Sin enters the story, as does our need for a Savior. Let’s consider what this means for our intended identity and dominion.
First, concerning identity, I find the interchange between the serpent and Eve very interesting. This is what Satan offers Eve for disobeying God and eating the fruit she has been told not to eat:
“For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”
Genesis 3:5, emphasis mine
How does Satan tempt Eve? By telling her she will be like God. But she is already like God! That was how she was created, remember? She was not created to be anything other than like God, and yet, somehow, she forgets that in the moment.
Maybe she had a bad hair day. Maybe the serpent was a really good liar. Whatever the case, something terribly tragic happens here. Satan offers her a lie—that she was not like God—and a solution: “If you eat my fruit, you will be like Him. Looks good, right?”
Here is the bitter irony: When Eve believed and acted on Satan’s lie, his lie became her truth. She was like God, until she ate the fruit.
In fact, the likeness of God was traded in a profound way. I believe it was no coincidence that Adam and Eve committed a sin that moved from their outsides to their insides. As they ate the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, that fruit metabolized and became part of their physical bodies. The sin they committed became part of their being. They were fractured at their very core.
Human beings always manifest what is happening inside of them. This is why, for example, it is not fun to be around someone who has a bad attitude. They draw from the negativity within and put it into the environment around them. A positive person, on the other hand, draws us into their positivity. This inborn ability was given so we could display the God who desires to dwell within us. But with sin now resident within humanity, the image Adam and Eve displayed was no longer the image of God. It was the image of sin.
As Paul discussed in Romans 7, the issue is far more than skin deep. It goes to the core. The sin problem of humanity is not just sinful actions that need forgiveness. It is also the sin image that we now bear instead of the image of God. Paul went so far as to say sin had the ability to act within him. It was a dynamic and active force within his person that manifested through his actions:
Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me.
Romans 7:20
Here is what we need to understand: The image of God in us has been hijacked by the image of sin. Furthermore, sin works its ugly way from the inside to the outside of us. After Adam and Eve took sin inside themselves, it was not long before they shifted the blame of their mistakes to each other and hid from God.
This is a big point and one worth dwelling on a bit more. I just told you the root of our sin concern is not sins that have been committed but sin that dwells within us. In other words, it is not behavioral; it is ontological. It relates to our being. Who we are at the core is fractured by sin. In fact, that shattered being is the root that causes our sinful behavior.
It is like this. Picture you have a dandelion in your yard. It is fully grown and showing its yellow head in your otherwise-pristine yard of smooth green grass. Of course, you want to remove the invader, so you walk over to the offender, bend down and pull the flower and all its leaves out of the ground. Have you solved the problem? Only temporarily. In a week, it will be back, and you will have to repeat the process. In fact, you can attack the surface of that plant all summer, if you choose, but it will keep resurfacing until you get underneath the ground and pull the plant out by the roots.
In the same way, humanity has sinful actions; these are like the leaves and flower of the dandelion. These sinful actions are real and need to be dealt with—but they flow from something deeper: sin’s residence in the very fibers of our being. We could address the sinful actions all day long and never get to the root of the issue.
This is, in fact, what happened in the Old Testament. As we have already seen, the system in place to deal with sinful actions involved going to the Temple, interfacing with a priest and performing animal sacrifices. Recall the verse we saw in the last chapter:
Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.
Hebrews 9:22
Under the Law, blood was required to forgive sins. Blood dealt with sinful actions. Yet notice what the author goes on to say a few verses later:
For since the law has but a shadow of the good things to come instead of the true form of these realities, it can never, by the same sacrifices that are continually offered every year, make perfect those who draw near. . . . But in these sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year. For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.
Hebrews 10:1, 3–4
Those blood sacrifices forgave sins, but they could not address the deeper issue. It was like pulling the head and leaves of the dandelion out of the ground but leaving the root in the soil. Blood sacrifices could not make the people perfect or remove their inherent sin. In fact, they functioned as a reminder of that sin instead. Because the Jews had to keep going back to the Temple each year, they could not escape the truth that they were powerless to stop sinning. Sin within them produced its ugly fruit, and there was no sufficient means to address it.
In fact, I would suggest that the term sinner in Scripture has more to do with the people that sin lives within than it does the people who have committed sinful actions. Paul writes about how people became sinners:
For as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners.
Romans 5:19
Are we made guilty by association with Adam’s failures? Did his bad record get passed on to us? No. Instead, his broken template was passed along to us. Once Adam and Eve sinned and became sinners—people in whom sin dwells—they reproduced that broken template throughout the human race. They could not pass along anything other than what they were, and that was the image of God, fractured and broken by sin.
Here is how I think of it. Inside an apple are seeds. Those seeds contain everything that is needed to grow another apple tree, given the right conditions. You might say there is an apple tree inside each apple. In fact, inside every apple is an apple tree that will bear more apples and, hence, more trees. So, inside every apple is a forest that could cover a large area, given the right growth conditions.
Now, whatever happens to that apple affects the whole forest that comes after it. If I eat the apple and throw the seeds away, that whole forest is erased. If I genetically modified the DNA in the seeds, changing the color of the leaves from green to blue, the whole forest would shift, as well, producing an orchard of blue-leaved apples. This is because the original apple is the template. It is the pattern for all the others after it. Its nature gets passed down to every tree in the forest.
This is how it works for you and me. Adam was the original apple that multiplied to create the forest of the human race. Every single one of us, you and myself included, is born after the template Adam broke when he sinned. He took sin inside himself and altered his nature. He changed, at the DNA level, from the image of God to the image of sin. We now bear that broken template.
A Lost Dominion
What about our dominion? That was lost, too.
As soon as Adam and Eve submitted to Satan’s suggestion to eat the fruit, they put him in the place of authority in their lives. The relationship with God that was supposed to provide them with identity and direction was usurped by the devil. Now, rather than being fathered by God, they had submitted themselves to the leadership of Satan. Along with that came the keys to the authority—or dominion—God had given them. The dominion delegated to Adam and Eve was now handed over to Satan until such a time as it could be reclaimed.
Before I continue, notice what I just said: Satan procured real authority on the earth as a result of the Fall. When Adam and Eve sinned, their rule over the earth did not default to God. It was handed to Satan.
In my experience, many believers are confused about this and believe God retained authority over the earth throughout the events of the Old Testament. But for this to be the case, God would have had to violate the structure He had set up. When He gave authority to Adam and Eve, He gave it to them, for good or for bad. If they chose to use it poorly and give it away, that was their choice—otherwise, they never really had authority in the first place.
Think of it this way. Suppose I gave you my car as a gift, and you decided you wanted to paint it a color I did not like. If I took it back and did not let you do that, I never gave you my car in the first place, did I?
In the same way, Adam and Eve either had the authority God gave to them or they did not—and we know they did. When they submitted to Satan’s instructions instead of God’s, they placed their authority under him. He, in a real way, then became the resident ruling authority on the earth. From that point forward, he began to use that dominion on the earth the way he wanted—and what he wanted was in opposition to God’s plans and will on the earth.
Jesus acknowledged this and spoke with matter-of-fact clarity about it. The Son of God called Satan the “ruler of this world” multiple times:
“Now is the judgment of this world; now will the ruler of this world be cast out.”
John 12:31
“I will no longer talk much with you, for the ruler of this world is coming. He has no claim on me.”
John 14:30
In the temptation in the desert, we see how far this authority goes:
And the devil took him up and showed him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time, and said to him, “To you I will give all this authority and their glory, for it has been delivered to me, and I give it to whom I will. If you, then, will worship me, it will all be yours.”
Luke 4:5–7
Now, of course we know Satan is the father of lies. But in case you are tempted to dismiss his statement because of that, I suggest this would not have qualified as a true temptation if it was not a legitimate offer. All the temptations Jesus experienced were true options He could have taken.
A Broken Relationship
As I have already pointed out, there has not been much discussion thus far of sinful actions—sins that need forgiveness. The need for forgiveness exists in a third area where the original plan goes astray: the relationship between God and mankind.
Before sin entered the story, there was intimacy and relationship between God and Adam and Eve. In fact, God formed Adam and Eve in a deeply personal way: with His own hands. After shaping Adam, the Scripture says God breathed His breath into Adam and he came to life (see Genesis 2:7). This is such a personal and intimate act of creation. God shared life with Adam with a kiss. Later, God took a rib out of Adam’s side and used it to form Eve, again with His own hands. Both Adam and Eve were made through touch. God was the first being they experienced.
The text indicates God would walk and talk with them in the Garden. But when sin entered the story, this fellowship broke down:
And they heard the sound of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God among the trees of the garden. But the LORD God called to the man and said to him, “Where are you?” And he said, “I heard the sound of you in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked, and I hid myself.”
Genesis 3:8–10
As Adam and Eve hid from God, the relationship broke down. Rather than experiencing God’s presence as love and freedom, shame and fear tainted the relationship. God sent them from the Garden in order to protect them, so they would not eat of the Tree of Life and live eternally as fallen creatures.
It is in this third area, the relationship between God and mankind, that forgiveness is required. We will return to this part of the story in more detail in chapter 7.
In summary, we discover three major strands were affected by the Fall:
The cosmic question coming out of Genesis 3 is this: What will God do about this? Surely Satan will not get the upper hand on God. How will God fix not only the relationship between us and Him, but also the violence done to our identity and the dominion Satan pilfered from us? That is the true question on the table.
What happened at the Fall is the bad news. With that, we turn to the good news.
THINKING LIKE JESUS