Was the Real Meaning of Genesis Hidden for Thousands of Years?
Before We Accept a Startling Interpretation, Let's Read Genesis Again
There are teachings circulating today that present a very different story of human origins from the one most Christians have understood from Genesis.
According to versions of this teaching, the Elohim of Genesis 1 were not simply the one God who created the heavens and the earth. They were multiple heavenly beings. Some connect these beings with Lucifer and his rebellion.
Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 are then understood as describing two different creations of human beings. Adam is not simply the man introduced in Genesis 1 and described more fully in Genesis 2. Humanity's real story, we are told, involves heavenly beings, a fall into physical bodies, the serpent, Cain, and eventually the “sons of God” in Genesis 6.
Some versions go much further.
The claim is that much of what Christians have traditionally believed about creation has missed the deeper story hidden in these chapters.
That is an extraordinary claim.
But an extraordinary claim should not frighten us.
Neither should it impress us merely because it is unusual.
There is a much simpler question:
What does the text actually say?
That is where we will begin.
1. Who Created the Heavens and the Earth?
The Bible begins:
“In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.”
— Genesis 1:1
The Hebrew word translated God is Elohim.
Here is where we need to slow down.
Elohim is plural in form. Taken by itself, it can be translated “gods.” And when elohim refers to multiple gods or heavenly beings, we normally expect the surrounding grammar to treat it as plural.
In simple English we might illustrate the difference this way:
The gods — they created.
But that is not what happens in Genesis 1:1.
The Hebrew word Elohim is plural in form, but the verb translated “created” (bara) is singular.
So, very literally, we have something that might initially look strange to an English reader:
Elohim — He created.
Not:
Elohim — they created.
That grammatical distinction is important.
Throughout the Old Testament, when Elohim refers to the God of Israel, it normally takes singular verbs, adjectives, and pronouns. The plural form of the noun does not make the God of Israel a group of gods.
Genesis immediately follows that normal pattern.
Again and again we read:
“And God said...”
“And God saw...”
“And God called...”
“And God made...”
“And God created...”
“And God blessed...”
The writer consistently presents Elohim as one acting subject.
So we should not translate Genesis 1:1 as though it said:
“In the beginning the gods created...”
The grammar tells us otherwise.
This becomes especially important when we reach verse 26:
“Let us make man in our image...”
Those plural words really are there, and we should not explain them away.
But neither should we ignore the grammar that surrounds them.
The very next verse says:
“So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him...”
— Genesis 1:27
Once again:
Elohim — He created.
Whatever “us” and “our” mean in verse 26, the actual Creator in verse 27 is presented as singular.
That does not answer every question about the heavenly council, the Trinity, or the plural language of verse 26.
But it does establish something before we ever begin those discussions:
Genesis does not present a group of gods creating mankind. It presents Elohim—the one God—as the Creator.
2. But What About “Let Us Make Man”?
Then we arrive at one of the most discussed statements in Genesis:
“And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness...”
— Genesis 1:26
There it is:
Us.
Our.
Who is God addressing?
Christians have proposed several explanations.
Some understand this in light of the later revelation of Father, Son, and Spirit.
Others see God addressing His heavenly court or divine council.
Others have suggested a plural of deliberation.
Those interpretations deserve to be examined on their own merits.
But notice something extremely important.
We do not have to settle that question before we continue reading.
The very next verse tells us who actually created mankind:
“So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created hethem.”
— Genesis 1:27
Notice the movement:
“Let US make...”
becomes
“God created...”
“HIS own image...”
“HE created...”
Whatever the plural language of verse 26 means, verse 27 does not say:
“So they created mankind in their images.”
The actual act of creation is attributed to God.
That distinction matters enormously.
A heavenly council interpretation of “Let us make” would not mean that the council created mankind.
God may announce His intention in the presence of heavenly beings without making those beings co-creators.
The text still says:
God created.
3. The Rest of Scripture Identifies the Creator
We should also allow later Scripture to help us understand earlier Scripture.
Isaiah records God saying:
“I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself.”
— Isaiah 44:24
That is difficult to reconcile with the idea that a collection of rebellious heavenly beings created mankind or the world.
The New Testament becomes even clearer.
John writes:
“All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.”
— John 1:3
Paul says of Christ:
“For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible...”
— Colossians 1:16
Then Paul adds:
“All things were created by him, and for him.”
Notice that Paul even includes the invisible heavenly realm among the things created through Christ.
That reverses an important claim.
Heavenly beings are not presented as the ultimate creators of mankind.
They themselves belong to the created order.
4. Are Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 Two Different Creations?
This is another major question.
Genesis 1 says:
“Male and female created he them.”
— Genesis 1:27
Genesis 2 then describes the formation of Adam from the dust and the creation of the woman.
Some conclude:
Genesis 1 describes one race of human beings. Genesis 2 describes another creation—Adam and Eve.
But does Genesis actually tell us that?
Genesis 1 gives us the broad account of creation.
Genesis 2 focuses closely upon mankind, the garden, the man's responsibility, and the creation of the woman.
This kind of movement from a broad account to a more detailed account is not unusual.
Most importantly, the Bible itself connects Adam with the humanity created in God's image.
Genesis 5 begins:
“In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him; male and female created he them...”
Then immediately:
“And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image...”
— Genesis 5:1–3
The writer does not appear to know about two unrelated creations.
He moves naturally from:
God created mankind
to
male and female
to
Adam
to
Adam's descendants.
The genealogical story continues from there.
5. Jesus Read Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 Together
This becomes especially important when Jesus discusses marriage.
He says:
“Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female...”
— Matthew 19:4
That points directly back to Genesis 1:27.
Then Jesus continues:
“For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife...”
— Matthew 19:5
That comes from Genesis 2:24.
Jesus moves from Genesis 1 to Genesis 2 without treating them as two separate creations of different kinds of people.
For Jesus, they belong to the same creation story.
That is powerful evidence.
If Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 actually describe two fundamentally different creations of humanity, Jesus gives no indication of it.
Instead, He joins the two passages together.
6. Was Adam a Fallen Heavenly Being Placed Into Flesh?
Now we come to another claim.
Was Adam originally a heavenly being who fell and was subsequently imprisoned or placed in a physical body?
Read what Genesis says:
“And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.”
— Genesis 2:7
Notice what the verse does not say.
It does not say God took a previously existing heavenly person and placed him inside a body.
It does not say Adam had lived before.
It does not say Adam had rebelled in heaven.
It does not say physical existence was Adam's punishment.
It says God formed the man from the dust, breathed into him the breath of life, and:
“man became a living soul.”
That is considerably different from saying an already-existing soul was imprisoned in flesh.
And when God looked upon His completed creation, including physical humanity, Genesis says:
“God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good.”
— Genesis 1:31
The physical creation is not introduced as a prison constructed for fallen heavenly beings.
It is God's very good creation.
7. Where Does Sin Enter the Story?
This is another critical point.
Genesis does not begin with Adam already fallen.
God gives Adam a command concerning the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
The serpent then approaches the woman.
The serpent questions God's word:
“Yea, hath God said...?”
— Genesis 3:1
He contradicts God's warning:
“Ye shall not surely die.”
— Genesis 3:4
Then the man and woman disobey.
That is where Genesis places mankind's transgression.
Paul reads the story the same way:
“By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin...”
— Romans 5:12
Notice Paul's sequence.
He does not say Adam sinned in heaven and therefore entered the world.
He says:
sin entered the world through the man.
Later Paul contrasts Adam with Christ:
“The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.”
— 1 Corinthians 15:45
And then:
“The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.”
— 1 Corinthians 15:47
Paul's contrast is striking.
Adam — from the earth.
Christ — from heaven.
That is not the contrast we would expect if Paul's theology were that Adam himself was originally a heavenly Elohim imprisoned in flesh.
8. Who Was the Serpent?
Genesis introduces:
“the serpent”
and describes him as:
“more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made.”
— Genesis 3:1
Genesis 3 itself does not call the serpent “Lucifer.”
It does not use the name Satan.
But later Scripture identifies the great spiritual adversary with the ancient serpent.
Revelation speaks of:
“that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world...”
— Revelation 12:9
And again:
“the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan...”
— Revelation 20:2
So there is good biblical reason to connect the serpent with Satan.
But notice what we just did.
We allowed Scripture to make the connection.
We did not need to invent it.
That is the method we should use throughout this study.
9. But Was Satan “Lucifer”?
This question requires more care than many of us were taught to give it.
Many Christians have grown up hearing something like this:
Lucifer was a beautiful angel in heaven. He became proud, tried to overthrow God, was cast out of heaven, became Satan, and took one-third of the angels with him.
Parts of that picture may reflect legitimate connections among several biblical passages.
But there is no single passage that tells the story in precisely that form.
The famous “Lucifer” passage occurs in Isaiah 14.
The King James Version reads:
“How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!”
— Isaiah 14:12
But “Lucifer” is not a Hebrew proper name in the text.
The Hebrew expression is commonly understood along the lines of “shining one, son of the dawn” or “morning star, son of the dawn.”
And we must not ignore the context.
Isaiah introduces this section by saying:
“Thou shalt take up this proverb against the king of Babylon...”
— Isaiah 14:4
That does not automatically settle every question about the passage.
The description becomes highly exalted:
“I will ascend into heaven...”
“I will exalt my throne above the stars of God...”
“I will be like the most High.”
Christians throughout history have seen similarities between this proud ruler and Satan's rebellion.
That possibility can be discussed.
But we should distinguish between:
what Isaiah explicitly says
and
the theological conclusions later readers draw from it.
If we demand that others make that distinction, we must make it ourselves.
10. What About Ezekiel 28?
A similar issue appears in Ezekiel.
The prophet speaks against the prince of Tyre and then takes up a lamentation over the king of Tyre.
But the language becomes extraordinary:
“Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God...”
— Ezekiel 28:13
and:
“Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth...”
— Ezekiel 28:14
This has caused many Christians to see Satan behind the earthly ruler.
Again, that interpretation deserves consideration.
But we should not pretend the text simply begins:
“Here is the history of Satan before Genesis 3.”
It does not.
The passage concerns Tyre, employs remarkable Edenic and cherubic imagery, and may intentionally portray the king's pride against a larger cosmic background.
We will examine that more fully on the next page.
For now, the important point is methodological:
Do not make the text say more than the text says.
That rule applies to traditional interpretations.
It applies to new interpretations.
And it applies to ours.
11. Did the Serpent Father Cain?
This is where some interpretations of Genesis become even more dramatic.
According to the so-called serpent-seed idea, Eve's encounter with the serpent was sexual and Cain was actually the serpent's offspring.
But read the beginning of Genesis 4:
“And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain...”
— Genesis 4:1
The natural sequence is straightforward:
Adam knew Eve.
She conceived.
She gave birth to Cain.
Nothing in Genesis 3 says the serpent had sexual relations with Eve.
Nothing in Genesis 4 says Cain was biologically fathered by the serpent.
Someone may construct such a theory by connecting other passages and assigning additional meanings to words or symbols.
But that is precisely where we must ask:
Did we get this from the text—or did we bring it to the text?
12. Then Why Is Cain Called “Of the Wicked One”?
The New Testament says:
“Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother.”
— 1 John 3:12
Does “of that wicked one” mean Satan was Cain's biological father?
Look at John's own use of this kind of language.
Jesus told certain people:
“Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do.”
— John 8:44
Jesus was not giving them a biological genealogy.
He was describing whose character and desires they were following.
John uses the same moral and spiritual contrast repeatedly:
“He that committeth sin is of the devil...”
— 1 John 3:8
and:
“In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil...”
— 1 John 3:10
John is not dividing humanity into people biologically fathered by God and people biologically fathered by Satan.
He is contrasting spiritual allegiance and behavior.
Cain behaved like the wicked one.
That does not overturn Genesis 4:1 and give Cain another biological father.
13. What Happens in Genesis 6?
Now we reach a genuinely difficult passage.
“The sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.”
— Genesis 6:2
Then:
“There were giants in the earth in those days...”
— Genesis 6:4
Who were these “sons of God”?
Several interpretations have been held by serious Bible students.
One identifies them as descendants of Seth intermarrying with ungodly women.
Another understands them as powerful human rulers.
A very ancient interpretation understands the “sons of God” as heavenly beings.
That last interpretation should not simply be laughed away.
In Job, the expression “sons of God” clearly refers to heavenly beings:
“the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD...”
— Job 1:6
And Jude and 2 Peter speak of angels who sinned in connection with discussions of ancient judgment.
So there are legitimate reasons for taking the supernatural interpretation of Genesis 6 seriously.
But now comes a crucial distinction.
Suppose we conclude that the “sons of God” in Genesis 6 were heavenly beings.
What have we proved?
We have proved only what the passage supports.
We have not proved that:
the Elohim created mankind in Genesis 1;
Adam was a fallen heavenly being;
human beings are imprisoned spirits from a previous heavenly existence;
Satan biologically fathered Cain;
Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 describe separate races of humans;
or physical human existence itself resulted from a heavenly rebellion.
Those are separate claims.
One disputed passage cannot be made to carry an entire theological system.
14. Heavenly Beings Are Not the Problem
This point is especially important.
The Bible unquestionably presents a supernatural world.
There are angels.
There are cherubim.
There are seraphim.
There are heavenly hosts.
There are spiritual powers.
There are rebellious spiritual beings.
There is Satan.
There are demons.
There are passages such as Psalm 82 that raise important questions about heavenly beings called elohim.
Therefore the choice is not:
Either accept this new system or deny the supernatural world of the Bible.
That is a false choice.
We can take the supernatural world of Scripture completely seriously while still asking whether a particular theory goes beyond what Scripture actually reveals.
In fact, that is exactly what careful Bible study requires us to do.
15. “Elohim” Does Not Mean “Creator”
This distinction may clear up much of the confusion.
The Hebrew word elohim does not by itself mean:
the Almighty Creator God.
Its meaning depends upon context.
Scripture can use the term in reference to beings other than Yahweh.
But that does not make those beings equal to Yahweh.
And it certainly does not make every elohim a creator.
The God of Israel is Elohim.
Other beings may sometimes be described with the same Hebrew term.
But Yahweh is unique.
He is not merely one member of a species called “gods.”
Isaiah records Him saying:
“I am the LORD, and there is none else...”
— Isaiah 45:5
The distinction is not simply:
God is an Elohim and there are lots of other Elohim just like Him.
The biblical distinction is between the Creator and everything He created.
That distinction becomes unmistakable in the New Testament.
16. The New Testament Gives Us a Powerful Test
When a complicated interpretation of Genesis is proposed, we should eventually ask:
How did Jesus and the apostles understand the human story?
Their outline is remarkably straightforward.
Jesus treats Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 as one creation account.
Paul calls Adam:
“the first man Adam”
— 1 Corinthians 15:45
He says:
“The first man is of the earth...”
— 1 Corinthians 15:47
He says:
“By one man sin entered into the world...”
— Romans 5:12
Luke traces Jesus' genealogy backward through human history until he reaches:
“Adam, which was the son of God.”
— Luke 3:38
Paul tells the Athenians that God:
“hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth...”
— Acts 17:26
The New Testament writers do not seem to know a hidden human history in which different races of humanity were created by competing heavenly beings.
Their story is:
God created mankind.
Adam sinned.
Sin and death entered human experience.
God began His work of redemption.
And ultimately:
Christ came as the last Adam to undo what sin and death had done.
17. This Is Where the Gospel Becomes Important
This discussion is not merely an argument about obscure Hebrew words.
Change Adam, and eventually you may change the gospel.
Paul deliberately connects Adam and Christ:
“For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.”
— 1 Corinthians 15:22
And:
“As by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.”
— Romans 5:19
Adam is not an insignificant character in Paul's theology.
Adam helps explain what went wrong.
Christ explains what God has done about it.
If Adam becomes something fundamentally different from the Adam Paul describes, we must ask what happens to Paul's argument.
That is why these questions matter.
18. Could Ancient Writings Help Us Understand Genesis?
Yes.
Ancient Jewish writings can help us understand how people in the ancient world interpreted biblical passages.
The book commonly called 1 Enoch, for example, contains an elaborate account of rebellious heavenly “Watchers,” their relations with women, giants, judgment, and forbidden knowledge.
That is historically important.
Jude even quotes material closely associated with 1 Enoch:
“Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints...”
— Jude 14
So we should not pretend that ancient Jewish literature is worthless.
It can provide valuable background.
But another distinction must be maintained:
Useful ancient background is not automatically inspired Scripture.
Knowing what an ancient writer believed can help us understand the intellectual world surrounding the Bible.
It does not give that writer authority to rewrite Genesis.
We will examine this much more carefully on the next page.
19. What If Someone Says This Truth Was Hidden?
This is where we should become especially careful.
A teaching can become very persuasive when we are told:
The truth has been hidden from you.
Religious leaders don't want you to know this.
Translations have concealed it.
The original Hebrew reveals something entirely different.
Sometimes traditions really do need correction.
Sometimes translations can obscure something.
Sometimes religious institutions have taught things that Scripture does not teach.
We should never defend tradition merely because it is old.
That is why this site is called:
TEXT B4 TRADITION.
But rejecting tradition does not mean accepting every alternative interpretation.
There is still a test:
“Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.”
— 1 Thessalonians 5:21
A teaching does not become true because it is ancient.
It does not become true because it is new.
It does not become true because it is suppressed.
It does not become true because it is exciting.
It does not become true because someone knows Hebrew words we have never heard before.
It must survive the text.
20. Scripture Warns Us About Deception
The Bible repeatedly warns God's people about deception.
Jesus warned:
“Take heed that no man deceive you.”
— Matthew 24:4
Paul warned that:
“evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.”
— 2 Timothy 3:13
John wrote:
“even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.”
— 1 John 2:18
This also reminds us of something important about the expression “last days.”
Peter applied Joel's “last days” prophecy to what was happening at Pentecost:
“This is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; And it shall come to pass in the last days...”
— Acts 2:16–17
Hebrews likewise says God:
“Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son...”
— Hebrews 1:2
Biblically, therefore, the last days are not merely a short period immediately before the end of the world.
The apostles understood themselves to be living in them.
And Christians were warned from the beginning to expect deception.
But those warnings give us no permission to label everyone with whom we disagree a deceiver or servant of Satan.
Quite the opposite.
They tell us why every teaching—including ours—must be tested carefully.
21. So What Have We Found So Far?
We have not answered every question.
We aren't supposed to yet.
But Genesis has already given us several firm anchors.
God created the heavens and the earth.
The grammar of Genesis 1 presents God as the acting Creator.
Whatever “Let us make man” means, Genesis immediately says God created mankind in His image.
Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 naturally fit together, and Jesus Himself reads them together.
Adam is formed from the earth, not described as a heavenly being imprisoned in flesh.
Human sin enters the story through disobedience in Eden.
Genesis identifies Adam as the father involved in Cain's conception.
The New Testament's language about Cain being “of the wicked one” concerns spiritual and moral allegiance, not biological paternity.
Genesis 6 may involve heavenly beings—but even if it does, that does not prove the much larger system sometimes constructed around it.
And perhaps most important:
The existence of other heavenly beings does not make them creators.
But We Aren't Finished
Several major questions remain.
What exactly are the elohim of Psalm 82?
What is the biblical divine council?
Was “Lucifer” really Satan's original name?
Do Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 describe Satan's fall, earthly kings, or both?
When Jesus said:
“I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven”
what did He mean?
What does Revelation 12 add?
Who were the angels who sinned in Jude 6 and 2 Peter 2:4?
What does Daniel 2:43 mean when it says, “they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men”?
How much should 1 Enoch influence our interpretation of Genesis?
And what happens when modern teachers take legitimate scholarship about the divine council and the supernatural world—ideas discussed by scholars such as Michael Heiser—and build conclusions that the scholarship itself does not establish?
Those questions deserve more than a paragraph.
So we will take them up separately.
NEXT:
Lucifer, the Elohim, the Divine Council, and the Watchers
There really is a supernatural world in the Bible.
The question is not whether it exists.
The question is:
How much has God actually told us about it?
And how much have we added?
TEXT B4 TRADITION
Read First. Conclude Later.
Tighten this page for web readersAdd a respectful opening disclaimer
Return to HOME page
Return to PREDICT page