Cheryl Schatz

Mark,

I am going to try to get through as much of your questions as I can before I have to leave.

2. In Gen 2 there is the introduction of the definate article so it is rightly translated ‘the man’ dealing directly with Adam not Eve.

Whenever it says “the man” it most certainly is talking about Adam and not Eve. We need to pay close attention to this so that we can properly understand the passage.

3. However in Gen 3 when they are banished from the garden, it is again ‘the man’, not ‘man’ (gender inclusive). Should we assume then that only Adam was removed from the Garden- i don’t think so.

It most certainly was only the man who was banished from the garden. God makes this clear in what he says about the man. It was the man who took of the forbidden fruit even though he was not deceived. Since Eve was no longer deceived, she would not be the one who would disobey God’s command not to eat from the tree of life. Adam is the only one who sinned in a willful way and who would likely do the same thing again with the tree of life. We cannot assume that Eve was thrown out of the garden, because the text clearly says that it was “the man” who was kicked out. If God wanted us to know that it was the woman too, them the grammar would be “them”.

We do know that the woman left the garden with the man but she was not kicked out. Why did she go? God clearly told us when he said that she would desire the man and the man who rule over her. She desired to be with him and the man took his sinful rule over her making sure that she went with him. He wasn’t about to leave without her.

This passage has had many think that God kicked the woman out of the garden because of our prejudice against women. Throughout church history the woman has been blamed for deceiving the man so that he ate, but Paul makes it clear, and the context in Genesis makes it clear that Adam was not deceived. Adam was not deceived by the serpent and Eve was not the deceiver nor did she deceive Adam.

Hosea 6:7 shows that it was Adam alone who sinned in a treacherous way. Eve is never said to have sinned by treachery.

Therefore my argument is that to get hung up on the combined function of ruling animals to prove equality and no leadership soley by the gender inclusive language is weak. Clearly we all except Eve to have been banished from the Garden also, even though the inspired words are directed to Adam only

It would be an error to accept that Eve was driven out of the garden when the text clearly says that it was only “the man” who was kicked out because of his propensity to disobey God in a treacherous way.

It is not a weak argument to use the specific grammar of Genesis 1-3. It is a very weak argument to ignore the specific grammar. This is what has been done by many that has caused them to read into the text something that isn’t there.

So i am happy to read into the text that ‘the man’ was held primarily accountable for the fall and thus is addressed first by God, and is the primary one spoken of in the banishment.

You shouldn’t be blaming Eve for something that God did not blame her for. It was not Adam that was “primarily” accountable for the fall. He was the only one accountable for the fall. While Eve sinned too she did not sin on her own initiative without the blindness that deception brings. She did die because God said that she would, but she did not bring rebellion into the world since she did not sin with rebellious treachery. Adam is the one who sinned this way and his actions caused sin to come into the world. It was Adam alone. When we blame Eve for something that Adam alone did, we then become guilty of being an accuser of Eve. God did not accuse her of treachery and she did not bring sin into the world.

A quick question for Cheryl or others. Egals claim that Adam was ‘with’ Eve when she was conversing with the serpent and thus dismiis the notion that Eve strayed from the protection of Adam as reading into the text. Where in Gen 2 is it explicit that Adam was there during the conversation?

In Genesis 3:6 we see some specific grammar that identifies Adam’s position.

Gen 3:6 When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate.

The grammar says that Adam was “with” Eve. It doesn’t say that she gave to Adam “when” with her. The Jehovah’s Witness Bible translates this passage was “when with her” (I am going by memory) because their doctrine teaches that Adam was not with Eve. But there is no grammatical justification for adding to the text that Adam was not with Eve until later.

Rather there is a conjunction used in the Hebrew that connects the actions of Eve sequentially to her eating. The Hebrew says that she did this “and” that and it is a sequential conjunction that is not divided by a time frame.

Secondly we know that God referred to Adam being “with” Eve since God said that Adam “listened” to the voice of his wife. This was the treacherous act of Adam as he “listened” and did not sound the warning. No other words of Eve’s are recorded other then her speaking to the serpent while she is being deceived.

Thirdly Adam being “with” Eve is not being just in the garden because according to BDB the word means beside or side. Adam was “beside” Eve while she was being deceived. We cannot get around the specific Hebrew grammar and when we disregard it we can so easily go into error.

Also Cheryl, how have you come to the conclusion that the curse of the woman is not a mandate given by God, but just a prophecy of what fallen man would do? Could you point me to the text where it explains this?

I have to go now to church so I don’t have time to finish this one. I may not be able to get to it until later tonight or perhaps in another day or two when we have arrived at our next location.