Mark

Hi Cheryl,

I agree with you now that God isn’t quoted here. Therefore I expect you to retract your comment “God called her woman before Adam did” from your main post, since we both agree that God did not ‘call’ her woman before Adam. Narrative is not the same as a ‘quote’ which I hope we agree on.

Regarding why the narrative doesn’t describe the woman as a ‘female’ is an argument from silence. It would be better to stick with what we do have and see why. The obvious reason that ‘woman’ is used (‘ishah) is because she was made from man (‘ish). It is a play on words used by the writer. This is common in Hebrew and particularly common in these early chapters of Genesis. We see it with man/woman, with man/ground.

Regarding where the narrative came from, as Christians we have to say both God and man. We do not believe as Islam does that scripture is the direct words of God per se and that there is no human agent. Inspiration of scripture is that God uses human agents to fulfil his purposes, so yes it is the word of God, but it is also the writing of man. That is why grammar, purpose, intention of writing, historical situation, culture etc are all important aspects for scholars when trying to understand the bible.

I agree that God knew before Adam that he would call her ‘woman’. What I disagree on is that God ‘called’ her woman before Adam did. This is not in the scripture. God is all knowing and sovereign no doubt, but that does not dismiss the fact that it was the man who named the woman. This was God’s purpose and plan for it to happen this way. Do you disagree with that?

Finally I find it interesting that you believe this “While it is possible that naming Eve was part of Adam’s sinful rule over her”, but that naming her before the fall is most definitely not to do with authority. Why is that?
In fact I would be more inclined to say that since Adam named her Eve (chavvah) which is closely associated with ‘life’ (chayyah), the naming is more associated not with sinful lordship, but with Adam’s recognition that through the woman would come the ‘seed’ to bruise the serpent’s ‘seed’. Adam’s post fall naming is more a declaration of God’s promise than it is sinful lordship. It is a recognition of God’s grace. Grammatically also, in verse 20b there is a causal clause linking the name ‘chavvah’ with the point that she would become the mother of the living ‘chayyah’. Again we see the play on words used when ‘naming’ occurs.
We see this again and again. In chapter 4 Eve declares that “I have ‘brought forth’ a man…’ Here ‘brought forth’ is closely associated with ‘Cain’. Literally Eve ‘cained a Cain’. Therefore there is more to naming something in the Hebrew culture than can easily just be dismissed. You seemingly recognised this with your comments on ‘prophetic’ naming etc, but for some reason think that the man naming the woman is insignificant (at least before the fall).