The Hebrew Edition
They heard the sound of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, Genesis 3:8 NASB
Walking – Walking presupposes feet. That assumption changes the picture of this verse. We imagine that God, in some physical form, is doing what we do when we walk, that is, moving on feet. And suddenly we assume that there is another “person” involved in this story. Trinitarians quickly suggest that this is the pre-incarnate Jesus. Others suggest that this is YHVH manifest in physical flesh. Both explanations require reading mithalech (walking) as an analog to human movement. But Kushner notes something about the Hebrew that no translation I know recognizes.
“The problem here is not just the translation of one word, kol [voice], but how to translate it in combination with mithalech.” She continues, “There are no feet in Genesis 3:8, just an intriguing verb: mithalech. This particular grammatical construction of the three-letter root for the verb ‘to walk’ is used for doing something repeatedly. If holech, or walk, in the present tense, means to walk from point A to point B, then mithalech means to walk from point A to B to D to C—walking back and forth, walking repeatedly, or without a particular destination in mind.” After some deliberation, Kushner suggests that this verse really says that the voice of God was heard from all directions. It is the voice that “walks” back and forth, back and forth, repeating the sound over and over. There are no feet. There is no body. There is a physical description of an audible sound. God is walking. His voice is coming into the Garden as if it were wandering everywhere at once.
Now what mental picture do you have? Are you still thinking about a physical “person” in the Garden? Are you still visualizing “Jesus” looking for Adam? Did you fall victim to a perfectly ordinary assumption about walking? Do you realize that Hebrew is radically different than the way that we think? Even its use of idioms is buried in constructions that we would be unable to translate without understanding the culture like a native! Some things just can’t be converted into words, at least not into the truncated words needed to accomplish a translation!
Now you can take this verse off your “proofs for the pre-existence of Christ” list. There is no body here. In fact, the very suggestion of a physical body for YHVH, even in assumptions, is inconceivable in Jewish thought. The Hebrew edition of the Bible simply isn’t like our translations, translations that include simple assumptions like “feet.” We will have to employ much greater care in the way we read—and we will need a good native speaker to keep us on track.
Topical Index: Genesis 3:8, walk, voice, kol, mithalech, pre-incarnate
As the saying goes we need to walk the talk but in Hebrew of course it reads backwards. We need to talk the walk. Maybe I am finally getting to understand how to think like a Hebrew instead of a Greek. {:-)
🙂
Looking at the KJV of this verse; “…heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden…” perhaps brings us a little closer to what your pointing out today Skip.
What strikes me today are two thoughts;
I need to really slow down and think about what I’m reading…you have taught me that.
And, the idea that God’s voice permeated the whole of the garden forms the image of the hearer not being able to detect from which direction it comes…sort of like having to turn your ear to detect the direction you hear something when in a forested location.
That idea of permeated can also draw us to the voice of God in our thoughts that occur throughout the waking hours…in the garden of our mind.
The Voice
Nevertheless, [what a handy word], both Adam and Eve [both fully human beings] heard the instructions of YHWH, and as they were both sinless, that is, without sin, they did somehow- some way, fellowship with God (Himself) in the Garden.
Then the LORD God called to the man, and said to him, “Where are you?” He said, “I heard the sound of You in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid myself.” And He said, “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you not to eat?”… (Trouble in Paradise!).
Adam, the origin of the species, heard His voice.. The words written in this portion of the Scriptures are written as a quote. God “called.” Conversation, both direct and personal, took place between God and man. The instructions of YHWH were both clear and concise and yet.. Adam and his better half, both “sinned,” – that is, they “missed the mark” and did what God directly commanded them both not to do. Yes, “Shema,” O Israel. Y’all know the drill.. to “hear” is to “obey.”
Adam was certainly derelict in his duty. All is mere conjecture (I wasn’t there!) but did Adam “not remember?” or was he somehow “distracted?” from doing his duty? Remember “zakar?”
It is interesting that in Hebrew all nouns are either masculine or feminine (there is no neuter). In general nouns are divided in how they act. Their roles define them- masculine nouns ‘initiate’, and feminine nouns ‘respond’. Body parts that are single tend to be masculine, and paired body parts tend to be feminine.
“Zakar” (male) comes from the same Hebrew verb “zakar”. “Zakar” as a verb is most commonly translated into “remember”, which loses out in translation. It would be better translated as ’speaking or acting in behalf of’- like when the Holy One “remembered the children of Israel” prior to sending Moses after them; or like when Joseph asked the Cup-bearer to “remember me before Pharaoh”. As “protector and provider” the male role is to ’speak or act in behalf of’ the female (which is where Adam failed in the Garden with the serpent!).
YHWH both initiates and responds- which is why it is only when the ‘zakar’ and the ‘neqebah’ fulfill their roles together that they truly reflect the image of the Creator!
May we “fast-forward” a few centuries? Menz, as male creatures, “zakar’ still applies today. We (too) are to remember and to speak. Remember the words of the Messiah, the second Adam? (love it, love it, love it!”)
These three will do it: “IT IS WRITTEN!!” (I heard that!) O, Hallelujah! for the written (and living) Word of God!! “Comfort one another,” —How? “with these [His] words..” 1 Thessalonians 4.18
Calling all Adams..
Friends, it is our duty (and our delight!) to remember and to speak the inspired (God-breathed) words of the Living God.
Yes, down through the centuries, — “and the word of the LORD came unto “_______.” He who spoke, still speaks.. And today?
“Today, if you will hear His voice, harden not your hearts.”
Carl, this one is going to resonate with me today. Thanks for the tidbits and the string you pearled them on!
The song, “In the Garden” is a song my dad loved and would sometimes burst out singing around our home when I was growing up. The song was written by C. Austin Miles based on John 20. The last stanza is as follows:
(3) I’d stay in the garden with Him
Though the night around me be falling,
But He bids me go;
through the voice of woe,
His voice to me is calling.
Just a different way of thinking of that image. One I love.
But Skip, I still fail to see why I have to “take this verse off (my) “proofs for the preexistence of Christ” list”.
If, for example, we were to conclude “if Voice heard everywhere at once, then no feet”, we still haven’t established that Christ in His pre-incarnate form, Whom John refers to more than once as the Word itself, as having to be limited to feet. To point to the encounter of the Angel of the Covenant with Abraham before the demolition of Sodom as having feet would be even worse as a presupposition.
I simply fail to see why we have to limit Him in His pre-incarnate form as it APPEARS TO HUMANS to a man with feet. Why cannot the Voice that spoke the universe as we know it into existence have universal qualities of choice without limiting whatever form He wishes to take?
And while we are at it, are you suggesting that He did not, in fact, exist before the Virgin birth? At this point, my curiosity has been roused!
Somehow, there seems to be some missing links in the evolution of this non-sequitur type conclusion, at least for me…
Laurita,
I won’t address the pre-existence of our King but I would like to pass some thoughts on ‘the Word became flesh’. I leave the citations for you concerning what became flesh…
“Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me”.
Torah is the ‘way’; Exodus 18:20, Deuteronomy 5:33, Deuteronomy 8:6, Deuteronomy 10:12
Keeping Torah is walking in His ‘ways’; Deuteronomy 26:17, Deuteronomy 28:9, Deuteronomy 30:16, Psalm 119:1
Torah is ‘Truth’; Psalm 119:142, Malachi 2:6
Torah is ‘Life’; Deuteronomy 30:16
Torah is ‘Light’ ; Proverbs 6:23
The Word became flesh was the manifestation of Torah (not the added laws) by our King as in the flesh he Walked Perfectly in Torah.
Deuteronomy 27:18 CURSED be he that maketh the blind to WANDER out of the WAY . And all the people shall say, Amen
Richard, you are right in what you pointed out, and I agree wholeheartedly, but that still does not preclude what I was asking; namely, if the Word was limited to speaking the will of the Father into existence with or without feet! Skip seemed to be trying to conclude that if there was an omnipresent Voice, then it could not have been a pre-incarnate Yeshua. To me, that argument is going to fail just as surely as any argument FOR Yeshua as the manifestation of YHVH in that garden, and for the same reason; reason being that we have not been given the type of information necessary to draw ironclad arguments for any of this from that Text. One way or the other, we are left with the necessity of faith. I do not believe that we have, by any means, been given the definitive information about God. The Bible tells us merely that we have been given only that which was necessary for our salvation. There are huge gaps of info in all directions, making it unable to argue any of these points. That whole Book has to be taken on faith, and I suspect this is probably why we haven’t been told.
I know I cannot use that Book to ‘prove’ my faith, but I don’t think anyone else can either! I don’t think that is what it was given to us for. Salvation is not the same thing as evidence that can hold up in a courtroom. I know I can find enough in it to save me, but not enough in it to go convincing others of my particular understanding of that salvation. There’s just been too many doctrinal wars in that direction for me.
Laurita, I agree! I just don’t think we can draw these conclusions. To me, it is enough to believe from the whole of Scripture that I needed a Savior and He came as the living Torah. Now I need to follow Him. I actually put in my notes a tid-bit quote from Skip’s TW on November 24, 2014…”time will take care of theology”.
The actual quote was “time will take care of the theology.” It is from the TW titled “Simple Simon”….a very good reminder for me!
I do find that God takes on many physical forms such as burning bush, clouds and fire. None of them are necessarily His ‘form’ and all we actually are told is that God spoke and guided within the time those forms were present. None of them gave us any indication He was or had them as actual concrete substances of form.
I think Skip always tries to get us to think within the frame of the time and culture of the words we read. My offering of specific scripture that gave source to Yeshua’s words and John’s, was to point to what a Jew would have perhaps connected those words to that they heard from Yeshua. What they knew more than anything else about, was Torah and Psalm/Proverbs. I offer that John wasn’t saying Yeshua was the physical ‘form’ of ‘The Word’ in the flesh, it was that Yeshua was the ‘image’ of Torah, which may be more of the image of God than a bush, cloud or fire. (“as I am in You so they be in me”)
Another way to approach this Laurita is to start a paleo Hebrew graph of the world ‘walk(ed,ing)’ and ‘voice’ from the modern Hebrew back translated. I have done this and found that ‘walk’ seems to have very little to do with ‘feet’ and a lot to do with actions/attributes.
That’s all very thoughtful, Richard, and I like your suggestion to play with the Paleo! I, too, think it is very important to place the scripture with the Hebrew audience, and appreciate the resistance Skip displays to just go allegorize everything we don’t think we already know. BUT, I still do not think he can just skip straight from “no feet”, or even omni-present Voice, to therefore, no form. Much less, to no presence of a pre-existent Yeshua. If he had just stopped short of there, he would have been quite solidly in his element that he does so well. To me, he is also always welcome and free to bring any personal paradigm or conclusion he wants to to what he does, because I know that I am, too, but just because he does is not enough reason to convince me. I just don’t think there is enough there to be confidently directing that anyone should be taking this verse off their list about the existence of a pre-incarnate Christ just because this verse denies a body (and does it?). Two reasons: why would anybody have to believe that a pre-incarnate Christ would be necessarily limited to a body, or even a body that lacked an omni-present Voice; and two, why would an omni-present Voice preclude a Presence that might have been Him? Exclusive evidence that establishes a negative is, I think, one of the hardest of all to prove. All I am saying is that it doesn’t track. That’s all. Everything else is rocking my boat just great, including everything you have said!
Hey Richard — I like where you are going with this! Moshe Kempinski told us that it is common in Yerushalayim for children to whisper about a passing rabbi “there goes the living Torah” or “he’s the walking Torah”. It means that the rabbi is one who walks out Torah. Our western thinking immediately takes the idea of walking and flesh and tries to make it a corporal being — but from what I can see, Hebraic thought never adds a body.
It’s clear Suzanne that ‘image’ does not specify ‘body’ (physical form). Yeshua said if you have seen me, you have seen the father, So can we say we have seen the feet, hands, face, of God? I think not…I think we have seen an image in what Yeshua does, Torah, that is the best image of our Father.
I’m struck by the KJV version of Genesis 3:8 reading; “heard the VOICE of God walking…”. As little as I think of the KJV as a primary source for me, could they have been on to something? And what would the ‘feet’ of God’s voice appear as?
I think this relates to love also -where it’s not “linear” but diffuses out ……
I want to do an object lesson where on 1 side of the room I have a oil diffuser with a sign on it that says:” love -diffuses” & the other side I have a loud vacuum cleaner that has a sign that says :
” shame confuses” …
– what is the heart of God to be expressed through men to women? I read Guardian Angel book already & didn’t grasp it,and when I pray I sense God wants Eves story retold or redeemed somehow .. …..& maybe my story also.. ..
Was it ” speaking or acting in behalf of” ???????
Genesis 3:21 – Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skin, and clothed them.
How does this fit with your interpretation of Genesis 3:8 being only a voice? Did God speak and an animal died and clothes were fashioned by His voice alone?
It seems clear, based solely on the English translation, that coverings were made by God Himself. This verse too is used to support a trinitarian belief. God/Jesus came down to the Garden, killed an innocent animal and used the skin to cover them after they sinned. I’ve heard more than one sermon preached on this as a picture of the Gospel.
How is this commonly held view wrong?
Thanks Skip.
His Body
It walks and it talks, it has hands and feet and you are a part of it.
~ Now you are the body of Christ, and each one of you is a part of it ~
(1 Corinthians 12.27)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJL7Eis0Rb0
I think it behooves us to NOT automatically assume that Jewish literature, Rabbinic writings or even “Hebrew thought” based on the Judaism’s of the last couple thousand years, or Jewish literature, accurately portraits what “Hebrew thought” really is or was to our messiah and those whom He taught in the 1st Century.
We know with certainty that an awful lot of Mishnah and Talmud was wrote, or even re-wrote, in a direct response to this heretical sect of the Jews, “the Way” or these pesky “Christianos” of the 1st and 2nd centuries.
Hebrew thought would have very much included the Greek text of the Septuagint as well. I mean clearly that’s the case given almost all quotes from the Tanach in the Apostolic text were from it. Not to mention it was read in a good many synagogues. They even had a special celebration, due to its creation, in the 1st Century.
That being said. While it’s reading far too much into Gen 3:8 to think HaShem had feet in this passage, we also can’t ignore that Adam “heard” Him walking as well.
We also can’t walk away from or ignore Gen 18 where the text says YHVH “stood”, as an honest to goodness fleshly being, not an “Angel” or messenger but, rather YHVH, in front of Abraham. Not to mention He ate with him and talked to Sarah too. I know, I know, how “Rabbinic thought” tries to do back flips to explain that away. They have to, don’t they? But, nonetheless, that’s what the Hebrew reads. We also can’t escape the reality that the God of Israel has feet while standing on the mountain in Ex 33, and they seen Him.
My point, we may “think” we can assume Hebrew thought doesn’t allow for the physical being of YHVH on this earth but, that doesn’t mean it’s a fact either.
That God can manifest Himself in human form is obvious. But that does not allow us to assume that Yeshua IS GOD. The Trinitarian equivalence is not supported by the text and even the early Church fathers noticed this. Manifesting Himself is not the same an ontological equality. But we knew that, didn’t we? Anyway, I am sure we could argue the point forever, or at least for 1800 years. But is it really that important? Does the theology help us draw closer?
Arguing over theology will never help us draw closer. I’m not an arguer. I do love a good debate and I also think it worthy for us all to voice our opinion and positions. I seriously doubt it if any of us has actually hit the nail on the head. Hence, why we all, sometimes change our views like a good pair of socks.
The journey to draw close to Him and to continue to dig into the text to grow in understanding and relationship as He desires us to have is always a worthy undertaking and one we all may not always completely agree on. Opposing views don’t have to be an argument or a knock down drag out. I see iron sharpening iron and causing each other to search out the matters as a good thing.
I don’t think Yeshua being YHVH come in the flesh is something that’s “logically” sustainable on any side of the “argument”. I think the text does, however, speak in terms of it being a very real possibility. At least from what I see and read.
I love and respect you, my brother 🙂
It definitely helps millions of people around the globe. Jesus was a man just like us but clearly he was more. Was he God in the flesh, was he something else or was he deluded? Who or what is the Holy Spirit if not God? According to Jesus the Paraclete guides us into all truth convicting the world of sin, righteousness and judgment. How is that done even without the availability of Torah or the written word? Was it not the sound Adam heard walking in the garden? Just asking because I don’t see how either Jesus or Holy Spirit can be explained without some notion of trinity. It maybe not a perfect explanation but it sure directs us into the mystery of God which always exposes our desire to know, which of course led to the fall.