The Circumcised Life
Now the man had relations with his wife Eve, and she conceived and gave birth to Cain, and she said, “I have gotten a manchild with the help of the Lord.” Genesis 4:1 NASB
Gotten – Genesis 4:1 is a most surprising verse. First, it is the only place in Scripture that records words from Havvah after the conversation with the serpent. There is a deafening silence from the absence of her voice in what is the most crucial conversion ever experienced. Second, the grammar of this declaration is all wrong. “With the help of the Lord” should be (and is) all in italics because it is a gloss of a misplaced ‘et. The linguistic marker for the direct object really belongs with ‘ish, not YHVH. But there it is in the wrong place. The implications are startling. Third, Havvah used the wrong noun. She bears a “child,” not a “man.” Her use of ‘ish reveals even more about the intention of this pregnancy. Things are not very happy after Paradise. Of course, we have examined all of these issues.[1] But there is one more surprise here that bears another look. For the first time, sex replaces love.
The Jewish idea of the relationship between Adam and the woman before the fateful conversation is different than the Christian idea. Christianity treats the couple as originally sinless. Judaism treats them as innocent. Sinlessness is a theological category. Innocence is a moral category. Innocence simply means “without guile or corruption.” It does not require conformity to a standard. It suggests that there is a genuine lack of awareness of any standard. Innocence means blissful ignorance. Sinlessness, on the other hand, assumes a comparison to some expectation of proper action or status. Sinlessness requires a commandment. Innocence does not.
What happens to the woman once she fails to keep the commandment, once she converts innocence to sinfulness? Her relationships are broken. God restores one. Adam refuses to restore the other. As a result, power, authority and its weapons come into play. For the first time, sex becomes a means to an end. Love, an expression of vulnerability, is converted into sex, a substitute of mechanics for intimacy. Making love is not the same as loving. Behavior mimes reality. The act becomes the goal. As the text says, the woman only needed the man in order to accomplish something else—a substitute for the lost lover of her soul.
Notice how this pattern is repeated in a variety of forms. For Adam, sex is about submission. Havvah is relegated to the status of an animal, under the man’s authority to serve the man’s needs. For the woman, sex is about revenge, a way to get even with a man who no longer treats her as an equal, a way to produce a substitute who will honor her for what she was designed to be.
Then there’s Abraham and Sarah. For Abraham sex becomes an excuse for not waiting for God to fulfill the promise. Hagar is a convenient alternative to the covenant, a way of fulfilling God’s blessing without God. For Sarah, sex is a justification for self-pity and a rationalization for present eschatology. There is no need to wait when human intervention can take charge. Both motives backfire. Neither is about intimacy. Both are about mechanics in order to avoid vulnerability.
Isaac follows suit. Sex is about comfort. Rebekah replaces his mother, the only one who protected him from a demonic God and an uncaring father. But sex for comfort leads to isolation and Isaac spends most of his life alone, surrounded by dysfunctional family members.
Jacob’s experience is no better. There is no doubt he loved Rachel. But life plays strange tricks on men who seek to control it, and sex with the wrong woman merely reinforces prior family traumas. Jacob’s sexual experiences turn out to be nothing but conflict. Two wives, two mistresses—all arguing over who will receive his attention tonight. For Jacob, sex is conflict. Vulnerability arrives at death, not life.
Jacob’s son Rueben understands the connection between sex and power. Take what belongs to the father and usurp the father’s position. For Simeon and Levi, sex was about violence. Broken relationships spin violent consequences, turned both inside and out. The treatment of the men of Shechem paves the way for the treatment of their own.
Finally, there’s Joseph. Sex with the daughter of a pagan priest produces two sons, but their names suggest something more than marital bliss. Manasseh—God has made me forget all my trouble in my father’s household—suggests that there was a lot of remembered trauma. Perhaps having a child whose name reminds you of things you would just as soon forget is not quite the therapy needed. Ephraim—God has made me fruitful in the land of my affliction—doesn’t take away the pain of the land. For Joseph, sex seems to be about loneliness.
Genesis is a story of trauma. More than most of us can understand or endure. It is the story of God’s hand invisibly guiding men and women whose lives are riddled with real human problems and real human mistakes. Certainly one of the themes of this transgenerational saga is the mistake of thinking that sex is love. That mistake reaps disastrous results. And it has been so ever since.
Topical Index: sex, love, trauma, Genesis 4:1
[1] You can read about them in previous Today’s Word editions or in my book, Guardian Angel.
A NOTE ABOUT SPRING CLEANING
I had a lot of comments back about pruning the database. On Feb 29 I wrote that I will soon clean the list of those who haven’t been contributors in the last year. I still intend to do this, but it won’t happen until I get back from Africa. So after March 15 I’ll simply remove the email addresses of all those who have chosen not be be involved. If you made any financial contribution or purchased any material or asked to be on the list since 1 January 2015, you don’t have to do anything. If you want to stay on the email list but you haven’t done any of the above, then all you need to do is go to
skipmoen.com/donate
and make a choice. Or you can write to me directly.
I trust you realize that this isn’t about forcing you to give. You can always go to the web site if you wish. This is about being part of something bigger than just information. This is about doing something. Thanks.
Skip
Very insightful!
SexAsControl. The opposite of vulnerability. Both sexes do it. Sex, like everything else, was created to be holy, and also to make the marriage holy, but only when it gets to be for its own sake. Sex as used by the world will always be about something else. I have to laugh when the world claims that religion somehow ‘keeps’ sex from getting to ‘be itself’. The justification of perversion of all sorts is held so often to be this just “letting sex be sex”, but that is a baldfaced lie. Perversion is about everything BUT sex.
“Perversion is about everything BUT sex.” < True statement, Laurita. There is nothing new under the sun. It seems that we are so far from the relationships that would help all of us to fulfill our roles on earth. Ugh! How to model this? How to share it? (I am always thinking of what my grandchildren see in the world, as they are now beginning to enter adulthood.)
Gayle, if we would just look at things simply, instead of trying to answer to the world, I think we would have far less trouble. Take the subject of marriage. If you want, you could look at marriage as the ONLY conditions under which all the possible impediments to sex for its own sake have been removed. Further, in no other place can sex ever possibly get to be just what it is. If you want to ever get to know (experience) sex in its full glory, you are going to have to be participating in a marriage that has been committed to itself. Everyone else just thinks they know about sex, but they have never had it.
As I re-read this, I wonder, “How would Havvah know the difference between sex and love?” Any answer I can think of requires assumptions not in the text, unless it is in Hebrew, and I have not seen such a teaching anywhere.
After eating of the tree, I am sure the only answer to that question would have to be that she would ONLY know after she experienced that difference. I think of the tree of knowledge of good and evil as being a choice to LIMIT us to only ‘knowing’ by experience. I think there is the probability that we forfeited any other way to understand once that choice got made. Eve would then only be able to KNOW the difference only by EXPERIENCING the difference. Which leads one to wonder if something fundamental changed in our yetzer stuff that opened the door of probability towards a blindness – a double-blind test, if you will – when it comes to reality. To eat of the tree, then, could have meant that we LOST something we might have originally had that would help us to discern reality without having to experience it first. Try to explain the difference between sex and love to a youngster nowadays who has experienced neither, and you are going to get either a flesh response “I won’t know unless I try for myself”, or a faith response “I trust that what you tell me is true”. We have no third route to wisdom or discernment today, but I wonder if we might have had, before the tree…
Good insight. I have considered the likelihood that humans “possess” many other senses than we are able to access today. I suppose time will tell.
Its always fun sharing a piece of ‘Mentine’ gum with you, Gayle! I think you are right about latent design. May we have the rest of the day to meditate (chew the cud) on what Skip gave us out of his pack. TW: the ‘chaw’ that keeps on chewing!
“A NOTE ABOUT SPRING CLEANING”
Can I bump this subject to this posting?
What a deal! Give through Amazon Smiles (you’re getting something anyways), Pay an author for his work and take a book on that vacation (better to read while growing fat), Spend a few bucks to listen to a down loaded lecture while ‘pruning the garden’ or doing the ‘hunny-do’s (this is my favorite).
Most people I know blow a handful of bucks each week (at least) on marginal items or self-gratifying endeavors. A simple equation of exercising any of the above mentioned ways or others (empty that coin jar, recycle for dollars, look at the asphalt in your shopping parking lot) and any one of us can come up with 25 cents a day for that ‘TW’ we so enjoy…that’s $1.50 a week! Round it to $80 a year! (Less than a month’s television cable). That’s a good sum when multiplied by all of us who read Skips work!
I wish I could go hear Skip in Israel, Africa, Europe, the Great North West or the Great South East (his hometown) but that would take a lot of our financial resources…so please do something so that one day he might come to the far Southwest, San Diego. I would collect aluminum cans to attend.
My wife and I stopped attending the largest church here in San Diego the Sunday we sat and heard (for the umpteenth time) the lead well known Pastor urge the congregation to keep contributing towards a 12 million dollar goal to build more of the same church in San Diego with ‘tithes’ and in the same breath call out for a show of hands of those who are looking for a job (maybe 10 in the audience) and offering to ‘pray for them’ in the tithe prayer.
While walking out of that service in silence, I turned to my wife and asked if anything bothered her about today’s service. She stopped and said; “Yes. Why is it that a congregation of 12,000 members can’t find a way to support the jobless members in the audience (probably hundreds of employers there) with other than just ‘prayer’ while collecting 12 million dollars to build other places for unemployed people to get ‘prayer’?
We came to the conclusion that there wasn’t a community, but just members. I like being a ‘regular’ on Skip’s list, but I don’t want to just be a ‘member’.
TO Richard Gambino: I hope you will see this post submitted so long after your own. Skip is coming to Fresno CA May 12-14. We are a 5 1/2 hour drive from San Diego. There is no charge to attend, and on Saturday, we provide Shabbat lunch, so your costs to come for the day would be minimal, other than an 11 hour RT drive. 🙂 We’d love to see you and your wife — see Skip’s calendar for my contact info.
Skip, any helpful resources on Song of Solomon. We’re doing a study, and I feel our group is missing the point. Faithful bunch, but I feel like a 3rd grader trying to get my head around War & Peace.
I have done Song of Songs as a lectures series more than once. I think it might have been recorded. I can check and let you know. Send me an email.
As always – insightful words of wisdom – from everyone. and as for the ‘spring cleaning’ – while we are on limited funds – this is one of the few ‘words’ I depend on to keep me going on the narrow path – making my way through the mire of muck and the forest of brambles that seem to be a part of my life. Skip’s previous help in many areas are a treasure in my heart and I call him ‘friend’ … while this monthly donation is not much … the thought goes beyond measure. Thanks Skip.
Isn’t this at the heart of becoming human. The difference between being in relationship to and relationship with. Grace confronts the former and chesed allows experience of the latter. Each experience becoming more human. Isn’t this at the heart of work and “dominion” and community?
Another mind blowing post Skip that I’m going to try to put into words what’s going thru my mind right now, I may be off base because Im new to learning the Hebrew perspective, on the scriptures but today’s word reminds me of a book I recently read and came across the term ” relational idolatry” for the first time. It’s defined as clinging too tightly to people to satisfy our deep soul needs instead of Yeshua. Idolatry was defined as how we replace our deepest desires for something other than God. There are 3 categories of deep soul idols: control/power; affirmation/approval; comfort/security. This post just further confirmation for me on how each of these people used sex as an idol on each of these areas in their lives. Sex no longer a refection of our deep intimacy with God and each other, but for Adam sex = submission; Havvah sex =revenge; Abram sex=substitute; Sarah, sex =justification; Jacob sex=conflict; Joseph sex= loneliness; Reuben sex= power; Levi/Simeon sex=violence.
This week in our Genesis study on Thursday night, I was discussing the difference between how we are now and the innocence of Adam and Havvah before the serpent entered the scene. As we tried to image what innocence looked like, felt like, there was a deep silence. For me, it was beyond my imagination, but I heard myself crying out to YHVH for a taste of that innocence. I wonder, will innocence be restored? Dare we hope for even that?
I feel like I have been through both sides of this. My first marriage lasted all of eight months. And my present dear wife and I just celebrated 40 years together. At least for me, innocence has indeed been restored.
Wait -I think I disagree with the submission -revenge equation of Adam & Eve -I don’t know any woman including myself that when their husband demanded submission i responded with revenge . Women desire love and are wired for intimacy & relationship , but women do compromise ourselves because Adam gets angry & makes her feel responsible & that she has to compensate Adam for both their sin.
There is a lot more in Genesis 4:1 than compromise. Take another look and see what you find. Look particularly at the misplaced syntax.
Much food for thought!
Did Adam had relationship/knew Chavah before the “fall”? Or, only after, though they were told and, created to procreate to fill the earth?
Were they innocent and childlike before they ate of the fruit of knowledge, before lust , replaced love in their lives due to having eaten the forbidden fruit brought forth their corrupted natures?
My father told me when I was a young woman that sex was a beautiful thing within the confines of marriage. I take it Laurita, that you are talking about that when you say you can only experience the glory of sex within a marriage. But Skip seems to be saying that even within a marriage there are conflicts that prevent this from being true. So ??? marks for me. Sex is one thing but intimacy is a whole other ballgame I think young people are missing out on the meaning of intimacy. TV definitely sells sex as exciting and illicit sex is even better. But then sex has been around? And of course we are back to the whole issue of men being able to be vulnerable in our culture. Young boys can cry for a while but then it is time to grow up and be a man. And girls can be vulnerable but not sexual. Double standard works both ways and so damaging. But it really comes down to our inability to be honest about who we are as a “human being” and go one step further and say being truly vulnerable with one another. Not just giving it lip service. I think Adam and Havvah enjoyed ‘everything’ in the garden, but then if so why give that up? I think
Skip answers that in his book, Guardian Angel.
Many years ago someone claimed that the genitals are the center point of the human body construction or layout. A lot of biblical scholars say that the human body represents the earth (Isaiah – sit on lap take up in arms and suckle. Psalms hears and sees wonder. Paul claims earth refers to conscience of man. If these are true then the feeding of Adam with fruit of the tree of knowledge would be sexual temptation as it is both a good deed and a evil deed depending on when and how enjoyed. This would also say why both the prophets and apostles warn against this in the biblical records.
Now women are stronger and more self controlling in this human attribute than men, and 90% plus of human adverts lure purchases using the woman body… This for me would then explain why such control by Eve over Adam is so easy, as is still today… And even woman fall for the images imprinted by using other female bodies.
Other than by the female body men are seldom lured to fashions, diets, food sorts etc, except when female companions raise the topic… Babylon’s great fall – whoring with the worldly trends. It is not only the deed but the focus on the sexual differences that make us desire changes and updates in the life.
Now Adam (earth) plus Eve (from Adam) – would have a new meaning if the other biblical scholars are correct and we need to look into ourselves to determine what controls us. Survival or trends. If survival and efforts to produce survival necessities then whatever we do with the human body that does not harm another or solely benefit our lusts would be strictly Godly correct… And the opposite would also be true and we will be eating of the evil side of the fruit of the tree of life.
And Yes Eve will then get a male child, something through her own insight, to focus on so that she does not have to cater for the nagging Adam.
Total recall – Human being with human intelligence. Seek not fashion or trends but seek the everlasting prosperity that God desires in relationships…
The failing of 80% of today’s marriages are a result of being focused on things outside the joint venture by one or both parties. Eve will always win when she uses her sexual side as that is Adam’ weakest attribute, and as the ragging elephant bull once desire is awakened all body actions move towards fulfilling…
Adam cannot change this hard wiring and Eve knows it… So to live a pure life cycle Paul also says get married and be committed to the relationship and Peter reiterates wife (rather widows) teach the younger generations to first cater for their husbands need as Solomon says a full and wonderful woman will do (Did it take Solomon 300 plus woman to realize this truth?).
So maybe we should look beyond the natural insight to find certain answers in the biblical records as Skip is doing by informing us what the words could mean and imply. The records may need to be taken more personally so that we can grow into that what God desires. Not to be saved but as Jesus did grow in wisdom and in favour before God and man…
Or we can take this female side of ours (knowledge of manipulating naturally created Godly things) and be controlled by it rather than by the will of God…
Indoctrination (EVE/ First Adam) versus Example (ADAM/ second Adam) unto others.
While I appreciate your interpretation of the text and your allegorical views, it seems quite unlikely that any of this is part of the original author’s intention nor would it be appreciated by the original audience. Let’s try to stick with what the text actually says and to whom it is addressed. Speculation and theological expansion leads to some very crazy implications. Better to ask, “What did this mean to the Israelites coming out of Egypt?”