Redeeming Adam (2)
Now the man named his wife Eve, because she was the mother of all the living. And the Lord God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife, and clothed them. Then the Lord God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might reach out with his hand, and take fruit also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever”— Genesis 3:20-22 NASB
Named – If we read to the end of this segment, we discover that sin does not inevitably bring death. Paul’s famous statement, “The wages of sin is death,” only applies post-expulsion. Oh, it’s true now . . . but it doesn’t seem to have been true for Adam. Otherwise this very odd verse about the tree of life makes no sense. That said, Sacks’ suggestion that it is mortality that alters Adam’s character seems a bit premature. Perhaps it altered Adam’s character after they were expelled, but Adam names his wife before that event. Therefore, it doesn’t seem that mortality plays a significant role in the naming. We might wish it did because that would redeem the other implications of Adam’s naming, but I don’t think we can support the claim about Adam’s tenderness and loving identification of his wife as essential to his own relationship with God. In fact, if we rely on the text alone, it seems that Adam not only never forgives but also never repairs the broken relationship with God or his wife.
Where does this leave us? First, I think the text invests much more meaning in the original designation of the woman as ʾiššâ. This is the only place in the story where the man self-designates as ʾîš, and as we know from previous study, ʾîš is not really “man” but rather the summary word of all the relationships that make up an identity. In this case, Adam’s own understanding of himself is a direct consequence of the presence of the woman. This is far deeper than “an assistant.” The ezer kenegdo isn’t just another person. She is the perfect reflection of what it means for him to be human. Without her something essential to Adam’s own consciousness is missing, which is why God can proclaim that it is not good for man to be a single unit, psychologically alone.
Second, I believe the story is ultimately devastating, not redeeming. It describes that breakdown of human relationship, primarily due to blaming, lack of personal responsibility, and lack of forgiveness. It does not end with a happy marriage producing beautiful offspring. In fact, from the point of Adam’s naming forward, all the subsequent relationships end with tragic consequences. The story ultimately explains why life is a mess, not how loving couples can achieve immortality by passing on their values to the next generation. We might wish it were so, but that note is missing in this story.
Jonathan Sacks offers plenty of insights and amazing exegesis in this book about Genesis, but in this case, I think his contemporary concern about the continuance of the Jewish race has clouded the investigation. This is a case where we must take the text for what it actually says, not what we hope that it says. And when we do, we still find incredible depth in this story about the first awareness of the self in relationship.
Topical Index: ezer kenegdo, ʾiššâ, Adam, naming, Jonathan Sacks, Genesis 3:20-22
