Man and Woman in Biblical Unity

Episode A’, Part 1: The Interrogation (3:8-13)

By way of structure, Episode A’ (3:8-24) falls naturally into three parts:

Part 1 (8-13) The Interrogation

Part 2 (14-19) God as Judge and Prophet

Part 3 (20-24) The Aftermath and Expulsion from Eden

The distress of the shame experienced by the man and the woman becomes compounded as God approaches to meet with them. Having constructed crude garments behind which to hide from one another, they physically attempt to hide from the presence of God. An inquiry ensues for the purpose of bringing matters out into the open.

God addresses the two who partook of the fruit in the chronological order in which they received the divine command. The man responds to God by describing his fear and shame: “I heard Your voice in the garden and I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid myself.” This response evokes two questions submitted back-to-back. “Who told you that you were naked?” expects a person to be named in response. “Did you eat…?” gives the man a chance to confess his transgression. God is giving him the opportunity to correctly identify the source of the sin and admit his own guilt.

At this moment there are four personalities in the story. The man could point to himself—he had made his own wayward choice. Or he could point to the serpent, attributing to him, appropriately enough, his responsibility in being the Tempter and the enemy. What is the man’s response? He mentions neither of these. Instead, he attempts to implicate the other two persons in the story.

It is true that the woman had given him the fruit, but not maliciously, not with the intent of the Tempter. He points a finger, nonetheless, at her. In v. 12 he begins, “The woman ….” Then audaciously sliding his finger from the woman to God, he wags his finger at God. “The woman whom You gave to be with me….” Such audacious barbs in retort to God’s questions come from a person who had hardened his heart and sinned knowingly. The New Testament confirms that he was not deceived (1 Timothy 2:14). He ate the fruit with his “eyes open,” that is, with full and conscious awareness of what he was doing.

The woman, in response to God’s inquiry, replies in three (Hebrew) words: “The-serpent deceived-me, and-I-ate.” She points to the serpent, describes accurately what he did to her (deceived her), and acknowledges her act of objective guilt.

The woman and the man both admit to having eaten. But there is a notable difference: One takes a very circuitous route in that admission. The man blames his human colleague and then God.

The woman and the man each transgressed God’s command. Both were guilty of doing what they understood God had told them not to do. For this they each would die.

Yet there was a difference in their understanding and thus a distinguishable difference in the guilt of each. For the man was not deceived by the serpent.

He deliberately and consciously dethroned God from His proper and rightful place as Sovereign of his life. This was the first step toward a new authority system replacing the one God had established.

Then, in his responses to God’s questions, the man assumed the role of Accuser. He seized the moment to make clear he was aligning himself against God. Nor did he act in this crucial moment as one might expect of a one-flesh partner. His stance became combative, accusatory. This was the second step toward a new hierarchy of male over female as he distanced himself from the woman and from God in an aggressive way.

And what of the woman? It is often assumed, in the context of the man’s blame-shifting, that she followed suit. But that may not be the case. Her reply held no words of self-justification; she told the truth. And the New Testament commentary on this episode bears out this understanding. Eve is mentioned by name in the New Testament twice; and both times her deception is attested. 2 Cor. 11:3 and 1 Tim. 2:14 both convey that she was deceived (ezapatesen).

Episode A’, Part 2: God As Judge And Prophet (3:14-19)

God is the sole speaker in this section. And he addresses the transgressors in the sequence of their disobedience: the serpent, the woman, then the man.

The text is quite straightforward. Yet the disparity of interpretation throughout history makes these verses among the thorniest in biblical interpretation (no pun intended). It may prove helpful to precede our analysis of the text with some general observations.

First and Third Speeches (3:14-15, 17-19)

From a structural standpoint, there is remarkable correspondence between God’s addresses to the serpent and to the man. Specifically, they follow the same pattern.

1. Both speeches open with the word “Because (ki).” That introductory word serves to justify the additional punishments He is about to inflict on the serpent and on the man.

2. Next, in both speeches, one specific curse (’arur) is pronounced. In this text, a curse is always clearly indicated by the word “curse.” Where the word is absent, there is no curse. The word ’arur occurs no place else in this passage.

3. In both speeches, the specific object of the curse is identified. In the former, the serpent is cursed; in the latter, the ground is cursed. “Cursed are you,” God says to the serpent in v.14. In v.17, “Cursed is the ground—because of you,” he says to the man. God levies these two curses: one on the serpent, one on the ground. The serpent was the tool of the Tempter; and that tool is henceforth cursed. The ground is cursed because of the man, and the man is profoundly impacted by that decree, but the man himself is not cursed. In each case, the objects cursed were chosen by God because they were related to the misdeeds of the wrongdoers. God says to the serpent and to the man, “Because you have [done this]...” and one could add, “cursed is the instrument of your sin.”

4. The nature of each curse involves eating. The serpent will “eat dust.” The man will eat the plants of the field and bread “by the sweat of your face [literally ‘nose’].” (There is an interesting bit of irony built into the text with the use of the words “dust” and “eat.” The man was made from dust; and he will return to dust. Now dust is what this cursed animal will be eating. Interestingly, eating was what brought about the transgression in the first place—that which the serpent wished to tempt them both to do. So the animal who succeeded in getting them to eat, will now himself be eating—dust.)

5. There is a note of duration in both speeches: “... all the days of your life.”

6. At the end of each speech there is a repeated verb, and the corresponding verbs in each segment sound alike. To the serpent God said, “He will bruise (shuph) you on the head and you shall bruise (shuph) him on the heel.” To the man God said, “By the sweat of your face You shall eat bread Till you return (shuv) to the ground, And to the dust you shall return (shuv).” This alliterative word interplay, shuph ... shuph / shuv ... shuv, is a deliberate stylistic device employed by the author, perhaps to aid in the memorization of these lines.

A striking thing about this pattern is that it is totally absent in the speech to the woman. He does not say to her “Because [you have done this.]” No curse is pronounced on the woman, or even because of the woman. Nothing is said about “eating,” and the phrase “all the days of your life” is omitted. Nor is there any alliterative verb repetition at the end.

Why is there no curse in the speech to the woman when each of the other speeches contains one? The best explanation seems to be that indicated in verse 13: The woman was deceived. She was not a malicious partner with the serpent trying to get the man to fall.