The big question in Scripture I’ve chewed on for years is this: Why does shame not enter the world when Eve eats the fruit? Their eyes are not open and they don’t realize they are naked until ADAM eats.
Every answer I’ve heard has been untenable.
When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves.
Genesis 3:6-7 (NIV)
The structure of the answers often start with this: “Adam was told the instruction before Eve existed.”
From this starting point, we get answers like this:
Eve was deceived. Adam should have told Eve & stopped her, but Adam was tempted by Eve.
It’s gender/marriage focused.
In this view, Adam failed in his responsibility, so men must take charge and lead. However, we’re still stuck with a question: If Adam didn’t eat, what happens? Why is there no shame yet?
But also, in the absence of sin, how does Adam “fail?”
This is a broken answer.
Another view suggests this is not a gender/marriage story at all. It’s a story of those hear God’s words directly vs those who don’t. Those who know the rules are accountable; those who don’t get more grace. But we all experience the consequence of the former’s disobedience.
In this view, Eve isn’t accountable; she didn’t hear the words from God directly; she only heard second-hand. The explains why she might have added to the law (“nor shall you touch it.”) It’s ignorance, and while it’s not sin, it makes you more vulnerable TO sin.
But…
While this view is more palatable (it helps answer “What happens to those who never hear the Gospel?”), it only roughly aligns with certain spiritual/religious views of the world, but NOT AT ALL with our lived reality: ignorance doesn’t prevent a consequence. It can cause it!
So both of these views, although interesting, are unsatisfactory. They fall out of alignment with the rest of scripture and our perceived reality, so I’m forced to reject them and keep studying. And in my studying, I’ve noticed a few things that are hard to ignore.
At the end of Gen 2:24, the text says something important: “… and they become one flesh.” They are ONE. In the Gen 1:27 creation account, it says the same thing.
(NIV breaks the translation and says “them” in both places, but it’s IT/HIM and THEM. It says they are one.)
וַיִּבְרָא אֱלֹהִים אֶת־הָאָדָם בְּצַלְמוֹ בְּצֶלֶם אֱלֹהִים בָּרָא אֹתוֹ זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה בָּרָא אֹתָם׃
H853: אֹתָם (‘ēṯ)
So God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them.
Genesis 1:27 (NIV)
And while they are one, they don’t have names. I know you think Adam & Eve, but early in Genesis, Adam is actually “the adam/human” and is called by a noun and NOT a name.
In the Hebrew, Adam isn’t used as a name until Gen 3:17. Eve isn’t given a name until Gen 3:20.
For both, they don’t have names until after they both eat the fruit. Until then, they are the ish (אִישׁ – man/husband) and the isha (אִשָּׁה – woman/wife).
In Gen 2:23, the ish doesn’t say that the isha is simply a female version of him. He says the isha is FROM him.
“In the image of God He created him (the human).”
“Male and female He created them (the individuals).”
Despite now being split (ish/isha), they are still… one. And while we want to view them as a literal man and literal woman, there’s something else to see here.
Immediately after the text shows us the isha, it tells us what she is like in Genesis 3.
She…
hears/speaks to the serpent.
knows/speaks WHAT IS TRUE
builds a fence around the Law
sees FRUIT
shares FOOD
desires WISDOM & being like God
gives to the ish
This feels… spiritual.
And this is interesting: The Spirit (רוּחַ) of God in Genesis 1:2 is a feminine noun.
And “Wisdom’s desire” of Proverbs 8 sounds familiar:
Feminine (v1)
Knows the truth and can speak it (v6)
Knows good fruit (v19)
Shares food (v5)
What I see is that “the isha” of the human being is /like/ the Spirit of God; she is built with similar characteristics.
Let me be clear: I’m not making a statement about /women/ or /Eve/. Remember: at this time, the ish and the isha are ONE. One flesh. Of the same thing.
…but each person is tempted when they are dragged away by their own evil desire and enticed. Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death.
James 1:14-15 (NIV)
If the isha represents the part of humanity that is in tune with the spiritual world, able to see and hear the serpent/temptation and to know how to interpret and even safeguard the law (“nor shall you touch it”), perhaps the isha is our spirit. Perhaps the ish is our flesh.
In that, perhaps Genesis 3 is not merely a “how sin entered the world” sort of story, but it’s also a “how sin enters the world always” sort of story.
This way of framing the human condition also gives another message of hope from back in Genesis 2.
“It’s NOT GOOD that the man is alone.”
“In the day you eat of it, you will surely die.”
God doesn’t say “if.” It isn’t a conditional statement. The man will eat it. He will die. The only way to save him is to split him in two. The flesh WILL die, but the spirit will live.
The isha was built so the human could live.
When Adam gets a name, God tells says “to dust (‘adam’) you will return.” You will surely die.
When Adam names his wife, he calls her “Eve,” which means LIFE. This is why there is hope in her, and why her curse carries a promise.
Finally, their definitions (that is, the flesh and the spirit) are established, they have names, and God covers them in skin.
Going forward, it’s a story about a MAN, Adam and a WOMAN, Eve. Prior to having a covering, perhaps it was a story about our spiritual selves.
