Rel. Eve and Adam. Genesis 2- 3 Reread. Phyllis Trible. Copyright 1. Andover. Newton Theological School. Video Diary Favorite Adam est. No torrents found, please try again later. A Feature film by Ren. Produced by Les Films Fernand Rivers, Orex Films. Release in France : 30/07/1954. Actors (20) Jean Carmet. Used by. permission. The Yahwist account of.
Genesis 2- 3 provides a strong proof text for. Accepting centuries of (male) exegesis, many feminists. They read to reject. My suggestion is that we reread to understand. Ambiguity characterizes the meaning. Genesis 2- 3. On the one hand, man is the first. The Lord God puts him in the garden. On the other hand, 'adham is a generic term. In commanding 'adham not to eat of the tree. Deity is speaking to both the. Until the differentiation of female. Release Date in Cinemas: Friday, July 30, 1954. Running Time: 1 h 32 min. Year of Production:1953.Concern for sexuality, specifically. Some. commentators allege female subordination based on this order of. They. contrast it with Genesis 1- 2. God creates 'adham as. Thereby they infer that whereas the Priests recognized the. Yahwist made woman a second. But the last may be first, as both the biblical theologian and the. Thus the Yahwist account moves to its. She is not an afterthought; she is the culmination. Genesis 1. itself supports this interpretation, for there male and female are. The last is. also first where beginnings and endings are parallel. In Hebrew. literature the central concerns of a unit often appear at the. Genesis 2 evinces this structure. The creation of man first and of. In no way does the order disparage woman. It can be a proper name for a male.(7). In our story it describes the animals and the woman. In some. passages it characterizes Deity. God is the helper of Israel. As. helper Yahweh creates and saves.(8). Thus 'ezer is a relational term; it designates a beneficial. God, people, and animals. By. itself the word does not specify positions within relationships. Position results. Accordingly, what kind of. Genesis 2: 1. 8, 2. Our. answer comes in two ways: 1) The word neged, which joins 'ezer. The animals are helpers, but they fail to fit 'adham. Yet their similarity is not equality. No fit helper is. And thus the narrative moves to woman. My translation. is this: God is the helper superior to man; the animals are. Let us pursue the issue by. This. episode concludes the story even as the creation of man commences. As I have said already, the ring composition suggests an. To establish this. In both. episodes Yahweh alone creates. For the last creation, the Lord God. He. exercises no control over her existence. He is neither participant. Like man, woman owes. God. For both of them the origin of life is a. Another parallel of equality is creation out of. Yahweh chooses. these fragile materials and in both cases processes them before. As Yahweh shapes dust and then breathes into. Yahweh takes out the rib and then builds it. To. call woman . Moreover, to claim that the rib means. Superiority. strength, aggressiveness, dominance, and power do not characterize. Genesis 2. By contrast he is formed from dirt; his life. Deity plans and interprets. The rib means solidarity and. The pun proclaims both the similarity and the differentiation of. Before this episode the Yahwist has used only the. No exclusively male reference has. Only with the specific creation of woman ('ishshah). In. other words, sexuality is simultaneous for woman and man. The. sexes are interrelated and interdependent. Man as male does not. Hence. the first act in Genesis 2 is the creation of androgyny (2: 7) and. Male embodies female and female embodies male. The two are neither. The birth of woman corresponds to the. Only in responding to the. No longer a passive. Some read in(to) the poem a naming. The man names the woman and thereby has power and authority. But. again I suggest that we reread. Neither the verb nor the noun name. We find instead the verb 'qara', to call. The typical formula for naming is the. This. formula applies to Deity, people, places, and animals. For. example, in Genesis 4 we read: Cain built a city and called. Enoch. (v. 1. 7). And Adam knew his wife again, and she bore a son and called his. Seth (v. 2. 5). To Seth also a son was born and he called upon the name of the. Lord (v. 2. 6b). Genesis 2: 2. Its absence signifies. The presence of both. So out of the ground the Lord. God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air and. In. calling woman, 'adham does not name her and does find in. Female and male are equal sexes. Neither has. authority over the other.(1. A further observation secures the. Woman itself is not a name. It is a common noun. It designates gender; it does not specify. This recognition is not an act of naming to. But the. true skeptic is already asking: What about Genesis 3: 2. We must wait to. consider that question. Meanwhile, the words of the ancient poem. From this one (androgynous) creature come. The two return to their original unity as 'ish. Next the differences which spell. The serpents speaks to the woman. Why to the woman and. The simplest answer is that we do not know. The. Yahwist does not tell us any more than he explains why the tree of. But the silence. of the text stimulates speculations, many of which only confirm. Cassuto identifies. It does not. sustain the judgment that woman is weaker or more cunning or more. Both have the same Creator, who explicitly uses. Both are equal in birth. There is complete rapport. If there be moral frailty. Further, they are equal in. What the narrative says about the nature. Why does the serpent speak to the. Let a female speculate. If the serpent. is . Throughout the myth she is the. Perhaps the woman elevates the animal world by conversing. At any rate, she understands the. In quoting God she interprets the prohibition. The woman is both. She contemplates the tree, taking into. The tree is good for good; it. It pleases the eyes; it is. Above all, it is coveted. Thus the woman is fully. The initiative and the decision. Thee is no consultation with her husband. She. seeks neither his advice nor his permission. She acts. independently. The man does not theologize; he does not. His one act is belly- oriented, and it is an act of. The man is not dominant; he is not. Even though the. prohibition not to eat of the tree appears before the female was. She has. interpreted it, and now she struggles with the temptation to. But not the man, to whom the prohibition came directly. He follows his wife without question or comment, thereby. If the woman be intelligent. I stress their contrast not to promote female. The contrast between woman and man. They are one in the new. They are one in hearing and in. They flee from the sound of the Lord God in the Garden. First to the man come questions of responsibility (3: 9. Here the man does not blame the woman, he does. Deity. The verb which he uses for both the Deity and. So far as I can determine, this. Again, if the Yahwist intended to make woman the. The woman's response. Only here occurs the strong verb nsh', meaning to. God accepts this subject- verb combination. Yahweh says to. the serpent, . But they are judged, and the judgments. They show how terrible human life has become as it. We misread if we assume that. They describe; they do not. They protest; they do not condone. Of special concern. This statement is not license for male supremacy, but. Subjugation and supremacy are perversions of creation. Through. obedience the woman has become slave. Her initiative and her. The man is corrupted also, for he has become. God- given equal. The. subordination of female to male signifies their shared sin.(2. This sin vitiates all relationships: between animals and human. Whereas. in creation man and woman know harmony and equality, in sin they. Grace makes possible a new beginning. A further observation about these. They are culturally conditioned. Husband and work. A literal reading of the tory limits both creatures and. To be faithful translators, we must recognize. Whatever forms stereotyping takes in. The suffering and oppression we women and men know. At this place of sin and judgment. The naming itself faults the man for. And so Yahweh. evicts the primeval couple from the Garden, yet with signals of. Interestingly, the conclusion of the story does not specify the. Instead the narrator resumes use of the generic. Visiting the Garden of Eden in the. Women's Movement, we need no longer accept the. Genesis 2- 3. Rather than legitimating the. And thus it functions to liberate, not to. This function we can recover and appropriate. The Yahwist. narrative tells us who we are (creatures of equality and. God. In other words, the story. NOTES1. See inter alia, Kate Millett, Sexual. Politics, NY: Doubleday, 1. Eva Figes, Patriarchal. Attitudes, Greenwich: Fawcett, 1. Mary Daly, The. Courage to See. Sheila D. Jacob. Theology of the Old Testament, NY: Harper & Row, 1. S. E. g.. Elizabeth Cady Stanton observed that Genesis 1: 2. See also Elsie Adams and Mary. Louise Briscoe, Against the Wall, Mother . Beverly. Hills: Glencoe Press, 1. Bailey writes emphatically of. Genesis. 2- 3, . These. James. Muilenburg, . Chronicles. 4: 4; 1. Nehemiah 3: 1. 9. Psalms 1. 21: 2. 1. Exodus 1. 8: 4; Deut. Koehler. and W. Baumgartner, Lexicon in Veteris Testamenti Libros. Leiden: E. The verb bnh. It is used of towns. Koehler- Baumgartner, p. Ruth Amiran, . See Walter. Brueggemann, . In. I find virtually no support form (male) biblical scholars. But my. view stands as documented from the text, and I take refuge among a. George Foot Moore, Judaism. I, Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1. Jos. Campbell, The. Hero with a Thousand Faces, Meridian Books, World Publishing. Verse 2. 4. probably mirrors a matriarchal society (so von Rad, op. If the myth were designed to support patriarchy, it is. Westermann contends, however, that an emphasis on. Cassuto. A Commentary on the Book of Genesis, Part 1, Jerusalem: The. Magnes Press, n. d., 1. Ricoeur. departs from the traditional interpretation of the woman when he. La Symbolique du Mal. Aullner, ditions Montaigne, Paris, 1. Ricoeur, The. Symbolism of Evil, Boston: Beacon Press, 1. See Bailey. op. See. Westermann, op. For a. Ricoeur, The Symbolism of Evil.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
January 2017
Categories |