Where was Adam?

kifoy

Where was Adam when Eve sinned?
Was he with his wife or somewhere else in the garden -- out of sight?

In the NWT, Genesis 3:6 says:

"Consequently the woman saw that the tree was good for food and that it was something to be longed for to the eyes, yes, the tree was desirable to look upon. So she began taking of its fruit and eating it. Afterward she gave some also to her husband when with her and he began eating it."

*Afterward*.
So.... The snake tricked Eve to take a bite of the forbidden fruit. Then Eve went to her husband somewhere else in the garden and made him eat as well.

This is how I always thought about these things. Adam was somewhere else. Eve was wandering around in the gardens by herself.

Then I got a tip from my aunt. And I read the passage more thoroughly in my Norwegian Bible. My Norwegian Bible says pretty much the same as the New International Bible:

"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."

So Adam was *with* her? That brings up lots of questions like: Why did he not stop it? And why is it so important for some to point out that it was *afterwards*?

The Interlinear Bible clearly (at least as far as I can se) shows that the words «with here» also was present in the original text: http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/OTpdf/gen3.pdf

So...
Where was Adam?

I googled and found this article: http://www.tlogical.net/adameve.htm

The writer still concludes that Adam had to be somewhere else, not present. Though I think some of his arguments are somewhat thin...

For instance, his first argument:

"It is possible to be with someone and not actually in their presence. For instance, when I am at home "with" my wife, she might be in another part of the house and not visible to me. Adam could have been with Eve in the same way. With her in the garden but not in her presence."

Well. Where could he be if not "in the garden with Eve". There was no other place to be, was there?

And what about this one:

"Adam and Eve before the fall had equal standing before God. There was no concept of headship or defined roles for their conduct. God's response to the sin of Eve was to change her relationship in respect to Adam and Himself. She was told that her desire would be to her husband and that he would rule over her. From this point forward in scripture we see man portrayed in a role of spiritual leadership and as the head of the wife. If Adam had been present during the temptation, and indifferent or deceived alongside Eve, it begs the question, why would God have given Adam headship?"

So because Adam was tempted by a mere woman instead of the more powerful Satan, he proved himself more competent to the headship? Eh...

What do you think?

I was just thinking, If Eve had a long way to go to meet up with her husband after she had taken a bite. Why did she not "see that she was naked" before Adam ate? Because verse 7 says:
"Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked".

So *then* also Eve saw it. After Eve had wandered around looking for Adam and then persuaded him to eat? Was she a bit slow or was he nearby after all?

kifoy

Narkissos

Interesting question.

The Hebrew syntax here is minimalist, lit. and (not "afterwards") she gave also to her man with her and he ate.

The narrative does imply a "private dialogue" between the serpent and the woman, though, which the NW (over)Translation makes explicit, but in doing so it artificially creates a problem of delay as you pointed out.

I would suggest that the non-relative `immah, "with her"("who was with her" would be better expressed by 'asher `immah, and "when he was with her" by ki hayah `immah for instance) precisely suggests the opposite, namely that they eat together and simultaneously, and feel the effect likewise (v. 7, sheneyhem, "both of them"). Personally I would rather translate it by "along with her". Imo, by this circumstantial phrase the Hebrew precisely (although a bit awkwardly) solves the tension between the private dialogue and the common act (and consequences).

Honesty

Some of the men in our church studied this in detail.

I will post the findings as soon as I remember where I laid them down.

Terry

Here is the flaw in the aftermath of Adam and Eve.

Adam as the "head" of the family was responsible for his wife.

However, the punishment went to his wife specifically in the form of pain of childbirth, being dominated by her husband, etc. representationally for ALL subsequent women.

Eve (and all women thereafter) had to "crave" being dominated!

If all women were specifically to inherit the burden of domination and painful childbirth as punishment for Eve's specific transgressions, then, why haven't all men been stripped of their headship over women since Adam completely botched his?

It doesn't fly, does it?

The Watchtower retells the story (over and over and over) in almost every book they publish according to a self-administered mythic reformulation. In the re-telling it was Adam's short-sighted "love" for his wife that brought him into ruin by "listening to his wife's voice."

Eve was "deceived". This is emphsized. Adam was not.

What can this mean except that Eve was lied to and Adam was not.

Eve acted on what she THOUGHT TO BE TRUE! Adam acted in SPITE OF what he knew to be true.

Yet, as mentioned above, Eve gets the brunt of the punishment on behalf of all women through subsequent history and man gets to maintain his stranglehold on domination and headship!

Deliberate sin (by Adam) isn't enough to strip men of their overlording.

Believing a lie and acting (sensibly to become like her father) on it is the worst you can say about Eve.

Something smells bad about this!

emptywords

This is how I always thought about these things. Adam was somewhere else. Eve was wandering around in the gardens by herself.

Very interesting post.....I don't know, but some great answers, this may be a new slant on things.

Maybe Satan waited till Eve wanted to go do poo poo's or wee wee's, that way she was all alone,(except for the snake).

Curucu

Good question.

I've heard a few explanations to this one...one of the more interesting solutions is that Adam was with Eve, and the serpent was not just some little snake but really something more monstrous (the Hebrew word Nahash is used which is the same word used to describe Biblical monsters like Leviathan). Basically Adam was intimidated by this thing and failed to protect Eve from it, she was convinced to eat the fruit, and Adam then went along with it like a wuss.

Here's a link that has some of this about halfway down the page: http://www.salvationhistory.com/online/beginner/class1_lesson2_1.cfm

It's pretty much speculation and not the official teaching of any denomination that I know of.

emptywords

Basically Adam was intimidated by this thing and failed to protect Eve from it, she was convinced to eat the fruit, and Adam then went along with it like a wuss.

I think it was deception rather than fear.....hath God said, Ye shall not eat of ANY tree in the garden? (question, raises a point with a sujestion ANY (lie). Eve (vs2) Eve answers not out of ignorance but knowing the God said only one tree.

(vs 5) the enticement

It was her own desires she dwelt on and therefore after giving into them she became independant of God, deciding for herself, becoming a law unto herself. Adam choose Eve over God therefore abandoning his headship role, this is why the headship is enforced in such an unloving harsh way, so as not to loose control, of the women. Without God governing their lives everthing is extreme and unbalanced.

Satan used Eve because she was the youngest most vunerable (spiritually) we don't know how long after Adam was created Eve was. So the difference in experience and spiritual maturity, really was the key, so Eve was tricked (decieved) and Adam made a conscience decision and choose the women over God. They came under the headship of Satan. Just my view.

hamsterbait

The account does not indicate that Adam had any part in the conversation - an unlikely thing had he been there seeing a snake talk for the first time.

Couples are not together 24/7. How many women hold their husband's han d while he does a dump? Maybe Adam had nipped behind a bush and was busy with dock leaves.

HB

kifoy

Thank you for all your interesting answers.

So, I find that there really is no definite answer to this question without doing some "if this" and "if that".
I see the point in the privateness of the conversation between the snake and Eve. And that «with her» doesn't really _have_ to be "within arm's reach", if I understood correctly.

This story was written down a long time after the events. So, it may also have been a little influenced by this writer's opinions. Right? (Unless one believes that it was 100% inspired...)

I think the headship question is equally interesting. Why is one sin worse that the other? Although 1 Tim 2:14 says: "And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner". But then again (unless inspired), the woman had never been regarded highly. And I think it says it all when Adam is mentioned by name, but not Eve, who is only "the woman".

Keep you thoughts coming :-)

This kind of bible study I can like. Comparing translations, history, and finding strange things. Not the JW way. That's so boring! Right now I'm occupied with this subject, and the 587/607 subject. I could never have found these interesting things when I was a JW. Now it's all on a theoretical basis, and I like to keep it that way.

Thanks for the link Curucu.
If there are more links out there, I'd like to see :-)

kifoy

Paralipomenon

The serpent was cursed to crawl on his belly and eat dust.

I'm rather curious how a snake got around before the whole "fruit incident" and I'm wondering when they got the "eating dust" reprieve.

Where was Adam?

Share this