NOTES to Lyn Bechtel's "Rethinking the Interpretation of Genesis 2:4b-3:24" 1. I would like to thank Rev. Marlin Schaffstall, pastor of the Mountainview Moravian Church,
Hellertown, PA, for his many contributions to this article, gleaned from numerous sermons on a
multitude of subjects.
2. For a general history of the exegesis of the myth, see Westermann 1984, or Wallace 1985.
Although his is a recent survey of exegesis, Wallace seems unaware of feminist contributions.
3.For an example of modern misogynous reading, see McKenzie 1954: 541-72. For a review of
misogynous readings, see Stone 1976: 5-8, 198-233. For Christian use of the myth, see Prusak
1974: 89-116; and Pagels 1988.
4. Westermann stresses that 'aphar is perishable material (1974: 205-207).
5. The issue of whether the story is a unity or not is still debated. Many scholars deny the
narrative's homogeneous character, proposing that the story is composed of a separate creation
myth and a paradise myth (e.g. Gunkel 1910; von Rad 1961). Most scholars agree that there
are non-Israelite background and oral prehistory for the individual motifs.
6. Observed by Naidoff (1978: 2-14) from Fromm (1966: 23) and Hanson (1972: 45-46). In
contrast to Gen. 2.4b-3.24, sin is the issue in God's judgment on Cain (4.7), and 'sin' vocabulary
is used to indicate that emphasis.
7. This is the result of modern cultural bias which misunderstands the symbolic mode of
communication and usually considers a myth to be a story that is untrue, mainly because it is
not historical. There is an assumption that only historical narrative adequately represents
'reality'. In fact, both historical narrative and myth communicate truth, but in different ways.
8. As shown by Levi-Strauss 1955: 81-106; and Leach 1961: 386-96 and 1971: 7-43.
9. Meyers (1988: 3, 73) has also posited the possibility of a difference in the meaning of the
text between ancient Israel and post-Israelite biblical religion; and she suggests that it is only in
early Judaism and Christianity that Adam and Eve emerge in the mainstream of religious
literature.
10. E.g. Lanser (1988: 67-84), who feels that the arguments of Trible and Bal break down when
'they press a formal theory of language beyond its own possibilities' (pp. 75-76). Or Detweiler
(1988: 135-39), who extends the thrust of Lanser s argument. For a review of the state of
feminist scholarship on the myth, see Milne 1988: 12-21, 39.
11. E.g. Milne 1988; L'Heureaux 1983: 76-79.
12. Trible 1978: 80-140. Trible's textual approach is the basis for Mieke Bal's study (1985c) of
the role of women in Gen. 2-3. Gardner
(1990: 1-18) also follows Trible's approach. Higgins (1976: 639-47) has revealed the
misconceptions of Eve as temptress.
13. Meyers 1988: 72-138. Meyers's study forms the backdrop for this interpretation.
14. I have been working on this analysis of the text for ten years and have recently discovered
van Wolde's semiotic analysis. We have independently reached the same conclusions about the
focus on maturation and the relation between the humans and the earth. For a previous
semantic study, see Jobling 1980: 41-49.
15. For different synchronic approaches, see Walsh 1977: 161-77 and Jobling 1986b: 17-43.
Also see Patte and Parker 1980: 141-59.
16. I will not do a thorough analysis of the semantic relationships in the myth because van
Wolde has already done an excellent and comprehensive analysis that takes the myth in the
same direction as I do, but from a very different approach.
17. See the conclusions drawn by Bechtel 1991.
18. Many scholars have misunderstood 'shame', assuming that it is a reaction of guilt for sin. E.g.
von Rad 1961; Brueggemann 1982; Sasson 1985:418-21.
19. Concluded by Driver 1904; Gunkel 1910; and Cassuto 1961.
20. For a psychological analysis of the maturation process, see Fromm 1941; Erikson 1963 and
1968.
21. Trible (1978) translates 'adam 'earth creature', positing that despite its exclusively male
reference the creature is androgynous, with its gender coming only with the creation of the
woman (p.53). Korsak translates it as 'groundling'; which retains the wordplay with 'ground'
(Korsak, pp. 39-52 in this volume).
22. The power of the goddess Asherah is symbolized by a tree (1 Kgs 16.33; 2 Kgs 13.6; 21.2-7;
Jer. 17.2, 7-8; Deut. 16.21) and her power is that of fertility which is the gift of life. See Day
1986: 385-408.
23. Some scholars feel that there is a point in the development of the myth when there is only
one tree, the Tree of Knowledge, because it is essential for the development of the myth; and
the Tree of Life is secondary. The duality is then attributed to the combination of traditions
(e.g. von Rad 1961; Speiser 1964; Westermann 1984). I disagree with this proposal because I
find that both trees are essential for the development of the myth, and stand in opposition to
one another.
24. See the Myth of Gilgamesh, where the tree of life signifies recurring youth. The Gilgamesh
Myth shares many of the same themes of maturation with Gen. 2-3 (see Jacobsen 1976), but the
full exploration and comparison of these themes is beyond the scope of this work. Cf. Bailey
1970: 137-50 for some articulation of the maturation theme, though Bailey adheres to the
traditional interpretation for Gen. 2-3.
25. I have combined the three general scholarly interpretations of the tree (ethical or moral
discernment, sexual awareness and experience, and universal knowledge). For examples of these
interpretations, see Buchanan 1956: 114-20; Clark 1969: 266-78; Clines 1974: 8-14; Wallace
1985: 123ff.
26. Soggin (1975: 171-72) attempts to remove the ambiguity revolving around the issue of the
'midst' of the garden by giving betok a less specific connotation.
27. Exegetes have, for the most part, abandoned the understanding of the snake as Satan.
28. See, e.g., von Rad 1961; Brueggemann 1982. For a more recent proposal, see Holter 1990:
106-12.
29. The Greeks kept non-poisonous house snakes as pets to protect their stored grain.
30. Joines 1968: 245-56; 1974; 1975: 1-11. Cf. Mundkur 1983.
31. Were it not for the importance of the wordplay, the word bos would normally be used here,
as it is in 2.25.
32. 'aphar carries simultaneously the connotation of 'dust' and 'clay' in the myth. In 2.4b-5 the
ground is dry. Then water rises up and waters the face of the ground, turning the 'dust' into
'clay', so that Adonay Elohim can form the 'adam from the 'adama.  In 3.19 Adonay Elohim
says to the 'adam 'You are 'aphar ("clay/dust") and to the 'aphar ("dust/day") you will return'.
Once the body has remained in the ground for a long period of time, the bones turn to 'dust'
(something, I would assume, ancientpeople were aware of). Here the translation 'clay' misses the
image.
33. The superior victors shame the defeated warriors by forcing them to crawl on their bellies,
with their faces in the dust, in an attitude of inferiority and defenselessness-thus psychologically
eliminating their initiative for reprisal (see Bechtel 1991).
34. This is not the Garden of God, but a garden for humanity (Westermann 1978: 208). For a
review of the motif of the Garden of God, in relation to the Genesis garden, see Wallace 1985:
70.
35. Akkadian edinu, based on the Sumerian eden.
36. Von Rad and Westermann make this distinction. Coote and Ord (1989) differentiate the
wild and cultivated vegetation as annuals, versus the fruit-bearing trees of the garden which are
perennials. Wallace contrasts the original wild vegetations (siah and 'eseb) with the cultivated
garden of paradise.
37. There is little consensus on the meaning of the word 'ed, which only occurs here and in Job
36:27. See Albright 1938: 91-103, who derives it from Akkadian id ('river', 'streams of sweet
water beneath the earth'). Cf. Speiser 1955: 9-11, who studies the occurrences of edu, a
Sumerian loanword in Akkadian, and derives a meaning of 'underground swell' or 'subterranean
water'.
38. Considered by many as a gloss here and in 2.19.
39. Brueggemann (1970: 532-42) assumes that 'flesh' refers to the external being, which is
physically and psychologically weak; and 'bone' refers to the internal being, which is physically
and psychologically strong, making men and women equally strong and weak. He does not feel it
refers to biological derivation but to commonality of concern, loyalty and responsibility.
40. In private conversation, D.N. Freeman noted that in the Greek translation 2.23 reads, 'she
shall be called woman for from her man she is taken'. This translation implies a Hebrew text
that had the 'ish being separated from 'isha making the word play work. The change in the
Hebrew text may have been done by a scribe who was uncomfortable with the dysfunctional
wordplay, and did not understand that the dysfunction had a purpose.
41. hawwa is derived from the verbal form hjh, which is related to hyh, 'to live'.
42.Observed by ancient interpreters; see Williams 1977: 357-74.
43. Trible has identified this unity and separation theme but, within the structure of the
traditional interpretation, it is difficult for her to make complete sense of it.
44. Von Rad says, 'This passage has no significance for the unfolding action, nor are its elements
mentioned elsewhere... It must therefore be considered as originally an independent element
which is attached to the story of Paradise but without being able to undergo complete inner
assimilation' (1961: 79).
45. There has been much speculation on the location of the Pishon and Gihon rivers, which form
a rhyming pair (see Wallace 1985; Driver 1904; Speiser 1955; Coote and Ord 1989; Wyatt
1981: 10-21). The text gives an important clue by including the east-west orientation of the
Tigris and Euphrates. It can be assumed that, although unknown, the Pishon and Gihon are
north-south rivers. Cf. Levenson (1976: 29) and Clifford (1972: 101) who tie Gihon to the
spring of Gihon that supplies water to Jerusalem.
46. According to Driver, Havilah may be northeast Arabia on the
west coast of the Persian Gulf, an area famed for its gold (1904: 39-40).
47. Probably valued for its fragrance.
48. Trible (1978: 74) has noted the cyclical design of the overall myth, as well as the cyclical
repetition of key words and phrases.
49. Ackerman 1990:60. Compare to the radically different interpretation of Kennedy 1990:
3-14.
50. Cf. Trible who states that the Tree of Knowledge offers 'knowledge not given by God,
knowledge that removes the limits of humanity and merges it with divinity' (1978: 112).
51. My translation is based on that of Meyers (1988: 95-121).
52. See the works of Meyers (1978: 91-103; 1983: 569-93; 1988) for a fuller explanation of
the socio-economic conditions of the Israelite highlands.
53. See the works of Meyers (1978; 1983: 569-93;1988).
54. In this technological age we have to be reminded that exercise/ work is essential for the
functioning and longevity of the body. Yet some commentators consider work to be a curse (e.g.
von Rad 1961; Gunkel 1910). Contrast with Wyatt 1988: 117-22.
55. I am still in the process of working through the very complicated symbolism of 3.15.
56. For misogynous readings, see von Rad 1961: 90; Driver 1904: 44; McKenzie 1954: 541-72.
57. See Higgins 1976: 639-47 for a discussion of the misreading as seduction.
58. For a discussion of seduction by a foreign woman, see Newsom
1989:142-60.
59. See Wilfong 1988: 58-63 who shows that 'ezer is used twelve times for help from God and
five times for human aid from a powerful army or prince. For further discussion see Vos n.d.: 16.
60. See Clines 1990: 25-48 for a discussion of the implications of  'helping'.
61. In the Gilgamesh Myth, before Enkidu begins to mature he runs with, and relates to, the
animals.
62. Van Wolde (1989: 203-204) has posited a unique explanation of the two names for God in
the myth: the two names indicate God's dual role.  The first divine name (the tetragram) is
probably the imperfect form of the verb hwh (to become), demonstrating God's dynamic
(feminine) lifecreating role. The second divine name (Elohim) is used in conjunction with the
tetragram throughout the myth, except four times in 3.1, 3, 5. In each of the exceptions Elohim
is used in relation to the Tree of Knowing. 'Discernment' characterizes the gods (eloheim) in the
ancient Near East, so the name Elohim signifies the male role and the tetragram the female role.
See Speiser 1964 for the more conventional understanding.
63. Van Wolde indicates similar stages (1989: 217-19).