3:6-7 — 6When 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. 7Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realised that they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves.
[T - OL ]
The form of the opening sentence here is interesting. It consists of the qal inperfect verb of the root r'h "see," followed by the subject, a form that has been used seven times already in Genesis; each time it spoke of God seeing what He had done and it was good (1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25 & 31). Here, for the first time, we read of a human seeing and what she saw was also good: "good for food . . . and a delight to the eyes." If this expression is (even if only vaguely) familiar to us it is because when God planted the Garden, He made "all kinds of trees grow out of the ground—trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food" (2:9). This use of the adjective 'good' is part of series, beginning with its seven-fold mention in the creation account in Chap 1, and into Chap 2, where the expression 'good and evil' begins to appear:
A. "God made all kinds of trees to grow . . . trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food," 2:9a.
B. "In the middle of the garden were the tree . . .of the knowledge of good and evil," 2:9b.
C. "The gold of the land was good . . ." 2:12.
D. "Yahweh God said to the man, 'You are free to eat from any tree, but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and
evil . . .'" 2:16-17.
C'. "God said, 'It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him'" 2:18.
B'. "The serpent said to the woman, 'For God know that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil . . .'" 3:5.
A'. "When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eyes . . . she took some and ate it," 3:6.
Taken together this series points to the overwhelming richness of good things that Yahweh had lavished upon creation; in comparison there was only one thing from which the First Couple was to keep away from. Against this canvas, the Woman's foolishness is clearly visible. God had already given her all the trees that were "pleasing to the eyes and good for food." But there is a difference which the inconsistency in translation of the same Hebrew words in all the commonly accessible English translations obscures. Here is the word order in, e.g., the NIV (the relevant words are highlighted):
2:9 — pleasing to the eye and good for food.
3:6 — good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also
desirable for gaining wisdom
If the translation had been consistent in translating the same Hebrew word with the same English word every time (which, however, would make for very poor reading), this is what the two verses would look like:
2:9 — pleasing (hemed) to the eye and good (tov) for food.
3:6 — good (tov) for food and desirable ('awa) to the eye,
and also pleasing (hemed) for gaining wisdom
Like her quotation from Scriptures which was all awry (see vv2-3), so was Eve's perception of the fruit turned around, mixed-up and confused. She saw what she wanted to see. Wisdom1 in the OT is always a gift from God. Here she wanted to grasp it against divine will. While Proverbs pictures wisdom as a dame calling out to be embraced (1:20ff; Chaps 8 & 9), it also asserts, rather categorically, that "the fear of Yahweh is the beginning of wisdom" (9:10). In deciding to disobey Yahweh she had already forfeited the possibility of wisdom. If it may be thought pedantic to say that this is what always happens to theology that does not honour God, I say it nonetheless.
The fear of the Lord
is the beginning of wisdom.
In deciding to disobey
Eve had already forfeited
the possibility of wisdom.
Then "she took (laqach) some and ate it." We have already examined the use of the verb laqach by Yahweh (see comments on 2:15-17). For the first time the verb is used of a human, it was in obvious disobedience. If this first act of human taking and eating reported in Scriptures spelled disaster for the human race, the last significant act of taking and eating recorded in it,2 however, brought redemption and life: "Take and eat; this is my body. . . Drink from it, all of you. This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. I tell you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it anew with you in my Father's kingdom." What glory!
"She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it." That she should give some to her husband should not be surprising. That he had kept silent all this while when he was with her is. He had remained silently invisible throughout the entire discussion: what was he doing? Alas, we do not know the answer (many women in the church today would also say, "Alas, they still remain invisible in the church"). This incident is famously cited by Paul in his letter to Timothy. Addressing the issue of women in church, Paul says, "A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent" (1 Tim 2:9). And the reason he gives for this instruction is this: "For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner." For this he has often been charged guilty of being a misogynist. I suggest that is failing to read the reason in its larger context. He had already proclaimed his intention in this part of his letter—"I want men everywhere to lift up holy hands in prayer, without anger or disputing." (v8). He brackets his charge about women with his instruction about the responsibilities of an overseer (3:1ff.). Set within these book-ends, what Paul said about the women did not seem addressed directly to the women as much as they were directed at the men. Seen in this light, his comments about Eve being the one deceived may be seen as a slap on the hand of Adam. If he had but taken his responsibility as "keeper of the Garden" and, as the first formed, had led Eve away from the serpent, things would have been different. Adam failed; that was enough. "Now, you men in the church," Paul is saying, "do what is right."
The powerful and toxic effect of the fruit was immediately visible. "The eyes of both of them were opened" is surely not literal—their eyes must have been open to see that the fruit was good for food and pleasing to the eyes—but a figurative reference to the stark realization that broke upon the couple. On this the serpent had not lied but It had kept the full truth about its effect from them. They saw they were naked and did the most pathetically possible thing in the world; what living creatures ever wore leaves to cover themselves? Even monkeys in circuses do not do so of their own volition after years of habituating to wearing costumes for their acts. Armani and Louis Vuitton are no fig leaves for sure, but they serve no better to hide the shame of our nakedness, the fact of human corruption.3 We remain the only species to need covering up our nakedness.
The first human act of taking and eating
reported in Scriptures
spelled disaster for the human race.
The last act of taking and eating recorded in it
celebrated redemption and life.
But let me repeat what I said earlier: if the first human act of taking and eating reported in Scriptures spelled disaster for the human race, the last act of taking and eating recorded in it,2 however, celebrated redemption and life: "Take and eat; this is my body. . . .Drink from it, all of you. This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. I tell you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it anew with you in my Father's kingdom." What glory!
You may wish to read the following commentaries-expositions:
Low Chai Hok
©Alberith, 2016