Gen 3:20-21

I'm currently taking a class on Biblical Theology. Coming to Gen 3, my professor makes a small note on these verses which just blew my mind. Hopefully I can present his view (as far as I understand it) and what I consequently take and add onto it. In case anyone is wondering my prof is Bruce Waltke at Regent College.

The text: (20) The man called his wife Eve, because she was the mother of all living. (21) Yahweh God made coats of skins for Adam and for his wife, and clothed them.

The context: Right after the judgement in the garden.

The biggest problem is that it breaks the flow of the narrative I believe. The story either flows better by omitting v. 20 (and so the judgement continues into expulsion) or by moving v. 20 later so that it immediately precedes 4:1 (and after the expulsion). By moving it later, it would act as a summary statement for what it to follow (Cain and Abel cycle followed by Seth and then the generations of Adam). Assuming intentionality on the part of the author/redactor (which we always do!), the explanation for why this verse is here arises.

Dr. Waltke explains these two verses as such: they are evidence of Adam and Eve's salvation after the Fall. The promise for the defeat of the Serpent is given in 3:15. Adam acknowledges this promise and "shows his restoration to God by believing the promise that the woman would bear offspring that would defeat the Serpent."

I would add one thing at this point that I believe Dr. Waltke has missed. The ability to name is given by God to mankind so to control it. One will remember that God showed dominion over creation by naming it. Adam employed his dominion over animals and fauna by naming it. After the Fall mankind's dominion over creation is taken away, evidenced in that he must struggle for survival. One of the curses that the woman is given is that her desire would be for her husband, but also that her husband would rule over her. This dominion is evidenced by Adam naming his wife. Eve here submits to God's punishment, but in an ironic twist also displays her own faith in God's restorative plan by accepting her name and the meaning of it. Both Adam and now Eve are restored back to God by submitting to His justice and having faith in His redemptive plan of salvation for humanity.

Waltke continues by pointing out that v. 21 shows God's provision for His restored people. Waltke's purpose is to show that Adam's faith moves to God's provision, as evidence of a restored people to God. Although he does not use the terminology here, Waltke gives us a picture of the first covenant. As with other covenants, a prime feature of the covenant involves sacrifice. "Through the Lord's sacrifice, the alienated couple is restored to fellowship with Him and one another."

I would bring up a few issues. This covenant, if the term is correctly being applied of course, is not offered from God initially. God's provision is a reaction to something that the individual(s) have done. This would be different from both the Noahic, Mosaic, Davidic, and New covenants where God gives the promise to do something only if the covenant is kept. Abram will have many offspring if he will trust God to lead him out to the wilderness. Israel will be God's people if they will keep His Law. The Church will be considered the true Israel and God's people if they follow Christ. Rhetorically v. 20-21 does follow this pattern if and only if v. 15 is seen as a blessing for Adam and Eve. In other words, what is left unstated is that although the promise of the destruction of the Serpent and his offspring is given as a curse, it is a potential blessing for Adam and Eve since it would restore the human race by means of their offspring. In even simpler terms, trusting God is the basis for redemption; by putting forth a plan of redemption provided the means for Adam and Eve to put their trust in God. God is then the initiator of the covenant, although this point is extremely subtle. Should we expect anything less within this particular style of story-telling though?

What this intrusion of grace means is that the story must be broken up. It ends the section of curses, but not the larger narrative of the Fall. 3:22-24 then conclude the story by describing what happens as the aftermath: mankind is expelled from the Garden. But they are embodied with hope, once read properly. Although cursed by God, they have God's provision nonetheless. The story must be broken here so that the readers can follow the rest of the story with the hope that God's provision follows us out into the wilderness. The original audience of the Hebrews needed this hope. The implied audience of the Church today would also do well to keep this message of hope in the forefront of their hearts as well.