Quote:
Originally Posted by Nell
. . . . She also noted that nowhere does the Scripture say that God put Eve out of the garden. It does plainly say, however, that He drove Adam out of the garden and that He gave a consequence that was specifically tailored to fit with what Adam’s job had been in the Garden of Eden—to cultivate and guard it.
|
While I am not averse to the general notion provided in this short part, I believe that it is potentially presumptuous to suggest that woman was not put out since she was on the same side of the cherubim and the flaming sword as Adam when it was all over.
Besides, no matter how you do or don't like the allegedly sexist wording of the Bible, it does not say that Adam was put out of the Garden, but that "he" was put out. "He" and "man" are often used generically for mankind.
If you want to take the "he" as just meaning Adam, then it should be that only "the man (Adam) has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil." And we know better than that because they both had the same revelation from the eating — they were naked. But other than the specific speaking to Eve, God never mentions the woman. Just "the man" and "he." Yet at least part of that is clearly applicable to the woman as well, so there is little room for anyone to be patting themselves on the back for getting a better shake in the deal.
But all of that aside, and my general perception that there is a level of over-analysis in this segment, the bulk of the truly relevant conclusions are correct. Genesis 3:16 is more descriptive, or maybe prophetic than it is prescriptive. The painful childbearing (if that is what it is supposed to be) is simply what it is. Maybe best described as Eve's punishment to go along with Adam's working the land that would now bring forth thorns and thistles. But the rest is a telling of what would be, not what ought to be. Or has to be.