What if a Woman had Written Genesis?

Let’s start at the beginning.

Genesis One: God makes the universe and everything in it. He creates life. He creates humans and he makes them in his own ‘image’, both man and woman. He gives humankind all of nature for their enjoyment and their sustenance. Although the chronology may be a bit confusing, the basics of this account can be made to square with what we know of nature, as long as you don’t read it too literally.

Genesis Two (the rest of the story?) is a bit fuzzier on the universe-making details but it does gives us more info on the first humans. Here we have God creating just one human, a man named Adam and instead of placing all of nature at his disposal he sets him up as the caretaker for a garden called Eden. Genesis doesn’t give us any of God’s policies and guidelines except for one;  Adam is to never eat the fruit from one particular plant –  the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.

God soon figures that Adam will become bored (especially if he is immortal, as some think) and that he needs a companion – or as the NIV say; a “helper”. So God runs all the animals by Adam (who names them all in the process) but none of them seem to fit the bill. So God tries something completely different. He knocks out Adam and removes one his ribs, which he then turns into the first woman. She’s also the world’s first Gal Friday, as it is her job to ‘help’ the world’s only man do whatever manly things he does. At this time, she doesn’t even have a name for herself.

a-mans-gospel

But good help is hard to find and soon the woman is picking up bad ideas from the local crime boss, Satan. Using her beguiling feminine ways, she gets Adam to join her in a little snack, courtesy of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. So God’s original deal is now off and life for the two of them will suck forever. At this time Adam finally names the woman, just like he did with the other animals. He calls her Eve , which means something like “mother of all the living” ( perhaps implying that kids and paradise are incompatible concepts?).

Now, though Genesis never actually says this, many people believe that what Adam and Eve did in the Garden queered things not just for them but everyone else that came after, including all of nature and the entire universe. So even though it is NEVER stated explicitly, one could get out of this story that  Eve (who owed her own existence not just to God but also to Adam) couldn’t stay focused on her job and so  ended up being a huge hindrance to Adam. And everyone else, including you and me.  Turns out she was not much of a helper at all.

No doubt the cultural views of the men who wrote the scriptures  had  some bearing on how they presented their stories of God.  It is obvious that this particular telling of the Creation story, along with a very rigid reading of it, has adversely influenced the relationship between men and women over the centuries. Amazingly, it  still does so today.

Advertisements

, , , , , ,

  1. #1 by Christian Beyer on February 6, 2009 - 3:27 pm

    No way. I’ve worked with guys like him, though. It’s not worth the cost of antacid.

  2. #2 by seekhispurpose on February 8, 2009 - 8:04 pm

    Could I point out here that God directly told Adam not to eat from the tree, but woman just heard it second-hand from Adam–and he must not have been all that convincing of a speaker if a snake seems like a more reliable source than Adam. Plus, even though he got Direct Orders from God, when woman says “Here, try this” Adam doesn’t even argue?

    I read an interesting comment a few months ago that Hebrews may have been written by a woman, maybe Priscilla, since it doesn’t name an author in the beginning like the other NT books.

    If everyone in OT times was so down on women, why do we have books like Esther and Ruth?

  3. #3 by Christian Beyer on February 8, 2009 - 9:04 pm

    Hah! Good point. That’s crossed my mind as well. You’d think that Adam wouldn’t have been so docile and obedient. And that not arguing thing – this all sort of changed after the “Fall”, didn’t it? 🙂

    Now, I didn’t say EVERYONE. And I don’t necessarily think they were ‘down’ on women but they sure seemed to think that there was a God ordained hierarchy that placed man above woman when it came to authority. With a few exceptions, like you pointed out. But the exception doesn’t prove the rule either. And certainly you have noticed that in some denominations you wouldn’t have the position you enjoy right now. .

    How do you see this “God ordained” hierarchy that OT and NT speak of? Was it really that, or just a sign of those times?

  4. #4 by Katya on February 18, 2009 - 8:23 pm

    If the Bible is inspired by God (which it is), then even if a little girl wrote Genesis it would be the same exact thing it is in my Bible right now.

  5. #5 by Christian Beyer on February 18, 2009 - 11:53 pm

    I’m not so sure of that Katya. I think there is a difference between inspired by and dictated to. And we see this in scriptures with some of the more obvious inconsistencies. In Genesis alone there are two different creation accounts. Is this because God couldn’t make up his mind or was it because two different writers, both inspired, had two versions of the event, that although different, did not question the underlying truth of the stories.

  6. #6 by Katya on February 19, 2009 - 10:09 am

    I don’t see how they are inconsistent. Genesis 1 is the Creation of the world, Genesis 2 is either what was happening in the Garden or a summary of Genesis 1, I have read the whole Bible more than once, and it has NEVER even occurred to me that they COULD BE “inconsistencies”.

  7. #7 by Christian Beyer on February 19, 2009 - 11:36 am

    Not unless you read them ‘literally’. In Genesis 1 God clearly makes the animals before man but in Genesis 2 it appears as if he made the animals later, in order to provide Adam with companionship. In Genesis 1 he makes man and woman together, in his image. In Genesis 2 he makes Eve only after none of the animals are sufficient to provide Adam companionship.

    These types of ‘inconsistencies’ have provoked some people to disregard scriptures entirely.

  8. #8 by Christian Beyer on February 19, 2009 - 3:51 pm

    Someone misunderstood what I just said so I want to clarify: I DON’T see inconsistencies between the two accounts in Genesis but suggest that if you read these verses literally (just the English words in black and white and with no understanding of context) there are some APPARENT inconsistencies.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: