Male and Female in Genesis 1-3 and in the Church
©Cynthia F. Serio
Interpretation of the Old Testament I
Dr. Alejandro F. Botta
November 27, 2006
I. INTRODUCTION
The Christian
church is a perpetually inhospitable environment for strong and independent
women. Traditional interpretations of Genesis
1-3 have long been used to hold women back from leadership in the church. The creation stories can be a valuable source
for ordinary women in the contemporary Christian church who seek to be equal
partners with men in the work of the church in the world. However, the text must be set free from a
traditionally literal translation that hides as much as it reveals. As a seeker in the church, I believe there is
deeply buried treasure to be unearthed in these ancient myths when men and
women who study together approach them with a sense of openness and intense
curiosity. As a woman in the church, I believe
this treasure can be a source of healing for both men and women when equality
is viewed as the wholeness of creation as originally intended. As a teacher in the church, I believe the
search for truth requires discussion that is simple yet substantially informed in
order to be not only wise but inoffensive to others. Although offense can make a statement and
draw attention, it rarely moves the conversation to the level of mutual respect
which will provide fertile ground for deeper understanding. In an atmosphere
of respectful listening, one can be the recipient of Christian love even when
there is disagreement about the biblical text and its interpretation.
The
approach I will take in this exploration of Genesis 1-3 is that of the teacher
who is both a seeker and a woman. I will
address the fact that there are two separate creation stories. While there are different details, each story
must be read in its own historical context and understood as mythical
commentary on the human condition of male and female in the patriarchal society
of ancient Israel. For the purpose of this essay, the creation
of the male and female in Genesis 1:27, 2:7 and 2:22 will be the focus of my search
for the equality of man and woman in the creation stories to provide a priceless
healing touch in the contemporary Christian church.
II. TWO CREATION STORIES
Genesis
1 is a beautifully poetic myth filled with the wholeness of life created by God. Genesis 2-3 follows as an expanded myth with
the feel of an old folk tale. I have
been taught there was one story. Therefore,
with only a surface reading that is what I see.
Genesis 1 is the big picture, and Genesis 2-3 provides a closer picture
with all of the details.
These stories are
so intricately woven together it takes an open and discerning eye not to
overlook the internal contradictions which highlight their separation. As a biblical scholar who supports the
Documentary Hypothesis, Richard Elliot Friedman gives an excellent view of the
sources of the creation stories in his book, Who wrote the Bible? This
repetition of similar stories is referred to as a “doublet” which means the same
basic story is repeated, often with conflicting details.[1] Friedman attributes Genesis 2-3 to the
Yahwist (J) who wrote during the time of the divided kingdom between 848 B.C. E.
and 722 B.C.E.[2] Although biblical scholars have long believed
the Priestly material (P) was written in the time of the exile, Friedman has
argued quite persuasively that P was written soon after 722 B.C. E. at the time
of the fall of the kingdom of Judah as an alternative to the version by a
creative redactor (JE) who merged the traditional faith stories of the two
kingdoms to form a cohesive account of Israelite religion.[3] Regardless of the reason P chose to write
Genesis 1, Friedman notes that “every biblical story reflects something that mattered to its author.”[4]
While each of the authors were writing to
address the issues that mattered to them, it must be understood that neither story
has any scientific basis that can be trusted to contain facts which give us the
truth about how creation happened. Setting
these accounts of creation free from a literal and historical reading we find a
treasure of mythical stories. These
stories give witness to a faith community who has, through the ancient art of
storytelling, preserved ancient thought processes regarding the relationship
between God who is the creator and humanity who are the created.
When men and women
seek to understand the relationship between God and humanity, they must engage
the biblical text openly and honestly.
Phyllis Bird articulates a three-step formula for the believer to
“[enable] meaningful conversation with an ancient text.”[5] First, one must ascertain the original
meaning of the author. Next, one must engage traditional interpretations throughout
history. Finally, one must assess the truth of the message as it relates to
persons and issues in their own time and place.[6]
One must engage
the process at all three levels or risk experiencing a shallow discussion that tends
to serve individual purposes rather than the community. Only with an attempt at this kind of depth
study can the community be enhanced by a vibrant relationship with God, each
other, and the self. Only within safe
and healthy relationships can the essence of a person be truly known. The creation myths challenge contemporary men
and women when they are seeking answers to the question of equality in the
church today. Danger lurks at the edge
of this search for one wants neither to hear God when God does not speak nor to
ignore God when God does speak. The
creative act of God in Genesis 1:27, 2:7 and 2:22 can serve to illustrate the
process of engagement as outlined by Bird.
III. GENESIS 1:27
So God created humankind in his
image, in the image of God
he created them; male and female
he created them.
In the beginning,
there was Genesis 1. The writer of P
masterfully crafted Genesis 1 which was similar to an ancient story “found in
the Mesopotamian myth ‘Enuma elish.’”[7] Male and female were created in the image of
God. There appears to be no sense of
hierarchy. Susan Niditch writes, in the Women’s Bible Commentary, “without
establishing relative rank or worth of the genders, the spinner of this
creation tale indicates that humankind is found in two varieties, the male and
the female, and this humanity in its complementarity is a reflection of the
deity.”[8]
Rosemary Radford
Ruether disagrees with any assessment that would attribute P or J with an
attitude of equality or a creation without hierarchy. She states her belief that an “inclusive
reading was far from the intentions of the original writers.”[9] As the
first step in the process, it must be acknowledged that the authors did not intend
much of what we read into the text.
However, one may wonder if the purposes of God transcend the attitudes
of the authors of antiquity and it is just such curiosity that leads one
deeper.
Ruether makes
ample reference to a wide variation in traditional Jewish exegesis ranging in
the extremes, from readings of an assumed shared equality of man and woman in
the image of God to intense glorification of the man who alone is created in
the image of God with the misfortune of having woman as the source of all of
his problems.[10] She makes an interesting connection between
“early Christian baptismal theology as gender transformation into a redeemed
state in which there is “no more male and female” which “affirmed women’s
spiritual equality.” However, she points
out that this “redeemed life is perfected spiritual masculinity.”[11] In the
second step of the process, we must acknowledge and accept that for most of
Jewish and Christian history, women have not been seen nor treated as created equal
by God.
IV. GENESIS 2:7 AND 2:22
Then the Lord God formed man from the dust of the ground, and
breathed into his nostrils the
breath of life; and the man became
a living being … So
the Lord God caused a deep sleep
to fall upon
the man, and he slept; then he
took one of his ribs and closed
up its place with flesh. And the rib that the Lord God had taken
from the man he made into a woman
and brought her to the man.
Even
before Genesis 1 there was Genesis 2-3.
The equality of male and female is in jeopardy for it appears man comes
first and woman follows. Niditch states,
“A clear hierarchy is established: woman and her offspring over the clever
snake, who is now reduced to a mere dust-eating reptile, and man over woman.”[12] The Yahwist writes with characteristically
anthropomorphic language in the detailed style of a storyteller who highlights
some aspects of the relationship between the male and the female which have
been so problematic for women in the church.
Phyllis
Trible delves deeply and freely into the text as she illustrates the third step
of the process by breathing new life into an old, old story. Trible describes
God’s creation of an earth creature (hā-’ādām)
that is sexually undifferentiated until the creation of male creature (’іš) and female creature (’іššâ) from material provided by the
earth creature.[13] This interpretation is not the intention of
the original authors. Nor does it align
well, if at all, with the traditional interpretations of the church. However, as the third step in the process, Trible’s
interpretation of the creative act of God adds a dimension of original unity to
the male and female creatures.
Bird’s 3-step process illustrates
how informed scholarship can help contemporary men and women look at the
biblical text free from the biases they bring to it. As we study together as equals, we can allow
God to speak into our chaos and create life once more, again and again. Bird says, “To describe and to emphasize the
limits of a biblical text is not to dishonor it or depreciate its message, but
to give integrity and authority to its voice where it does have a word to
speak.”[14]
IV. Conclusion
To
heal means “to restore to
original purity or integrity.”[15] Each human being has been originally created
in the image of God. One may spend a
lifetime searching and never know what this truly means. Yet this is something we hear deep within
our souls calling us home. Perhaps it is
the Spirit of Christ. As we journey
together in Christian community as faithful men and women, may we recognize equality
between the sexes as the restorative healing power to be found deep within the
creation stories of Genesis 1-3.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bandstra,
Barry L. Reading the Old Testament. 3rd Edition. Belmont, CA:
Thomson and
Wadsworth,
2004.
Bird, Phyllis A. Missing
Persons and Mistaken Identities: Women and Gender in Ancient
Israel. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1997.
Friedman, Richard Elliot. Who Wrote the Bible? New
York: HarperCollins, 1987.
Merriam-Webster
Online Dictionary. 2006. http://www.merriam-webster.com.
Newsom,
Carol A. and Sharon H. Ringe, eds. The Women’s Bible Commentary.
Expanded edition. Louisville:
Westminster
John Knox Press, 1998.
Ruether, Rosemary Radford. Women and Redemption: A Theological History.
Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1998
Trible, Phyllis. "A Love
Story Gone Awry" in idem. God and
the Rhetoric of Sexuality.
Philadelphia:
Fortress Press 1978. 72-143.
[1] Richard
Elliot Friedman, Who Wrote the Bible? (New
York: HarperCollins, 1987) 22
[2] Ibid, 87
[3] Ibid,
189-190
[4] Ibid,
206
[5] Phyllis
Bird, Missing Persons and Mistaken
identities: Women and Gender in Ancient Israel (Minneapolis: Fortress
Press, 1997) 150
[6] Ibid,
150
[7] Niditch,
15
[8] Susan Niditch, The Women’s Bible Commentary.
Expanded edition. eds. Newsom, Carol A. and Sharon H. Ringe (Louisville:
Westminster John Knox Press, 1998), 16
[9] Rosemary
Radford Reuther, Women and Redemption: A
Theological History (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1998) 25
[10] Ibid,
26-28
[11] Ibid,
29-30
[12] Ibid,
17
[13] Phyllis Trible, "A Love Story Gone Awry" in
idem. God and the Rhetoric of Sexuality
(Philadelphia: Fortress Press 1978) 98
[14] Bird,
149
[15]
"heal." Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. 2006.
http://www.merriam-webster.com (27 Nov. 2006).
No comments:
Post a Comment