Is Genesis 3:20 a Textual variant or error

[adamjedgar (adam james edgar)]

Genesis 3:20 seems to be out of place…it appears seemingly from left field.

Prior to the passage, God is arraigning Adam, Eve and the serpent for their sins…then suddenly out of the blue the writer returns to a previous theme from Genesis 2 just before Adam names the animals.

20And Adam named his wife Eve,e because she would be the mother of all the living.

Then the writer appears to return back to the events after the arraignment…clothes and then the boot out of the Garden in the East of Eden.

Anyone else think perhaps this is a textual error or variation?

It would have to be one of the weirdest “out of order intervals” i think I’ve read in the bible…its a very strange statement to insert at that point in the story. Its like the writer forgot what they were actually writing about, or lost concentration, got distracted and blurted this out, then returned to the actual topic without remembering to fix/remove this stuff up?

[jpm (Phil McCurdy)]

Perhaps it is not that much out of order, as it closely follows the statement “I will make your pangs in childbirth exceedingly great;
in pain you shall bring forth children,"
Since Eve appears to be the Hebrew word for “living” and Adam the word for “the man, or mankind” it would only follow that she would be named that in relation to her role in giving birth.
I actually find it stranger in a way that this is the first time she is named. Before, she is just referred to as “the woman”. Perhaps it goes back to the idea of naming defining function and order, and for life outside of Eden, the so called curse placed upon them was a statement of what their functional status would be, to give birth in Eve’s case, and grovel out a living, also painfully, in Adam’s.

[graft2vine (Ethan)]

The name Eve may mean more than just living, but also symbiosis. At this point in the story, Adam and Eve go from representing our common decent with single celled organisms to clonal and then later as multi-celled organisms. Before Genesis 5, Adam is not even properly named, the word for Adam just meaning “mankind”, but God called “their name Adam” when they became multicellular, living together as one flesh.

• Gen 5:1 This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him; 2 Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.

[adamjedgar (adam james edgar)]

@jpm

Perhaps it is not that much out of order, as it closely follows the statement “I will make your pangs in childbirth exceedingly great;
in pain you shall bring forth children,"
Since Eve appears to be the Hebrew word for “living” and Adam the word for “the man, or mankind” it would only follow that she would be named that in relation to her role in giving birth.
I actually find it stranger in a way that this is the first time she is named. Before, she is just referred to as “the woman”. Perhaps it goes back to the idea of naming defining function and order, and for life outside of Eden, the so called curse placed upon them was a statement of what their functional status would be, to give birth in Eve’s case, and grovel out a living, also painfully, in Adam’s.

but doesnt that kinda present the idea that prior to them actually receiving their own names, this habit (if you like) wasn’t important or, worse, wasn’t necessary?

Given that God had already said “be fruitful and multiply” this suggests to me that (and I’m going to struggle to adequately explain my thoughts here)… its almost like mankind was no different to the animals that Adam had already named (kinds/species whatever one wishes to call it).

Animals had an overall name and “man” had an overall name up until sin. Then all of a sudden, man sins, then unique individual names were given. Why now in the story and not earlier? Why should a unique name appear in the story only after sin and not before?

The bible says Adam called her Eve because she would become the mother of all living…but remember God had already told them to produce offspring in Genesis 1:28.

27So God created man in His own image;

in the image of God He created him;

male and female He created them.e

28God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and every creature that crawls upon the earth.”*

it seems to suggest to me that giving an individual a name, which surely is linked to morality, that morality either did not exist in Genesis chapter 2, or wasn’t a social issue.

I think Ethans reply here seems to reinforce that notion that is rattling around in my head

@graft2vine

The name Eve may mean more than just living, but also symbiosis . At this point in the story, Adam and Eve go from representing our common decent with single celled organisms to clonal and then later as multi-celled organisms. Before Genesis 5, Adam is not even properly named, the word for Adam just meaning “mankind”, but God called “their name Adam” when they became multicellular, living together as one flesh.

• Gen 5:1 This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him; 2 Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.

i hope I’m making sense there…its a new thing and i haven’t nutted this out in my own head yet. Usually, this is when i need to be “in my shed literally talking to myself whilst tinkering around fixing something”

[Bill_II]

@adamjedgar

Anyone else think perhaps this is a textual error or variation?

I don’t have a critical text of the Hebrew but there is no indication in my Bible for alternative texts. I will point out that actually Adam first named his female partner “Woman” back in 2:23.

From my SBL Study Bible for 3:20,

The name of Eve and her description as the mother of all living may be related to similar names and epithets of older Near Eastern goddesses.