Genesis 3:1-6: Adam was a Silent Witness to the Suicide of his Wife

Genesis 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which YHWH Elohiym had made And he said to 'ishshah [1] Indeed has Elohiym said You shall not eat of every tree of the garden[2] 2: And 'ishshah said to the serpent[3] We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden 3: But of the fruit of the tree which is in the center of the garden Elohiym has said You shall not eat of it neither shall you touch it lest you die[4] 4: And the serpent said to  'ishshah You shall not surely die[5] 5: For Elohiym does know that in the yowm[6] you eat of it then your eyes shall be opened and you shall be as Elohiym knowing good and evil 6: And when 'Ishshah saw that the tree was good for food and that it was pleasant to the eyes and a tree to be desired to make one wise[7] she took of the fruit thereof and did eat[8] and gave also to 'iysh [who was] beside[9] her and he did eat[10]

Ephesians 1:4-5, 1 Peter 1:20, Revelation 13:8 God knew the couple would sin. This was no hiccup in his eternal plan of Redemption to rid the Kosmos of evil. This was foreordained from before the foundation of the earth. The man was equally with/standing beside the woman, passively observing (before the Fall) while she partook of the forbidden fruit, and thereby losing her life. The scriptural is clear on that. Many commentators hold the opinion that the husband was created with a divine mandate to lead, guide, and teach the wife. But if that was the case, the man sinned by omission before the Fall, for failing to at least attempt to save his wife. But there was no sin before the Fall. Complementarian commentators state that male passivity toward female leaders is a result of the Fall, but we see the first man demonstrating at passivity before the fall. There could have been no sin of omission on the man’s part, as the very first time he sinned was in eating the fruit. The man obviously did not feel as if he was superior to the woman before sin came into the world. It is interesting to note that popular Bible commentator, Matthew Henry, blatantly contradicts himself concerning whether or not the man and woman were created unequal or whether equality was lost due to sin. In his Genesis commentaries, he claims both, then uses the same passage from the New Testament to prove his case in each.

 

---

[1] Is it a possibility that before the fall, all the animals could speak and reason to some extent? Why was the serpent more subtle than all the beasts of the field? We know that Satan manifested through the serpent and that the animal itself was cursed to crawl on its belly. Do animals have the choice to listen to Satan or not? We do not speak of redemption, here, but of hearkening to right or wrong spirits. We know the Lord commands animals (he commanded the ravens to bring food to Elijah), and we have the example of Balaam’s ass seeing the angel and speaking to the man (numbers 22). The ass both spoke and the angel of the Lord affirmed that the obedient and persecuted animal would have been saved alive had Balaam persisted trying to get past the angel.

[2] Verse :6 tells us that 'iysh was standing beside 'Ishshah (she is not yet called, Eve) as the serpent was speaking to her about the “benefits” of disobeying God. He would have listened intently indeed, but we know he said nothing to contradict the serpent and did nothing to prevent his wife from committing what he knew to be, suicide.

[3] If there was a Divine Order of Creation, as complementarians claim, where the first woman was created to follow and the first man was created to lead, the scriptures are silent on it up to this point, where, had that been the case, 'Ishshah would most certainly have deferred to her leader, 'iysh —who was standing right beside her ^{verse 6}—rather than answering the serpent herself on this vital matter of life and death. But the first couple obviously lived an egalitarian existence with no knowledge of male headship or female subordination, as the sinless woman did not hesitate to answer for both of them while 'iysh stood silently listening as the serpent imperiled his wife.

[4] 'Ishshah has been falsely accused of adding to the Word of God when she told the serpent that YHWH Elohiym commanded the first couple to refrain from even touching the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Since these are the words of a sinless woman, we must believe that they are true.   

[5] Why did 'iysh stand silently by, saying nothing to contradict the serpent’s lie or to prevent the death of his wife? We can only conclude that he had no knowledge of any Divine Order of Creation, and also that his temptation to eat the fruit was just as strong as the woman’s.

[6] Yowm H3117 Strong’s: (from an unused root meaning to be hot [as the warm hours]) Day; Time; Year; Lifetime; Time Period; Age… Gesenius: From the time when; Always; At that/this Time; Now; In all time

[7] At this point, the silence of 'iysh only confirms that he gazed upon that forbidden fruit as intently as 'ishshah. There is no doubt that he understood that she had been deceived and that her intention was now to stretch forth her hand and pluck that fruit from the tree. This was his last chance to speak up and fight to save his wife. But…, if by chance she really did not die…, well, they would be gods together. In this scene, we witness, for the first time, how powerful is the draw of the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life. At the chance of becoming a god, a woman is willing to believe a blatant lie, and a man is willing to sacrifice his wife.

[8] How intently 'iysh must have watched as his wife took that fateful bite. Would she die, as YHWH Elohiym said she would? But godhood had to have been more important to him than anything, at that moment, because he just stood there… and watched.

[9] V.6 The Hebrew preposition translated “with” is ‛im, with a specific meaning of “equally with” (Strong’s). It is used as such in Genesis 18:23 and 25. It can also be translated “beside,” (she gave to her husband beside her), Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew Lexicon

[10]
'Ishshah was deceived but 'iysh was not. He now believed (if only for a moment) YHWH Elohiym to be a liar, and he was determined to seize godhood for himself. This is the power of the lust of the eyes, the lust of the flesh, and the pride of life (the world, the flesh, and the devil). Whether one is deceived or not, they can be brought down through these things. Sinning with our eyes wide open does not make us wiser or more intelligent than those who sin because they have been deceived. Neither of the first couple showed superior wisdom or intelligence over the other by signing their own death warrants. She was gullible. He was corruptible. They both plodded headlong after death like an ox to the slaughter. 

It is becoming a common theme among complementarian teachers to ennoble the sin of 'iysh by saying that he ate of the fruit so that he could die along with his wife (like a Romeo and Juliet double suicide), but this argument loses steam when the scriptures show that he was standing beside 'ishshah during the conversation with the serpent and did nothing to stop the process of her destruction. Since he ate of the fruit after she did, it can only be surmised that he was watching to see if she would die or not, and if she did die—or had even sickened after taking the bite--then it is likely that he would not have followed her lead. But, since nothing bad happened that he could see, he ate as well.