What is the Point of the Hebrew in Word, and Specifically the Garden Word in Genesis?

[Dawn Davidson]

Speaking to the glory of God, what do we gain in the absence of the Hebrew when interpreting the garden word of Genesis? And when we fail to employ full use of the Hebrew in the Genesis garden word are we walking, or putting ourselves at risk to walk in, idolatry and even idolatry of our own minds?

I ask with my own answer in mind but would like to poll the issue and find out what you think. I speak with specific reference to the garden word but even as a broader issue, is the authority of the Hebrew in Old Testament of the same critical and decisive nature as is the Greek in the New Testament?

In my opinion, it is critical to proper discernment and understanding to employ full application of the Hebrew in the Old Testament, and specifically to the garden word, in like manner as the Greek to New Testament. In the absence of doing so, whether well intended or not, we are at immediate risk of, or even already walking in, idolatry by preferring those things constructed in our own mind(s) to that which is clearly rooted (as perhaps found in a Strong’s Concordance) in the word and even of God.

The intention of this post is not to specifically speak about Hebrew terms of the garden, but only whether full application of the Hebrew in the garden should have priority in interpretation and what does it mean, if anything, when we fail to do so?

[Chaplain Pat Harris]

Thanks Bro.Watson for the correction and clarity on the name Woman before the Fall and Eve after the Fall. I noticed the distinct difference in the names spoken before and after the Fall, but I didn't think it had relevance since Adam was called by his given name before and after the Fall. Can you shed further insight on this?

I think that it is interesting that there is no mention in the Genesis account of Eve calling Adam by his name.

I, too, think this is interesting. Can you shed some light on this also, or is it relevant in the Genesis account?

One more question, for those of us who have not studied Hebrew and Greek, are we hindering ourselves in our study of the scriptures? The thought of actually studying Hebrew and Greek is intimidating to me. But if it is a "must" then I'll just have to suck it up and go for it.

I appreciate your input and advice.

[Chaplain Pat Harris]

Thank you Bro. Watson for this information. It just so happens that I do in fact have the study tools you mentioned. I purchased the Interlinear Hebrew-Greek English Bible several years ago; I have yet learned how to use it. But, I will pursue this challenge. I purchased the Strong's Exhaustive Concordance several years ago as well when I was enrolled in a bible study class at the Dallas Christian College where I received my B.S Degree in Ministry & Leadership; however, I didn't have an interest in taking Hebrew or Greek at that time.

I hope you won't mind if I contact you from time to time by email for assistance as I further my studies in the Word.

I sincerely appreciate your help.

[Chaplain Pat Harris]

God bless you Bro.Watson. This is a challenge well worth the time and effort. I have always desired to go deeper in the Word, not for vain glory, but to be drawn closer to the Lord as He reveals Himself and His works which can only elevate my faith to another level.

[Chaplain Pat Harris]

Thank you Pastor Darby for this confirmation. I will pray for all sisters in the Lord who are deceived by the aged old trickery of Satan. For me to not be a learned theologian, I saw and understood exactly what you articulated here. Satan is still using women to usurp authority.

For any household where the woman/wife is sitting in the driver's seat, there's no way she can tell me she has peace within herself or her home because it will be totally out of order. Her husband may appear to be content if he is passive, but she is constantly being stressed trying to manage a household as the head that was not meant to be according to God's divine order. Woman cannot cover man, let alone the entire family.

[Dawn Davidson]

Pastor Darby,

So I cannot use the same garden word applied by a Paul in my effort to prove female equality, but you in fact can, and even as confirmation to prove what you believe is exclusive male headship and therefore her subjugation? That is only consistent with the nature of a hypocrite, even the Adam the man in the garden proved to be.

Eve was not deceived until Genesis 3:6, but at what point was an Adam, both present and silent from Genesis 3:1-6 deceived? The serpent certainly proved no expectation that the man would speak the truth, a truth that the man had even from God in Genesis 2:17, that the fruit could be touched only not eaten. Why then, did the serpent take the presence of this man for granted? Can you adequately dispute his presence? But you will avoid this question because you can’t and everything else will fall down for an Adam (and the traditional mind of a Paul in this) like a deck of cards.

Who was God even speaking to in Genesis 3:15? Was it the serpent and the man, or the serpent and the female? But it was the serpent and the female and to her he was speaking victory. And where was Adam but on a time-out awaiting his punishment? It was even time God purposed for the man to learn from, yes even “hearken” to, the righteous example of an honored female and make full confession. Yet he did not.

But you say you are justified to subjugate what God chose to use as an example of his proven righteousness post-fall in the garden because Paul said so. The real issue here is that the Church failed to foresee the day when the ability to widely read and access word even in the original languages was coming. When women would themselves be freely educated, that even some of us would boldly make study and even noise about the fix that has been in since the time of the garden. I should remain silent, but why? We are talking about God and the sanctity, even holiness of God, before men happens to matter. What you do in the life of the female happens to matter, and if not to you then to Him. The female isn’t even alone in being misled by the Church, but so too are the men. Consider the position of pride and arrogance the Church puts them in before God. But an Adam was cut, bled, and lost a rib according to the foreknowledge of God and he was harshly punished even receiving the death penalty post-fall. If you have a straight line of truth in the garden proving the exclusive headship of the male, then put the meat on the table free of tradition, hypocrisy, and lies about God. That should be simple for you right?

Why did God even name him “Adam” and her an “Eve?” Do you think He did not know the difference? Are we to ignore such obvious wisdom and knowledge coming from God? That God gave him a name not speaking well of him but for her he did? Was God not identifying for us who was who in the garden?

Please don’t come back telling me that it was an Adam who purposed name and title for the female as if according to his own mind and free-will he was sanctioned by God to operate in authority. Adam was assigned to name in the garden, even to speak his word, according to the will of God only and even to the glory of God. And why would an Adam name a female “Eve,” meaning “life-giver” (and that only after having called her “Woman”) in the garden with title as “mother of all living,” if in fact as you say, she was judged because she transgressed?

Why would Adam even now "electively" according to his own free-will call her an “Eve,” (a name speaking better of her, than did Adam for him), given his own continued proven arrogance before God? He alone was judged. Why did even God desire these names for her, if as you say, there is nothing here for us to learn? But then again as you say, we should just go on subjugating and pretending that it is not all there. I guess we should all just worship Paul and Adam then instead. But it was God who set precedent in the garden when he called him an Adam, and proved even post-fall, to have called her an Eve.

Satan also chose to tempt Christ, did he too then have the nature of being a weaker vessel? Let me hear back from you on that one. Some of us don’t desire to worship a form of godliness. You want to by-pass the mind in the garden exercising a feigned ignorance to the whole of word. If no weapon formed against me shall prosper, and if God is no respecter of persons, what is going on as you say he created and judged in the garden? Based upon your beliefs, how is God not a liar? Although incorrect (as he was human and though highly gifted, himself a man of tradition) even Paul points to something based upon fallen action, not creation by the hand of God. So what the Church participates in is freely allowing, facilitating, and even defending (as you do here) the right of a weapon formed against the female in the garden to prosper. As a member of the male tradition, you don’t look tight at all in this word. I am throwing up, I am spewing out, I can’t keep this down.

To follow your logic, as it is clear you do not desire to discuss what is actually in the garden word, a Righteous God subjugated a confessed and honored female under the rebellion of a man who was punished (earning even the death pronouncement), and that he even determined to do so based upon the function (I would then say inept) of his own foreknowledge. Take a step back, put that you are offended aside, and consider what it is that you are teaching about God. This is the theology of Satan.

The problem you have is not with me, the problem is rampant fallacies in the teaching. You might be willing to dismiss lost souls to Christ due to hypocrisy and pride running rampant in the Church but God is not. And finally, there is absolutely nothing hidden in this day about the Hebrew. It is just as available on-line as it is in stores. The only thing hidden is the selective use of the Church in rightly applying it to the garden word.

[Dawn Davidson]

Pastor Darby,

You wrote:"YOU ARE TRYING TO ESTABLISH A TRUTH ON OLD TESTAMENT UNDERSTANDING. DID ANYBODY TELL YOU THAT WE HAVE A MORE PERFECT UNDERSTANDING BUILT ON BETTER PROMISES"

I am aware of New Testament, but why then are females still subjugated and denied full call in light of New Testament? Upon what basis but the same basis you yourself pointed to, it is in the Old Testament garden word and according to the traditional mind of men. Which is what takes us back to the garden. The argument you use is like a circular house of straws.

You don't want to answer details of my post because you can't rightly answer them so here we are with character assaults again. My only point is if you are going to subjugate according to the garden word then you ought to be able to prove it. These are real lives and the details of the word that you stand upon to do it matter. It's a matter even of your own personal character before God as well as that of the Church.

What you accept as truth is that a righteous God subjugated a confessed and honored female under the rebellion of a man who was punished (earning even the death pronouncement), and that he even determined to do so based upon the function (I would then say inept) of his own foreknowledge.

That is what you teach, it is what you say about God, and that is what you practice. How do you get around it? I think you are right to say we should not beat the issues of an Adam over a male head, but then stop subjugating the female! A person like me only happens because of the hypocrisy of what you do.

I am not "hating" on you or the Church that I love, I am trying to make you better. You guys are getting to the point where you are only fooling yourselves and an increasingly smaller number of the called.

[Dawn Davidson]

Brother Watson,

Correct me if I am wrong here. Wasn’t Adam supposed to speak and therefore name in the garden according to what was the will of God? I was actually taught this in the church (and we know God corrects him in Genesis 3:9) but have heard also as you are now saying.

If he was not supposed to speak and therefore name according to the will of God, then how would it be to God’s glory and why then did God return correcting him? What would be the point of her having two names?

Few other biblical instances jump out at me, when Abram was made Abraham, Jacob became Israel, and Saul became a Paul. Yet every circumstance here points to God’s leadership in their individual lives, the use of terms that are actually names for them both before and after (and not merely speaking to gender such as “Woman“ - incomplete in the Hebrew and even most if not all languages as a name), and not a change of name spoken by a post-fall man formerly calling her "Woman," (having even denied his own name) but now punished by God for lack of right confession and even with the death pronouncement.

The examples above represent transition in the lives of these people, of God taking them from one place in faith to that of another. Eve however, was a “woman” before she was obediently called “Eve” and a “woman” after she was finally called Eve. That never changed. The only thing that changed was the right application of “woman” to her in gender and not in name and that Adam finally properly spoke a name that was hers even in the beginning. She was “Eve.”

Also, due to Adam, Eve didn’t even know Adam’s name until after the fall, how much of an opportunity in word as it is recorded would she have had to speak it?

[Archbishop Trevor 'Elihu' Greene]

1) Where did GOD correct Adam???? All HE did in verse 9 was call him!! What obedience was shown by him calling her Eve?? My GOD, are you really that desperate to justify Eve that you would even say that Adam error-ed in calling her "woman"?? If thats the case then stop calling yourself a woman, and call yourself an Eve!

2) HOW ON EARTH DO YOU COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT SHE DIDN'T KNOW ADAM'S NAME??????????? I would LOVE to see what scriptures you are reading on that one, cause I read this from the Book of Genesis, The First Book of Adam and Eve, The Second Book of Adam and Eve, and the Book of Enoch, and NONE indicate such! Therefore, I can safely say that I couldn't find your doctrine within eith a Canonized or non-canonized book!

3) Saul didn't switch his name to Paul. MY GOD, I WISH THEY WOULD TEACH PROPERLY ON THIS!!! His Hebrew name was Saul, but the Greek pronunciation was Paul.

[Dawn Davidson]

Brother Watson, I thought you were leaving?

[Dawn Davidson]

Brother Greene,

You said: “1) Where did GOD correct Adam???? All HE did in verse 9 was call him!!” Adam was supposed to speak obediently according to what was the will of God only not his own. His name was never “Man,” and her name was never “Woman.” He was “Adam” and she was “Eve.” Period. The only question is, did he prove an inability, or did he rebel? And yet he properly proved able to name the animals according to the will of God in Genesis 2:19.

Did you ever stop to consider that Genesis 2:19 was a test? God knew the female would manifest operating on a higher level of righteousness than did the man (She was “Eve” as “life-giver” and “mother of all living,” a name and title speaking to the spiritual and not the physical). And in saying that I am being kind to an Adam, he proved no righteousness in God at all and God did not even speak the title he really earned in the garden. God knew how challenged this man would be given the issue of pride to obediently recognize her on a level greater than was his. God proved in Genesis 2:19 that the man was able. So what happened in Genesis 2:23? Why was he suddenly not able to get it right?

Also, the mere fact that God called him by the name of “Adam” establishes that even God had full expectation and knowledge that the man already knew his name was Adam.

You said: “All HE did” This is where you no doubt error in making right interpretation. Anytime God does anything we are to immediately hearken and with righteous mind determine the meaning of his actions or words and then obediently apply it within the context of the text. This is a large part of what an Adam failed to do in his garden life.

If the God of Judgment suddenly called you by a name which you have never called yourself (and even worse for a now exposed Adam before the female because he knew his truth, he was really an Adam), you would still just say, “All HE did?” You are failing to rightly discern and then apply what and who God is in any given situation. There is no possible way you can get the right answers when you factor God out.

I find it very interesting that the male tradition is so very forgiving of Adam but zealous about the persecution of an Eve and her daughters.

You said: “If thats the case then stop calling yourself a woman, and call yourself an Eve!” What???

You said: “2) HOW ON EARTH DO YOU COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT SHE DIDN'T KNOW ADAM'S NAME???????????”
Give me the Scripture where she learns the name of the man as an “Adam” other than in Genesis 3:9. Adam squandered his opportunity in Genesis 2:23 when she was newly presented to him by God. Adam either rebelliously refused to rightly call her name or proves that he had an inability to do so. What is most telling about his mind-set in Genesis 2:23 is that he seeks to change his own name before the female but in Genesis 3:9 rightly knows how to answer to it when called by God.

I operate under the authority of the canonized books of the Bible. I understand more might be gained as a point of reference from non-canonized books but the female is subjugated in the pew with the canonized.

You said: “3) Saul didn't switch his name to Paul. MY GOD, I WISH THEY WOULD TEACH PROPERLY ON THIS!!! His Hebrew name was Saul, but the Greek pronunciation was Paul” Do you scream when you teach too? That Saul was changed to a Paul is a side issue here, just a point of illustration and nothing worth further comment. The point of the illustration was the significance of transition in the life of the person experiencing it, that versus the static transition of the female who was a woman, even called “Woman“ by an “Adam“ (who was now “Man“ but later “Adam“ again as called by God) and she now an “Eve,“ (though still a woman) as finally obediently confessed by “Man,“ I mean “Adam.”.

You said: “MY GOD, I WISH THEY WOULD TEACH PROPERLY ON THIS!!!” My thoughts verbatim about the garden!

[Dawn Davidson]

Pastor Darby,

What physical seed does the woman have? God used his created seed in the birth of Christ, not hers, she doesn‘t have one. And if it was not physical seed, then it was spiritual. And if spiritual then it was as an earned result of her righteous actions in the garden by way of making righteous confession in Genesis 3:13 unlike the man in Genesis 3:12. She alone was approved by God, even proving to have spiritual seed that God purposed to overcome the enemy.

If physical, how could God be just to further life in the earth in a complete proven absence of his righteousness? His Mercy is without question but even God must have a legal basis to do this, and especially in the garden. That would only be to further the evil. He certainly couldn’t use an arrogant, jugded Adam to do it. And did Adam not physically have the “seed?” I know it went unused, but he had it.

Word proves that Joseph as a step-father was physically in the line of David, not a Mary. God was not speaking about a physical seed.

[Dawn Davidson]

Pastor Darby,

What “seed” belonging to an Eve (and not a Mary as we are still in the garden) in Genesis 3:15 was God speaking of?

You said: “When the bible says her seed, it meant the seed would be in her womb (it was also a prophecy speaking of Mary birthing Christ.) She (woman) would carry the seed and birth the seed.” Aren’t you the one who talked about the gnat and the camel? What are trying to do with this word? Children are birthed from the seed received from their father. I wasn’t aware we had to have a conversation on such a basic level. The “seed” never belongs to the female though in her womb. And never, in a bible written tracing linage belonging only to that which is of the male (save an exception here and there), does word ever speak of physical seed in reference to the female. What are you talking about? Are you forgetting about all of the "begats?" That's seed, his seed. It isn't even true in human biology. Do you see what a refusal to submit to truth is doing to you right now?

You said: “Eve was not righteous, she was decieved.” But what did Eve confess to God in Genesis 3:13? Did she not say that she was tricked, even “beguiled?“ Be careful brother as I highly doubt you have been without sin in your own life, but what has been your expectation of God if you are faithful to confess? If you refuse the work of confession for Eve you are putting yourself in jeopardy and even as does the male tradition of the Church.

You said: “SHE WAS NOT DIVINE” Never have I said Eve was divine, only forgiven. She fell, she confessed, she was forgiven, and even honored.

You said: “but I think you are trying to exalt Eve through some unseen righteousness to say the bible is flawed by placing the man over the woman.” I am not trying to exalt anyone but God in the garden. This is the word, eat the meat. I can prove Eve righteous in Genesis 3:13, in Genesis 3:15, and even in Genesis 3:20 (I would go deeper but your not ready for that). What say you about a punished Adam? Where is he proven righteous in this word? Surely you must be able to immediately point to what Paul saw. Right? I am waiting…

You said: “This story is clear even without the Hebrew.” All I can say to that is “wow.”

You said: “This is feminism not Christianity” But it is Christian to teach that God is indeed a respecter of persons, that a weapon formed against the female shall prosper, even that God is a liar? These things are Christian? Your problem is you can’t figure out how to prove Adam righteous and you hide behind the label of “feminism” with an intent to distract and dismiss.

Brother you are still speaking in circles. You called what I teach complicated, that she fell, made right confession, and was forgiven even honored by God as an “Eve” and “mother of all living.” That’s really complicated. It takes so long to get, right? There’s mine, but I am still waiting for what you say is simple theology which proves the man as righteous in the garden. Tick. Tock.

And again, what is this point about Eve as the weaker vessel because the serpent sought to tempt her? Did Satan not also seek to tempt Christ? So He was a weaker vessel for you too? Rather, Satan had no need to tempt a man already called an “Adam” by God in the garden, clearly the man already had no mind for God. But an “Eve” did.

You can’t imagine submitting to this. But if you would exalt God in the garden and not the man you would reach the same conclusion. Why not even examine the garden word in the absence of considering their gender, just make an examination of actions taken by two people before a holy God. Which actions did God prove to approve of, and which one’s did he not. Unlike what the Church has done to the female, that the man proved to be an “Adam” does not speak anything over men! That was true in the life of Adam, not necessarily also you. If you make choice to reject God as did Adam, then yes, if not, then no. It's simple Christian stuff.