Was Eve Adam's twin flame


→ Paradise / story of paradise; → Fall of Man

The noun אָדָם'Adam In the Old Testament, as in other Western Semitic languages, it is used primarily in an appellative way as a collective singular with the meaning "man / humanity". There are also uses as a genitive instead of an adjective (“human”) and in the sense of an indefinite pronoun (“someone”). In Gen 4,25; Gen 5,; 1Chr 1,1 stands אָדָם'Adam as a proper name for the first person (in Gen 2,20b; Gen 3,17.21 reads לָאָדָם).

The etymology has not been conclusively clarified. Among the numerous proposals remains the assumption of a connection with the Semitic base 'dm “Being red” is worth considering. The connecting element then lies in the red-brown skin color of the person. Gen 2.7 and Gen 3.19 relate to it ’Ădāmāh "Earth" (cf. Akkadian adamātu "Dark, red earth") and thus identify people as "Earthlings".

The name חַוָּהḥawwāh "Eva" (LXX: Ζωή "life" in Gen 3,20, but Ευα "Eva" in Gen 4,1) is only documented for the wife of the first man / Adam in Gen 3,20 and Gen 4,1. It is found in Gen 3:20 with the root חיה (ḥjh) "Live" put together: The name Eva (ḥawwāh) should mean "mother of all living things" (cf. Sir 40: 1). Whether the connection of חַוָּהḥawwāh "Eva" with חיהḥjh “Living” based on historical etymology is controversial. Reference is made to Ugaritic, for example ḥwt "Living" (Kapelrud 1977, 796). Among the (vague) alternatives, the derivation from Aramaic is particularly important 'wj' To name "snake", which has already been discussed by medieval rabbis.

A literary-historical biography of the first human couple in Gen 1-5 results from the following levels of genesis: the pre-literary paradise tradition Gen 2-3 *, the non-priestly ("Yahwist") prehistory Gen 2-11 *, the priestly prehistory and the Pentateuch editorial office:

1) The one processed in Gen 2-3 Jerusalem paradise tradition from the time of the kings (→ Paradise / Paradise story; → Women in the literature of OT 2.) denotes the first People with the appellative אדם or האדם "(the) person", all the more permanently valid the → Bring people to the table. Yahweh formed man out of earthly matter and animated it by breathing in the breath of life (Gen 2,7; → creation). The earthly physical constitution characterizes man as mortal from the start (cf. Gilgamesh epic Pl. 10 II 10-14; V 21f = TUAT III, 721.725; texts from Mesopotamia), even if the older Paradise tradition does not specifically consider mortality as an anthropological theme unfolds. In the garden of God, man achieves 'equality with God' and the ability to 'know good and bad' (Gen 3.5), which he then has to prove outside the garden (Gen 3.23). The tradition is conceptually based on a two-stage anthropogony, according to which man is initially created as a natural being, but then becomes a cultural being through the appropriation of "equality of God" and "knowledge" (for the ancient oriental background see → Paradise / Paradise story). The elements 'being like God' and 'ability to know' are unmistakably shaped by the ideology of the king. In the tradition - as in the side pieces Ez 28: 11-19 * and Hi 15: 7-8 - the woman has no place yet.

2) First the story of paradise on the level of what is traditionally called “Yahweh” non-priestlybut by no means pre-exilic Composition of prehistory puts the "woman" at the side of the "man". Yahweh "builds" it from a rib of the 'Adam (Gen 2: 21-22) after the failure of the attempt to end man's creature loneliness through the creation of animals. The conspicuous tree metaphor in the context of human creation (בנהbnh "Build", צֵלָעṣelā ‘ next to “rib” especially: “side / board / door leaf” etc.) against the background of the formatio of the “man” in Gen 2,7 understandable, which also den deus faber (“God as a craftsman”) requires (Uehlinger 1988).

The physical origin of the → woman from the bones of the man establishes the relationship between the two. This takes the place of the blood relationship between man and God shown in the ancient oriental anthropogonies. The designation of women as "male" (’Iššāh) (Gen 2:23) emphasizes the unity in the polarity of the sexes. The etiological addition Gen 2.24 establishes the primacy of this unity over the ties to the parents: The man “neglects” (עזב‘E.g.; see Neh 13:11; Prov 4.2; Keel / Schroer 2002, 153) father and mother to “stick” to his wife (דבקdbq) and to become “one flesh” with what was previously called “my meat” (Spieckermann 2000).

The exclusive community relationship between woman and man, like the relationship with God, is fundamentally disturbed by the violation of the commandment (Gen 2.16-17). The distinction between the sexes (as well as that between God and man) now leads to a profound divorce. The rupture is first expressed in the → shame (cf. Gen 2.25; Gen 3.7 - with a view to God: Gen 3.10). Then Yahweh decrees the existence of men and women. These dissolve the unity of the sexes insofar as the woman is unilaterally assigned the libido, while the man is assigned dominion over the woman (Gen 3:16). Yahweh imposes the "complaint" on both of them (‘Iṣṣāvôn; Gen 3:16, 17). In women it comes to the fore as the pain of childbirth, in men / "people" as heavy field work in a cursed field.

The fundamental disturbance of human community relations continues in the Cainite descendants of the first human couple (Gen 4,1-24 *). With the second generation (→ Cain) murder comes into the world. Human cultural achievements in the following generations are finally combined with hubris (Gen 4,23) and thus make culture appear as a deeply ambivalent phenomenon. The line of evil of the Cainites is only broken through → Noah, who finds favor in the eyes of Yahweh (Gen 6: 8).

3) Adam as a proper name for the first person encountered for the first time in the Priestly scripture (→ Priestly scriptures). The creation account Gen 1 does not, however, immediately refer to the creation of Adam. Rather, in Gen 1: 26-28, the creation of (= the) man ('Adam as a collective appellative) as the image of God and in the difference between men and women. In the Toledot Adams (Gen 5), the priestly written text closest to Gen 1,1-2,3, the fundamental human determinations begin to be realized in the 10 generations of antediluvian humanity (without Cainites!). In order to be able to present their history in the form of a genealogy, the priestly scriptures now use the term 'Adam in Gen 5, as proper names of the "primitive man", while in Gen 5,2 both sexes together 'Adam to be named. The differentiation between “male” and “female” (Gen 1,27; Gen 5,2) in creation leads to the creation blessing of Gen 1,28 in Gen 5 to the procreation of sons and daughters. The → likeness of God to the human species ('Adam) is realized for the first time in Adam and from then on through procreation in the image of the respective father (Gen 5,3).

4) Gen 4,25-26 has already been perceived as a foreign body by the representatives of the classical document hypothesis (Noth 1948, 12, note 26) and is most likely to be the Pentateuch editorial office be assigned (see Witte 1998, 61-65). This takes over the proper name Adam from Gen 5 as well as the names Seth (Gen 5,3.6) and → Enosch (Gen 5,6.9) as descendants of Adam. In contrast to the non-priestly composition of Gen 4: 1-24 *, Adam not only shows the line of evil of the Cainites. Rather, the line that was broken off with the murder of Abel is now being replaced by the conception of Seth. The Sethite lineage represents a new human race (’Änôš), which then runs towards Noah. The Cainites no longer belong to this new human race.

5) The originality of the Proper nameחַוָּהḥawwāh “Eve” in Gen 3.20 and Gen 4.1 has rightly been discussed again and again in research. Gen 3.20 is a duplicate of Gen 2.23 and looks back prematurely on the birth of the sons of the first human couple. Even “man” does not yet have a name in Gen 2-3. In terms of composition, however, the note has been cleverly inserted at the seam between the sentences in Gen 3:14-19 and the expulsion in Gen 3:22-24. The pain in childbirth governing women in Gen 3:16 and man’s rule over women begin to materialize with naming. That חַוָּהḥawwāh was inserted in Gen 4.1, shows the addition of the Pentateuch editorial staff in Gen 4.25, which falls back on the formulation of Gen 4.1, but does not take over the name of Mrs. Adams mentioned there. Probably the wife of the first person got her name at a late stage in the final editing.

The interpretation of חַוָּהḥawwāh "Eve" as "mother of all living things" in Gen 3:20 does not only appear factually appropriate in view of the continuation in Gen 4. The creation of the woman from the man's rib (Gen.2.22) could also intend such a connection, if one can count on the knowledge of Sumerian ti in the double meaning of “rib” and “life” in the author of the Hebrew text (Kramer 1970, 149 and others). This would also explain why women do not have to be specially animated like “humans” when they are created (Uehlinger 1988).

3.1. Early Judaism

Early Jewish literature developed the royal features of Adam, which were already given in the oldest Paradise tradition, more broadly. According to SlavHen 30.12, Adam is “King of the earth” by virtue of divine wisdom. Accordingly, Adam's outstanding glory (Sir 49:16 [King James Version]; Weish 10: 2-3) and beauty (Philo, De opificio mundi 136-141) could be emphasized. When Adam is referred to as the "second angel" or represented as the equal of the angels (SlavHen 30, 11; Ethiopian 69, 11; Vita Adae et Evae 4; 12-16), this also implies his original immortality (Wis 2:23). However, sin brought death on him and his descendants (4 Esr 7, 118: "Oh Adam, what have you done! When you sinned, your fall came not only on you, but also on us, your descendants!" , 7.21; syrBar 17, 2f; 54, 15 etc.) and also led to a diminution of the entire creation (4Esr 7, 10f). On the other hand, the sin of Adam does not simply abolish the personal responsibility of human action (syrBar 54, 15.19). The depravation of creation could alternatively be explained with the “descent of the guardians” based on Gen 6.1-4 (Ethics 1-36; Jub 5; Damascus scripture 2, 14-21).

According to → Philo's doctrine of the double creation (De opificio mundi 76; 134f; 146; Text Philo) God created man in a first act as an idea and a generic term. The first man is incorporeal, neither male nor female, immortal by nature and God's true image (Gen 1:26). Only the human being formed according to Gen 2,7 is a sensually perceptible and perishable being. Accordingly, man appears on the boundary between mortal and immortal nature. At the same time, Philo connects Adam with the idea of ​​the microcosm (De opificio mundi 146; cf. slavHen 30, 13). He explains the → Fall of Man allegorically, whereby the snake is related to lust (De opificio mundi 157-164), Adam to reason and Eve to sensory perception (De opificio mundi 165-169). The case is that lust (snake) seduces the senses (Eve) and these then have a pernicious effect on reason (Adam).

Occasionally the early Jewish and Haggadic literature shows the tendency to blame Eve for the actual guilt for the Fall (Sir 25:24 [Lutherbibel: Sir 25,32]; Jub 3, 3-11; Apocalypse Mosis; Vita Adae et Evae; Philo, De opificio mundi 165ff).

3.2. Rabbinic Judaism

Rabbinic Judaism sometimes sets different accents (Schäfer 1986). The idea that Adam had a gigantic figure that filled the entire cosmos when he was created plays an important role (Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin 38b, etc.; Text Talmud). It is discussed in the research whether a (Gnostic?) Prehistoric human myth was included (Altmann 1944/45). At the same time, Adam is described as a microcosm that God formed from the dust of the four ends of the world (Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin 38a, etc.), and as an originally androgynous being (Midrash Bereschit Rabba 8, 1).

The idea of ​​Adam's original glory leads, within the framework of the rabbis' anthropocentric way of thinking (Schäfer 1986, 89f), among other things, to the assumption that the angels would have worshiped the image of God himself (Midrash Bereschit Rabba 8, 10). On the other hand, it was precisely the angels who, foreseeing sin, turned against the creation of Adam. However, God did not give in to this contradiction, which shows that he willed mankind even in the face of his sin (Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin 38b; Midrash Bereshit Rabba 8, 4ff and so on). For Adam, sin causes not only the loss of original greatness and glory but also the loss of immortality (Midrash Bereschit Rabba 12, 6). However, it can be emphasized that ultimately every person has freedom of choice for doing good and bad and thus for life and death (Pirqe Avot 3, 15; Mekhilta de Rabbi Ishmael, 112).

3.3. Adam literature

Probably in the period between the 1st century BC. The so-called Adam scripts (Stone 1992; Anderson et al. 2000) were created in the 1st and 1st century AD, mainly including the Vita Adae et Evae (Latin) and the Apocalypse Mosis (Greek) (text pseudepigraphs ). There is also an Adam book from Old Church Slavonic, the Armenian script “Armenian life of Adam and Eve” (= Penitence of Adam) and the Georgian script “Georgian life of Adam and Eve” (for text editions and literature cf. JSHRZ VI / 1, 2, 151 -153; working aids for the study of pseudepigraphs).

The scriptures transport the reader to the time after the expulsion from Paradise and reflect the life of Adam and Eve up to the death and burial of the two first parents in Paradise. The narrative threads of the various writings run parallel over long stretches (see the synopsis of structure in JSRHZ II, 755f). Earlier research usually used a common Hebrew script, but today one recognizes a highly complex literary history, at the beginning of which perhaps there were once independent Haggadic Adam traditions (JSRHZ II, 755-769; VI / 1, 2, 170-186 ).

In Vita Adae et Evae, the devil himself gives information about how the → Fall of Man came about in Paradise: God created Adam in his image and required the angels to worship him. The devil, however, refused because Adam was far below him in the hierarchy of creatures. God then drives the devil out of paradise, who in turn seduces Eve. According to Vita Adae et Evae, Eva was seduced a second time after being expelled from paradise. Adam's sin is forgiven in the end, and Adam's resurrection is looked ahead to as "all of the flesh" (Apocalypse Mosis 13).

The religious-historical background of these writings cannot be elucidated with absolute certainty. The clearly recognizable Christian influences are usually traced back to later processing. The thesis of gnostic origin has not been able to prevail to this day. The Jewish roots of these writings are still widely recognized.

3.4. New Testament and Christianity

In contrast to early and rabbinical Judaism, the New Testament establishes a typological relationship between Adam and the Messiah. In his discussion of the pneumatically enthusiastic idea of ​​the resurrection of the Corinthians in 1 Corinthians 15: 21-22, Paul emphasizes that in Adam all people must die because death came into the world through him, but in Christ all are made alive. 1 Cor. 15: 42-49 then unfolds this thought with regard to the physical existence of man. Adam, formed of earth, was known as a "living soul" (i.e.as a living being related to this world) a creature and therefore subject to impermanence. The last Adam (i.e. the risen Christ), however, is the “quickening spirit” and will (through eschatological creation mediation?) Bring about the “pneumatic-physical resurrection” (Wolff 2000, 384f.401-412).

Romans 5: 12-21 develops the Adam-Christ typology further in terms of justification. According to this, death did not come into the world because of Adam's pious constitution (1 Cor. 15: 45-49), but because of his sin. All human beings have in fact followed Adam in sin and are therefore under the rule of death. Christ corresponds typologically to Adam in that his “act of justification” (Wilckens 1997, 306) has life-creating justification for all people. It is disputed whether the Adam-Christ typologies in 1 Cor. 15 and Rom. 5 are original creations of Paul and how these typologies relate to the teaching of Philos of the double creation of man.

A typological Adam-Christ antithetics also shines through in Mk 1:13. Like Adam once in paradise, Jesus is tempted in the desert at the beginning of the dispensation. Haggadic Adam tradition is in the being of Jesus with "the animals" (Apocalypse Mosis 10-12.24; Slavic Adam book 1; text pseudepigraphs; cf. Isa 11.6-8; Isa 65.5; Strack-Billerbeck, 4th ed. 1965, 892 ; Text Talmud) and in the statement about the service of angels (Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin 59b; Vita Adae et Evae 4). The tracing of Jesus' genealogy back to Adam in Lk 3:38 is likely to be based on a typological correspondence between Adam and Christ.

In a few places the Corpus Paulinum with reference to Gen 1-3 explains the relationship between men and women. In 1 Cor. 11: 7-9, the apostle justifies the differences in headgear during worship and prophecy with the fact that the man is the image and reflection of God, while the woman is the reflection of the man. For him, the derived being of woman results from the sole reference to Adam and the creation of woman out of man or for man (Gen 2: 18.22; Tob 8: 6) , 8]; Sir 36:24 [King James Version: Sir 36:26]). Of course, Paul immediately emphasizes in v12 that the man is only (born) through the woman (Wolff 2000, 244-256).

According to 1Tim 2,8-15, women have to submit to the men of the congregation in worship and remain silent (cf. the addition of 1Cor 14,33b-36). To justify this suggestion, the author refers to the temporal succession of the creation of Adam and Eve, which he interprets in the sense of a value. Only Eva is charged with the transgression. At the same time, 1 Timothy 2: 9 presupposes the image of women as a potential seductress (cf. 1 Peter 3: 1-6).

For the doctrinal development of the church, Gen 2-3 in connection with the statements made in the image of God (Gen 1.27; Gen 5.1-3; Gen 9.6) and the New Testament Adam-Christ typologies provide the decisive textual basis for theological anthropology, in particular for the doctrine of original sin (Augustine). For the doctrine of Mary, the development of an Eva-Maria typology as a parallel to the Adam-Christ typology (since the 2nd century AD) gained importance. In this context, on the basis of the textual tradition of the Vulgate Gen 3.15, reference could also be made to Mary (Mary as corredemptrix "Co-redeemer" and mediatrix omnium gratiarum “Mediator of all graces”).

3.5. Koran

In addition to the biblical references, the Adam tradition of the Koran shows a certain proximity to the Haggadic traditions attested in the Adam literature. Adam is the first person in the Koran to be the typos of all people (Sura 2, 30-39; 7, 11-25.189; 15, 26ff; 17, 63-67; 20, 115ff; 38, 71-85; 95, 4-6 u.ö .; text Koran). God formed it out of earth and animated it by breathing in the spirit of God. The woman Adam (7, 189) formed from the man remains nameless in the Koran. After God created Adam, He sets him as the khalīfa (“Representative / successor” of former humanity or God) on earth and teaches him “all things and names” (2, 30f). The first human couple lives in paradise. The angels are asked to worship Adam. However, refuses Iblīs (the devil) this commandment with reference to his higher existence. Iblīs is then cursed and expelled from paradise. Until the “day of resurrection” he is given time to seduce people. Those who let themselves be seduced by him will in the end fill hell with the devil. Iblīs succeeds in seducing the first human couple to eat from the forbidden paradise tree. Adam and his wife are then cursed and cast out of paradise. However, Adam repents of his sin and experiences the mercy of God.

Overall, Adam represents both the righteous and the sinner type. The Adam-Christ typologies of the New Testament echo in the Koran insofar as here, too, both figures are placed in a relationship to one another. However, the Koran emphasizes (presumably in a polemical turn against the idea of ​​Christ's sonship with God) that ‘Īsā (Jesus) be like Adam with Allah, insofar as he too is a creature made of dust and was called into existence by God (3, 52).

Literature research Index Theologicus

Literature research Biblical Bibliography Lausanne

1. Lexicon article

  • Theological dictionary for the New Testament, Stuttgart 1933-1979
  • Religion in the past and present, 3rd edition, Tübingen 1957-1965
  • Lexicon of Christian Iconography, Freiburg i.Br. 1968-1976 (paperback edition, Rome et al.1994)
  • Encyclopaedia Judaica, Jerusalem 1971-1996
  • Theological dictionary on the Old Testament, Stuttgart et al. 1973ff
  • Theological Real Encyclopedia, Berlin / New York 1977-2004
  • Concise theological dictionary of the Old Testament, Munich / Zurich 1978-1979
  • New Bible Lexicon, Zurich a.o. 1991-2001
  • The Anchor Bible Dictionary, New York 1992
  • Lexicon for Theology and Church, 3rd edition, Freiburg i.Br. 1993-2001
  • Exegetical dictionary for the New Testament, 2nd edition, Stuttgart et al. 1992
  • The New Pauly, Stuttgart / Weimar 1996-2003
  • Religion in the past and present, 4th edition, Tübingen 1998ff.
  • Lexicon of Islam, Berlin 2001

2. Further literature

  • Anderson, G. / Stone, M. / Tromp, J., 2000, Literature on Adam and Eve. Collected Essays, Studia in veteris testamenti pseudepigrapha 15, Leiden et al.
  • Altmann, A., 1944/45, The Gnostic Background of the Rabbinic Adam Legends, JQR N.S. 35, 371-391
  • Brandenburger, E., 1962, Adam and Christ. Exegetical-religious-historical study on Rom 5, 12-21 (1.Cor 15) (WMANT 7), Neukirchen-Vluyn
  • Erffa, H.M. v., 1989, Iconology of Genesis. The Christian pictorial themes from the Old Testament and their sources, Munich
  • Gertz, J.C., 2004, From Adam to Enosch. Reflections on the genesis of Gen 2-4, in: M. Witte (ed.), God and Man in Dialogue (FS O. Kaiser; BZAW 345/1), Berlin / New York, 215-236.
  • Gunkel, H., 9th ed. 1977, Genesis. Translated and explained by Herrmann Gunkel, Göttingen
  • Kapelrud, S., 1977, Art. חַוָּהḥawwāh, ThWAT II, ​​794-798
  • Keel, O. / Schroer, S., 2002, Creation. Biblical theologies in the context of ancient oriental religions, Göttingen / Freiburg (Switzerland)
  • Kramer, S.N., 4th ed. 1970 (1st ed. 1963), The Sumerians. Their History, Culture and Character, Chicago
  • Kratz, R.G., 2000, The Composition of the Narrative Books of the Old Testament. Basic knowledge of biblical criticism (UTB 2157), Munich and others
  • Levin, Chr., 1993, Der Jahwist (FRLANT 157), Göttingen
  • Noth, M., 1948, History of the transmission of the Pentateuch, Stuttgart
  • Pfeiffer, H., 2000/2001, The tree in the middle of the garden. On the traditional origin of the story of paradise (Gen 2,4b-3,24), Part I: Analysis, ZAW 112, 487-500; Part 2: Formative traditions and theological accents, ZAW 113, 2-16
  • Schäfer, P., 1986, Adam in the Jewish tradition, in: W. Strolz (ed.) From the old to the new Adam. Primeval myth and salvation history (publications by the Oratio Dominica Foundation, World Discussion of Religions, Series of publications on the Great Ecumenical Movement 13), Freiburg / Basel / Vienna
  • Schöck, C., 1993, Adam in Islam. A contribution to the history of ideas of the Sunna (Islamkunde 168), Berlin
  • Schüngel-Straumann, H., 2nd ed. 1989, The woman at the beginning. Eva and the consequences (Frauenforum), Freiburg / Basel / Vienna
  • Spieckermann, H., 2000, Ambivalences. Creation made possible and realized in Gen 2f, in: A. Graupner et al. (Ed.), Connecting lines (FS W.H. Schmidt), Neukirchen-Vluyn, 363-376
  • Speyer, H., 1961, The biblical stories in the Koran, Hildesheim
  • Stone, M.E., 1992, A History of the Literature of Adam and Eve (Early Judaism and Its Literature 3), Atalanta
  • Strack, H.L. / Billerbeck, P., 3rd ed. 1961 / 4th ed. 1965, Commentary on the New Testament from Talmud and Midrash, Part III / IV, 2, Munich
  • Uehlinger, Chr., 1988, Eva as a “living work of art”. Traditional history on Gen 2.21-22 (23.24) and 3.20, BN 43, 90-99
  • Westermann, C., 1985, Genesis Chapters 1-11. Part 1 (BK I / 1), Neukirchen-Vluyn (reprint of the 3rd edition)
  • Wilckens, U., 3rd ed. 1997, The Letter to the Romans (Rom 1-5) (EKK VI / 1), Neukirchen-Vluyn
  • Witte, M., 1998, The Biblical Prehistory. Editorial and theological history observations on Gen 1,1-11,26 (BZAW 265), Berlin / New York
  • Wolff, Chr., 2nd ed. 2000, The first letter of Paul to the Corinthians (THK 7), Leipzig
  • Wish, A., 1906, Creation and Fall of Man of the first human couple in the Jewish and Muslim legends. With consideration for the traditions in the cuneiform literature, Leipzig

All versions of this article as of October 2017 for download as PDF archive: