Carol, I see you've studied the Eden story extensively. So have I. My book, "The Secret Dowry of Eve," narrates similar sentiments as yours. However, I would like to point out that Eve was never given any commandment forbidding her the fruit. Only Adam was given that commandment and he was alone when the commandment was issued. Eve did not yet exist when the commandment forbidding the eating of the fruit was issued. My take on that is related directly to the text. Adam was forbidden the fruit because he was alone. It was his solitude, his existence without a female partner, that determined the need to forbid him that fruit. His inability to interpret the fruit, to understand the fruit, to properly digest the fruit was hindered without a "helpmate." So, until then, he is forbidden the fruit, and if he dares disobey and eats the fruit when he is alone, he will die. So then, Eve is created, she eats the fruit, gives it to Adam, and neither of them dies. Instead, their eyes are opened. That's what the text says. So Eve being blamed for tempting Adam is simply a misconstrued assumption with no basis in the facts narrated in the story. According to the story, it seems that her role as "helpmate" was specifically to aid him in eating that fruit without dying, because it's the only act she performs as a helpmate. And it certainly helps him. He doesn't die. Instead his eyes are opened. I find it interesting that a text which begins with the creation of light, then goes on to narrate a story in which Adam and Eve have their eyes opened. To me, it's a direct connection between light and seeing, and specifically a new kind of seeing, inner seeing, or enlightenment, germinated by Eve's eating of the fruit.
Also, in Genesis 2:24, in which Adam is directed to leave his father and mother (his family) and cleave unto his wife, you claim that interpretations of the "helper" or "helpmate" refer to equality. Yet Genesis 2:24 directs Adam to cleave unto his wife. It does not direct Eve to leave her family and cleave unto Adam. It seems to me that something besides equality is going on here. It directs Adam, the male, to leave his family, his heritage, his patriarchy, and instead cleave unto his opposite gendered partner, the woman. Couldn't it be saying that the male agenda should be left behind and the instead the female agenda should be adopted, because it promotes life?
Carol, I see you've studied the Eden story extensively. So have I. My book, "The Secret Dowry of Eve," narrates similar sentiments as yours. However, I would like to point out that Eve was never given any commandment forbidding her the fruit. Only Adam was given that commandment and he was alone when the commandment was issued. Eve did not yet exist when the commandment forbidding the eating of the fruit was issued. My take on that is related directly to the text. Adam was forbidden the fruit because he was alone. It was his solitude, his existence without a female partner, that determined the need to forbid him that fruit. His inability to interpret the fruit, to understand the fruit, to properly digest the fruit was hindered without a "helpmate." So, until then, he is forbidden the fruit, and if he dares disobey and eats the fruit when he is alone, he will die. So then, Eve is created, she eats the fruit, gives it to Adam, and neither of them dies. Instead, their eyes are opened. That's what the text says. So Eve being blamed for tempting Adam is simply a misconstrued assumption with no basis in the facts narrated in the story. According to the story, it seems that her role as "helpmate" was specifically to aid him in eating that fruit without dying, because it's the only act she performs as a helpmate. And it certainly helps him. He doesn't die. Instead his eyes are opened. I find it interesting that a text which begins with the creation of light, then goes on to narrate a story in which Adam and Eve have their eyes opened. To me, it's a direct connection between light and seeing, and specifically a new kind of seeing, inner seeing, or enlightenment, germinated by Eve's eating of the fruit.
Also, in Genesis 2:24, in which Adam is directed to leave his father and mother (his family) and cleave unto his wife, you claim that interpretations of the "helper" or "helpmate" refer to equality. Yet Genesis 2:24 directs Adam to cleave unto his wife. It does not direct Eve to leave her family and cleave unto Adam. It seems to me that something besides equality is going on here. It directs Adam, the male, to leave his family, his heritage, his patriarchy, and instead cleave unto his opposite gendered partner, the woman. Couldn't it be saying that the male agenda should be left behind and the instead the female agenda should be adopted, because it promotes life?