Like many of our contemporary, university trained feminist theologians, MacHaffie uses feminist arguments which had been circulating for hundreds of years to argue for the inherent, God-ordained equality of men and women. Yet, her work differs substantially in tone to earlier writers in that she doesn't use her arguments to engage in "male-bashing" as some earlier writers were wont to do.

      MacHaffie refers to the creation story in three places in her book.

      In the first place, following in the tradition of Agrippa, Speght, Sowernam, and Blake, MacHaffie discusses the meaning of the Hebrew words 'Adam' and 'Eve.' Like Sophia, Murray, and Sarah Grimke, she explores the nuances of the meanings of the Hewbrew words, here the words 'adam (earth creature) and 'ezer (helper). Like Stanton and Dietrick, she uses higher criticism to analyze the words in the book as a piece of literature, using nuances in the text to draw a new meaning from them.

      "The first episode of the account (2:7-24) opens with the creation of 'adam, which Phyllis Trible argues persuasively should be translated as "earth creature." In these early verses, 'adam should be understood as a human being without sexual differences. The story goes on to tell that the earth creature was lonely, so Yahweh sought a suitable companion. When the animals proved unsuitable, Yahweh created another earth creature and introduced sexual differences, thus bringing male and female (ish and ishah) into being simultaneously. After this point in the story, 'adam can be translated accurately as "male creature." The author, however, builds ambiguity into the term. The episode moves from wholeness to differentiation but then back to wholeness again as the two become one flesh.

      The Hebrew word 'ezer which is translated "helper" (v. 18) does not imply that the woman was in any way inferior to the man or the human creature. The word simply describes a beneficial relationship between two parties in which one helps the other. God, for example, is frequently referred to as the helper of Israel. There is no sense in which the helper is subordinate to the one in need.

      Also the fact that woman comes from the rib of the man or the creature does not mean that she is inferior. God alone performs the creative act while the man or creature is asleep. God uses the material of the rib to build woman just as the earth was used initially. Woman is no more subordinate to man or the creature than man or the creature is to the earth used in the creative process.

      Even if the second Genesis story does not authorize the subordination of women in its description of the original creation, there have been many attempts to impose that subordination on the grounds that the first woman brought sin and death into the world. A favorite argument of theologians throughout Christian history has been that God sentenced woman to be subject to her husband and to bear children in pain as a penalty for her disobedience. In the words of the early Christian theologian Tertullian, "Your are the Devil's gateway; you are the unsealer of that forbidden tree: you are the first deserter of divine law: you are show who persuaded him who the devil was not valiant enough to attack. You destroyed so easily God's image, man."

      There are alternative ways, however, of interpreting this story. The account tells us that the man and woman are both present when the serpent approaches. It is interesting to speculate why the woman is chosen as a partner for conversation. It may be because the woman was traditionally associated with the preparation of food, or it may be because the woman appeared to be imaginative and thoughtful. The woman is certainly portrayed by the writer as intelligent and aware of what the forbidden tree had to offer. She is also sensitive to the beauty of the tree and the goodness of the food it provided. She acts independently and takes the initiative. She is perceptive enough to know that the command from God not to eat from the tree applied to her even though it was given before she was created. While the man simply gobbles up the fruit that is offered to him, she struggled with a theological issue - the temptation to disobey. Nowhere in the story is the woman accused of seducing the male. Rather, the verb "to seduce" or "to deceive" is used only in connection with the serpent's activities. Nowhere does the story say that the woman tempted the man or used wicked persuasion. The text simply says, "She gave some to her husband and he ate" (Gen 3.6b).

      The judgments passed on the couple as a result of their disobedience can also be given a new interpretation. What we find in Gen 3:14-19 is a description of life as it is lived in disobedience to God. In the story, the supremacy of male over female is condemned as a perversion of creation. God intended male and female to be equals in the created order. This is a remarkable assertion for a writer steeped in patriarchal culture. It raises the question of how men and women are to relate in the community of grace where sin has been forgiven." pages 12- 13

      Secondly, MacHaffie uses one biblical text to interpret another. In this case, in a novel interpretation, she uses the Song of Solomon to interpret the creation story in Genesis.

      "The Song of Solomon can also be interpreted as providing a thought-provoking commentary on the story in Genesis 2-3. Both the poem and the Genesis story use the image of a beautiful garden filled with animals as well as trees which are lovely to look at and good for food. What we have in the Song of Solomon, however, is a description of male-female relationships as God intended them to be and not as they exist in a disobedient world. The paradise that was lost in Eden has been regained in the garden of this poem. The man and woman are not ashamed of their nakedness, the man desires the woman and she desires him, and they live in a situation in which there is no male dominance or female subordination." page 14

      "The Montanists believed that since Eve was the first to eat of the tree of knowledge, women were more likely than men to be recipients of divine wisdom and revelation." page 33

      Barbara J. MacHaffie, Her Story: Women in Christian Tradition, Philadelphia, Fortress Press, 1986

Return to Women's History Month 2000 Table of Contents

e-mail sunshine@pinn.net