POST FOUR OF FIVE
(“IT WAS ACCORDING TO GOD’S WILL THAT ADAM ACQUIRED WISDOM”
E) “NAKEDNESS” - THE BALANCE BETWEEN LITERAL AND SYMBOLIC - “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him” / “And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked”
In our attempts to determine and define what the ancients are saying in early texts, it’s often difficult to determine the correct mixture of what is literal and what is symbolic and what is a mixture and to what extent the two principles are mixed. It is clear, for example, that when the early Christian texts describe God, having “
created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him” (Gen 1:27),
they were speaking quite literally. To repeat an earlier text as an example :
“God formed Adam with His holy hands, in His own Image and Likeness and when the angels saw Adam's glorious appearance they were greatly moved by the beauty thereof. For they saw (Fol. 5a, col. 2) the image of his face burning with glorious splendor like the orb of the sun, and the light of his eyes was like the light of the sun, and the image of his body was like unto the sparkling of crystal... There he was arrayed in the apparel of sovereignty, and there was the crown of glory set upon his head, there was he made king, and priest, and prophet, there did God make him to sit upon his honorable throne, and there did God give him dominion over all creatures and things.... ” (Cave of Treasures - chapt on Creation of Adam)
Such detailed descriptions make it clear that they are talking about the appearance of Adam being in God’s own “image” and “likeness”. Such literalness is confirmed when they talk about the immortal Adam’s appearance. It is all very anthropomorphic in the extreme.
In an earlier post I said that Adam’s “
appearance and image was so much like that of God the Father, that he is actually mistaken FOR God the Father until it’s realized he is human”. A good example is from early Jewish Haggadah :
"When Adam opened his eyes the first time, and beheld the world...his admiration for the world surrounding him did not exceed the admiration all creatures conceived for Adam. They took him to be their creator, and they all came to offer his adoration. But he spoke : “Why do you come to worship me? Nay, you and I together will acknowledge the majesty and the might of him who has created us all. ‘The Lord reigns,’ “ he continued, “‘he is appareled with majesty.’” And not alone the creatures on earth, even the angels thought Adam the lord of all, and they were about to salute him with “Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord of hosts, “ when God caused sleep to fall upon him, and then the angels knew that he was but a human being. (The Haggadah (Woman) - THE FALL OF ADAM AND EVE)
Whether these early Christians were correct or not, a survey of the many, many such descriptions of Adam’s appearance make it absolutely clear that
these early Christians are talking about physical appearance when they taught that God made Adam in his own image.
However, what is one to make of the description of “nakedness” of Adam and Eve?
“And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.” (Gen 3:7)
On the surface it may seem that they are somehow embarrassed about physical nakedness (else why sew physical aprons?). Some modern readers take this to mean that the pair who had just eaten of the tree of wisdom simply realized that had always been physically naked. However, to the ancients, it meant that they had
become “naked” in some way that had reference physical appearance AND to their moral status. The two things were connected for these immortal being who are becoming mortal.
Enoch says of his vision :
“3 And I came to the garden of righteousness and saw beyond those trees many (other) large (ones) growing there— .... And the tree of wisdom, of which one eats and knows great wisdom, (was among them)....” 6 Then the holy angel Raphael, who was with me, responded to me and said, “This very thing is the tree of wisdom from which your old father and aged mother, they who are your precursors, ate and came to know wisdom; and (consequently) their eyes were opened and they realized that they were naked and (so) were expelled from the garden.” (1st Enoch 32:3-6)
In multiple records there is this connection between being “naked” and nakedness being a reason for being “expelled from the garden”. Presumably there was nothing wrong with nakedness itself, nor is there a moral quandary created for either to be “naked” in front of their spouse. The word “naked” in this specific context has deeper connotations and connections in the early Judao-Christian literature.
In Christian (vita) Adam and Eve text, eve says : “
And at that very moment my eyes were opened and I knew that I was naked of the righteousness with which I had been clothed. 2 And I wept saying, ‘Why have you (satan) done this to me, that I have been estranged from my glory with which I was clothed?” [/quote] Eve She then approaches a tearful and reluctant Adam (he is tearful because he can see that Eve’s very nature has changed and reluctant to take of the fruit himself. She then truthfully relates : “
I said to him, ‘Do not fear; for as soon as you eat, you shall know good and evil.’5 Then I quickly persuaded him. He ate, and his eyes were opened, and he also realized his nakedness.” (Life of Adam and Eve (apocalypse) 20:1-2, 21:1, 3-5)
The concept of being “clothed” in a garment of glory and loss of this garment is found throughout the early literature. With the fall of Satan from heaven, it was said of Lucifer : “
...he was cast out, and "Daiwâ" because he lost the apparel of his glory. And behold, from that time until the present day, he and all his hosts have been stripped of their apparel, and they go naked...” (Cave of Treasures, chapt on “The Revolt of Satan”
Though I would describe it differently, Ginzbert discusses this principle when he (legends, vol. 5, pp. 121 f. and n. 120) correctly noted that the haggadic interpretation of “naked” in Gen 3:7, 10 is that the first pair became aware that they were bare of good deeds. ( cf shab 14a; Meg 32a; GenR 19:6; PRE 14). This also, in view of other ancient Jewish and Christian writers asserting that Adam and Eve had garments of light before the fall. However, it seems not so much as a bareness of good deeds, but rather a loss of “purity”, a loss of a “primal state” (as the christian Abbaton translator said it.)
Regarding Adam, Jewish haggadah says “
he lost his celestial clothing .... in sorrow he was to earn his daily bread...” (The Haggadah - The Punishment). Speaking of immortal beings in heaven, an early Christian text says “The inhabitants of that place were clad with the shining raiment of angels and their raiment was suitable to their place of habitation.” (The apocalypse of Peter). Early hymns relate the similar doctrines in their verse : “
I am clothed with a garment of light...and I am passed beyond the pain and anguish of bodies. And I am arrayed and succored by the savior of my spirit, through the power, which was never constricted. " (Angad Roshnan - From the Parthian Hym-Cycles - The Ship of God VIII)
The use of the term “naked” in a connection to a lack of righteousness and glory were used in many other texts. For example, in the “Rechabite” vision of heaven, the heavenly individuals explain : “
But we are not naked as you suppose, for we are covered with a covering of glory; and we do not show each other the private parts of our bodies. But we are covered with a stole of glory (similar to that) which clothed Adam and Eve before they sinned.” (History of the Rechabites 12:3)
Part of the point in focusing on a single point is to simply demonstrate that modern Christian theories regarding Adam and Eve are, in the main, quite different than early doctrines AND, the modern’s lack the same context and depth of meaning and understanding that the ancients had on these subjects. The data that modern Christianity has gained does not offset the data and context they have lost. This is part of the reason why restorationist Christians who want to restore early Christian doctrines will have a very difficult time with those who are convinced that the modern theories ARE the same as the ancient doctrines. (Or that they are somehow “better” than the original christian doctrines)
POST FIVE OF FIVE FOLLOWS