Adam and Jewish Thought

The Figure of Adam in pre-Rabbinic thought Portrayed in the Writings of the Pseudepigrapha

Presented by:

Adam B. RuditskyOctober, 2014

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the MJLS degree

at Hebrew College.

Boston, MA

0

Abstract for

The Figure of Adam in pre-Rabbinic Thought as Portrayed in the Writings of the Pseudepigrapha

Working with the narrative literature of Pseudepigraphical books such as The Life of Adam and Eve and Jubilees, this paper examines the story of Adam and Eve from Genesis 2-3. Reflecting on some aspects of Jewish theology from the Second Temple period the story of Israel begins with the life of Adam rather than Abraham. Various aspects of the Adam and Eve story including the role and function of creation, the root of temptation, free will, the nature of sin, etc. become a foreshadowing of the life of Israel and the Jews. Through an examination of the lives of Adam and Eve from the material mentioned above as well as other material from this period of Jewish history we will be able to uncover many strands of midrash and Jewish theology, some of which are visible in later interpretations of the Adam and Eve story.

1

Table of Contents

PART I: Brief Introduction to the Pseudepigrapha…..3

PART II: Adam and the Pseudepigrapha…..5

Genesis…..6 Jubilees…..7 The Life of Adam and Eve…..9

PART III: Adam in the Pseudepigrapha…..13

The Creation of Adam…..14The Purpose of Adam …..19The Person of Adam…..26

The Service of Adam ..…28The Sin of Adam..…30The Source of Adam’s sin….32The Free-will of Adam…..36The Law as Adam’s Accuser….40The Repentance and Restoration of Adam….46

PART IV: Conclusion…..50

Bibliography…..54

To be noted:

All quotes from the Hebrew Bible come from the 1917 JPS Translation(unless otherwise noted)

All Quotes from the Pseudepigrapha and Apocrypha come from Pseudepigrapha, Apocrypha and Sacred Writings provided by the Mormon Church online (unless otherwise noted)

2

Part IBrief Introduction to the Pseudepigrapha

The Pseudepigrapha is a collection of writings of unknown authors that represent various

Jewish voices of thought primarily from the post-exilic period through late antiquity. This

collection as we have it today argue original language and intent, initial context and added

interpolations (primarily Christian) as well as important theological meanings and value in

general. As such a wide variety of topics are found in these writings that include commentaries

on biblical texts such as with Jubilees on Genesis, messianic speculations found in books of

Enoch that share the language of the biblical Daniel, or even wisdom literature such as Ben Sira

that can be likened to other biblical books of the Proverbs or Ecclesiastes. Pseudepigraphal

books as we have them today are mainly preserved in Greek, Syriac, Ethiopian and Latin,

although most scholars would say they were primarily written in Hebrew and Aramaic with some

representing diaspora works written in Greek. Likewise, given their time period of suggested

dates, these books are preserving Jewish thought although they are not a theology of Judaism nor

can they really, or are they meant to be, harmonized to find one dominant voice to grasp. In the

very first words of the forward of Charlesworth's two volume set on the Pseudepigrapha, George

Macrae claims the Pseudepigraphal writings in general hold purpose for Jews and Jews who

were Christian, although the writings were more important to incipient Christian thinking than

Judaism itself.1 But also keep in mind that the various texts and traditions, not just the

Pseudepigrapha, that co-existed were voices of Jewish thinking that represented the diversity of

1 Macrae, Pseudepigrapha vol. 1, forward p. ix

3

its day.2 In other words the Pseudepigrapha is ‘not’ Judaism although it has much to say about

what Jews thought during that time. James Kugel comments on this very thought:

“For, even before the Bible had attained its form, its stories, songs, and prophecies had begun to be interpreted. From early times, sages and scholars in ancient Israel had made a practice of looking deeply into the meaning of these sacred writings, and with each new generation, their insights and interpretations were passed on alongside the texts themselves. As a result, as each new age inherited what were to become the Bibles various books from the previous age; it also inherited a body of traditions about those texts.”3

For Kugel, referring to the other Jewish literature rather than the Hebrew Bible, these

other various traditions reflect how the original stories came to be understood more so than they

were an interpretation of them. This is how the Pseudepigrapha fits into the interpretative

trajectory of Jewish thought, thus the topic of interest for this paper will focus on the

Pseudepigraphal voice about Adam and what his place in Jewish history and thinking became.

We are not doing a general survey of the Pseudepigrapha nor are we doing a study of

comparative literature of that day. However, to better help us in understanding what the

Pseudepigrapha may have attempted to say we will do the following. Firstly, the

Pseudepigraphal voices like all other Jewish literature is connected to the biblical Torah as we

have it and therefore we will interact with the text; in our case the book of Genesis. Secondly,

we will touch upon, when appropriate, other contemporary Jewish texts such as Philo, the

Septuagint, the Apocrypha, Dead Sea Scrolls and even the New Testament to help better

comprehend what the Pseudepigrapha might be communicating. Thirdly, and more tangentially,

we will interact with later Jewish views from time to time if the change of thought is worth

noting and/or is helpful to or overall purpose. And fourthly, as already mentioned, the

2 It was not the writings of the Pseudepigraphical books alone but other Jewish ways of thought both in Israel and the Diaspora that reflected their own sense of literature, not to mention the community of Qumran that produced the Dead Sea Scrolls, which provided the basis of a community’s beliefs and traditions to its way of life, as Jews however.3 Kugel, Traditions of the Bible, p.xvii of the PREFACE

4

Pseudepigrapha texts are Jewish voices that are not meant to be unified although reflecting on

both intra-Pseudepigraphal continuity and discontinuity can be helpful for the overall purpose.

So what is our purpose? Already stated in part our purpose will be to look at the various and

select texts of the Pseudepigrapha pertaining to the story of Adam. But our purpose will also be

to explore the various parts of the text to show how Adam also was central in the

Pseudepigraphical traditions as God’s first human, servant of and member of Israel In order to

do this we will look at the biblical story of Adam (and Eve) in connection with the various

Pseudepigraphal texts and attempt to understand their meaning. However, what we shall see is

that the use of the Pseudepigrapha and Adam did reflect Jewish tradition of its day that will help

us reach our goal as stated in our purpose; To better comprehend the figure of Adam in pre-

Rabbinic Thought as portrayed in the Pseudepigrapha.

Part IIAdam and the Pseudepigrapha

Texts to Consider

As said in the opening of this paper the Pseudepigrapha is a collection of writings that

reveal different voices that can also be variations of a theme. Per our purposes there are several

references to the story of Adam scattered throughout this collection of writings with some being

limited to a comment while others are lengthy narratives. Therefore, the relationship of the

Pseudepigrapha to the biblical story of Adam is based on the Genesis narrative that itself is

challenging and sketchy. The trickiness of the Genesis story lays in what it does not say as much

as what it chooses to convey. In this case the problem we are going to encounter is that the

biblical story of Adam that begins in Genesis 2:7 and ends with the conclusion Genesis 5,

although our focus will only be 2:7-3:24, is not only short but also it is very sparse and “God

5

heavy.” In other words the writer of this narrative provides the reader primarily with information

about what God says and does more so than Adam (and later his wife, Eve) really say or do. 4 In

this section we will focus on two Pseudepigrapha books predominantly; the Book of Jubilees and

The Life of Adam and Eve, each uniquely use the Adamic story from Genesis, which is where

we will begin.

Genesis (1) 2:5-3:24

After God creates the world ending with mankind on the six day and the establishment of

the Sabbath on the seventh day the narrative turns its attention to the creation of Adam in

particular whom is created by God from the dust of the ground. The land was barren although

the rivers provided water and God placed Adam in the midst of the Garden of Eden with pleasing

food of every tree as well as the tree of knowledge. Adam was charged with the responsibility to

maintain and cultivate the grounds as well as to name all the animals. God saw that there was no

other like Adam so from his rib formed a helper who would be called a woman. Adam and his

wife (so the woman would be called) lived naked with no shame as they cared for the garden,

only being asked to avoid eating the fruit from the tree of Knowledge although every other plant

and tree was there for their liking. The woman is tempted by the serpent to eat of the fruit of the

forbidden tree and she convinces Adam, her husband, to partake of it also. As a result of their

disobedience, first, Adam and Eve see each other’s nakedness unlike before. Second, God

appears in the midst of the garden searching for Adam (not the woman) by way of explanation.

Third, both Adam and his wife, when confronted by God do not accept responsibility for their

actions. Fourth, the result of shunning their responsibility was followed by God’s judgments

that led to, fifth, their banishment from the garden. Upon leaving the garden by way of exile two

4 Although they are both recorded as speaking twice there is no human thought about their circumstances throughout the story.

6

angels are left to guard the entrance and Adam and Eve begin their family outside the Garden of

Eden.

The Book of Jubilees (2) 2:17-3:25

The book of Jubilees also recounts the creation and references the creation of mankind on

the sixth day and the Shabbat on the seventh. After the creation statements it is the Sabbath that

occupies the next section, initially with Adam till Jacob (and Jacob’s seed) being asked to keep

the Sabbath whose laws and testimony would also be for every generation to follow. Over the

next six days, Adam would name all of the animals in five of them, then on the sixth would see

the fullness of his taken rib come to life in the creation of the woman. After two weeks of

creation and another 40 days Adam and his wife (cause of childbirth here the Laws of Niddah are

in mind) were placed into Eden where for the next eight years they took care of the land before

their encounter with the serpent is recorded. While the story after the seven days of creation in

Jubilees is focused on the Sabbath, the biblical text of Genesis was focused on the story of

Adam’s journey in the garden. The Jubilees writer wants his readers to see the connection

between Adam, and even his wife, to the Sabbath by showing how each was created on the sixth

day, of the first and second weekly respectively, the day before the Sabbath itself; this is not in

the peshat of the Genesis text. While we will return to this later, for now we will continue with

the story of Adam and his wife and the consequences rerecorded in Jubilees when they partook

of the fruit of the forbidden tree. First, like the Genesis story they needed to cover themselves of

their nakedness out of shame. Second, both Adam and Eve are subject to God’s judgment

although the Jubilees text does not record the actual command from God to Adam and his wife,

nor are their reactions even though that was recorded in Genesis. Still, after the eating of the

fruit is recorded, God like in the Genesis text casts out punishments on Adam and his wife even

7

if the walking in the midst of the garden is also not recorded. Third, Jubilees makes no mention

of two angels guarding the entrance of Eden so Adam and his wife could not return although we

do read that Adam took spices from the garden to offer sacrifices and that all the animals that he

named and understood were unintelligible now to his hearing. And finally, for now, the covering

of Adam and his wife’s shame did not end with just an animal skin as recorded in Genesis but

the law of the command itself. The focus on the Sabbath, the Law and how to repair the

consequences of what had been broken in Jubilees 2-3 is not the same as Genesis 2-3 that records

the story about a man and his wife who were asked not to eat of a particular tree and expelled

from the garden when they did.

O.S. Wintermute suggests that Jubilees seemed to be dependent on the books of Enoch

whereas in Qumran, the Dead Sea Scrolls was dependent on Jubilees. 5 All this by way of dating

is developed to show that Jubilees was written in Hebrew sometime in the 2nd century BCE and

fits into a Jewish corpus of thought. 6 Wintermute also makes the claim that the very title

according to the Qumran literature connects the purpose of this book with the Torah, and

therefore Israel, in regards to date and seasons. The importance of this work was to connect the

writer’s world to that of Moses in order “to restore a proper relationship with his (God’s) people

and call its readers to repentance.” 7 Yet with topics such as angels and demons being addressed

Wintermute says that Jubilees is reflective of a writer who was either of the Hasidic or Essene

branch of the Judaism of that day with the book being written before the priestly split brought

about the rise of the Qumran community given that there is no indication of problems revealed in

the book of Jubilees itself. Thus Wintermute concluded that the Jubliee’s writer was most likely

5 Wintermute on the introduction to the Book of Jubilees, p. 35-35, The Pseudepigrapha, vol. II Charlesworth Editor.6 Here is a case as mentioned in the introduction of a book being more than likely in Hebrew although preserved in another language.7 Wintermute, introduction to the Book of Jubilees, p. 47. The Pseudepigrapha, vol. II.

8

a priest who had an extensive understanding of the Torah and the Prophets (less so the Writings

since they had not been redacted as such) and is holding Israel accountable for its actions as to

not go astray. In fact Wintermute makes it clear that the future restoration of Israel was the

intent beind the Jubilees writer who has a differing view “of God’s intent for Israel vis-a-vis the

other nations, seeming to call “for a rejection of all things gentile.” It is not our purpose to

investigate the gentile issue but when looking at the Jubiless text it does seem to appear more

legal and Israel focused. Therefore according to Wintermute an underlying legality is found in

Adam’s story with regrad to childbirth and perhaps the laws if Niddah (Jub. 2:18-14) and the

propbition of nudity thereby distinguishing mankind and the animals (Jub. 2:15-26). In our

telling of the story above it was said that while the Gensis text contiuned with Adam in the

garden the Jubliees text contiuned with the place of the Sabbath in Israel calling on its first man,

Adam, to the obedience of Torah. In this case Jubliees is more intent upon “the seed” of Jacob

than the Adam story itself. More than that, the Jubilees concern in the Story of Adam went

beyond just the Sabbath but spoke itnto the keeping of Torah and the worhsip of God. For the

Jubiless writer it is possiblee that his focus on Israel, the Law and the Sabbath (and not Adam) is

how he came to understand the Gensis story itself.

The Life of Adam and Eve

The Life of Adam and Eve is the other Pseudepigraphal book with an expanded story

regarding the Adam and Eve narrative from Genesis. However, unlike Jubilees, the intention of

the writer of this book seems to be more concerned with the actual events preceding their

expulsion as well as how they reacted to their new environment outside of Eden. Thus while the

Jubilees writer addressed the two weeks of creation and the other 40 days before Adam and Eve

are placed in the garden, as well as the fact that Adam was created from the dust of the earth and

9

Eve from his rib, the Life of Adam and Eve aside from a brief mention about Adam and the dust

(or clay) where he was created from and will return, makes no real mention of creation at all.

This dual manuscript, one being Latin and the other being Greek (some material is shared and

some is unique to either manuscript) portrays a story of Adam and Eve in the garden, acclimating

to a new surroundings outside the Garden and the recounting of their interactions with the devil

himself. The book recalls Adam’s (Latin) and Eve’s (Greek) very different versions of the events

that lead to their exile from Eden, the temptation, God’s appearance in the garden, the nature of

the punishments, their reaction when they were removed and the repentance (and restoration)

that followed, their death, and in the case of Adam, the plight of both his soul and body. More

than that, they are greatly detailed. For example, how Satin deceived Adam and Eve is

recounted in particulars, twice, not found in Genesis and Jubilees. Likewise, the eating of the

fruit itself, hence we have an expanded dialog between Satan and Eve regarding making sure the

wife would indeed deceive her husband who Satan wanted to destroy for getting him kicked out

of the pre-garden paradise. The same is so for the events surrounding Adam’s death (not even

his wife) that garner no more than a mention in Genesis 5:8 whereas in Jubilees 4:29-30 the

writer makes sure his readers know that Adam’s death was a byproduct of his sin of eating from

the forbidden tree. Thus, in the Life of Adam and Eve, Adam (as does Eve later) recounts the

error of the fruit from the tree that got them expelled as well as his need to have spices from

Eden for sacrifices or that Eve attempted to take on the pain of her husband given her own guilt

for what happened. The roles of the angels who guard the tree and guard the garden are

recounted in this book with no parallel. In the end mention is made regarding the care of

Adam’s body by the angels while at the same time a detailed account of Adam’s soul to be

presented before God is recalled. Such detail is not found in the biblical Genesis or in the

10

Pseudepigraphal Jubilees.

D. Johnson writing on the Life of Adam and Eve presents a whole different set of issues. 8

Finding a date, ultimately being 100BCE to 200CE, has proven difficult for Johnson given that

(1) the only preserved copies of this text are in Greek (ApMos) and Latin (Vita) that are much

later; (2) there appears to be a relationship to not only other Pseudepigraphal texts but also

rabbinic Judaism, the Dead Sea Scrolls as well as the New Testament and (3) at best inter

polemical Hebraisms suggest an early Hebrew version and therefore Jewish foundation. Johnson

while noticing similarities with New Testament views (especially from Paul) has resisted the

temptation to harmonize them but simply say they both operated from a common tradition

without explanation. The other complexity Johnson offers in his writing is the harmonization of

the ApMos and the Vita texts into one story. Here, the problem at hand is, while there are shared

story lines such as with the fact that sin entered the human race through the woman or that Adam

came from the clay or the dust of the ground there are stories such as the final episode of Adam’s

soul and body that only Eve recounts in detail as well as the events in the garden itself. Another

Jewish view made popular during this time period and not hinted at in either Genesis or Jubilees

is that of resurrection, although it is also thought to possibly be a Christian interpolation to the

original text. So an evil heart is replaced by a godly heat (ApMos 13), what was withheld via the

tree of life (ApMos 6:2) was now given in its fullness (ApMos 28) and the oil that was not given

to sooth Adam’s pain would be given at the due time (ApMos 13). Likewise while the story of

Adam’s dialog with Satan and his ascent into the heavenly paradise are recorded in the Vita

version, Seth’s quest for the healing oil at Adam’s burial narrative are found in the ApMos;

Johnson simply appeals to the appropriate text as he outlines the entire book as he assumes there

was a common source they partook in. It is therefore concluded by Johnson, although with

8 Johnson, introduction to The Life of Adam and Eve, pp. 249-256. The Pseudepigrapha, vol. II.

11

uncertainty, that the writer of The Life and Adam and Eve was a “Palestinian” Jew who has a

“non-Philonian approach to biblical interpretation” where allegorization under lies the said

conclusions, and presented more of a Haggadic Midrash than a letter that hailed legal observance

as was the case of Jubilees. Thus in the end it is the “The biblical story of the Fall of the first

humans and its effect has grasped and stimulated the minds of Jews, Christians and Muslims

from antiquity to the present day.” Therefore it is a universal intent to the plight of mankind that

motivated the writer of The Life of Adam and Eve and just not the obedience to God’s Law and

role of the Israel per Jubilees.

Albeit just an overview, what we just saw is how two different Pseudepigraphal texts

related to the Genesis story about Adam. In so doing it would be an error to assume that they

were interpreting Genesis more so than they allowed Genesis to speak into their individual

concerns. It is here we are faced with our first challenge of Pseudepigraphal interpretation; these

are individual books with their own meanings yet can we also speak to the whole? As said, the

goal here is not to harmonize the books of the Pseudepigrapha and present a theology of thought

however there is no reason not look at the whole, nor should it be avoided, in terms of continuity

as well as discontinuity. Conversely the nature of these books, yes as a whole, raises the question

of what they said in the Jewish world that they seem to have emerged from. It was noted at the

start that Macare stated that Christian thinking more than Judaism benefited from the extant

Pseudepigraphal texts of the time. Likewise, Jewish writer and Rabbi, Samuel Sandmill writes

that “By and large it has been Christians who have done the painstaking work of gathering the

material, comparing the various manuscripts, producing critical editions and providing

translations into modern language.” 9 Bottom line for Sandmill is that the Pseudepigrapha does

not fit into the noted rabbinic literature of the Midrashim, Mishnah and Gemara or even the

9 Samuel Sandmill, PREPACE, p. xii. The Pseudepigrapha, vol. I.

12

Targumim that related to the biblical text. Investigating the full extent of the Pseudepigraphal

background is beyond our purpose but even within our limited scope, vis-a-vis Adam, but can we

deduce a meaning of Jewish thought during that time period even though it became common

thought that the Pseudepigraphal text served the Christian community much more than Judaism?

Both Jubilees and The Life of Adam and Eve appealed to the Genesis story of Adam for the basis

of their message. Still, others like The Symboline Oracles, The book of 4Ezra, 2 Baruch, The

Testament of Adam, to name a few also called upon Adam in their writings. That being so for

this paper we will ask how the selected Pseudepigraphal texts may have understood various

related topics about the story of Adam as a key-figure in pre-rabbinic Jewish minds.

Part IIIAdam in the Pseudepigrapha

Questions to consider

The Genesis text offers the readers’ questions to ponder given a textual lack of

interpretation.10 Such questions may ask, what is the relationship between Genesis 1:27 and 2:7

&18 regarding the creation of Adam, and his wife? Another question may be, what was Adam’s

role in the world and how should it be viewed? Likewise, what was Adam and his wife's

relationship to the rest of humanity let alone to that of Israel and the Jewish people? Still, a

bigger question may ask, did the writers of the Pseudepigrapha even ask those questions, or for

that matter, concern themselves with the questions above? The fact is it is hard to know for sure

although that does not mean such answers are not imbedded in the Pseudepigraphal texts

themselves. In this section we will look at three topics; (1) The Creation of Adam, (2) The 10 Jubilees for example, as we have seen and will throughout this paper, will attempt to connect the Law back to Genesis. It can be assumed that the voice of the text was part of the interpretation process. See why Rashi asked the question why the Torah did not begin till Exodus 12 for the same reason.

13

Purpose of Adam, and (3) The Person of Adam; this will help us to determine how the various

Pseudepigrapha texts may have spoken into them. But this will also help us to understand better

the figure of Adam in pre-Rabbinic thought as portrayed in the writings of the Pseudepigrapha

The Creation of Adam

The writer of Jubilees as noted above like the earlier Genesis 1 text provides an overview

of the creation in 2:1-12 Likewise, in Jubilees 2:13-14 it says the following:

“And on the sixth day he made all of the beasts of the earth and all of the cattle and everything which moves upon the earth. And after all of this, he made man - male and female he created them – and gave them dominion over everything which was upon the earth and which was in the seas and over everything which flies, and over beasts and cattle and everything which moves on the earth …”

Regarding then the creation of man, made male and female, the Jubilees writer in 3:8 of

that book goes on to say;

“In the first week Adam was created and also the rib for his wife. And in the second week he showed her to him. And therefore the commandment was given to observe seven days for the male but a female twice seven days in her impurity.”

“Twice the seven days in her impurity” is beyond the scope of this paper more so than to

say that this view is also shared by rabbinic authorities although tracking the history of this view

is another study. Of interest to us, however is the interpretation of the Jubilees writer about

creation. Aside from the purity comment, the writer tells us that one, Adam was created during

the first week of creation along with the rib that would be his wife on the sixth day, and two, the

Rib was made manifest in the flesh of the woman on the second week of creation also on the

sixth day. Creation for the man and woman in Jubilees was a two-week process with Adam and

the woman, but was this a statement about an underlying Genesis theology? This unique view

14

belongs only to the book of Jubilees and does lend credibility to the purpose behind it as we shall

see a bit later. Therefore while later Jewish commentaries on Genesis, such as Rashi, sought to

harmonize Genesis 1 and 2; chapter 1 is a general overview of creation to include the creation of

Adam, whereas chapter 2 is specific about how that was accomplished. Likewise with the

Midrashim of Rabbenu Bachta’s Sefer Ikkarim 2, or Bereshit Rabbah 9, they saw creation to

extend beyond the seven days provided in Genesis. One has to wonder if the writer of Jubilees

like his contemporary, in terms of dating, Philo, understood Adam to be an androgynous? Philo

writes that the “composite human” of Genesis 1:27 was created as “male and female”

representing an “androgyne” and their “individual members” (as Adam and his wife) had “not

yet taken shape” till Genesis 2, thus “Elohim separates man and woman” by creating Eve

separating the “composite individual man.” 11 While Jubilees does not maintain that view

outright, The Apocalypse of Adam (ApAdam) perhaps does. It therefore says in ApAdam 1:4,

“The God of the ruler of the aeon, and the powers, separated us.” In his footnote to the text, G.

Macrae has concluded that this is in reference to the androgynous primordial state of Adam and

Eve before their individual person’s in Genesis 2. Yet, Macrae also relates this as exclusive to

the ApAdam text as the vast majority of the Pseudepigrapha is not made up of gnostic

influences.12 Other Pseudepigraphal texts also concern themselves with Adam (and Eve’s)

creation but do not connect Genesis 1 and 2 the way Jubilees does. Again, what about Genesis;

what can we learn from that text and did it in anyway influence the Pseudepigraphal writers?

Let’s look at the other narrative from The Life of Adam and Eve where we read in ApMos 4:13:

11 The Creation of Man and Woman Gerard Luttikhuizen, Editor, Ed Noort, “The Creation of Man and Woman,” Brill, 2000. See page 3.

12 G. Macrae, p. 710, The Pseudepigrapha, vol.I

15

“And God called to Adam and said, ‘Adam, Adam’ And the body answered from the ground and said, ‘Here I am Lord.’ And the Lord said to him, ‘I told you that you are dust and to dust you shall return” (ApMos 41:3)

Likewise it also says in the Vita text:

“Cast me not out from Thy presence, (me) whom Thou didst form of the clay of the earth.” (Vita 27:2)

Here, Adam’s creation was from the clay, or dust, meaning the ground. In that spirit we

read in the book of 4Ezra 3:5, “O Sovereign Lord, did you not speak at the beginning when you

formed the earth – and that without help – and commanded the dust and it gave you Adam’s

lifeless body? Yet he was the workmanship of our hands and you breathed into him the breath of

life …” The words of Ben Sira are similar that say “All men are from the ground, and Adam was

created of the dust” (Wisdom of Sirach 33:10).

As just asked, then, were the Pseudepigraphal influenced at all from the Genesis text itself

that such views existed? What has been called the “two creation stories” of mankind is found in

Genesis 1:26-27 and 2:7, 18-22 although they have noted differences that can help us to shed

some on possibly primary Pseudepigraphal connections for Adam to Genesis 2, and not, Genesis

1.13 In this case we read in Genesis 1:27 that אדם was created whereas in Genesis 2:7 it says

was created, even more specifically from the earth itself. Likewise, in Genesis 1:27 האדם את

and in Genesis 2:23 when Eve was made from Adam’s rib it says that ונקבה זכר was created אדם

Regarding Jubilees 3:3, then, when Adam was given the .מאיש כי אשה became האדם את

mandate in the second week after creation to name all the animals he observed they were “male

and female,” not only recalling Genesis 1:27 that called man “male and female,” but also when

Noah brought every kind of animal and creature into the ark two by two in Genesis 6:19-20, he

13 Kugel, p. 108. We will not address that in this paper although the view is debated.

16

did so as “male and female.” Therefore, mankind (אדם) created in Genesis 1:27 was made male

and female (ונקבה זכר) just like the beasts of land, the fish of the sea and the birds of the air (Gen

1:21-25; also see. Jub. 3:3 where Adam names all the animalsl) whereas the created man of

Genesis 2:7 (האדם את) appears to be a particular story about a man made from the ground. This

view is helped by the later LXX and its understanding between Genesis 1:27 and Genesis 2:7.

Here in Genesis 1:26-27 and Genesis 2:7 the Greek word ανθρωπος for man is used in

correspondence with the Hebrew אדם, and τον ανθρωπος is used in 2:7 just like the Hebrew

to indicate a singular man. What is different, however, is that in Genesis 2:16 the ,האדם את

Hebrew reads האדם את although the Greek reads Αδαμ, and no longer τον ανθρωπος, thereby

suggesting that by the time of the Greek translation the story was commonly accepted to be about

Adam in particular. So this makes sense for 4 Ezra and Wisdom of Sirach not to mention The

Life of Adam and Eve (cf. ApMos 41:3 and Vita 27:3) that their Adam is connected to creation

from the ground in Genesis 2 alone.

In can therefore be suggested that the writer of the book of Jubilees was not attempting,

per se, to connect the two stories as one. The first creation week was Adam and the Rib that

would be the woman and second creation week with the fleshing of the rib that was to be Eve

(see again Jub. 3:8). It would be an error to assume that Jubilees, like the Gnostic Apocalypse of

Adam, “separated” created man as male and female because he was androgynous. In fact it is

not at all clear that the writer of Jubilees (or the other texts in this conversation) had any interest,

or for that matter purpose, of even addressing the (how or why of the) initial creation of Adam,

he just was and from the ground. Noted again, the writer of Jubilees does not even mention how

or where Adam came from and the continuing story after the creation was not Adam and his life

(as in Genesis) but the Sabbath itself. In short, what the writer of Jubilees appears to have done

17

is connect the creation of mankind, beginning with Adam on the sixth day to the keeping of the

Sabbath day (seventh day) and the Law that would be holy for Israel generationally (also see this

theme in Pseudo-Philo 44:6 and 2 Baruch 84:9). The writer of Jubilees offers his readers two

expanded sections about the Laws of the Sabbath themselves given their importance (Jub. 2:17-

33 and 50:1-13).

Although The Life of Adam and Eve only mentions the Sabbath in connection to Seth

mourning the deaths of his father and mother, Adam and Eve, in chapters 42-43 and 51, the use

of the Sabbath and Adam are unique only to Jubilees. Therefore looking at that connection

Adam is the first of God’s people charged with the responsibility to keep the Sabbath as a sign of

the covenant, thus, “Behold I will separate for myself a people from among all the nations and

they will keep my Sabbath” (Jub. 2:19). But behind the intent to this text may be the priestly

nature of its writer. The Sabbath, as well as various laws is part of his writing, prompting

Wintermute above to suggest that likely the Jubilees writer was a priest of an order that

eventually split to from Qumran. What should the be added is that if portions (if not all) of

Genesis 1, 5,6,7,8 10 and 11 are said to be a part of the P Document and in general the P

Document was written by the priests of Israel’s post exilic period in order to show that God has

not turned his back on Israel, then could we equally say that if it was indeed a priest who wrote

Jubilees, given when it was written (per Westermute), that his concerns would be the same?14

The Jubilees focus, then, on the Sabbath, as well as the Patriarchs, the Law and sacrifice, gives

one the sense of continuity with the post-exilic period of Jewish thought and its relationship to

the P documents of Torah.15 In other words, the Jubilees text as a priestly text should come as no

14 Kugler and Hartin, pp. 103-104; Brettler, p. 3515 See Kugel, pp. 166-167, 634, 673 and 824, and Buckham, pp. 123-128. The point here is that the writings of Jubilees are representative of many other Pseudepigraphical books that were written during the post-exilic time (and into antiquity) just as the priestly documents in general. That being so there is every reason to see how the mutual influences and theological concerns are the same, or at least similar, of priestly inspirations.

18

surprise given the help of modern interpretative tools. The connection of Adam and the Sabbath

underlies the very theme of this paper regarding Adam’s relationship to Israel.

The Purpose of Adam

The purpose of Adam will stand out as a separate section although really his propose and

person is one in the same. Our view here will be that Adam according to Jubilees represents the

first person of God but also the first member of the people of Israel. But according to other

Pseudepigraphical texts Adam’s purpose was also to represent the glory of God’s creation.

Beginning with the idea of Adam being the glory of God we read in Ben Sira 49:16, “so was

Adam above every living thing in creation.” The book of 4 Ezra 3:6 claims that God would

“lead him [Adam] into the garden which your right hand has planted before the earth appeared”

that allowed Jon Levenson to conclude that “Adam was an immortal individual who lived in a

preexistent paradise.”16 Levenson also evoked 4 Ezra 4:7-8 and 7:36-37 that polarized “hell” and

“paradise” making Levenson’s conclusion plausible, thus Adam preexisted (in glory) in paradise

before he would eventually be led into the garden upon the earth by God himself (to represent

glory). This view of paradise before the garden quite possibly finds some support in The Life of

Adam and Eve, Vita 11:2, where Adam has a dialog with the devil asking, “What evil have we

done to you? For it is because of your calumnies that we went out from paradise. Is it because

we have caused you to be expelled that you are angry against us?” Was paradise the place

where Satan was kicked out of but also first encountered Adam? 17 Adam’s glory, per the

Pseudepigrapha, was witnessed by the fact that he had dominion over the entire creation in

Jubilees 2:14, he lived naked and unashamed in Jubilees 3:15 as well as being the first priest of 16 Levenson, Portraits, p. 11617 Under the source of Adam’s sin below 2 Baruch tells us that Satan participated in the construction of the Garden with the tree to be avoided. Adam and Satan may have cohabitated in that same preexistent place prior to the garden itself.

19

Israel also imbedded Jubilees 3:17-31. Adam is hailed as God’s glory in 2 Enoch 30:11 calling

him “great and glorious” to be exalted above the rest of humankind according as we saw in Ben

Sira 49:16. Furthermore, Adam’s life was to be beyond death according to 4 Ezra 3:4-11 as he

was also considered to be the exaltation of wisdom per the words of 2 Baruch 51:3; lastly when

Abraham asks the angel, who was the most glorious off all mankind, the answer is Adam

according to the Testament of Abraham 11:1-10.

Yet in that state of glory Adam’s purpose was also as the first servant and the first

member of Israel. To help this point we will look the interpretative grid that has been labeled as

primordial history, from Genesis 1-11, to help reconstruct Adam’s purpose. Genesis 1-11,

according to Claus Westermann, offers a history that “establishes a relationship between God

and all that is [thus] in these chapters lies the heart of every event, wherever located in space and

time.”18 Moses Edelman added “in that narrative it is possible to identify several distinct

episodes: the origins of humanity [as well as] the ancestors of Israel …”19 The question of

primordial history of Genesis 1-11 furthermore allowed Edelman to write “the story of Abram’s

call (Genesis 12) is constructed to serve as a contrast to the story of the ‘tower of Babel’

(Genesis 11). For Edelman, then, Israel’s history begins after the primordial history of Genesis

1-11 with Genesis 12 that begins the story of Abraham the first patriarch of Israel.

In this paper the primordial history of Genesis 1-11 will help us to show that the

beginnings of Israel did not start with Abraham, as is commonly held per Edelman, but with

Adam. So not only did Edelman hold to the former but also Westermann concluded, “God is

not dealing here with a specific people or a specific religion, but with the totality of the world

18 Westermann, pp. 85-8619 Edelman, Davies, Philip Nihan, pp. 12-13

20

and the total human race, from beginning to end.” This certainly does not seem to fit with the

writer of Jubilees who wrote in 2:23-24:

“There were twenty-two chief men from Adam to Jacob, and twenty-two kinds of work that were made before the seventh day…and it was granted to the former that they should always be the blessed and sanctified ones of the testimony and the first law just as he has sanctified and blessed the Sabbath day on the seventh day.”

What does the above say? Well aside from the fact that the generations ending with Jacob

(and his seed mentioned elsewhere in Jubilees) were to be the workers who maintained the

sanctified things of God, such as the Sabbath of the seventh day, it was Adam, and not Abraham,

who was the first of the “chief men.” Next question, who were these men? “Adam to Jacob”

was a particular line and not just a random selection of names. Thus in the contemporary

Pseudepigraphal text of the first century, Pseudo-Philo, five of the first ten chapters (1, 2, 4, 5

and 9) are dedicated to genealogies that begin with Adam until Moses to help establish Israel.

Although slightly later, 2nd century CE, another Pseudepigraphical text to mention is the

Testament of Isaac, in particular 3:15, which speaks of a genealogy between Adam and

Abraham:

“… I mean our father Adam, the created one, who God formed with his own hand; likewise our mother Eve; also Abel and Seth and our father Enoch and Mahalalel, the father of Methuselah and Lamech, the father of Jared and Enoch, the father of our father Noah and his sons, Shem, Ham and Japheth and after them Phinehas and Kenen and Noah and Eber and Reu and Terah and Nahor and my father Abraham …”20

Jewish Philosopher Michael Wyschogrod notes why the Bible begins with the story of

Adam and not Abraham given the universal nature of the message to all people.21 Wyschogrod

20 Brettler comments on the importance of genealogies in Israel, pp, 129ff. In this case 1 Chronicles 1:1ff makes the connection between Adam and Abraham as does the New Testament book of Luke 3:34-38.21 Michael Wyschogrod, “The Body of Faith” page 103.

21

furthermore writes that Israel was chosen, albeit an imperfect nation, just as Adam was also

imperfect, reflecting the continuity of the Adam-Israel relationship allowing Wysochgrod to

further write, “God dwells in Israel. He dwells in the midst of its uncleanness. He envelops

Israel. Israel is Hashem’s abode in the created world. Nothing that Israel does is therefore

unrelated to Hashem…” 22 In many respects it can be argued that in the Adamic history of the

Genesis primordial text there is a particular and a general message; “God dwells in Israel” but

also with Adam. Adam therefore represents all mankind (general) but also represents the first

person of God and therefore the people of Israel (particular). However, was this to be seen as a

standard view in the Pseudepigrapha? As much as the writer of Jubilees tells us that the “chief

men” were from Adam to Jacob he also wants to make it known that the promises of Abraham

were specific through Isaac, and thus Jacob. We therefore read in Jubilees 16:13-16 that

Abraham has several children but it was Isaac who was the seed of promise and not the others;

“Adam to Jacob” includes Abraham and Isaac.

The Jubilees writer’s goal is Israel and therefore like Genesis needs to distinguish Ishmael

and Isaac. Yet the place of Abraham, Isaac and therefore Jacob begin with Adam, which is why

after recounting the twenty-two “chief men” from Adam to Jacob the Jubilees writer turns his

attention to the keeping of the Sabbath and writes in 3:26, “And you, command the children of

Israel, and let them guard this day so that they might sanctify it …” Taking a step back this

paper is not about Abraham and certainly while the patriarchs of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are

also central to the Jubilees writer, who devotes chapter 11-23 in his book on them, our concern is

Adam. Above we stated that the Bible’s primordial history of mankind includes the story of

Israel that begins with the story of Adam (and not Abraham), who represents the first chosen

person of God. It is with this understanding that the narrative of Adam will underscore the

22 Ibid. p. 212

22

interconnectedness of not only the creation to mankind but also Adam to Israel; Israel is the

chosen people of God in fulfilment of the first election of Adam. Adam was chosen to

accomplish his role while in that state of unity with God’s just as Israel would be elected to the

same. The election of Adam and his stated purposes were clearly intertwined. But what needs to

be clarified here is that Adam who represented the first member of Israel was also the first

servant of God. Thus Adam came from the ground and was charged with the responsibility to

tend to it in order to receive its fruit just as Eve came from Adam and was assigned to be his help

mate. Conversely, the ground was dependent on Adam to till it so it would yield its produce just

as Adam was to “know” Eve in order for their child to be born. The idea that the creation was

dependent upon each other in order to function provides background for Adam whose service

was connected with the creation itself. Yet prior to Adam’s service in the garden the Jubilees

writer tells of a time that pre-dated that time. Looking at 3:8-14 we read:

“In the first week was Adam created, and the rib -his wife: in the second week He showed her unto him: and for this reason the commandment was given to keep in their defilement, for a male seven days, and for a female twice seven days. And after Adam had completed forty days in the land where he had been created, we brought him into the garden of Eden to till and keep it, but his wife they brought in on the eightieth day, and after this she entered into the garden of Eden. And for this reason the commandment is written on the heavenly tablets in regard to her that gives birth: 'if she bears a male, she shall remain in her uncleanness seven days according to the first week of days, and thirty and three days shall she remain in the blood of her purifying, and she shall not touch any hallowed thing, nor enter into the sanctuary, until she accomplishes these days which (are enjoined) in the case of a male child. But in the case of a female child she shall remain in her uncleanness two weeks of days, according to the first two weeks, and sixty-six days in the blood of her purification, and they will be in all eighty days. And when she had completed these eighty days we brought her into the garden of Eden.”

Once this time was complete that lasted eighty days only then do we read of this nirvana

like relationship of Adam and Eve with their surroundings and interconnectedness that is

summed are summed up in Jubilees 3:15-16 that says:

23

“And during the first week of the jubilees Adam and his wife has been in the garden of Eden for seven years tilling and guarding it. And we gave him work and were teaching him to do everything which was appropriate for tilling. And he was tilling. And he was naked, but he either knew it or was ashamed.”

Adam and his wife had an organic relationship to their environment and lived in a state of

harmony were even physical nakedness was not seen as unusual. Who were Adam and Eve that

they could live in that state unhindered? Better yet where were they during the eighty weeks

before the seven years in Eden? We do not know, so Genesis simply says the following:

Genesis 2:5-7

“No shrub of the field was yet in the earth, and no herb of the field had yet sprung up; for HaShem God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground; but there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground. Then HaShem God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.”

Genesis 2:18

“And HaShem God said: 'It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a help mate for him.”

A quick survey of the above texts reveals the following. First, in Jubilees there is an

eighty day period after Adam, and his wife, are created before they are brought into the Garden

of Eden, but not in Genesis. Second, in Genesis 2:7, and for the matter the Life of Adam and

Eve (cf. ApMos 41:3 and Vita 27:3), Adam is created from the ground by God to care of Eden

that needs tilling and lay baron and then his wife is created from his rib (remember in Jubilees

Adam and the rib are created at the same time and the rib is made flesh a week later). Third,

their state of harmony and nakedness is a part of their earthly dwelling in the garden and reflects

their untarnished glory. It does appear that the writer of Jubilees was not really interested

however in harmonizing his writings with Genesis given Adam’s pre-garden experience (see Jub.

3:8-14 above) although the writers of 4 Ezra wrote, “[God] lead him [Adam] into the garden

24

which your right hand has planted before the earth appeared.” We really cannot know if

Jubilees and 4 Ezra operated from the same tradition although the possibility is intriguing. What

we do see is that the Pseudepigraphical writers connect Adam’s service to Israel according to

Baruch 4:2-5 that says:

“This building now built in your midst is not that which is revealed with Me, that which prepared beforehand here from the time when I took counsel to make Paradise, and showed Adam before he sinned, but when he transgressed the commandment it was removed from him, as also Paradise. And after these things I showed it to My servant Abraham by night among the portions of the victims. And again also I showed it to Moses on Mount Sinai when I showed to the likeness of the tabernacle and all its vessels.”

Here, Adam, Abraham and Moses are all referred to as God’s servants of the tabernacle

who would also represent a continuous line of people that begins with Adam (although he

sinned), then Abraham and ultimately Moses. In the bible again “who” Adam was is not stated

more than he was. Conversely, the bible speaks to the glory of Israel, thus in Isaiah 46:13 it

says, “I bring near My righteousness, it shall not be far off, and My salvation shall not tarry; and

I will place salvation in Zion for Israel My glory.” The bible presents Israel as the glory of God

whereas the Pseudepigrapha hail's Adam as the glory of God. Yet we do find in 4 Ezra 9:31 the

teaching that Israel is “glorified through” the Law, which while not the same, certainly

represents one way Israel was glorified. Therefore, it was Adam who was the first human

created by God and it was Israel who the first born nation of God (i.e. Ex. 4:22) that in many

ways allows Adam to be considered a patriarch.23 The writer of 3 Enoch 30:11 presents this first

man of all God’s people as “great and glorious” prior to Israel (also see Isaiah 49:3). Israel is

God’s glory because they are as chosen by Him as it says in Deuteronomy 7:6, “For God has

chosen you to be his treasured people” just as Adam was chosen by God to work and guard the

garden. Adam was glorified through his call to service and obedience to the command as Israel 23 Hayward, p. 448

25

was gloried through the Law via 4 Ezra. But Adam was just not a one-man Israel of some kind,

but his own person who pre-figured Israel. Adam was the first person, and priest, of Israel in the

Pseudepigrapha as implied in Jubilees 3:25, so to the entire nation of was a priest in Jubilees

33:20. They both were called and were given a task; we will return to this below.

Concluding this section then, we began by looking to the primordial history of Genesis 1-

11 to better help recognize Adam as a key figure in the Pseudepigrapha that itself presents Adam

as the glory of God and the first servant of God. The glorified Adam (and not Abraham) then

also represents first chosen people of God to be fulfilled in a nation, Israel, making Genesis 1-11

just not a general story about mankind. It is with this understanding that the narrative of Adam

will underscore the interconnectedness of not only the creation but also Adam to Israel.

Furthermore, any such state of peace and unity that flourished in the garden was confirmed in the

Shabbat (for all Israel as well) that was the symbol of God’s completion and satisfaction and is

the reason more than likely that Jubilees prioritized the Sabbath in his writing over the story of

Adam and his wife itself (see the section above on creation and Adam). Adam and his seed

culminating in Israel were God’s glory seen in the Law and their service.

The Person of Adam

In the previous section we saw that the purpose of Adam was to be the first person to

represent God’s glory on earth, the first person of God’s servants and the first person of a nation

that would be called Israel. Adam and Israel were God’s glory not just because they were

formed by Him, but because they had a purpose as part of the larger creation that they existed

within. Taking it one more step their glory was also tied into the very presence of God to be an

active partner in their midst (This is not something we’ll develop in this paper but as we shall

26

see, and have seen, it is present in the related texts). 24 In this section the purposes of the

previous section will morph into Adam’s person where the nature of his service will be explored

as well as his sin and what caused it, his free-will, his connection to the command, his

repentance, and in the end, his restoration. Yet as in the last section here too the Adam-Israel

connection will be made. Therefore, beginning with Israel let’s develop their sense of service as

a chosen nation. We read the following:

Exodus 19:5-6

“Now therefore, if ye will hearken unto My voice indeed, and keep My covenant, then ye shall be Mine own treasure from among all peoples; for all the earth is Mine; and ye shall be unto Me a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.”

Isaiah 49:6

“Yea, He saith: 'It is too light a thing that thou shouldest be My servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the offspring of Israel; I will also give thee for a light of the nations, that My salvation may be unto the end of the earth.’”

Based on Isaiah 49:13 we saw from the previous section that Israel found its glory not just

in the cloak of a chosen or particular nation, but in God for the later interpreters; “For God will

lead Israel with joy, in the light of his glory, with the mercy and righteousness that come from

him.”25 Referring back to Jubilees 2:16 Israel is chosen to serve God in keeping the Sabbath and

the Law and in Jubilees 33:20, in the backdrop of Exodus 19:5-6, “Israel is a holy nation to the

Lord his God, and a nation of inheritance, and a nation of priests …” Israel was chosen to be a

nation of priests that served as a light to the world for the sake of God. Thus, in the Bible Israel

24 In the previous section we saw how the very glory of Adam was tied into a pre-garden connection with God in another sphere according to some texts of the Pseudepigrapha. Likewise a pillar of fire at night and a cloud by day leading Israel through the wilderness can be said to represent God’s presence with Israel.25 See Baruch 5:9 from the Apocrypha.

27

found her glory in the Lord (Is, 49:13), in the establishment of Zion (Is. 46:13) but also in her

service (Is. 49:6). Israel’s glory and servant-hood in the Hebrew bible were tied together and just

not two sides of the same coin so to speak. Back to the Pseudepigrapha it said that Israel’s role

as a servant included God’s presence as already mentioned. We therefore read in Jubilees 1:16-

17 and 22-24:

“And I will build My sanctuary in their midst, and I will dwell with them, and I will be their God and they shall be My people in truth and righteousness. And I will not forsake them nor fail them; for I am the Lord their God.”

“And after this they will turn to Me in all uprightness and with all (their) heart and with all (their) soul, and I will circumcise the foreskin of their heart and the foreskin of the heart of their seed, and I will create in them a holy spirit, and I will cleanse them so that they shall not turn away from Me from that day unto eternity. And their souls will cleave to Me and to all My commandments, and they will fulfil My commandments, and I will be their Father and they shall be My children. And they all shall be called children of the living God, and every angel and every spirit shall know, yea, they shall know that these are My children, and that I am their Father in uprightness and righteousness, and that I love them.”

“After this” when speaking to Moses is upon their release from Egypt as slaves where

Israel would become a nation whose hearts will be circumcised to the ways of Torah (cf. Dt.

10:16) by having the very spirit of God operate in their midst (cf. Num. 11:29). Thus as a

servant of God “they all shall be called children of the living God, and every angel and every

spirit shall know,” meaning that the very nature of the service witnessed God in their midst.

Again, leaning on the words of Michael Wyschogrod, he asks, “How do we characterize the

relationship of Israel to God?” Wyschogrod answers that question by saying, “But God

certainly dwells in the midst of his people in some way. Perhaps it best to say that He does not

dwell in the people of Israel but among or alongside them?” 26 Israel’s success as a servant

people/nation was dependent on God being with them.

26 Wyschogrod, p. 11

28

The Service of Adam

The same is so for Adam and ultimately his wife as well. We saw how Adam was created

by God as the first person and servant and therefore the progenitors of the nation of Israel itself.

But as we saw with Israel’s God based election to be a particular people that was the case with

Adam beforehand. That being so it was more than just an organic relationship to the greater

creation to be a symbol of God’s glory, but in Genesis 2:7 (and Jub. 3:15) God elects Adam for

the purpose of service to “till the ground” that was void and needing of care, a task that was in

partnership with God. We read further of Adam’s task in Genesis 2:19-20 as well as Jubilees

3:1-3, respectively, of the naming the animals:

“And out of the ground HaShem God formed every beast of the field and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto the man to see what he would call them; and whatsoever the man would call every living creature, that was to be the name thereof. And the man gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air and to every beast of the field;”

“And on the six days of the second week we brought, according to the word of God, unto Adam all the beasts, and all the cattle, and all the birds, and everything that moves on the earth, and everything that moves in the water, according to their kinds, and according to their types: the beasts on the first day; the cattle on the second day; the birds on the third day; and all that which moves on the earth on the fourth day; and that which moves in the water on the fifth day. And Adam named them all by their respective names, and as he called them, so was their name. And on these five days Adam saw all these, male and female, according to every kind that was on the earth …”

As already mentioned in Jubilees 3:15 Adam and his wife maintained the ground,

although in Jubilees 3:1-3 Adam’s naming of the animals took 5 days in Jubilees with no

mention of time in Genesis (it differs in The Life of Adam and Eve as seen below). We also find

the same stated purpose in Pseudepigraphical text of 2 Enoch 58:17 that says:

“Listen to me, my children, today. In those days when the Lord came down on to earth for Adam’s sake, and visited all his creatures, which he created himself, after all these he created Adam, and the Lord called all the beasts of the earth, all the reptiles, and all the birds

29

that soar in the air, and brought them all before the face of our father Adam. And Adam gave the names to all things living on earth And the Lord appointed him ruler over all, and subjected to him all things under his hands, and made them dumb and made them dull that they be commanded of man, and be in subjection and obedience to him. Thus also the Lord created every man lord over all his possessions. The Lord will not judge a single soul of beast for man’s sake, but judges the souls of men to their beasts in this world; for men have a special place.  And as every soul of man is according to number, similarly beasts will not perish, nor all souls of beasts which the Lord created, till the great judgment, and they will accuse man, if he feed them ill.”

In both Genesis and Jubilees, then, Adam’s need for a helpmate is a part of each narrative

that sees his created wife become part of the story (Gen. 2:18ff and Jub. 3:4-7). The creation of

his wife as a helpmate (or even a separate event) to be distinguished from the rest of creation is

not found in the book The Life of Adam and Eve although the fact that they were created is

mentioned (cf. Vita 32:1 and ApMos 7:1). There is also no naming mentioned in the story per

The Life of Adam and Eve, but from ApMos 15:2-3 we are given a much more detailed account

of how Adam, and his wife, cared for the Gardan; the garden was divided into two sections, East

& North and South & West, and Adam and Eve was each assigned one half of the garden to tend

as part of the work they were created to perform; Adam tending to male animals and Eve to the

female animals (Jubilees just says Adam took care of both male and female animals in 3:3).

Regarding Eve, then, who when created as we saw above, she was created to be Adam’s wife.

The Life of Adam and Eve in ApMos 15:3 stated that her role was to watch over the female

animals although in Jubilees she also tilled the land with her husband (Jub. 3:15); Genesis tells

us that her role was to be a helper to Adam with no further explanation (cf. Gen. 3:20). But aside

from their laboring in Eden they are given one more instruction.

The Sin of Adam

In Genesis 2:15-17, Jubilees 3:17-18. Vita 32:1 and ApMos 17:4-5 we read the following:

“And HaShem God commanded the man, saying: 'Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it; for in the day that

30

thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.”

“And the serpent said unto the woman, 'Ye shall not surely die: for God doth know that on the day ye shall eat thereof, your eyes will be opened, and ye will be as gods, and ye will know good and evil.”

“Regarding the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, which is in the midst of paradise, do not eat of it.”

“And I (Eve) said to him, ‘Yes, we can eat of every plant except only one, which us in the midst of Paradise, concerning which God commanded us not to eat, else you shall most surely die.”

The forbidden tree warning is conspicuously not in the book of Jubilees although Eve’s

recounting of it is implying they knew (cf. Jub.3:18; the serpent actually stats the command first

in v.17 but that is another topic). The Life of Adam and Eve, from Vita 32:2 and ApMos 18:2

present each confirming the story that they both knew the command, although like Jubilees, there

is no actual command from God as there is in the biblical Genesis text. It should also be noted

that when Adam recalls the tree command in Vita 32:2 there is no mentioned of death connected

to it unlike Eve’s account in ApMos 17:5.27 So Adam was a person of firsts; the first to represent

God’s glory on earth, the first person of the first nation of God, but now Adam has become the

first person of sin (well his wife was actually first although it would be Adam who was held

accountable according to Genesis 3:8-9). But here Paul Kahn claims a different scenario in

Genesis 2 as in Genesis 1. In Genesis 1 Kahn writes that everything is “complete and thus

good,” that there is “no need for labor or speech, and that the man “does not see his own death,”

concluding that “man has no need beyond that of realizing the principle of his own being, which

is to be the image of God.” Conversely, Genesis 2 for Kahn is a place of anxiety and potential

fearfulness, thus “everything about Genesis 2 points to the future as anticipated need; labor, not

contemplation [therefore defining] man’s character.” That being so Kahn claims that the nature

27 It should be further noted that as Adam’s tells his own sense of the greater story death is connected to the outcome which is a byproduct of his sin (see Vita 32-36). This is also hinted at in Eve’s account from the ApMos 28:1-4. It is not just directly from Adam’s mouth.

31

of the fall was “not a failure in the dimension of knowledge but that of action. God is no longer

there to help man with this endless task - man is on his own, and this is truly terrifying.”28 Sin is

a byproduct of Adam’s (and Eve’s) anxiety then. Can we find this view in the Pseudepigrapha? 29

The Source of Adam’s Sin

Looking to both the Book of Jubilees and The Life of Adam and Eve we read the account

of Adam and his wife’s sin

Jubilees 3:17-22

“And after the completion of the seven years, which he had completed there, seven years exactly, and in the second month, on the seventeenth day (of the month), the serpent came and approached the woman, and the serpent said to the woman, 'Hath God commanded you, saying, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?' And she said to it, 'Of all the fruit of the trees of the garden God hath said unto us, Eat; but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden God hath said unto us, Ye shall not eat thereof, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.' And the serpent said unto the woman, 'Ye shall not surely die: for God doth know that on the day ye shall eat thereof, your eyes will be opened, and ye will be as gods, and ye will know good and evil. And the woman saw the tree that it was agreeable and pleasant to the eye, and that its fruit was good for food, and she took thereof and eat. And when she had first covered her shame with fig leaves, she gave thereof to Adam and he ate, and his eyes were opened, and he saw that he was naked. And he took fig leaves and sewed (them) together, and made an apron for himself, and, covered his shame.”

The ApMos 16-21

“And the devil spake to the serpent saying … "Fear not, only be my vessel and I will speak through thy mouth words to deceive him…," then Satan appeared in the form of an angel and sang hymns like the angels. And [Eve] bent over the wall and saw him, like an angel. But he saith to me: "Art thou Eve?" The devil answered through the mouth of the serpent: 'Ye do well but ye do not eat of every plant." And [Eve] said: "Yea, we eat of all. save one only, which is in the midst of paradise, concerning which, God charged us not to eat of it: for, He said to us, on the day on which ye eat of it, ye shall die the death." But I said to [the serpent] “I fear lest God be worth with me as he told us." And [the serpent] saith to me: "Fear not, for as soon as thou eatest of it, ye too shall be as God, in that ye shall know good and evil… Then the serpent saith to me "Fear not, for as soon as thou eatest of it, ye too shall be as God, in that ye shall know good and evil. But God perceived this that ye would be like Him, so he envied you and said, Ye shall not eat of it. Nay, do thou give heed to the plant and thou wilt see its great glory." Yet I feared to take of the fruit. And he saith to me: "Come hither, and I will give it thee. Follow me…"

28 Kahn, p. 6329 The Life of Adam and Eve does reflect on the human reactions to their sin but the root cause is certainly unsure.

32

And in that very hour my eyes were opened, and forthwith I knew that I was bare of the righteousness with which I had been clothed (upon)… But when your father came, I spake to him words of transgression [which have brought us down from our great glory]. For, when he came, I opened my mouth and the devil was speaking, and I began to exhort him and said, "Come hither, my lord Adam, hearken to me and eat of the fruit of the tree of which God told us not to eat of it … And I said to him, "Fear not, for as soon as thou hast eaten thou shalt know good and evil." And speedily I persuaded him, and he ate and straightway his eyes were opened and he too knew his nakedness.”30

The texts above retell the Genesis story about the sin of Adam and Eve with slight

variations, but the gist is the same. Jubilees is different more so with the time in the garden as

already mentioned whereas The Life of Adam and Eve differs enough to take notice. First, the

devil enlists the serpent’s help to deceive the man and woman in the ApMos account. Second,

the nature of Satan appearing as an angel is not found in the Genesis text. Here, the angel that

misleads Eve is called Gadreel in 1 Enoch 69:5 yet is called Satanel elsewhere (3 Bar. 4:6, Vita

33:3, ApMos 17:2).31 Third, when the serpent said to Eve in Genesis “Ye shall not surely die; for

God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as

God, knowing good and evil” it is expanded in the ApMos to include God’s jealousy seeking to

pin Eve against God, the serpent asking her to “follow me.” And Fourth, although Eve’s eyes

were open before Adam’s in the ApMos, Eve is said to have made a covering and not Adam,

although in Jubilees 17:17-22 both Adam and Eve made coverings with Eve making hers first

and then Adam; in the Genesis text their eyes were open and their coverings were made

simultaneously. While again the differences were worth mentioning the issue is the nature of

“why” the sin in connection to what Kahn wrote above.

Adam and his wife’s mindset are worth noting. Kahn said that they before the garden

30 ApMos 16:1 and 5 17:2,4 and 5, 18:2-6, 20: 1 and 2, 21:2,3 and 531 The connection between 1 En. 69:5 and ApMos 17:1 is interesting. Gardeel, meaning “the wall of God,” from 1 En can be compared to the wall that surrounds paradise in the ApMos therefore raising the question; was one of the angels who were charged with guarding the tree in Vita 33:2, Gardeel, leaving the possibility to ponder that Satan took on Gardeel’s identity as an angel of light in the ApMos 17:2?

33

they were in a place of good and perfection, not knowing want or need, they just were. This

seems to be supported by 2 Enoch 31 that says Adam was in a “paradise” that was “never

darkened,” a place of perpetual light, only to be placed in the garden in another world created by

God, “everything [being] subjected to Adam on the earth.” Whatever the case, looking to Eve

she must have been vulnerable to some degree as she sparred with the serpent as to why she

could not east of the tree. After she succumbed to the serpent she convinced her husband to do

the same. Both Adam and Eve ate of the forbidden tree that God commanded them not to. Can

we really blame them, however? Did they have any “street smarts” to know they were being

deceived? Adam and Eve only knew living in peace and interconnectedness with the entire

creation so what reason would there be to have doubt or fear concerning a serpent? Eve herself

was never told by God not to eat from the tree, only Adam was, yet he must have told her

because she obviously knew (cf. Jub. 3:18 and Gen. 3:2). Whatever the case, the serpent’s

proposal must have sounded good to them both, the ability to know more about God by being

like Him. The result of Adam and Eve eating the apple was irreversible as now, unlike before,

their nakedness was now a reason for shame.32 Here, Kahn’s point is somewhat acceptable.

The Jubilees and the Life of Adam and Eve text do not cast blame although the writer of

3 Baruch does. It therefore says in 3 Baruch 4:7-8:

“And the angel said to me, ‘When God made the garden and commanded Michael to gather 200,003 angles so that they could plant the garden, Michael planted the olive and Gabriel, the apple; Uriel, the nut; Raphael, the melon, and Satanael, the vine. For at the first his name in former times was Satanel, and similarly all the angels planted the various trees. Again I Baruch said to the angel, ‘Lord, show mw the tree through which the serpent deceived Eve and Adam.’ And the angel said to me, Listen, Baruch, in the first place , the tree was a vine, but secondly, the tree (is) sinful desire which Satanael spread over Eve and Adam, and because of this God has cursed the vine because Satanael had planted it, and by the deceived the protoplast Adam and Eve. ”

32 Genesis 2:6-14, 3:2-6, 3:7 (Compare 3:7 with 2:25)

34

Satanael in 3 Baruch, also mentioned as the prince of the other fallen angels in 2 Enoch

18:3, is said to be one of God’s angels who participated in the planting of the Garden on earth.

In 3 Baruch 4:8 it says that the vine (also called a tree) planted by Satanael contained a “sinful

desire” that Satanael “spread over Eve and Adam” that is the root of their sin. In other words,

like being drunk the evil influence that was in the garden in the figure of Satanael cast a spell

upon Adam and Eve’s humanity that caused them to sin.33 More than that, and somewhat

tongue and cheek, Margaret Olofson Thickstun writes, “But in Paradise Lost, the Tree of

Knowledge does not contain ‘knowledge.’ If it did, all Satan would have to do would be to slip

some cut-up pieces into Adam and Eve’s fruit salad. He must, instead, persuade them to eat so

that they know what they are doing as they do it.”34 In 3 Baruch Satan created the tree not to be

eaten and what Thickstun is suggesting is that he could have gotten Adam and Eve to eat of it

attempting to undermine God again. The question of how could Adam and Eve sin if created by

God in his image underscores the need to make a justification of how they might have fallen the

way they did. More than that the sin itself seems to have occupied the thoughts of the

Pseudepigraphical writers more so than “who dun it” if you will. So in 3 Baruch 4:8 blame is

placed upon Satan whereas in 4 Ezra 3:20-26 it is put upon Adam; the Wisdom of Sirach 25:49

and 2 Enoch 31:6 indict Eve, with the writer of 1 Enoch 98:4ff holding both Adam and Eve

equally accountable. Kahn may have been right, about the fear, but the reason alone?

But still another Pseudepigraphical view (although it is not from Jubilees or The Life of

Adam and Eve) remains that the fault of sin lies with God first and foremost. In the book of 4

Ezra mankind is praised as the “workmanship” of God’s entire creation echoing Genesis 2:7 and

not 1:26-27 (cf. 4Ezra 3:5). Ezra is bemoaning the evil of man that began with Adam and

33 Eve and Adam, p. 9034 Thickstun, p. 15

35

continued in all the nations of the world (4 Ezra 3:7-8). The nations of the world were to include

a chosen nation descended specifically from Jacob (4 Ezra 3:19) whom the Law was given and

ultimately to the “posterity of Israel” (ibid. 3:19). Ezra writes of God that “Yet you did not take

away from them [meaning the posterity of Israel] their evil heart, so that your Law might bring

forth fruit in them.” Adam, according to Ezra, was burdened with “an evil heart,” and he was

not able to uphold God’s command regarding the forbidden tree, likewise, those who would

follow Adam could not keep what was asked of them also. This point is made directly by the

writer of 3 Enoch who said the Law that was given to the posterity of Israel became a

“permanent disease” in as much as both the Law and evil lived side by side in the “people’s

heart,” as such unfaithfulness to the Law created separation between God and Israel (Ibid.

3:20ff, also see 4 Ezra 7:48 and 9:36). Earlier we wrote how Levenson claimed that Adam was

in a paradise that pre-existed the physical world according to Ezra 4:7-8 and 7:36-37 and the

Law enticed the evil of within Adam. This battle of good and evil for Ezra has been interpreted

by Jon Levenson to be a questioning of God’s moral intent of Israel’s evil nature “explicitly”

[yet] “implicitly,” God getting some of the blame by not eliminating this evil heart.

Adam and Free-will

Arguing Ezra’s view as per Levenson above is not our concern in this paper, but blaming

God on some level for Adam’s choice is. But contemporaries to 4 Ezra saw things a bit

differently according to 2 Enoch 30:15-17 that says:

“And I gave him [Adam] free-will, and I pointed out to him two ways – light and darkness. And I said to him, ‘This is good for you, but this is bad,’ so that I might come to know whether he has love for me or abhorrence, and so that it might be plain who among his race loves me. Whereas I have come to know his nature he did not know his own nature. That is why ignorance is more lamentable than sin such as it is to him sin. And I said after sin there is nothing but death. And I assigned a shade for him and imposed sleep upon him, and he fell asleep. And while he was

36

sleeping I took from him a rib. And I created for him a wife, so that death might come (to him) by his wife.”

Did the sin come from Satan, was it a byproduct of God’s failing Law or perhaps it was a

matter of free-will? Regarding then the text from 2 Enoch above it tells us that somewhere

between the animals not being a suitable helper for Adam in Genesis 2:20 and the creation of his

wife in Genesis 2:21 the Pseudepigraphical Enoch text reveals God teaching Adam the

difference between good and bad prior to the inception of “his wife.” Looking to 4 Ezra 7:129

Levenson who on some level blames God who gave us a Law imbedded with a choice, thus 4

Ezra says of Moses, “While he [Moses] was still alive [he] spoke to the people, saying, ‘Choose

for yourself life, which you may live! But they did not believe him or the prophets after him.”

Both Enoch and Ezra held Adam to a choice based on the ways of Torah. During antiquity free-

will was a part of the Jewish conversation as related in the texts just mentioned but more so the

Enoch text is related to the Torah text of Deuteronomy 30:15 and v.19 that says, “See I set before

you this day life and good and good and death,” which is connected with v. 19 that goes on to

say, “I call heaven and earth today to bear witness against you; I have placed life and death

before you, blessing and course, and you shall chose life, you and your offspring.” It should be

no surprise then that we find these words in Deuteronomy given its Priestly influence and

therefore the general acceptance of free-will in Jewish thought during the post-exilic period of

Judaism (Ecclus. 15:11-17 and 1 QS 6:13; 5:1). Yet can we attribute this free will idea to Adam

and his wife from such later thought? The Genesis 2-3 texts are part of the Yahwist source of the

Pentateuch narrative that represents an older text then the writers of the Priestly texts (such as

Genesis 1) where presenting the man and woman with a choice is part of the text. It may sound

simple but it could be said that when Adam was asked by God to till the ground and tend to the

animals it was his choice to do so (just as he had with the tree) and could have said no, so free-

37

will was existent there as well.

Although off the topic of the Pseudepigrapha exclusively, the free-will argument in

Judaism is worth touching on a bit more in-depth. Beginning with the biblical text of the Torah,

Moses is speaking with the people of Israel about their participation in building the Mishkan. In

doing so Moses’ implores those who will bring gifts to help build the tabernacle to do so freely

and willfully, thus from every man whose heart motivates him you shall take my portion (Ex.

25:2). In this case the word ידבנו (motivates him) is only used in the Exodus 25:2 passage and

comes from the word נדב that means to be willing, generous, inciting or to impel. The word נדבה

(another form of ידבנו) is found in passages such as Exodus 35:29 and Deuteronomy 16:10 and

refers to “voluntary offerings,” hence the offerings brought were done so by the person’s own

self-compulsion and desire to do so. This seems to be the view by Pseudepigraphical Ben Sira in

Ecclesiasticus already mentioned once above that says:

“Say not that He[God] has caused me to err…He himself made man from the beginning and left him in the hand of his [own] counsel; if you will keep the commandments and preform acceptable faithfulness.”

looking again at the Deuteronomy text we find the lynch-pin foundationally for many

views of free-will. In this we read in Deuteronomy 30:15-19 the following:

“See, I have set before thee this day life and good, and death and evil, in that I command thee this day to love HaShem thy God, to walk in His ways, and to keep His commandments and His statutes and His ordinances; then thou shalt live and multiply, and HaShem thy God shall bless thee in the land whither thou goest in to possess it. But if thy heart turn away, and thou wilt not hear, but shalt be drawn away, and worship other gods, and serve them; I declare unto you this day, that ye shall surely perish; ye shall not prolong your days upon the land, whither thou passest over the Jordan to go in to possess it. I call heaven and earth to witness against you this day, that I have set before thee life and death, the blessing and the curse; therefore choose life.”

38

The theme of such choice that is rooted in Torah makes its way through the

Pseudepigraphical material as we saw in 2 Enoch and Ben Sira and then into later antiquity with

the 2nd century Rabbi Akiva who taught “everything is foreseen [by God], yet man has the

capacity to choose freely” (M.Avot 3:15). A quick overview of Maimonides on this topic

teaches that in this case the issue is not about the fault of the Law (see 2 Enoch above), per se,

but mankind’s endowment to choose. Therefore in his “Eight Chapters” Maimonides goes on to

write that “God however does not degree the fulfilment of a command,” thus if he did and

mankind failed then “God would be preordaining iniquity.” In the Mishnah Torah, on the Laws

of Repentance, Maimonides writes that “Free-will is bestowed on every human being,” and

mankind decides for himself if he will “turn toward good and be righteous [or] turn toward evil

and be wicked.” But this choice is for mankind alone as Maimonides claims that the passage of

Genesis 3:22 that reads, “Behold, the man is become like one of us, to know good and evil,” is a

testament to mankind’s uniqueness and not God’s regret. Maimonides goes on to also write that

the “foolish Gentiles” and also “the senseless folk among Israel” are mistaken if they believe that

God created mankind either wicked or righteous. Furthermore this important doctrine for

Maimonides also argues that while God created mankind to sit, stand, walk and bend over, it is

mankind who has the free-will to exercise those abilities, likewise with the Law and their actions

as well.35 Modern Jewish thinkers such as Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel said, “Freedom does

not mean the right to live as we please. It means the power to live spiritually; to raise to a higher

level of existence … Freedom is an act of self-engagement of the spirit, a spiritual event.”36

Writing about free-will David Winston refers to biblical events to which he concludes that “God

35 Maimonides Reader, pp. 380-381, 77 and 183 (in order of usage in the paragraph)36 Heschel, God in Search of Man, p. 411

39

directly intervenes,” questioning if free-will is divinely determined or humanly chosen. Winston

ultimately found no need to reconcile such discrepancies and concluded that both the human

right to choose and God’s direct intervention are never meant to be “harmonized” and therefore

God “remains content to affirm both.”37 All this to say that there was a view of free-will that

might have played into the Adam stories for the Pseudepigraphical writers regarding choice. In

this case, although not directly mentioned, both Jubilees and The Life of Adam and Eve

seemingly teach that free-will to recount God’s ways are implicit by the lack of the divine

command verses it’s human response, therefore suggesting, it was about human choice in

response to God’s commands.

The Law as Adam’s Accuser

The continued story of Adam introduces new themes of loss that connects the

punishments of sin to disobeying God’s command. In this case, the first human loss for Adam

would be his personal sense of being ‘naked and unashamed,’ only to now know a feeling of

nakedness that results in shame. We will see how the Law when broken produced a human

feeling for Adam (and all mankind really) not yet experienced, but in this case seems to be a

result of the Law itself when transgressed. Per his first loss, that is his nakedness, both Jubilees

3:21 and The Life of Adam and Eve, ApMos 21:5, speaks to it without explanation. If Adam

and therefore his wife experienced the glory of their creation although naked then how did that

same nakedness become became their state of shame? (cf. Gen. 3:17, Jub. 3:31 and ApMos

21:50). Claus Westermann in his commentary to the biblical story of Genesis claims that the

serpent was really no more than “the narrative symbol of this power of temptation” in the garden

and when the nature of evil appears the mystery of its origin is unspoken. Westermann himself

37 Winston, p. 269-270, Contemporary Jewish Religious Thought

40

writes “something has changed,” and in so doing offers no explanation of nakedness.38 In short,

Adam although created in the image of God found his difference in the limitations that marked

all humanity, when altered, became a new appearance of reality. Given the original Hebrew

language of some books there is no reason not to think that the Pseudepigraphical writers also

did not make the same connection between naked and ashamed. It has been pointed out that

there is a relationship between the word for nakedness, ערומים, and the word for cunning, ערום,

regarding the nature of the serpent who worked with Satan (cf. Genesis 3:1; Jub 3:17&22, The

Life of Adam and Eve, ApMos 18:1&20:1).39 The cunningness for Adam was a by-product of

his nakedness and who knows what he came to understand at that moment. The serpent we saw

above was an evil that came from the devil and is tied into that nakedness perhaps which is why,

“At that very moment my [Adam] eyes were opened and I knew that I was naked of the

righteousness with which I had been cloth,.” or his nakedness was his sense of glory lost. The

temporal article of clothing made from fig leaves was so that he “might cover his shame”

(ApMos 20:1 and 4). Nakedness and shame are now the norm as well as one in the same. James

Barr also notes that the eating of the fruit revealed a “weakness and limitations” that he suggests

was the basis of Adam’s shame.40 As such he writes:

“Understanding the story as a serious rebellion against God, a sin of consciousness of with obvious guilt, thought of the awareness of nakedness as a manifestation of guilt, expressed as shame, is ashamed for the evil one has done, and this shame of evil done is expressed as a feeling of shame.”

It is “a sin of consciousness” that a person will express “as shame,” that emanates from a

“feeling,” that feeling according to Adam’s self-assessment, was fear, עירם אנכ׳ ואחבה כ ואירא,

he was naked because he was afraid. Barr is connecting nakedness with shame in the Adam 38 Westermann, pp. 22-2339 The Torah, A Modern Commentary, p. 3540 James Barr, pp. 57-65

41

story although the two words do not appear together in a negative way in the original Genesis

narrative. Barr holds that Adam’s line crossing emerged with the knowledge of “good and evil”

that created a feeling of being exposed, thus it can furthermore be said that these feelings of

shame, nakedness or fear that gripped him would then be reflective of Israel. It is here that we

may understand Moses’ words from Exodus 20:17, “And Moses said unto the people: 'Fear not;

for God is come to prove you,” thus for Adam when God came into the garden his fear was more

operational so he felt afraid and was ashamed; like Israel in front of that mountain with no

shelter Adam too at this point must have felt exposed in his nakedness. Is this not perhaps what

it meant when asked in the text by God, איכה לו ויאמר “where are you?” Although not a word

study it could be said the root of איכה is notאיפה but איך, which in Hebrew is translated as

“how.” God’s question, “where are you,” also recorded in Genesis 3, may have been more so

asking “how are you” [now that you (Adam) have seen your shame?]. Certainly this was the

case with Israel when their lack of gratitude for God’s goodness had been exposed thus Israel

became both עריה ו ערם “naked and bare” (Ez. 16:7). As a result the prophet speaking to

Israel’s unfaithfulness writes, “You, too, feel ashamed and bear your humiliation” (ibid. 16:52).

This Adam-Israel relationship is seen in the following Pseudepigraphical 4 Ezra texts:

4 Ezra 7:70-74

"When the Most High made the world and Adam and all who have come from him, he first prepared the judgment and the things that pertain to the judgment. For this reason, therefore, those who dwell on earth shall be tormented, because though they had understanding they committed iniquity, and though they received the commandments they did not keep them, and though they obtained the law they dealt unfaithfully with what they received. What, then, will they have to say in the judgment, or how will they answer in the last, for how long the time is that the Most High has been patient with those who inhabit the world, and not for their sake, but because of the times which he has foreordained!" 

4 Ezra 7:117-125

42

“It would have been better if the earth had not produced Adam, or else, when it had produced him, had restrained him from sinning. For what good is it to all that they live in sorrow now and expect punishment after death? O Adam, what have you done? For though it was you who sinned, the fall was not yours alone, but ours also who are your descendants. For what good is it to us, if an eternal age has been promised to us, but we have done deeds that bring death? And what good is it that an everlasting hope has been promised to us, but we have miserably failed? Or that safe and healthful habitations have been reserved for us, but we have lived wickedly? Or that the glory of the Most High will defend those who have led a pure life, but we have walked in the most wicked of ways? which are abundance and healing, but we shall not enter it, because we have lived in unseemly places?  Or that the faces of those who practiced self-control shall shine more than the stars, but our faces shall be blacker than darkness?” 

Although the 4 Ezra texts above does not define the command spoken of (cf. 7:70-74) or

the nature of what defined the deeds leading to death (cf. 7:117-125), Jubilees may be able help

somewhat. In this case, using the punishment of death such as with eating of the tree above (Jub.

3:17-18, etc.), the Jubilees writer connects disobedience to the Law with the penalty of death in

2:26 for the “children of Israel” regarding the breaking of the Sabbath, “from Adam to Jacob”

and “the seed of Jacob” (cf. Jub. 2:20-23). In other words the breaking of the commandment is

what accused Israel leading to her punishment. 4 Ezra 4:117-125 above also talks of what is

“blacker than darkness,” something that may have been for King David tied into breaking of the

Law. Psalm 119:5-6 connects shame with being unfaithful to following Torah, it says, “Would

that my ways were firm in keeping your laws, then I would not be ashamed when I regard all

your commandments.” Returning to the Pseudepigrapha the writer of The Life of Adam and

Eve, ApMos 23, makes that very exact point. After God comes into the garden in 23:1 to seek

Adam’s reasons for his sin, God also asks in 23:3, “Who showed you that you were naked.” The

ApMos writer answers that question by saying the very accuser of Adam’s nakedness, just as it

was in Jubilees to Israel in general, was the Law itself, “Who showed you that you were naked,

unless you have forsaken my commandment which I delivered to you to keep?” 4 Ezra 7:70-74

above showed that from Adam to Israel the Law would work this very way to reveal the

43

nakedness from sin accompanied with the shame of being exposed from unfaithfulness. One

might ask the following: Did the knowledge of good and evil gained after eating the fruit of the

forbidden tree allow the Law to become “the very accuser” of Adam or was it always meant to

operate that way? Appealing again to 4 Ezra, from verses 3:20-23, the very accuser of Adam’s

nakedness only became so after the commandment revealed what was bad, hence, the “disease

became permanent; the law was in the people's heart along with the evil root, but what was good

departed, and the evil remained.” The disease to have become permanent is the evil of the

human heart that began with Adam, after the Law showed him as such, therefore “Yet thou didst

not take away from them their evil heart, so that thy law might bring forth fruit in them. For the

first Adam, burdened with an evil heart, transgressed and was overcome, as were also all who

were descended from him.”

Without evil, the Law would look different, not being the voice of accusation that taught

the difference between good and evil. This is seen much later in the life of Israel as well. Torah

warns Israel in Exodus 20:8 to keep the Sabbath holy lest they die and the prophets to follow

warned of the same. The prophet Jerimiah in 17:27 says, “But if ye will not hearken unto Me to

hallow the Sabbath day, and not to bear a burden and enter in at the gates of Jerusalem on the

Sabbath day; then will I kindle a fire in the gates thereof, and it shall devour the palaces of

Jerusalem, and it shall not be quenched.” The result of those words is found in 2nd Chronicles

36:15-19 that says because of Israel’s unfaithfulness a foreign army came into Jerusalem, burned

it down, and ultimately took the city and its people captive; because they broke the law and did

not keep the Sabbath.

In Jubilees Adam is to foreshadow Israel's calling; thus for Adam to Jacob the penalty

for the failure to do so being death to all in Jubilees 2:25-28. Regardless of its source, sin carried

44

consequences as already seen in several Pseudepigraphal books, with 4 Ezra in particular.

Therefore, while the initial loss resulting from Adam’s disobedience to the command was his

glory the other would he his expulsion from the garden, but this is another first; the first biblical

person, the first servant, the first of Israel, the first to be accused by the Law by sinning, and

now, the first to be expelled (later it would be Israel on account of the Sabbath as just discussed).

Various Pseudepigraphical voices connected their sin, death and their expulsion from the garden

with the following generations in books other than Jubilees or The Life of Adam and Eve to

include 2 Baruch 23:4, Apocalypse of Adam 1:5-9, Testament of Adam 3:2 and the Wisdom of

Solomon 2:23-24 that says,

“For God created man to be immortal and made him to be an image of his own eternity. Nevertheless through envy of the devil came death into the world; and they that are of his side shall find it.”

Every person beginning with Adam shall find death according to the above quote. Adam,

and his wife, are expelled from the eternal bliss of the garden into the world outside of Eden

where every generation was also to find themselves. So as a result of the sin God handed out

punishments to Adam. Death is both hyperbolic and physical for the Jubilees writer, so although

Adam’s physical death will come (cf. Jub. 4:1) this seems to be a death of glory, nakedness and

location. Therefore, as a result of his sin, Adam has been confined to hard labor according to the

ApMos 24:1-4 that will also include many hardships such as being weary with no rest, opposed

by heat and burdened by cold, hard work that will yield no gain of wealth and that the very

animals that Adam was to keep would turn on him because he did not keep God’s sole command

(expanded beyond the Genesis 3:17 text). While it does not come out and say it the result of

Adam’s sin is presented as a death of glory and peace that was enjoyed beforehand in the garden

before he sinned. In an awkward way then these punishments also destroyed the last vestiges of

45

the created unity that Adam enjoyed with the rest of creation as evidenced by the fact that he

lived in unashamed unity with the whole to have included his wife in Genesis 2:25, but also

Jubilees 3:16. It needs to also be pointed out that God’s punishment of Adam and his wife was

because of their sin although their expulsion was because they ultimately desired to be like God

and know good and evil according to Genesis 3:16-19 and 23-24 (recall our discussion above

regarding the result of evil).41 Interestingly The Life of Adam and Eve, Vita 28:1-4, unlike

Genesis and not at all like Jubilees is not concerned that Adam (and his wife) would be like God

more so than Adam should not live in a permanent state of glory given the nature of the

consequence. This seems to be the case for Adam’s own understanding as recorded in Vita 21:6

that reads; “Why have you wrought such destruction among us? You have estranged us from the

glory of God.”

Adam’s Repentance and Restoration

Adam understood what he lost, clearly. More than that the very Law that accused him

revealed his nakedness, shame and fear. But the Law also became the means of his repentance

and eventual restoration. Thus we read in Jubilees that “Adam went from the garden” (Jub. 3:27)

and in the Life of Adam and Eve, ApMos 27:1-2, “he (God) ordered his angels to cast us out …

and while we were being expelled and lamenting, your father Adam begged the angels …”

While both Jubilees and The Life of Adam and Eve cast the expulsion as a by-product of the

broken command, so to do the Sibylline Oracles, Book I, 1:50 and perhaps the much later 3

Enoch 5:11. Yet 1 Enoch 32:6 says that on account of eating from the tree they gained the

wisdom of good and evil that got them banned from Eden whereas 2 Enoch 32:1 says it was

Adam’s transgression, but which one; eating of the tree, being deceived by the devil or listening

41 The Genesis text as well as the others tells of God’s judgment upon the serpent as well although that is not pertinent to our story for now.

46

to his wife? Keep in mind the punishment for eating was death unexplained in Genesis and not

banishment, although it clearly was for the Pseudepigraphal writers. Much more is really not

found beyond what we have seen to this point although the writer of The Life of Adam and Eve

(both texts) does identify Adam and his wife’s struggles to define themselves outside of the

Garden of Eden, found in great detail from Vita 1-24 and 30-31 and ApMos 27-42. Thus if we

recall Maimonides from our brief discussion regarding free-will Adam and his wife wanting to

be like God in Genesis 3:22 is treated as a testament to their ability to choose right or wrong, but

can we make that conclusion from The Life of Adam and Eve? It is hard to say for sure, but

choice did play a part also. Therefore, Adam instinctively choose to offer sacrifices of

“frankincense, galbanum, state and spices,” prior to being exiled from the garden after his sin,

and continued to offer his sacrifices of the “fragrances from paradise” after he left (Jub. 3:27 and

ApMos 29:1-3). Also, it was Adam who trust’s in God for the provision of food, the need for

repentance and the defeat of evil. In contrast, the evil that caused guilt and shame continued to

impact Eve who because of her lack of faith believed that she would starve, thought death was

the better option than their new circumstances and once again fell victim to the evil of the devil.

In many ways the actions of Adam and Eve mimic the good and bad actions of Israel, although

there is no way of saying that indeed was the writers intent in The Life of Adam and Eve (this

can be seen throughout the books of Kings and Chronicles where Israel is judged according to if

the nation is faithful or not recalling the words Dt. 30:15ff about choice, life and death). After

they are expelled a rare dialog between God and Adam takes place in ApMos 27:4-5 that sys the

following:

“But the Lord turned to Adam and said: 'I will not suffer thee henceforward to be in paradise." And Adam answered and said, " Grant me, O Lord, of the Tree of Life that I may eat of it, before I be cast out." Then the Lord spake to Adam, "Thou shalt not take of it now, for I have commanded the cherubim with the flaming sword that turneth (every way) to guard it from

47

thee that thou taste not of it; but thou hast the war which the adversary hath put into thee, yet when thou art gone out of paradise, if thou shouldst keep thyself from all evil, as one about to die, when again the Resurrection hath come to pass, I will raise thee up and then there shall be given to thee the Tree of Life.”

This is important in as much as after the writer deals with the results of the expulsion and

Adam’s need to repent he also begins a story of restoration that is not found in Jubilees or the

Biblical Genesis narrative. The likeminded Damascus Document 78:18 refers to the original

state of glory being returned to Adam as does the Testament of Adam 3:2-3 that also speaks to

Adam’s former glory. The book of Jubilees speaks of the connection of repentance and

restoration in 1:13-17 although it is for Israel (cf. Jub. 2:23) and just not Adam:

“And I will hide My face from them, and I will deliver them into the hand of the Gentiles for captivity, and for a prey, and for devouring, and I will remove them from the midst of the land, and I will scatter them amongst the Gentiles. And they will forget all My law and all My commandments and all My judgments, and will go astray as to new moons, and sabbaths, and festivals, and jubilees, and ordinances. And after this they will turn to Me from amongst the Gentiles with all their heart and with all their soul and with all their strength, and I will gather them from amongst all the Gentiles, and they will seek me, so that I shall be found of them, when they seek me with all their heart and with all their soul. And I will disclose to them abounding peace with righteousness, and I will remove them the plant of uprightness, with all My heart and with all My soul, and they shall be for a blessing and not for a curse, and they shall be the head and not the tail. And I will build My sanctuary in their midst, and I will dwell with them, and I will be their God and they shall be My people in truth and righteousness. And I will not forsake them nor fail them; for I am the Lord their God.”

This earthy restoration of Israel being the head and not the tail takes on a heavenly tone

with the same theme a few verses later in Jubilees 1:22-25 where “every angel and spirit will

know and acknowledge that they are my son.”42 It is impossible to really know if every “angel

and spirit” for the Jubilees writer somehow in the back of his mind recalled the dialog of

contention between Adam and Satan elsewhere in the Pseudepigrapha? (cf. The Life of Adam

and Eve, Vita 12-17). But the Vita and the ApMos of texts from the Life of Adam and Eve are

42 There is a possible messianic element as later on in ApMos 28:4 the tree of life is a messianic implication of the future and another topic all together.

48

more direct concerning the restoration of Adam. Adam in Vita 25-29 is experiencing a vision of

being brought into the heavenly paradise where God assures him that his seed will last forever

(although forever on the earth can also be possible). This recorded vision seems to act for Adam

as a sign, per 28:1-2, of hope in the retelling of the story in the garden to his son, Seth, beginning

in Vita 32. In this account, which goes from chapter 32-44, Adam recalls the physical pain of his

body and implores Seth not to attempt to correct it (which he does anyway). But 42:1 offers a

glimmer of the very future restoration spoken of, “Truly I say to you (the angel to Seth) that you

are by no means able to take from it (that is the life giving oils from paradise), except in the last

days.” We then read in ApMos 28:1-4 as follows:

“But the Lord turned to Adam and said: 'I will not suffer thee henceforward to be in paradise." And Adam answered and said, " Grant me, O Lord, of the Tree of Life that I may eat of it, before I be cast out." Then the Lord spake to Adam, "Thou shalt not take of it now, for I have commanded the cherubim with the flaming sword that turneth (every way) to guard it from thee that thou taste not of it; but thou hast the war which the adversary hath put into thee, yet when thou art gone out of paradise, if thou shouldst keep thyself from all evil, as one about to die, when again the Resurrection hath come to pass, I will raise thee up and then there shall be given to thee the Tree of Life.”

The last two verses are of interest here, that if Adam keeps himself from evil in the end he

will experience the resurrection and taste of the very tree of life eternal (another conversation but

resurrection is often tied into life eternal). Yet the Vita writer in chapter 37 makes sure in his

narrative to say the following about Adam after his death; “lo, an angel blew the trumpet, and

there stood up all the angels (and they were) lying on their faces, and (the Lord) He hath pitied

Adam (therefore) sitting on his holy throne stretched out his hand, and took Adam and handed

him over to the archangel Michael saying: 'Lift him up into Paradise unto the third Heaven, and

leave him there until that fearful day of my reckoning, which I will make in the world.' Then

Michael took Adam and left him where God told him.” It would be as through the writer of the

49

Vita and ApMos texts have been working on the premise that if God could not redeem Adam in

the end then could He really redeem Israel? We saw in Jubilees 1:13-17 and 22-25 that such a

future restoration was to be for Israel echoing the sentiments of the biblical prophets (Is. 59:20-

21, Ez. 37:21-28, Amos 9:11-12, Zech 13:6-9 and Hoses 3:5 and 14:4, just to name a few). But

our final thought here is that in the same way Adam was the father of other firsts he was also the

first of redemption as portrayed in the ApMos narrative. To be sure then, Adam was a key figure

in the future of Israel’s own restoration according to the traditions as well.

Part IVConclusion

Looking at primarily the books of Jubilees and The Life of Adam and Eve from the

Pseudepigraphical literature we sought to address the very title of this paper, The Figure of Adam

in pre-Rabbinic thought Portrayed in the Writings of the Pseudepigrapha. This paper did not

attempt to present a ‘theology’ of the Pseudepigrapha and attempted to respect the individual

book while at the same time looking to the like traditions in the whole. Our claim was that the

Pseudepigrapha presented Adam (although we are not saying that was even their intent) as a man

of firsts; the first person created, the first person to be a servant of God, the first man of sin,

repentance and restoration, and regarding Israel, the first member of that people. In so doing we

looked at the creation of Adam, created in glory to represent the pillar of God’s creation. We

looked at the purpose of Adam, in this case to represent God’s glory on earth, but also be the first

of God’s servants by caring for the garden and to be the first of God’s elect nation. We

concluded with looking to the person of Adam, what his service entailed, his sin, his free-will,

his relationship to the Law, his attention to repentance and God’s future restoration after his

50

expulsion from the garden. Yet we looked all these things about Adam and ultimately related

them to Israel.

There were other themes that could have been added or expanded on along the way.

When speaking of free-will a conversation about the development of original sin could have been

included pertaining to Adam that could have been drawn out.43 In this case although really a

Christian development, we could have looked into the writings of Karl Rahner who noted that

the original sin issue was a 4th century C.E. conversation that influenced the 16th century Council

of Trent’s ‘original sin’ declaration, both being birthed from the story Adam itself.44 The nature

of Adam’s nakedness could have included a word study behind why he hid, was it hiding or

retreating, and could such implications have helped to define Adam’s motivation for not

answering God when he called? 45 Likewise, looking at the punishment to Eve where she was to

be ruled by her husband and asking what that would mean in terms of a power struggle and loss

of equality. Phyllis Trible looks at the punishments as descriptive and not prescriptive,46 that

seems to be a similar position by Paul Kahn who said that the tree for Adam was a “symbol of

this failure, which arises with the knowledge of good and evil, is the awareness of man’s sexual

43 Creation, p. 60; J. Van Rutten looks at 2 Enoch 31:7 and notes that the curse as a result of the sin was only against Adam and Eve and not the rest of the creation just as the judgments in Genesis 3:16-19 were the same, hence was the sin punishments to Adam get handed down as they ere proclaimed?44 Rahner, p. 1149-1150. The Council of Trent stated that “If any one asserts, that the prevarication of Adam injured himself alone, and not his posterity; and that the holiness and justice, received of God, which he lost, he lost for himself alone, and not for us also; or that he, being defiled by the sin of disobedience, has only transfused death, and pains of the body, into the whole human race, but not sin also, which is the death of the soul; let him be anathema:--whereas he contradicts the apostle who says; By one man sin entered into the world, and by sin death, and so death passed upon all men, in whom all have sinned.”45 The word “hid” in its root from חבה, means just not to hide, but to withdrawal. This is opposed to Deuteronomy 31:18 and Ezekiel 39:29 where in each case intentionally God hides (סתר) himself from Israel because of their evil. In terms of “to hide” as used in Genesis 3:9 the idea of withdrawal underscores the motivation. This is the case in 1 Samuel 14:11 where Jonathan and the attendant of his armor hid from the Philistines who when they saw them said, “Look, the Hebrews are emerging from the holes where they were hiding.” They hid not because they were afraid, like Adam, but their hiding was a withdrawal of wisdom to lay in wait. The opposite is found in 2 Chronicles 22:12 when Jehu, the son of Nimshi, who was “anointed [by God] to eliminate the house of Ahab.” In this case Ahab’s grandson Ahaziah when pursued by the Jehu (his father) to “execute judgment” withdrew to Samaria where he lay in hiding; Ahaziah hid because he feared for his life, as did Adam. 46 Eve and Adam, p. 436

51

nature.”47 What makes this possibly more descriptive and not prescriptive for Trible is that the

break-down of Adam and Eve’s equality, hence Kahn’s “sexual nature,” seems to then be a by-

product of their tarnished husband-wife relationship as a result of their sin. This sin dynamic

between Adam and Eve can be a foreshadowing of Israel’s own rebellious relationship to God,

thus Jeremiah 3:20 and Isaiah 54:5-6 say the following:

“Surely as a wife treacherously departed from her husband, so have ye dealt treacherously with Me, O house of Israel, saith HaShem.”

“For thy Maker is thy husband, HaShem of hosts is His name; and the Holy One of Israel is thy Redeemer, the God of the whole earth shall He be called. For HaShem hath called thee as a wife forsaken and grieved in spirit; and a wife of youth, can she be rejected? saith thy God.”

But for now, our aim again was to view Adam as the first of God's people who was the

progenitor to both humanity and also the nation of Israel. Adam, not only in the Jewish thought

of the Pseudepigrapha as we have seen, but in Christian thought (never mind his importance in

Islam as the first prophet) is a pivotal character who continues to supply religions with whatever

need they may have vis-à-vis Adam and the implications drawn out of his life. James Kugel in is

opening to the chapter on Adam and Eve writes the following:

“The story of Adam and Eve and their life in the Garden of Eden fascinated the Bible's earliest interpreters, since it seemed to concern the very nature of the human species. This biblical story was probably written about more than any other. Not coincidentally, readers today are likely to have great difficulty looking at this story "without blinders." For the importance of this episode to the Bible's ancient interpreters has given their interpretations of it a unique staying power. Who nowadays, for example, does not automatically think of the story of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden as telling about some fundamental change that took place in the human condition, or what is commonly called the Fall of Man? And who does not think of the "serpent" in the story as the devil, or paradise as the reward of the righteous after death? Yet a careful reading of the Bible itself shows that none of these things is said explicitly by the text-they are all a matter of interpretation.” 48

47 Kahn, pp. 65-6648Kugel, p.95.

52

Given that for each religious system just mentioned Adam represents the father of

humanity it is no wonder why he plays such a central role. Regarding this paper, we too

attempted to provide views of questions asked here, and while sure there was more that could

have been developed, this was really no more than a detailed overview of an in-depth subject.

Still, of all that was written the one thing showed throughout was the continuous

Pseudepigraphical connection between Adam and Israel, albeit creation, sin, the Law, repentance

and redemption. What happened with Adam foreshowed what would happen with Israel, thus;

The Figure of Adam in pre-Rabbinic thought Portrayed in the Writings of the Pseudepigrapha

was important for the development of Jewish thought in general.

53

Bibliography

Baden, Joel S.; “Composition of the Pentateuch: Renewing the Documentary Hypothesis.” Yale University Press, New Haven, CT 2013

Berlin, Adele and Marc Zvi Brettler (editors); “The Jewish Study Bible.” Jewish Publication Society, Oxford Press, New York 2004

Brenton, Sir Lancelot C.L. (Editor); “The Septuagint with Apocrypha: Greek and English.” Hendrickson Publishers, Peabody, MA 1986

Brettler, Marc Zvi; “How to Read the Bible.” Jewish Publication Society, Dulles, VA 2005 

Buckham, Richard (et al); “Old Testament Pseudepigrapha.” Eredmans, Grand Rapids, MI 2013

Charlesworth, James H. (editor); “The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha.” 2 Volumes. Doubleday Publishers, New York, 1985

Cohen, Arthur A. and Mendes-Flohr, Paul; “Contemporary Jewish Religious Thought.” The Free Press, New York 1987

Driver, S.R. (et al); “The New Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew-English Lexicon.” Hendrickson Publishers, Peabody, MA 1979

Edelman, Moses (et al); “Bible World: Opening the Books of Moses.” Acumen, Sheffield, GBR 2012

Green, Jay P. (editor); “The New Englishman’s Hebrew Concordance.” Hendrickson Publishers, Peabody, MA 1984

Heschel, Abraham Joshua; “God in Search of Man: A Philosophy of Judaism.” Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York 1955

Kahn, Paul; “Out of Eden: Adam and Eve and the Problem of Evil.” Princeton, NJ 2006

Kugel, James; “Traditions of the Bible: A Guide to the Bible as it was at the Start of the Common Era. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA 1997

54

Kugler, Robert and Hartin, Patrick; “As Introduction to the Bible.” Eredmans, Grand Rapids, MI 2009

Hayward, Robert; “Targums and the Transmission of Scripture Into Judaism and Christianity.” Studies in the Aramaic Interpretation of Scripture, Vol. 10, Brill Academic Publishers, Boston, 2010

Kvan, Kristen (et al, editor); “Eve & Adam. Jewish, Christian and Muslim Readings of Genesis and Gender.” Indiana Press, Indiana 1999

Levenson, Jon D.; “Creation and the Persistence of Evil: The Jewish Drama of Divine Omnipotence.” Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ 1988------------------ “Portraits of Adam in Early Judaism, From Sirach to 2 Baruch.” Sheffield Academic Press, GBR 1988

Luttikhuizen, Gerald P. (editor); The Creation of Adam and Eve; Interpretations of the Biblical Narratives in Jewish and Christian tradition.” Brill, Boston, MA 2000

Plaut, W Gunther (editor); “The Torah, A Modern Commentary.” Union of American Hebrew Congregations, New York, 1981

Rahner, Karl (editor); “Encyclopedia of Theology.” Burns & Oates, London 1975

Sherman, Nosson, Rabbi (editor); “The Stone Edition; Tanach.” Messorah Publications, Brooklyn, NY 1996 ------------------ “The Complete ArtScroll Siddur.” Mesorah Publications, Brooklyn, NY 1985------------------ “The Torah; with Rashi's Commentary, Translated Annotated and Elucidated.” Messorah Publications, Brooklyn, NY 1995

Stern, David (editor); “The Complete Jewish Bible.” Jewish New Testament Publications, Clarksville, MD 1998

Thickstun, Margaret Olofson; “Milton’s Lost Paradise: Moral Education.” Palgarve Macmillan, Gordonsville, VA 2007

Twersky, Isadore; “A Maimonides Reader.” Behrman House, Inc. Springfield, NJ 07081

Westermann, Claus; “Genesis A Practical Commentary. Text and Interpretation.” Eredmans, Grand Rapids, MI 1987

Wyschogrod, Michael; “The Body of Faith, God and the People Israel.” Jason Aaronson, Northvale, NY|J 1996

Zlotowitz, Meir, Rabbi; “Genesis.” Vol. 1, Messorah Publications, Brooklyn, NY 1977

55

56