EVE'S BIRTH ANNOUNCEMENTS (GENESIS 4:1,25)

Commentators have spilled much ink in comparing Cain and Abel to see if they can figure out why God only accepted Abel's sacrifice and not Cain's. Answers to that question have included Cain taking less care in choosing the quality of the sacrifice, only animal sacrifices were acceptable to God, Satan had tempted Cain, it was a basic heart issue with Cain, he was trying to outdo his brother, or his sacrifice was not prepared in the proper manner.

Much less has been written regarding Eve's part in the births of her three sons. Whereas Eve seems to pass over Abel's birth rather quickly, the same is not true for her two other two sons, Cain and Seth. It is interesting to compare her words on both of these occasions to see if there is any message here.

    “Now Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain, saying, 'I have gotten a man with the help of the LORD.'” (Genesis 4:1)

    “And Adam knew his wife again, and she bore a son and called his name Seth, for she said, 'God has appointed for me another child instead of Abel, for Cain slew him.'” (Genesis 4:25)

Carr notes that these two verses are parallel to one another. However, they can also be contrasted.

Let us start with v. 1, of which von Rad says, “Every word of this little sentence is difficult.” Collins agrees with this assessment and elaborates: “Eve's declaration has received a number of different interpretations...Each word here involves us in semantic and syntactical questions, as well as larger literary and theological ones.”

For one thing, we have the verb qana (“acquire”) to explain. Hamilton, as well as others, point out that this sounds quite a bit like Cain (qayin in Hebrew). “Several scholars have suggested, correctly we believe, that this is another instance of popular etymology, based on assonance...But the meaning of qana is debated. In most of its eighty-two occurrences in the Old Testament, it seems clearly to mean 'acquire, possess,' but in several passages the meaning 'form, produce, create,' is possible...though for various reasons some scholars have denied this meaning even to these references. Thus it seems best to retain the more standard translation of qana, and render 'I have acquired.' Surely qana is used here more for its sound than its precise significance...Cassuto reads, 'I have created a man equally with the Lord.' He perceives here some arrogance in Eve's statement. Yahweh created the first man. She created the second man, and thus her reproductive act is no less significant than Yahweh's productive act.” Hamilton believes this interpretation “is specious.”

For some unknown reason, Ross agrees with Cassuto but does not take Eve's statement in a negative way at all: “Eve's statement is full of hope and faith. She says, in effect, 'God made man, and now with the help of the Lord, I have made a second man.'”

Similarly, McKnight recognizes these two different interpretations, but agrees in the end with Hamilton: “The term acquired has given rise to two major interpretations, one indicating a boast on the part of Eve and the other a statement of gratitude to God for a son...In the first case, Eve boasts that she, too, has 'created' (quanifi), as did the Lord (Gibson). One could argue that the variation of expression between Genesis 4:1 ('I have acquired') and 4:25 ('God has provided me with') indicates a different sense in 4:1 (triumph versus gratitude). In this view, Eve's arrogance emerges from her anger at the Lord for exiling her from Eden. According to the second interpretation, Eve expresses gratitude that she has gained a 'little man' with the Lord's help.” He feels the gratitude interpretation is the most likely with 4:1.

Wenham also recognizes the difficulty of pinning down the exact significance of Eve's comment in verse 1. He says, “Cassuto and Westermann interpret Eve's remark as a shout of triumph at putting herself on a par with Yahweh as creator: 'I have created a man equally with the LORD...there is an ambiguity about her expression which may suggest that she covertly compared her achievement with Yahweh's greater works and hoped that he would be with her son.”

Cornelius and Van Leeuwen are also on this side of the dispute. They state, “The root qnh in the sense 'create' is much disputed, but is to be maintained on grounds of the comparative linguistic and religious evidence and of its use and parallels (Gen 14:19,22; Deut 32:6; Ps 139:13; Prov 8:22).”

My own opinion on this particular issue is that Eve appears to be bragging in v. 1 but grateful by the time Seth's birth in v. 25 comes about. To me, her statement in v. 1 is somewhat equivalent to the title of the famous autobiography (and movie) of WW II pilot Robert Lee Scott Jr. – “God Is My Co-Pilot.” The author may have been trying to show his appreciation for God's care over him, but it still clearly relegates Him very much to a secondary position.

The next issue concerns the role of the little Hebrew particle 'et in Genesis 4:1. Harman explains, “The presence of 'et- in Gen 4:1 is a crux. It can be taken as marking the object, so that Eve expresses a confidence that the child she has borne is indeed the Lord, so fulfilling the promise of Gen 3:15. However, most translations and exegetes assume that the word is a preposition connected with the Akk[adian] preposition itti...meaning 'from.' Hence, many English translations accept this derivation and paraphrase 'from' to mean 'with the help of.'”

Heiser explains the issue in a slightly different way for those of us who are not intimately acquainted with Hebrew grammar: He quotes “Genesis 4:1, where Eve says, 'I have acquired a man with ['et] Yahweh.' The Hebrew lemma 'et is most frequently an untranslated particle that marks the direct object of a verb. It may also be a homograph that is a preposition denoting the assistance or participation of the following noun ('with', 'together with').”

Closely related to this problem is the question of the identity of “the man.” Kaiser says, “Who this male descendant [of Genesis 3:15] was to be was not immediately revealed. Perhaps Eve thought Cain was that one. She named her son Cain saying she had 'gotten a man, even the Lord' (Gen. 4:1); at least that is one way of rendering the enigmatic phrase. Regardless of how it is to be interpreted, she was mistaken...”

Collins echoes the same thought: “He first disputes the idea that qana can mean 'create' rather than 'acquire' in any other Old Testament text. He then notes that v. 1 “is ambiguous: grammatically it can mean, 'I have gotten a man, namely, the LORD.' If anyone wonders if that was what Eve meant, he will quickly conclude, based on Cain's behavior, that if she did think it, she was wrong.”

Then we come to v. 25, Eve's utterance on Seth's birth. “the explanation Eve provided at the birth of Cain focused on herself: 'I have...' The explanation Eve provides at the birth of Seth focuses on God: 'God has...' This may indicate a spiritual maturation taking place in Eve, or simply the human role and the divine role present in all births.” I like his first explanation much better.

And there are other changes in wording in v. 25: “Eve's comment contrasts with her remark in 4:1: 'I have gained a man with the LORD's help.' Is there significance in her substituting 'offspring' for 'man' and 'God' for 'LORD'? Jacob and Cassuto see Eve as less proud and triumphant at the birth of Seth than at that of Cain. Gispen suggest the Eve is mourning the fate of her first two sons and therefore sees God as the remote and distant creator rather than as the LORD, a name affirming his intimacy with man. The word 'offspring' rather than 'man' may suggest she hoped for a line of children from Seth such as the rest of Genesis describes.” (Wenham)

And Collins additionally notes, “Eve's saying in 4:25...acknowledges the sin of Cain and the kindness of God. It also reflects her approbation of the offspring promise of 3:15, although it does not say whether she thought that Seth was the offspring. There is no ambiguity here about the ultimate origin of the child: God has appointed him.”

I can't help speculating about the effect of Eve's attitude on her two surviving sons. At Cain's birth it appears that she had not completely gotten over her wish to become equal to God which had caused her expulsion from the garden. And this feeling of superiority may have been communicated to Cain. This certainly would help to explain his surly behavior toward God. But after her disillusionment with Cain, she appears to have been content to found a line of offspring who were mere human beings content, for the most part, to live under God's sovereignty rather than attempting to challenge his rule.