What do you think?
Rate this book
What Really Happened in the Garden of Eden?
A provocative new interpretation of the Adam and Eve story from an expert in Biblical literature.
The Garden of Eden story, one of the most famous narratives in Western history, is typically read as an ancient account of original sin and humanity’s fall from divine grace. In this highly innovative study, Ziony Zevit argues that this is not how ancient Israelites understood the early biblical text. Drawing on such diverse disciplines as biblical studies, geography, archaeology, mythology, anthropology, biology, poetics, law, linguistics, and literary theory, he clarifies the worldview of the ancient Israelite readers during the First Temple period and elucidates what the story likely meant in its original context.
Most provocatively, he contends that our ideas about original sin are based upon misconceptions originating in the Second Temple period under the influence of Hellenism. He shows how, for ancient Israelites, the story was really about how humans achieved ethical discernment. He argues further that Adam was not made from dust and that Eve was not made from Adam’s rib. His study unsettles much of what has been taken for granted about the story for more than two millennia—and has far-reaching implications for both literary and theological interpreters.
“Classical Hebrew in the hands of Ziony Zevit is like a cello in the hands of a master cellist. He knows all the hidden subtleties of the instrument, and he makes you hear them in this rendition of the profoundly simple story of Adam, Eve, the Serpent, and their Creator in the Garden of Eden. Zevit brings a great deal of other biblical learning to bear in a surprisingly light-hearted book.”―Jack Miles, author of A Biography
The Garden of Eden story, one of the most famous narratives in Western history, is typically read as an ancient account of original sin and humanity’s fall from divine grace. In this highly innovative study, Ziony Zevit argues that this is not how ancient Israelites understood the early biblical text. Drawing on such diverse disciplines as biblical studies, geography, archaeology, mythology, anthropology, biology, poetics, law, linguistics, and literary theory, he clarifies the worldview of the ancient Israelite readers during the First Temple period and elucidates what the story likely meant in its original context.
Most provocatively, he contends that our ideas about original sin are based upon misconceptions originating in the Second Temple period under the influence of Hellenism. He shows how, for ancient Israelites, the story was really about how humans achieved ethical discernment. He argues further that Adam was not made from dust and that Eve was not made from Adam’s rib. His study unsettles much of what has been taken for granted about the story for more than two millennia—and has far-reaching implications for both literary and theological interpreters.
“Classical Hebrew in the hands of Ziony Zevit is like a cello in the hands of a master cellist. He knows all the hidden subtleties of the instrument, and he makes you hear them in this rendition of the profoundly simple story of Adam, Eve, the Serpent, and their Creator in the Garden of Eden. Zevit brings a great deal of other biblical learning to bear in a surprisingly light-hearted book.”―Jack Miles, author of A Biography
397 pages, Kindle Edition
First published June 18, 2013
51 people are currently reading
135 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews
November 25, 2017
I think about the garden of Eden too much. It sticks to my brain for some reason and I can't let it go. So, how interesting it was to come across this piece of biblical scholarship that jumps into this crazy linguistic vortex in an attempt to make sense of what the ancient Hebrew text was actually about for the people who wrote it and for its original audience! I skimmed a lot, but there were quite a few interesting bits to be sifted out from the minutiae. And looking at the common translations side by side gave me some insights into the difference a few words can make.
January 23, 2018
Zevit brings a wealth of linguistic knowledge to this ancient text, which comes with incredible insights and observations that have furthered my understanding of the story tremendously. Zevit's ultimate thesis however, that the story was meant to convene an etiological explanation for the origin of human ethical discernment, and not a story of a 'loss of paradise' I don't think holds up, or at least he did not substantiate his central thesis well enough. He presented his case for his own original reading of the text but he did not substantiate his conclusions well enough in my judgment. If you can read this story and not think that anything terrible happened, you, I still affirm, missed something.
December 31, 2021
Written by a Biblical scholar, this book retranslates and analyzes the Garden of Eden story based on what an ancient Hebraic understanding of the text would have been as opposed to a modern Judaic or Christian interpretation.
Zevit starts by reviewing just how widespread and influential the traditional interpretation of the story is to Western culture, but notes that this interpretation, based on a "fall" from an idyllic state, is one that is alien to ancient Judea. That interpretation didn't come about until Hellenism influenced Judaic and Christian readings, merging the Garden of Eden with Greek conceptions of a Golden Age. Zevit notes that no Israelite prophet ever alludes negatively to the events in the Garden, though there were different responses given as to whether people were punished for the sins of their ancestors or solely responsible for their own sins. But under the influence of Greek thought, Jews eventually looked as far back as the first generation to find reasons for humanity's sinful nature. This resulted in reading the story of the Garden as one that involved a negative fall for all mankind.
Zevit counters this interpretation by dissecting the text in small pieces, reviewing sub-sections of the Garden stories in separate chapters. He uses four modern English translations and then adds his own to get at the text from a linguistic as well as an analytic perspective. He sums up the story as one that explains the origins of humanity and human nature, and especially of ethical self-awareness.
Many of his findings are both interesting and compelling: the Garden was not an idyllic state of nonwork, for Adam was set to work as a laborer in the Garden from the beginning, and Eve was created expressly to help him in his labors. Eve wasn't created from Adam's rib, but from his penis: the word translated as rib means something lateral to a main axis and is likely a euphemism - this story being an etiology for why men don't have a bone in their penis, as so many animals do, since that bone went into creating Eve. The craftiness of the serpent is made even clearer when the underlying Hebrew is explained: for example, repeating God's command which was given in singular and masculine, makes it seem like the command may not have applied to Eve. Finally, Eve had already given birth to at least Cain before Adam and Eve left the Garden, as is clear from the Hebrew in Genesis 4:1 and from the fact that Adam names Eve "the mother of all living" while still in the Garden.
As an LDS reader, how do Zevit's findings align with or impact interpretations of LDS scripture and theology, especially in the Book of Mormon? I haven't done enough close reading or contemplation to arrive at firmer conclusions, but here are some first tentative thoughts. First of all, the insight that earlier understandings of the Garden story were changed through the influence of Greek thought aligns well with Nephi's vision in the Book of Mormon of Gentiles changing or diluting the plain and precious truths of the Bible after the Bible goes from the Jews to the Gentiles. Secondly, however, and somewhat opposed to this first point, Zevit's conclusion that the original story isn't about an actual "Fall" does not align as well with LDS scripture and theology - in spite of the LDS teaching that the fall was a positive development, 2 Nephi 2:22-23 still describes the fall as a change from endless and unchangeable conditions and states that Adam and Eve had no children until after the fall.
One solution is to view the Book of Mormon as drawing directly on later understandings of the Garden story available to Joseph Smith than on a more ancient, pre-Greek reading. In this reading, the Book of Mormon is either 19th century scripture without ancient provenance or it is a 19th century expansion and adaptation of ancient scripture which draws on post-Book of Mormon theological understandings.
On the other hand, the Book of Mormon self-consciously builds on and adapts earlier traditions in ways that would be quite different from contemporary or older Judaic understandings. For example, one of the first times Nephi mentions the Messiah he feels the need to explain that this Messiah is the Savior of the world (1 Nephi 10:4). When Nephi quotes and applies Isaiah to his people he specifically states that he is "likening" the text as he expands and applies it to a new setting. And Lehi's reading of the Garden story in 2 Nephi 2 follows his comments that "according to the things which I have read, [he] must needs suppose" that an angel fell from heaven and became the devil. In saying this, Lehi is interpreting or adapting scripture to tell us something it originally may not have been understood as saying. While the original Garden story may not have meant what it came to mean for the Nephites or for modern LDS theology, that doesn't necessarily militate against those meanings being "wrong." As we see from the Hebrew Bible to the New Testament to modern LDS scripture, scripture itself is in a constant process of reinterpretation, addition, and expansion. Indeed, the Book of Mormon and modern scripture draw not only on more modern interpretations of the Garden story but on their own unique take and interpretation of the original story.
To the LDS reader, therefore, Zevit's reading and conclusions of the Garden story are helpful in understanding how the story would itself have been read originally, but are merely a starting point for how the LDS reader should read the story based on our unique scriptural take.
Zevit starts by reviewing just how widespread and influential the traditional interpretation of the story is to Western culture, but notes that this interpretation, based on a "fall" from an idyllic state, is one that is alien to ancient Judea. That interpretation didn't come about until Hellenism influenced Judaic and Christian readings, merging the Garden of Eden with Greek conceptions of a Golden Age. Zevit notes that no Israelite prophet ever alludes negatively to the events in the Garden, though there were different responses given as to whether people were punished for the sins of their ancestors or solely responsible for their own sins. But under the influence of Greek thought, Jews eventually looked as far back as the first generation to find reasons for humanity's sinful nature. This resulted in reading the story of the Garden as one that involved a negative fall for all mankind.
Zevit counters this interpretation by dissecting the text in small pieces, reviewing sub-sections of the Garden stories in separate chapters. He uses four modern English translations and then adds his own to get at the text from a linguistic as well as an analytic perspective. He sums up the story as one that explains the origins of humanity and human nature, and especially of ethical self-awareness.
Many of his findings are both interesting and compelling: the Garden was not an idyllic state of nonwork, for Adam was set to work as a laborer in the Garden from the beginning, and Eve was created expressly to help him in his labors. Eve wasn't created from Adam's rib, but from his penis: the word translated as rib means something lateral to a main axis and is likely a euphemism - this story being an etiology for why men don't have a bone in their penis, as so many animals do, since that bone went into creating Eve. The craftiness of the serpent is made even clearer when the underlying Hebrew is explained: for example, repeating God's command which was given in singular and masculine, makes it seem like the command may not have applied to Eve. Finally, Eve had already given birth to at least Cain before Adam and Eve left the Garden, as is clear from the Hebrew in Genesis 4:1 and from the fact that Adam names Eve "the mother of all living" while still in the Garden.
As an LDS reader, how do Zevit's findings align with or impact interpretations of LDS scripture and theology, especially in the Book of Mormon? I haven't done enough close reading or contemplation to arrive at firmer conclusions, but here are some first tentative thoughts. First of all, the insight that earlier understandings of the Garden story were changed through the influence of Greek thought aligns well with Nephi's vision in the Book of Mormon of Gentiles changing or diluting the plain and precious truths of the Bible after the Bible goes from the Jews to the Gentiles. Secondly, however, and somewhat opposed to this first point, Zevit's conclusion that the original story isn't about an actual "Fall" does not align as well with LDS scripture and theology - in spite of the LDS teaching that the fall was a positive development, 2 Nephi 2:22-23 still describes the fall as a change from endless and unchangeable conditions and states that Adam and Eve had no children until after the fall.
One solution is to view the Book of Mormon as drawing directly on later understandings of the Garden story available to Joseph Smith than on a more ancient, pre-Greek reading. In this reading, the Book of Mormon is either 19th century scripture without ancient provenance or it is a 19th century expansion and adaptation of ancient scripture which draws on post-Book of Mormon theological understandings.
On the other hand, the Book of Mormon self-consciously builds on and adapts earlier traditions in ways that would be quite different from contemporary or older Judaic understandings. For example, one of the first times Nephi mentions the Messiah he feels the need to explain that this Messiah is the Savior of the world (1 Nephi 10:4). When Nephi quotes and applies Isaiah to his people he specifically states that he is "likening" the text as he expands and applies it to a new setting. And Lehi's reading of the Garden story in 2 Nephi 2 follows his comments that "according to the things which I have read, [he] must needs suppose" that an angel fell from heaven and became the devil. In saying this, Lehi is interpreting or adapting scripture to tell us something it originally may not have been understood as saying. While the original Garden story may not have meant what it came to mean for the Nephites or for modern LDS theology, that doesn't necessarily militate against those meanings being "wrong." As we see from the Hebrew Bible to the New Testament to modern LDS scripture, scripture itself is in a constant process of reinterpretation, addition, and expansion. Indeed, the Book of Mormon and modern scripture draw not only on more modern interpretations of the Garden story but on their own unique take and interpretation of the original story.
To the LDS reader, therefore, Zevit's reading and conclusions of the Garden story are helpful in understanding how the story would itself have been read originally, but are merely a starting point for how the LDS reader should read the story based on our unique scriptural take.
December 1, 2019
This is a heavily academic book but I think completely worth it. Zevit is clearly an authority on Iron Age Semitic linguistics and uses every tool at his disposal to go absolutely back to basics on the literal words written down in the Garden story. This is definitely where he was strongest - arguing that this word doesn't mean that, it means this. He breaks down the story verse by verse, almost, to leave no stone unturned. Ultimately, he veers a little into midrash at the end (in the infamous 'curse' section where no word for 'curse' actually appears), and constructs a slightly optimistic reading of the story, which is interesting and valuable but a little out of step with his otherwise highly empirical approach. However, I think it's impossible to not over-correct a little bit when dealing with a text with such an entrenched interpretations, and while this is outside his area of expertise, I would have loved a more detailed history of the evolution of that interpretation - something he touches on briefly but doesn't go into depth with.
All that being said, if you or someone you know is open to a reader-response/historical linguistic commentary on Genesis and would benefit from understanding that the Fall is a cultural invention that WILDLY post-dates the Garden story and is not convincingly reflected in it, it is worth your while to work through this text.
All that being said, if you or someone you know is open to a reader-response/historical linguistic commentary on Genesis and would benefit from understanding that the Fall is a cultural invention that WILDLY post-dates the Garden story and is not convincingly reflected in it, it is worth your while to work through this text.
June 23, 2022
This was an especially challenging read. I'd never read a book of biblical criticism before, nor engaged with a text that assumed a non-divine source for the Torah. I know, crazy, right? But that's very much a function of my upbringing.
Regardless, this was not only challenging but engaging and inspiring. Yes, also DRY. But it's a book of biblical criticism based in history and archeological and anthropological records, so what would you expect? But the way it unpacked the Eden story, and how it removed layer after layer of cultural and religious influence and interpretation to get at what the actual words actually meant to the people reading at the time, was revelatory (ha! puns.). I so appreciated reading this story in a new light, one that erases all the "original sin" interpretations. This is a vitally important book for my own connection to this text, and I really valued Zevit's take.
Regardless, this was not only challenging but engaging and inspiring. Yes, also DRY. But it's a book of biblical criticism based in history and archeological and anthropological records, so what would you expect? But the way it unpacked the Eden story, and how it removed layer after layer of cultural and religious influence and interpretation to get at what the actual words actually meant to the people reading at the time, was revelatory (ha! puns.). I so appreciated reading this story in a new light, one that erases all the "original sin" interpretations. This is a vitally important book for my own connection to this text, and I really valued Zevit's take.
May 7, 2022
I'm certainly not qualified to comment on Hebrew philology, but I found the modified translations Zevit posited fascinating. Some, like the creation of Eve from Adam's "bone" made more sense than any "rib" explanation I've other heard. Other things, like the "punishments" or lack thereof imposed by YHWH, I'm still pondering. The tracing of the "fall" and "original sin" stigma to Hellenic rather than ancient Hebraic thinking is at once staggering and hopeful.
November 13, 2017
A very interesting academic study of the story of Adam and Eve. Learned quite a bit about the iron age in the middle east and was most interested in the analysis of where the garden of Eden was likely located.
December 8, 2014
This wonderful book works to reconstruct the reading of the garden of Eden story in Genesis as it was understood by people in the the first millennium BCE. It transforms the story from a diatribe on the fall into original sin, to a story of the emergence of ethics and kinship society of the Hebrew people. Along the way we learn how the story was distorted by Hellenism and early Christianity. A stunning analysis of the Hebrew text and all the scholarship about the times and surrounding peoples that impacted the creation of the Torah. Recommended.
July 26, 2014
I found this book very interesting and a nice page-turner. Though I don't agree with all of his conclusions, I truly appreciate his scholarship. I tend to argue with books, and write my objections and observations in the margin. Several times I would find an objection to his argument, write a comment about it, then within a page the author would very effectively answer my objection. He is very skilled at anticipating problems and answering them.
September 23, 2015
There's several interesting arguments that this book makes, and it generally gets them out of the way upfront. The rest of it bogs down somewhat with finicky details of word translation and extrapolations of distant cultural nuance, but it still makes for some great dinner party conversation.
May 5, 2016
An attempt to refute the notion the story of the Garden of Eden was an account of the Fall of Man--not entirely convincing for this reader, but many fascinating thoughts and insights along the way.
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews