WERE ADAM AND EVE REALLY NAKED? (Gen 2:25 ; 3:6 ; Ex 34:30)

[JacobBenAvraham]

WERE ADAM AND EVE REALLY NAKED?

This midrash has been on my mind, I would like to share it with you all. Since we are starting over again with our Torah studies, the first Parasha was" B'Reisheet" and of course, it has the story of Adam and Eve, and their fall, which kinda threw the monkey wrench into G-d's perfect machinery.

We see their creation, and in Genesis 2:25 it reads " and they were both naked, the man and his wife, and they were not ashamed" but then, in Gen 3:7 "Then their eyes were opened and they knew that they were naked"

Well, the question might be put, didn't they realize before that they were naked? that they didn't have a stitch of clothing on? I mean, YHVH didn't created them with Levis, they came straight from the earth, and from the rib. So, how do we deal with this question,

There is a saying, "If a tree fell in the forest 6000 years ago, did it make a noise?" We would answer, "Yes" but then, the other person would say; "how do you know that? you weren't there to hear or see it" Then you would say "Well, when a tree today falls in the forest, it makes a noise, so it must have made a noise 6000 years ago" We are relying on other evidence to assume something we did not actually see or hear. This is what we must do with the "nakedness of Adam and Eve" for this, we must go forward in time a few thousand years, to where Moses was on Sinai, this is when he received the second set of tablets with the commandments, he had been on Mt. Sinai 40 days and nights, alone in the presence of YHVH, and when he came down.....

... Moses did not know that the skin on his face SHONE while he talked with Him (G-d) Exodus 34:30

Imagine that, Moses was "glowing" with the "shekinah of YHVH" because of being in HIS presence for 40 days, and this is Moses, who was born a sinner, just like all of us, yet he GLOWED with the glory of YHVH,

Now, could it be that, just perhaps, before the sin of Adam and Eve, when they were still perfect and sinless, the "glory / Shekinah " of YHVH covered them BOTH? being, sort of saying, their "clothing/covering" over their skin? In the Hebrew, the words "light" and "skin" are pronounced the same; "or" only difference is that the word "light" is spelled with an "Alef" and "skin" with an "ayin"
the word "Naked" is "arom" in Hebrew, the first letter is also an "ayin" the letter "ayin" in Hebrew is the symbol for "eye" something to see with! and if we were to look at the word "arom" using the ancient Hebrew letter-symbols, we would tend to get the message "seeing man, who used to be supreme, is connected to chaos" so "nakedness" symbolized "sin and chaos"

When Adam and Eve, "were naked and not ashamed" could this mean that they did not have any "material" clothing on, like tunics, nor sandals, nor animal skins, yet they were "covered" still by the Shekinah light of YHVH? if Moses "glowed" just by being in the presence of YHVH for 40 days, imagine Adam and Eve who were "perfect and sinless" and in constant fellowship with their creator? how much more they had to glow, radiate with the light and glory of God, that was their "covering" once they sinned, we can imagine that the "covering of light" diminished and finally disappeared, leaving them THEN "Naked" that is when they discovered their "nakedness" since they had no more covering of light, we can connect this with YHVH's question to them

"Who told you that you were naked? did you eat of the tree of knowledge of Good and evil?" YHVH is giving them a chance to confess, they could relate their now "nakedness" with their "sin" and loss of the "covering of Shekinah"

For this reason, a clean animal (or animals) were sacrificed , and the skins of the animals made into coverings for Adam and Eve, so that their "sins were covered" in the sight of G-d. How much fortunate we are today, for our sins are "forgiven" and "erased" completely through the "blood of Yeshua" and even though we might not have an external glowing light, we have the ruach HaKodesh (Holy Spirit) living inside of us, who is in a way, "Ha Or Shekinah" (The shekinah glory) and gives testimony to our "Yeshuah" (Salvation)

rabbi Ben Avraham

[ennison]

Interesting Jacob. I'd say it has both a literal and symbolic meaning. They were almost certainly naked literally. Self-awareness, self-consciousness, knowledge is fatal for a state of innocence. If one becomes aware of defects both physical and spiritual one wants to deal with them somehow - some choose cosmetics, some are more radical. You're a radical.

[HCabret]

I have once again reported your post. Please stop.

[HCabret]

Interesting Jacob. I'd say it has both a literal and symbolic meaning. They were almost certainly naked literally. Self-awareness, self-consciousness, knowledge is fatal for a state of innocence. If one becomes aware of defects both physical and spiritual one wants to deal with them somehow - some choose cosmetics, some are more radical. You're a radical.

Jacob is a evangelical Protestant fundementalist. He clearly has no regard for basic human decency and is only here to try and convert people to his religion.

[ennison]

And you are ... .?

[mona amon]

When Adam and Eve, "were naked and not ashamed" could this mean that they did not have any "material" clothing on, like tunics, nor sandals, nor animal skins, yet they were "covered" still by the Shekinah light of YHVH? if Moses "glowed" just by being in the presence of YHVH for 40 days, imagine Adam and Eve who were "perfect and sinless" and in constant fellowship with their creator? how much more they had to glow, radiate with the light and glory of God, that was their "covering" once they sinned, we can imagine that the "covering of light" diminished and finally disappeared, leaving them THEN "Naked" that is when they discovered their "nakedness" since they had no more covering of light, we can connect this with YHVH's question to them

"Who told you that you were naked? did you eat of the tree of knowledge of Good and evil?" YHVH is giving them a chance to confess, they could relate their now "nakedness" with their "sin" and loss of the "covering of Shekinah"

The stories of Genesis are truly fascinating. I like your interpretation of Adam and Eve's nakedness, but if something physically perceptible had happened, I do not think God would ask them the question. Raiment of light is not that different from a covering of cloth. There is a perceptible change when either is removed. For me, it was subtler than that. Adam and Eve had eaten of the tree of knowledge, so now they 'knew' they were naked. Before that, they did not 'know', and of course God knew that they could only have 'known' if they had eaten the forbidden fruit.

I like the idea that they were covered in the light of God's presence, but I do not think that would disappear because of their sin. Perhaps later, when they were kicked out from Eden and actually banished from God's presence?.

[108 fountains]

Have you ever noticed that in all the depictions of Adam and Eve, they both have belly buttons? Think about it.

[Ecurb]

Have you ever noticed that in all the depictions of Adam and Eve, they both have belly buttons? Think about it.

OMG!!!!! The scandal!

In this Marc Chagall "depiction", it's hard to tell, though: http://www.marcchagallart.net/chagall-66.php

Raymond Chow doesn't appear concerned with navels, either: http://www.capuletart.com/wp-content...6/adam-eve.jpg

[togre]

As to the belly buttons...so? First, that's artistic depiction, so the artists used the human form as they knew it. However, it is probable they did have belly buttons because they were created with the appearance of age. If 2 days after Adam and Eve were created you would have seen them, you would have sworn they were twenty or thirty years old. Because you know that's how long it takes for the human body to grow and develop. Normally safe assumption, but here it would be wrong. Just the trees that were created probably had "growth rings," even though they hadn't existed for years and years. The belly button would easily be included as a similar appearance of age (assuming you take the actual account of the Bible at face value--which I do).

As to Adam and Eve's nakedness--I see nothing in the actual words to suggest it means anything less than that they had no clothes on their bodies. Shameful by modern sensibilities (and by those of rabbinic tradition, to be sure!), but is nakedness itself shameful? Or is it the thoughts I feel when I look on another's body, or think of another looking at mine? Sex and sexual desire are not by definition sinful or dirty. But after the fall the sinful nature (my sinful nature/our sinful nature) corrupts all good things. Sex and sexual desire, which were created as a blessed component of the marriage of a man and a woman, fill my thoughts in selfish ways, in appropriate ways. Adam and Eve noticed their nakedness when their hearts were corrupted and felt shame at the selfishness of the desires it invoked. Perfect world fallen.

As a general aside, I don't have a problem with Jacob posting things from the Midrash and such (and if I did, that would be my problem, not his) but I also fail to value it too highly either. Why? First, the traditions and learning of God's people before the coming of Jesus (or for that matter after his coming too), no matter how pious, wise or well-intentioned, is human writing. Scripture teaches that it is on a different plain than any other writing. It is written by the Lord's inspiration and therefore is entirely accurate and reliable. Any teaching that goes beyond what God has revealed lacks this level of reliability. Why should I believe they were covered by the glory of the Lord? Did the Lord have it recorded? Was another eyewitness there? No, in this case this pious opinion is really changing what the actual words are, because it would be unseemly for our blessed ancestors to have been literally naked. And so we make God's Word more palatable to our sensibilities. Dangerous to do, even out of respect or piety, when the Lord urges us to neither add nor subtract from his Word...

[Alfonso Espada]

If so, then they would have been for decorative purposes only since no placental feeding via a navel was mentioned as being involved in their creation.

[JacobBenAvraham]

Interesting fact is: in the Hebrew language, both the words "light" and "skin" have the same pronunciation, "OR" only the first letters in Hebrew are different, "or" (light) is "Aleph, vav, resh" and (skin) is "Ayin, vav, resh" the two are related, in the fact that the letter "ayin" in Hebrew is "eye" our "eyes can see light" only when it is reflected off of something. Could the "light" have been a sort of a "skin" which covered Adam and Eve's flesh? something to ponder on. The Torah is our light, which when we read, (through our eyes) goes into our minds and soul, to learn God's will and words for our life.