And Adam said, This [is] now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.
23. This is now, &c.] The exclamation of joy and wonder is expressed in the rhythmical language of poetry. It is as if the man, after passing in review the animals, recognizes instantaneously in woman the fulfilment of his hope. “This is now” is equivalent to “here at last”; the German “Diese endlich.”
bone of my bones ] A strong metaphorical phrase to denote that the woman is different from all the animals, and is absolutely one with the man. For similar expressions used of near relationship, compare Gen 29:14, Gen 37:27; Jdg 9:2; 2Sa 5:1; 2Sa 19:12-13 ; 1Ch 11:1. This proverbial expression may have furnished the symbolism of the story.
she shall be called, &c.] The marg. by pointing out that the Hebrew for “woman” is Isshah, and for “man” Ish, shews the resemblance in the sound of the two words. This is fairly reproduced in the English words “Woman” and “Man”; and in Luther’s rendering “Mnnin” and “Mann.” The LXX is unable to reproduce it. The Latin attempts it with questionable success, haec vocabitur virago, quoniam de viro sumpta est.
Instead of “from man.” m-ish. LXX and Targ. read “from her husband” = m-ishh, which adds to the resemblance in sound.
As a matter of philology the derivation is inaccurate. Probably Isshah is derived from a different root, anash. But nearly all these popular derivations of words prove to be inaccurate when judged by scientific etymology. They are based upon the assonance, or obvious resemblance in sound; and this, while it cannot fail to catch the ear and cling to the recollection of the people, is notoriously to be distrusted for supplying the real derivation.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Whether the primeval man was conscious of the change in himself, and of the work of the Supreme Being while it was going on, or received supernatural information of the event when he awoke, does not appear. But he is perfectly aware of the nature of her who now for the first time appears before his eyes. This is evinced in his speech on beholding her: This, now – in contrast with the whole animal creation just before presented to his view, in which he had failed to find a helpmeet for him – is bone of my bone, and flesh of my flesh; whence we perceive that the rib included both bone and flesh. To this counterpart of myself shall be called woman; the word in the original being a feminine form of man, to which we have no exact equivalent, though the word woman (womb-man, or wife-man), proves our word man to have been originally of the common gender. Because out of a man was she taken; being taken out of a man, she is human; and being a perfect individual, she is a female man.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 23. Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, c.] There is a very delicate and expressive meaning in the original which does not appear in our version. When the different genera of creatures were brought to Adam, that he might assign them their proper names, it is probable that they passed in pairs before him, and as they passed received their names. To this circumstance the words in this place seem to refer. Instead of this now is zoth happaam, we should render more literally this turn, this creature, which now passes or appears before me, is flesh of my flesh, c. The creatures that had passed already before him were not suitable to him, and therefore it was said, For Adam there was not a help meet found, Ge 2:20 but when the woman came, formed out of himself, he felt all that attraction which consanguinity could produce, and at the same time saw that she was in her person and in her mind every way suitable to be his companion. See Parkhurst, sub voce.
She shall be called Woman] A literal version of the Hebrew would appear strange, and yet a literal version is the only proper one. ish signifies man, and the word used to express what we term woman is the same with a feminine termination, ishshah, and literally means she-man. Most of the ancient versions have felt the force of the term, and have endeavoured to express it as literally as possible. The intelligent reader will not regret to see some of them here. The Vulgate Latin renders the Hebrew virago, which is a feminine form of vir, a man. Symmachus uses , andris, a female form of , aner, a man. Our own term is equally proper when understood. Woman has been defined by many as compounded of wo and man, as if called man’s wo because she tempted him to eat the forbidden fruit but this is no meaning of the original word, nor could it be intended, as the transgression was not then committed. The truth is, our term is a proper and literal translation of the original, and we may thank the discernment of our Anglo-Saxon ancestors for giving it. [A.S.], of which woman is a contraction, means the man with the womb. A very appropriate version of the Hebrew ishshah, rendered by terms which signify she-man, in the versions already specified. Hence we see the propriety of Adam’s observation: This creature is flesh of my flesh, and bone of my bones; therefore shall she be called WOMB-MAN, or female man, because she was taken out of man. See Verstegan. Others derive it from [A.S.] or [A.S.], man’s wife or she-man. Either may be proper, the first seems the most likely.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
And Adam said.
Quest. How knew he this?
Answ. Either,
1. By his own observation; for though it be said that he was asleep till the rib was taken out and restored, yet he might awake as soon as ever that was done, the reason of his sleep ceasing, and so might see the making of the woman. Or,
2. By the revelation of God, who put these words into Adams mouth, to whom therefore these words of Adam are ascribed, Mat 19:5.
This is now; or, for this time the woman is made of my bones, &c.; but for the time to come the woman as well as the man shall be produced another way, to wit, by generation. Made of my rib and flesh; i.e. God hath provided me a meet help and wife, not out of the brute creatures, but nearer hand, a part of my own body, and of the same nature with myself.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
23. Womanin Hebrew,“man-ess.”
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And Adam said, this is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh,…. Of “his bones”, because made out of a pair of his ribs, as some think, one on each side, and therefore expressed in the plural number, “and of his flesh”, a part of which was taken with the rib; this Adam knew, either being awake while she was made, though asleep when the rib was taken out; or by divine revelation, by an impress of it on his mind; or it might have been declared to him in a dream, while asleep, when, being in an ecstasy or trance, this whole affair was represented unto him: and this was “now” done, just done, and would be done no more in like manner; “this time” o, this once, as many render it; so it was, but hereafter the woman was to be produced in the way of generation, as man:
she shall be called woman, because she was taken out of man: her name was “Ishah”, because taken from “Ish”, as “vira” in Latin from “vir”, and “woman” in our language from “man”.
o “hac vice”, Pagninus, Montanus, Junius Tremellius, Piscator, Vatablus, so the Targum , Symmachus Theodotion “hoc semel”, Fagius.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
The design of God in the creation of the woman is perceived by Adam, as soon as he awakes, when the woman is brought to him by God. Without a revelation from God, he discovers in the woman “ bone of his bones and flesh of his flesh.” The words, “ this is now ( lit., this time) bone of my bones,” etc., are expressive of joyous astonishment at the suitable helpmate, whose relation to himself he describes in the words, “ she shall be called Woman, for she is taken out of man.” is well rendered by Luther, “ Mnnin ” (a female man), like the old Latin vira from vir . The words which follow, “ therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife, and they shall become one flesh,” are not to be regarded as Adam’s, first on account of the , which is always used in Genesis, with the exception of Gen 20:6; Gen 42:21, to introduce remarks of the writer, either of an archaeological or of a historical character, and secondly, because, even if Adam on seeing the woman had given prophetic utterance to his perception of the mystery of marriage, he could not with propriety have spoken of father and mother. They are the words of Moses, written to bring out the truth embodied in the fact recorded as a divinely appointed result, to exhibit marriage as the deepest corporeal and spiritual unity of man and woman, and to hold up monogamy before the eyes of the people of Israel as the form of marriage ordained by God. But as the words of Moses, they are the utterance of divine revelation; and Christ could quote them, therefore, as the word of God (Mat 19:5). By the leaving of father and mother, which applies to the woman as well as to the man, the conjugal union is shown to be a spiritual oneness, a vital communion of heart as well as of body, in which it finds its consummation. This union is of a totally different nature from that of parents and children; hence marriage between parents and children is entirely opposed to the ordinance of God. Marriage itself, notwithstanding the fact that it demands the leaving of father and mother, is a holy appointment of God; hence celibacy is not a higher or holier state, and the relation of the sexes for a pure and holy man is a pure and holy relation. This is shown in Gen 2:25: “ They were both naked , with dagesh in the , is an abbreviated form of Gen 3:7, from to strip), the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.” Their bodies were sanctified by the spirit, which animated them. Shame entered first with sin, which destroyed the normal relation of the spirit to the body, exciting tendencies and lusts which warred against the soul, and turning the sacred ordinance of God into sensual impulses and the lust of the flesh.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
23. And Adam said, etc It is demanded whence Adam derived this knowledge since he was at that time buried in deep sleep. If we say that his quickness of perception was then such as to enable him by conjecture to form a judgment, the solution would be weak. But we ought not to doubt that God would make the whole course of the affair manifest to him, either by secret revelation or by his word; for it was not from any necessity on God’s part that He borrowed from man the rib out of which he might form the woman; but he designed that they should be more closely joined together by this bonds which could not have been effected unless he had informed them of the fact. Moses does not indeed explain by what means God gave them this information; yet unless we would make the work of God superfluous, we must conclude that its Author revealed both the fact itself and the method and design of its accomplishment. The deep sleep was sent upon Adam, not to hide from him the origin of his wife, but to exempt him from pain and trouble, until he should receive a compensation so excellent for the loss of his rib.
This is now bone of, etc (149) In using the expression הפעם ( hac vice,) Adam indicates that something had been wanting to him; as if he had said, Now at length I have obtained a suitable companion, who is part of the substance of my flesh, and in whom I behold, as it were, another self. And he gives to his wife a name taken from that of man, (150) that by this testimony and this mark he might transmit a perpetual memorial of the wisdom of God. A deficiency in the Latin language has compelled the ancient interpreter to render אשה ( ishah,) by the word virago. It is, however, to be remarked, that the Hebrew term means nothing else than the female of the man.
(149) “ Hac vice os est ex ossibus meis.” זאת הפעם, ( zot haphaam.) These words are rendered in the English version by “This now,” which very feebly and imperfectly expresses the sense of the original; nor does the version of Calvin, “At this turn,” give the true emphasis of the words. It is perhaps scarcely possible to do so without a paraphrase. The two words of the original are both intended to be emphatic. “This living creature ( זאת) which at the present time ( הפעם, hac vice) passes before me, is the companion which I need, for it is bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh.” — Vide Dathe in loco. — Ed
(150) “ Nomen uxori a viro imponit.” אשה, ( ishah,) from איש, ( ish,) which is the Hebrew word man with a feminine termination; as if we should say, “She shall be called manness, because she was taken out of the man.” Calvin uses the word virissa; Dathe, after Le Clerc, the word vira; and though neither of them are strictly classical, yet are they far preferable to the term virago in the Vulgate, which Calvin justly rejects, and which means a woman of masculine character. The English word woman is a contraction of womb-man. — Ed
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(23) This is now.Literally, this stroke, or beat of the foot in keeping time. It means, therefore, this time, or colloquially, at last. Adam had long studied the natural world, and while, with their confidence as yet unmarred by human cruelty, they came to his call, grew tame, and joined his company, he found none that answered to his wants, and replied to him with articulate speech. At last, on waking from his trance, he found one standing by him in whom he recognised a second self, and he welcomed her joyfully, and exclaimed, This at last is bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: that is, she is mans counterpart, not merely in feeling and sensehis fleshbut in his solid qualities. In several of the Semitic dialects bone is used for self. Thus, in the Jerusalem Lectionary (ed. Miniscalchi, Verona, 1861) we read: I will manifest my bone unto him (Joh. 14:21), that is, myself; and again, I have power to lay it down of my bone (Joh. 10:18), that is, of myself. So, too, in Hebrew, In the selfsame day is in the bone of this day (Gen. 7:13). Thus bone of my bones means my very own self, while flesh of my flesh adds the more tender and gentle qualities.
She shall be called Woman (Ishah), because she was taken out of Man (Ish).Adam, who knew that he was an Ish (see Excursus at end of this book), called the woman a female Ish. The words of our Version, man and woman (perhaps womb-man), represent with sufficient accuracy the relation of the words in the original.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
23. This is now bone Hebrews, This the time bone of my bones, etc. , the time, is here equivalent to the adverb now. Comp . Gen 30:20. The words are an exclamation, and indicate the joyful surprise with which he recognises this time, after having looked hitherto repeatedly among the lower animals in vain, a suitable companion for himself .
Shall be called Woman He gives her at once her proper name, and he does it by means of the same deep insight into her nature as that by which he named the living creatures of Paradise . Thus now has the sacred writer completed a fuller description of the creation of man, male and female, than it was his design to give in the previous section, Gen 1:27. That was creation, this formation. See above on Gen 2:7. On the proper name of the woman, see Gen 3:20.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘Then the man said, “This one at this time now is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh, this one shall be called Woman (isha) because this one was taken out of Man (ish)”.’
The woman is not just produced from one of his ribs, but is made up of his flesh and bones. The man names the woman, thus once more establishing his position over her, but this time the ‘woman’ is given a name similar to his own. The naming is an act cementing a close relationship as well as revealing his special status. While she too is subject to him, she is also his close companion. (Ish and isha do not have the same etymology. Their connection is in sound. The original word play would be in anothe language than Hebrew). Note the threefold repetition of ‘this one’ (zoth) signifying completeness and uniqueness.
“At this time now” – RSV translates ‘at last’. Here was one at last who could stand on a par with man as his helpmeet.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Gen 2:23. Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, &c. Adam here begins to be used as a proper name; not as the general name of man. The several genera of beasts and birds had already passed before Adam, to which he gave names expressive of their respective natures and properties: but among all these, there was not (kenegdo) his counter-part found: but when the woman was brought in her turn to pass in review, he said (zoth hapaam) this turn, this which passes now in review, is flesh of my flesh, &c.; which words may be either understood in a literal sense, referring to the manner of Eve’s formation; or in a general sense, expressing only nearness of relation and proximity of blood: in which sense Laban says to Jacob) Surely thou art my bone and my flesh, my near relation.
She shall be called woman i.e.. She shall partake of my name as she does of my nature; she shall be called ishah, from ish, man, from whom she is taken. I may again observe, that this agreement of the names of persons with the names of things from which they are derived, is one of the main arguments which are offered in proof of the Hebrew’s being the original, or, at least, a dialect of the original language.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
REFLECTIONS
MANY are the sweet reflections which are suggested to the Readers mind, from the perusal of this Chapter. Here is the first institution of the holy sabbath. And here we meet also with the first institution of the holy estate of marriage. Both of divine authority. Both sanctified by God himself; and therefore both worthy to be observed with suitable reverence. Concerning the former, I would say to the pious Reader, may it be your mercy, and mine, to honour the Lord’s day, on account of the many precious purposes, for which the Lord himself honoured it: and to cease from our own works, as God did from His. And concerning the latter, I would add a prayer, that a due sense of the Divine appointment, in the institution of holy wedlock, may make everyone engaged in it, remember what the Apostle says: Marriage is honourable unto all, and the bed undefiled; but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge. But doth not the idea of union in the marriage-state, in this life, awaken a spiritual improvement, and call up to the recollection of the true believer in Jesus, the sweet thought of our spiritual union with Him, who hath betrothed his people to himself, forever? Oh! what a precious scripture is that; Thy Maker is thy Husband, the Lord of Hosts is His name. Isa 54:5 . Dearest Jesus, be Thou my Husband, Shepherd, Friend!
May the recollection, which Gen 2:7 awakens, of the dust of which our nature was formed, remind you and me of our earthly extraction; so that we can truly say to corruption, thou art my father; and to the worm, thou art my mother and my sister. Job 17:14 . But at the same time, may the pleasing thought, that the LORD God hath breathed into our nostrils the breath of life, make us never forget our heavenly relationship. And oh! that God the Holy Ghost would breathe upon the dry bones, both of him that writes and him that reads, and bid us live.
Reader! do not overlook the very gracious doctrine of Gen 2:20 . There was not found an help meet for Adam. No! There is not, there cannot be, in any, or in all the creatures of God’s providence, an help meet. And though the LORD God brought the woman to our first father, as a suitable help meet for the body; yet it is the Seed of the woman, alone, which can become an Help-meet for the soul. Dearest Jesus! be thou my Help, my Hope, and my Portion forever.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Gen 2:23 And Adam said, This [is] now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.
Ver. 23. This is now bone of my bone. ] This sentence, saith Tertullian, and, after him, Beda, is the first prophecy that was ever uttered in the world. And it is uttered in a way of admiration, which they that are taken with, do commonly use a concise kind of speech; especially if overjoyed, as Adam here was upon the first sight of the woman; whom he no sooner saw but knew, and thereupon cried out as wondering at God’s goodness to himself, “This now is bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh.” Luther, the night before he died, was reasonably well, and sat with his friends at table. The matter of their discourse was, whether they should know one another in heaven, or not. Luther held it affirmatively, and this was one reason he gave: Adam as soon as he saw Eve, knew what she was, not by discourse, but by divine revelation; so shall we in the life to come. All the saints shall sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, having communion with them, not only as godly men, but as Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. And if with them, why not with others? a Chrysostom b saith, we shall point them out, and say, Lo, yonder is Peter, and that’s Paul, and there are the prophets, apostles, &c.
She shall be called woman.
a Melch. Adam.
b I, P, P
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Man. Hebrew. ‘ish. App-14.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Eve
Eve, type of the Church as bride of Christ Joh 3:28; Joh 3:29; 2Co 11:2; Eph 5:25-32; Rev 19:7; Rev 19:8
Woman “Isha,” “because she was taken out of man” (Ish) Hos 2:16
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
bone: Gen 29:14, Jdg 9:2, 2Sa 5:1, 2Sa 19:13, Eph 5:30
flesh: Gen 2:24
Woman: Heb. Isha, 1Co 11:8, 1Co 11:9
taken: 1Co 11:8
Man: Heb. Ish
Reciprocal: Gen 2:19 – brought Gen 3:20 – Adam Gen 5:2 – their 2Sa 19:12 – my bones Rom 7:2 – the woman Col 3:19 – love 1Pe 3:7 – ye
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Gen 2:23. This is now bone of my bone Probably it was revealed to Adam in a vision, when he was asleep that this lovely creature, now presented to him, was a piece of himself, and was to be his companion, and the wife of his covenant. In token of his acceptance of her, he gave her a name, not peculiar to her, but common to her sex: she shall be called woman, isha, a she-man, differing from man in sex only, not in nature; made of man, and joined to man.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
The word "woman" (Heb. ishah) sounds similar to the Hebrew word translated "man" (ish). This similarity reflects the close union between the two. Moses named Adam by his relation to the ground, but Adam named himself in relation to his wife. [Note: Sarna, p. 23.]
"Name-giving in the ancient Orient was primarily an exercise of sovereignty, of command." [Note: von Rad, p. 83. George W. Ramsey, "Is Name-Giving an Act of Domination in Genesis 2:23 and Elsewhere?" Catholic Biblical Quarterly 50:1 (January 1988):24-35, disputed this view.]
"Genesis 2 is unique among the creation myths of the whole of the Ancient Near East in its appreciation of the meaning of woman, i.e., that human existence is a partnership of man and woman." [Note: Westermann, p. 232.]
"Though they are equal in nature, that man names woman (cf. Gen 3:20) indicates that she is expected to be subordinate to him, an important presupposition of the ensuing narrative (Gen 3:17)." [Note: Wenham, p. 70.]
When Adam discovered that God had provided him with a partner like himself, not like one of the other animals, he rejoiced greatly. He received his mate as God’s good gift to him because he trusted in God’s wisdom, goodness, and integrity. Adam was now beside himself! (Pardon the pun.)
Likewise it is essential for every husband and wife to thankfully receive the mate God has given us as His best provision for us. To do so we must know and trust God’s goodness. Our mate’s differences are good things God brings to us that He will use as tools to shape us into the people He wants us to be. Failure to accept one’s mate as a good gift from a loving God leads to many problems in marriage and frustrates God’s purpose and plan for marriage. It expresses rejection of God and His provision for one’s life. It also demonstrates unbelief, disobedience, and displeasure with God’s character. Your mate needs your unconditional acceptance.