The Real Imbalance between Adam and Eve in the Garden

Oct. 30 2024

Both feminists and traditionally-minded Christians—although many fewer rabbis—have tended to interpret the opening chapters of Genesis as a justification for male domination over women. But Roslyn Weiss reads the account of the creation of man and woman, and the relationship between Adam and Eve, in a different light:

It is, after all, the woman who lacks nothing; she even contains a part of the man. The man, by contrast, is now incomplete: a piece of his body has been removed. Furthermore, the woman was never alone; from the start she had a companion. She is introduced into the world to satisfy the neediness of another, but she herself is not needy. Adam is delighted at the sight of the woman when they are first introduced to one another. He exclaims: “This one at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh” (Genesis 2:23). There is no comparable reaction on the part of the woman.

God corrects the first flaw in Creation—the loneliness of the man—by creating the woman. But the creation of woman gives rise to a second flaw: the man becomes so attached to the woman that he obeys her rather than God. This, too, must be rectified, and so God levels the playing field of desire.

Read more at Jewish Review of Books

More about: Adam and Eve, Genesis, Hebrew Bible, Women

After Taking Steps toward Reconciliation, Turkey Has Again Turned on Israel

“The Israeli government, blinded by Zionist delusions, seizes not only the UN Security Council but all structures whose mission is to protect peace, human rights, freedom of the press, and democracy,” declared the Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan in a speech on Wednesday. Such over-the-top anti-Israel rhetoric has become par for the course from the Turkish head of state since Hamas’s attack on Israel last year, after which relations between Jerusalem and Ankara have been in what Hay Eytan Cohen Yanarocak describes as “free fall.”

While Erdogan has always treated Israel with a measure of hostility, the past few years had seen steps to reconciliation. Yanarocak explains this sharp change of direction, which is about much more than the situation in Gaza:

The losses at the March 31, 2024 Turkish municipal elections were an unbearable blow for Erdoğan. . . . In retrospect it appears that Erdoğan’s previous willingness to continue trade relations with Israel pushed some of his once-loyal supporters toward other Islamist political parties, such as the New Welfare Party. To counter this trend, Erdoğan halted trade relations, aiming to neutralize one of the key political tools available to his Islamist rivals.

Unsurprisingly, this decision had a negative impact on Turkish [companies] engaged in trade with Israel. To maintain their long-standing trade relationships, these companies found alternative ways to conduct business through intermediary Mediterranean ports.

The government in Ankara also appears to be concerned about the changing balance of power in the region. The weakening of Iran and Hizballah could create an unfavorable situation for the Assad regime in Syria, [empowering Turkish separatists there]. While Ankara is not fond of the mullahs, its core concern remains Iran’s territorial integrity. From Turkey’s perspective, the disintegration of Iran could set a dangerous precedent for secessionists within its own borders.

Read more at Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security

More about: Iran, Israel diplomacy, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Turkey