Considering the differences in both scriptures, it is appropriate to analyse the implications of these differences on their own religions, including exegesis of the texts, deeper issues such as social status between the sexes, and the subsequent emergence of different doctrines.
A critical difference in both accounts is the Genesis’ absence of Satan and the Angels, as opposed to the Qur’anic version. The Isma doctrine within Islam outlines that all Prophets, regardless of the minor sins they commit, have innocent intentions. Both accounts agree that the reasoning behind Adam and Eve’s sin of taking the fruit from the tree was in fact to be closer to God through qualities similar to His “likeness”. This means that if Adam’s innocence and his reasoning behind taking the fruit is to be maintained, there must be an external source to be blamed for his taking of the fruit. However, the lack of outside influence (including Satan and the Angels) in the Bible implies that Adam and Eve were both being deliberately disobedient, highlighting the intrinsically evil nature of human beings, and therefore the responsibility to redeem themselves through Jesus Christ. Thus, this forms the basis for the notion of Original Sin. This doctrine is absent in Qur’an, and it is possible to ascertain so because it is explicitly stated in the Qur’anic narrative that Adam and Eve are tricked by Satan rather than a mysterious serpent, and so the moral teaching of this narrative is that listening to God will always trump listening to Satan.
One of the major implications of the Biblical account on Christianity is the subsequent doctrine of Original Sin. The opening chapters of Genesis delineate a wondrous Garden where all things lived harmoniously, but were disrupted when the first human beings arrived and ate the forbidden fruit, resulting in the consequent sinking of humanity into sin and strife, where the only path to redemption is through Jesus Christ . Paul W. Kahn summarises Original Sin eloquently in his book where he states that Western Religious tradition teaches human beings that their essential task as individuals and as communities is to overcome the evil that is inherent to human nature, and to return to the “image of God” that human beings possessed at the time of their creation. Simply put, a human beings’ ultimate mission on Earth is to “recover Eden”. Therefore, it is apt to claim that the biblical characters of Adam and Eve represent the universal human who has gone astray and is given a new opportunity through Jesus Christ.
However, the doctrine does not come without its criticisms. Patricia A. Williams explains the effects of the doctrine of Original Sin in a more cynical manner, claiming that the Roman Catholics, the Protestants, and the Eastern Orthodox churches have all split due to disparate views on Original Sin and therefore, a “doctrine so divisive” must be subject to reexamination.
Other obvious issues raised through the Biblical narration is the status of women within the religion. The fact that chaos erupts after Eve is created and her blunder leading man into sin plays a huge part in the structural status of women in modern Christian families. Kvam et al. believe that religion plays a critical role in the way people shape their worldviews and in the formation of human identities. The narrative of Adam and Eve is constantly called upon by the Christian tradition to illustrate images of “maleness” and “femaleness”, forming cultures and by extension familial paradigms.
However, different interpretations of the Biblical account can often clash. Julie Faith Parker’s argument that mainstream translations of the Biblical account of Eve’s decision to eat from the tree often disregards the word עמה (with her) in the verse of Genesis 3:6. By not incorporating the word “with her” in their translations, she argues that the result is the elimination of essential information which indicates the man’s presence when Eve took the bite from the fruit, thereby “excusing the man and condemning the woman”.
On the other hand, the Qur’ans minimal reference to Eve has had various perceived implications on post-Qur’anic written materials. The Qur’an only refers to Adam or to both Eve and Adam using dual word forms. In the Qur’anic account, it is made evident that Adam’s trials are individualized and he is twice addressed by God as the “prime transgressor”. The lack of detail in this account about Eve leaves much room for interpretation. This has resulted in the assumption in 9th century Hadith that Eve was created from man’s rib according to Biblical subtext. Al-Tabari’s exegesis describes how“Adam did not eat… but Hawwa (Eve) went forward and ate. Then she said, “O Adam, eat! I have eaten and I am unhurt…”” Al-Tabari’s “fill in the gaps” exegesis style clearly demonstrates how the Qur’an possesses biblical subtext, and how this has resulted in similar implications on the Islamic status of woman and familial structure to that of Christianity.
Many interpreters, both within the Christian and the Islamic tradition have tried to address this issue of unequal social standing between men and women through a closer examination of the word “Adam.” Rifat Hassan claims that it is not explicitly stated in the Qu’ran that Adam is a male, and he further believes that the term “Adam” functions as a collective noun, rather than a masculine name. This means that Adam would represent humankind, rather than a dominant male figure. Hassan goes on to support this by stating that in the Qur’an, “Adam” is interchangeable with “Alinsan” and “Bashar” which are both generic terms for humanity in Arabic. Similarly, Robert S. Kawashima solidifies this point from a Christian standpoint, by arguing the importance of the creation of Eve as a “female”, suggesting that Adam’s identification as a “male” was non-existent before she came to be. This means that Adam was gender neutral before Eve arrived, and it was only through the identification of Eve as a woman that Adam became a man, lending weight to the importance of female figures in establishing the “maleness” of men. This interpretation continues to enjoy the support of many female scholars.
The creation narrative of Adam and Eve is clearly a foundational account in both Christianity and Islam. Despite the basic outline of each of the accounts being very similar, both project various theological and structural details, and utilise different language styles and form, and purpose. These differences have had immense implications on the religions themselves, including the extension of newer religious doctrines, and the intertwining of themes throughout the narratives into modern cultural and family life.
