Yahweh’s Proclamation About the Man

Hebrew Without Vowels or Accents

The text of Genesis 2: 23 – 24 appears as follows:

Samaritan Targum Interlinear Translation

Here’s the interlinear translation of Genesis 2: 23 – 24 from tanakh.info:

Facts About Hebrew

We can add the following to our facts about Hebrew:

146. The pronoun zoth זאת (Strong’s 2063 604 occurrences) means ‘hereby in it, likewise, the one other, same, she, so much, such deed, that’.  According to Brown-Driver-Briggs zoth is the feminine of zeh זה (Strong’s 2088  1177 occurrences) that means ‘he, hence, here, itself, now, of him, the one’, often translated ‘this’.  Zayin appears to be functioning as a prefix in the case of zoth and zeh, that according to the article  – Waw and – Zayin – Biblical Hebrew Study Dictionary on the site Discover The Holy Language indicates ‘result, product’ https://objectivetranslation.home.blog/%D7%95-waw-and-%D7%96-zayin-biblical-hebrew-study-dictionary/.

The root of zoth, by all appearances, is eth את (Strong’s 853 11050 occurrences)  alleged by Strong’s and NAS Exhaustive Concordances to not be translatable (see fact #5).  The same as the preposition eth את (Strong’s 854 809 occurrences) allegedly means ‘with (denoting proximity), on Shebanq.ancient-data, 779 of these occurrences are translated as ‘together with’,  but more specifically means ‘intercourse of different kinds with another, e.g. after verbs of making a covenant or contract, or (less often) of speaking or dealing’ according to Brown-Driver-Briggs.  For example in Gen. 4:1 “The man knew (yada) Eve his wife and bore Cain and said ‘I acquired mighty one in covenant with (eth translated ‘from’) Yahweh’”, an important distinction since ‘from’ makes it appear Yahweh fathered Cain.

The meaning of zoth includes an element of covenant between parties.  For example, in the 3 occurrences of zoth in Gen 2:23, the first is the man saying “This one in covenant with (zoth translated ‘this’) self of myself and flesh of my flesh”, the second and third are in the statement “to this one in covenant with (zoth translated ‘she’) call Mighty Toward Fire because from Mighty One taken this one in covenant with (zoth translated ‘she’)”, which I believe are not the words of the man, but Yahweh because of the change from 1^st to 2^nd person.  Similarly, in Gen 12:12 Abraham said to Sarah “when see you the Egyptians, and say ‘his wife this one in covenant with (zoth translated ‘this’)’ and kill me and you live”.  In Gen 3:13 & 14 in Yahweh’s words to the Mighty Toward Fire “what this one in covenant with (zoth) have you done”, and to the serpent “because you have done this in covenant with (zoth)”, which is why Yahweh said “Like Adam they he transgressed  (abar – bar that means ‘son, clean, pure, grain’ with the prefix ayin that indicates corruption) the covenant” in Hosea 6:7.

The noun eth את  (Strong’s 855  5 occurrences) allegedly means ‘plowshare’, but the text is problematic.  For example, in 1 Sam 13:20 & 21  there are 6 occurrences of eth, 4 of which are assigned Strong’s  853 and not translated, and 2 assigned Strong’s 855 and translated ‘mattock’, and “sharpen mighty one’s (ish) (eth)  plowshare (macharesheth) and (eth) his covenant with (eth translated ‘mattock’) and (eth) his ax (qardom) and (eth) his sickle (machareshah), and was charge pim to plowshare (machareshah) and to covenant with (eth translated ‘mattock’) .  .  .” The prophecies in Isaiah 2:4 and Micah 4:3 are similar, when “judge (shaphat) between peoples  (am) many and rebuke (yakach) nations  (goy) strong (atsum in the form עצמים) [upon far off] and beat (kathath) their swords into covenant with (eth translated ‘plowshare’) . . .”, and Joel 3:10 it states the opposite “beat your covenant with (eth translated ‘plowshares’) into swords . . .”.

In A Lexicon of Hebrew Chaldee and English by Samuel Lee, p. 63, it says “It has been shewn, that the real signification of eth את is, as to, with reference to, touching, or the like.  It is also worth remarking, that the Arabic particle which is used for the same purpose, has not only precisely the same power, but is derived in the very same way.  This particle . . . therefore, will signify, betaking to, coming to, & c., just as את does.”  According to Merriam-Webster Dictionary, betake in archaic language means ‘commit’, similar to ‘in covenant with’.

Et/eth with the he suffix forms  attah אתה  Strong’s 859 (1091 occurrences – 747 occurrences on Shebanq.ancient-data) that allegedly means ‘thee, thou, ye, you’, and the verb athah אתה  (Strong’s 857 21 occurrences) means ‘to come’ or ‘come’, must in fact refer to a future covenant since the he suffix indicates movement toward.  In Gen 3:11 Yahweh said to the man “who made know that bare/desolate (erom) covenant with you (attah) on account of the tree lord (aser) commanded you to not consume from have consumed”, and concludes in Gen 3:14 saying “ . . . cursed covenant with you (attah) from all the cattle (behemah)  . . “.

In Ezekiel 38, there are 7 occurrences of eth (Strong’s 853 not translated) in Ezek 38: 4 x 2, 6, 9, 16, 17, & 22 of which 2 (in v4 & 9) are in the form אות, the same form as oth (Strong’s 226  with 79 occurrences) that means ‘a sign, mark’, 4 occurrences of eth (Strong’s 854) alleged to mean ‘with’ in Ezek 38: 5, 6, 15, & 22, and 5 occurrences of attah (Strong’s 859) alleged to mean ‘you’ in Ezek 38: 7, 9, 13, 15, & 17.  Used of mankind who are in league with Gog to attack Yahweh’s people who are living securely, in what I believe is the New Jerusalem in Rev 21: 1 – 5.  It is difficult to identify mistranslations when a simple word like ‘with’ replaces ‘in covenant with’, but the true nature of the relationship of Gog with his people is only understood when the word ‘covenant’ or ‘mark’ is stated, as we see in this text:

• In Ezek 38: 4 – 9 Yahweh says “I will turn you around and put hooks into your jaws and lead those with mark (eth אות translated ‘you out’), and in covenant with (eth not translated) all your army . . .” v. 4,  “. . . in covenant with them (eth Strong’s 854 translated ‘with them’ all of them shield and helmet.” v. 5, “ . . . and in covenant with (eth not translated) all it’s troops, people many in covenant with you (eth Strong’s 854 translated ‘with you’)” v. 6, “prepare and ready to you, those in covenant with and all your companies gathered them upon you and be to them prison.” v.7, “You will ascend like storm coming like cloud covering (kasah) the land them be in covenant with you (Strong’s 859 translated ‘you’) your troops and many with your mark (eth אות translated ‘with’).” v. 9. 
• In Ezek 38: 13 – 17 Yahweh continues “ . . . all villages will say to you ‘take spoil, plunder in covenant with, bring seize booty, assemble your army to carry away silver and gold, to take away livestock and goods, to take plunder great’” v. 13, “and in covenant with (eth misidentified as Strong’s 935 and translated ‘you will come’), from your place, from recesses north in covenant with you (Strong’s 859 translated ‘you’), and peoples many in covenant with you (Strong’s 854 translated ‘with you’) . . .” v 15, “You ascend upon my people Israel like a cloud to cover (kasah) the land in latter years will bebring you upon my land to purpose know the nations covenant with me (Strong’s 853 not translated) in/at/with separate in/at/with you to their eyes (ayin) Gog.” v 16, “Those in covenant with (Strong’s 859 translated ‘you’) that lord declared in days former, in hand my servants, prophets of Israel prophesied in days these, years bring in covenant with you (Strong’s 853 not translated) upon their.” v 17.
• In Ezek 38:22 “I will enter into judgment in covenant with him (Strong’s 853 not translated) with pestilence and bloodshed and rain  flooding and stones, hail, fire and brimstone rain down upon him and upon his troops and upon peoples many lords in covenant with him (Strong’s 854 translated ‘with’).”

147. The noun paam פעם (Strong’s 6471 118 occurrences) means ‘a moment of time, once/formerly, footstep/pace, stroke/beat’, in the sense of a planned course ‘footsteps’, as a verb means ‘to beat, to strike, to knock’, the same as paam פעם (Strong’s 6470 5 occurrences) that means ‘to stir, to trouble’. In Nahum 1:9 paam is translated ‘a second time’ but ‘stir’ fits the context of the sentence; “. . . He will make not they rise up stir (paam פעם) trouble.”

148. The noun etsem עצם (Strong’s 6106 126 occurrences) means ‘body, bone, selfsame’, in the sense of ‘kin’, and is sometimes used in the context of ‘same day’.   Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance states etsem is “from atsam; a bone (as strong); by extension, the body; figuratively, the substance”, and atsam עצם (Strong’s 6105 20 occurrences) means “break the bones, close, be great, be increased, be more, shut, become, a primitive root; to bind fast, i.e. close (the eyes), to be (causatively, make) powerful or numerous”.  Related to the noun etsah עצה (Strong’s 6098 89 occurrences) that allegedly means ‘counselor’, often translated ‘plan, strategy, scheme’ evidencing it is advice that has been committed to action, from yaats יעצ (Strong’s 3289 78 occurrences) that means ‘advise, consult’, the yod prefix indicating third person, future tense, ‘he/they will’.  

149. The adjective ken כן (Strong’s 3651 767 occurrences) alleged to mean ‘so, thus, therefore’, actually means ‘upright station’ as revealed in the article Comparison of the Text and Translation of Genesis 2:24.  I am leaving it mistranslated in this article to show the value of using definitions provided by Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon’s to uncover the real meaning.

150. The verb azab עזב (Strong’s 5800 211 occurrences) means ‘forsake, abandon’.

151. The noun ab אב (Strong’s 1 1212 occurrences) means ‘chief, principal’, translated as ‘father’, a title hijacked by Patriarchy to support the rule of males over females.  Yahshua condemned Patriarchy, commanding his disciples to call no one father (G3962 pater 418 occurrences) except Yahweh in Matthew 23:9.  When ab is used of ‘father’ in the familial way, not of Yahweh as ‘chief, principal’, may be evidence of uninspired text or mistranslation.  For example, in Isa. 43:27 Adam is referred to as “your father (ab) that first sinned . . .”.

Text where Yahweh is called our ‘father’, means our ‘chief, principal’, not our male parent.  For example Isa. 63:16 “for you our father . . .”  & 64:8 “now Yahweh our father (ab that means chief) you, we the clay and you our potter and the work of your hands we all”.  In the Valley of Vision prophecy in Isa. 22 “in that day (the day of Yahweh) I call to my Servant (Yahshua) . . . v20 I will clothe him with your robe and your sash, strengthen him, and your dominion put in hand and become principal (ab) to dwellers Jerusalem and house Judah v21, and I will put the key of house David upon shoulder and open and no shut and shut and no open v22, and I will fasten him peg in station faithful and become throne honor to house his principal (ab) v23.“.  The inspired text becomes more meaningful when we understand no mortal should be our chief, not father or mother, nor husband or wife, nor earthly masters.

Ab is the root of eben אבן (Strong’s 68 273 occurrences) that means ‘building stone’ (see fact #105), translated as ‘son’ and made to appear to apply solely to males, but in the first occurrence found in Gen. 2:12 in conjunction with ‘onyx’ that means ‘blanche, sheep’, is used of woman (ishshah in the form אשה that means ‘mighty toward fire’), not the man (adam) who is a ‘mighty corrupt fire’ (ish that means a corruption of Yahweh’s fire).

152. The noun em, singular אמ plural אם (Strong’s 517 220 occurrences) allegedly means ‘mother, originator, codifier’.  Em is the root of amar/emer/omer אמר  (Strong’s 559, 560, 561 and 562 5308, 71, 48  and 6 occurrences) mean ‘utter, say, tell, command, speech, word, promise’, the resh suffix adding an element of authority to the ‘speech, word’, thus the meaning of the underlying word em must be ‘speech, words’. 

The plural form, im אם (Strong’s 518 1070 occurrences) is translated as ‘if, surely’, but we see in Ezek. 38:19 it means ‘promise, oath’, as Yahweh promises “in jealousy, in fire my fury declare (dabar) promise/oath (em) . . .”  In Gen. 3:20 “proclaim the man (adam) appointed name his woman אשתו (‘mighty toward fire’) Life because she become promise (em) all living”. 

Where em doesn’t support the meaning ‘promise, oath’ may be evidence of mistranslation or uninspired text.  For example, in Hosea 4:5 “stumble the day and stumble also spokesman with you to night and destroy your promise (em translated as ‘your mother’)”.  Text which mentions gendered familial relations like Gen. 2:24, Isa. 8:4, Ezek. 16: 44 & 45, 19:2 & 10, 22:7, 23:2 Hosea 2:2 & 5, 10:14, Micah 7:6 and Zech. 13:3, are evidence of uninspired text.  Also, in Ezek. 21:21 where em is translated as ‘the parting’ is evidence against the text. 

153. The noun dabar דבר (Strong’s 1697 1441 occurrences) means ‘act, advice, affair, answer, any such thing, because of, book, business’, from the verb dabar דבר (Strong’s 1696 1144 occurrences) means ‘answer, appoint, bid, command, commune, declare, destroy, give’.  The resh suffix adds an element of authority to the declaration, appropriate when used of Yahweh, and inappropriate when used of mankind.  As stated in James 5:12, “do not swear, not by heaven or earth, or by any other oath.  Simply let your ‘yes’ be yes, and your ‘no’, no, so that you will not fall under judgment”.

154. The verb dabaq דבק (Strong’s 1692 54 occurrences) that allegedly means ‘cling, cleave, keep close’ is translated as ‘overtook’ in a few instances, figuratively ‘loyalty, affection’.  The same as the noun debeq דבק (Strong’s 1694 3 occurrences) that means ‘a joining, soldering, appendage’.  I believe dabaq/debeg, like dabar (see fact #153), indicates an oath, and the ooph ק suffix indicates verbalization, meaning ‘declare an oath’. 

155.  The noun ishshah found in Gen. 2:22, 23, 3:1, 2, 4, 6, 12, 13, 15, & 16 is in the form אשה, and in Gen. 2:24, 25, 3:8, 21, 4:1 & 17 it is found in the form אשתו with a  taw waw תו suffix, and in Gen. 3:17 it is found in the form אשתך with a taw kap suffix.  In Hebrew, when the he suffix receives a pronominal suffix like waw or kap, the he is replace by taw.  In these forms, the underlying meaning ‘mighty fire’ remains, becoming ‘his mighty fire’ and ‘your mighty fire’ respectively.

Constructing the Sentences

Let’s construct the sentence:

Gen. 2:23  The subject ‘the man’, verb ‘say’, and object ‘this one formerly self from myself and flesh from my flesh’, and second verb ‘proclaim’, and object ‘woman (‘mighty toward fire’)’, and third verb ‘seized’, and object ‘from Mighty (Corrupt) One this’.

Gen. 2:24  The subject ‘Mighty Corrupt Fire’, verb ‘forsake’, and object ‘his principal and his oath’, second verb ‘join’, and object ‘with woman (‘Mighty Fire’)’, and third verb ‘become’, and object ‘flesh apart’.

Translation

The paragraph translates as follows:

 And say the man “this one formerly self from myself and flesh from my flesh”, to this proclaim woman (‘mighty toward fire’) because from Mighty (corrupt) One seized this. Upon thus forsake Mighty (corrupt) One his principal and oath and join with his woman (‘mighty fire’) and become flesh apart”.

Analysis

As discussed in fact #91, all sentences within the chapter except the first (e.g. Gen 2:4) begin with ‘and (taw)’.  The fact that Gen 2:24 begins with ‘Upon (al)’, indicates it is either a continuation from the previous verse, or has a different author than the surrounding text. 

Taking a closer look at verse 23, in the first half of the sentence, the man (adam) said “this one (see fact #146) formerly (see fact #147)  self  (see fact #148) from myself (see fact #148) and flesh from my flesh”.  The second half of the sentence changes to second person – “to this proclaim woman (‘mighty toward fire’) because from Mighty (corrupt) One seized this”, which continues in verse 24 “Upon thus forsake Mighty (corrupt) One . . .”. 

The first part of verse 23 are identified as the words of the man (adam), but the second part of verse 23 and verse 24 are quite likely Yahweh’s words.  It is unlikely the man would change from first person to second, and name the one cut from his flesh ishshah ‘mighty toward fire’ and himself ish ‘mighty corrupt one’.  Yahweh gods had indicated in Gen. 2:19 they  “entered upon the man to first see what proclaim if and all lord proclaim if the man soul living his name/fame”, and this is the outcome.  Yahweh foresees the Mighty (corrupt) One will “forsake (see fact #150) his principal(see fact #151) and oath (see fact #152) with his Mighty Fire ishshah and become flesh apart (from Yahweh)” v.24.

As a result of the mistranslation of ab and em as ‘father’ and ‘mother’, many critics believe Gen. 2:24 to be an interpolation, as I also did before digging into the real meaning of the Hebrew text:

• In his article The Resumptive Repetition (Wiederaufnahme), Dr. Rabbi Zev Farber called Gen. 2:24 “the famous parenthetical remark about marriage in the Adam and Eve story, narrated in a way that it does not distract readers from the main story line; nevertheless, in translation, it is best inserted in parentheses, which did not exist in the biblical period”. 
• In Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers it states ‘these are evidently the words of the narrator’, and similarly in Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges. 
• In Keil and Delitzsch Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament it states the words “are not to be regarded as Adam’s, first on account of the על־כּן, which is always used in Genesis, with the exception of Genesis 20:6; Genesis 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.”
• In his article, On Genesis 2:24, Angelo Tosato states “A number of exegetes have adverted to a certain lack of continuity in the transition from Gen 2:23 to 2:24”, who sees it as a post exilic gloss.  Tosato references scholars who also see it as a gloss – C A Simpson in The Early Traditions of Israel, C. Westermann in Creation, Genesis 1-11: A Commentary, and Genesis: A Practical Commentary, also W H Schmidt in Die Schopfungsgeschichte der Priesterschrift), and others who see it as “an addition” (P Weimar in Untersuchungen Zur Redaktionsgeschichte des Pentateuchs supported by F. Langlamet’s positive comments on his works, and C. Dohmen in Schopfung und Tod Die Entfoltung theologischer und anthropologischer Konzeptionen in Gen 2/3.
• In Marital Imagery in the Bible, Colin Hamer admits that “the union of Genesis 2:24, unlike that of Genesis 2:23, is not a literal one-flesh union”, and sees the meaning of ‘flesh’ in this verse as metaphorical for one’s own kin or family.

The misquotation of God’s words in Matthew 19:3 – 9 and Mark 10: 2 – 9 is an outright lie, to which they added “what God has joined together, let no man separate”, turning what really happened in Gen. 2: 23 & 24 upside down.  The text of Eph 5:22 to 32 (80% of scholars believe that Ephesians was not authored by Paul) replaces Yahshua, the Messiah, with the church and male headship, quoting Gen 2:24 in support.  This bold faced lie hidden to this very day in our English Bibles and in the theology of organized religion, deceive us into believing marriage to be a God ordained institution, a covenant Malachi 2:14 – 16. 

The idea of becoming ‘one flesh’, clearly alludes to a sexual relationship, which is Gnostic.  1 Cor. 6: 12 – 20 is a Gnostic interpolation falsely attributed to Paul which confirms the one flesh union is sexual in stating “the one who joins himself to a prostitute is one body with her, for he says ‘the two shall become one flesh’” v. 16.  In The Gnostic Apostle Thomas, Chapter 24, Saying 22, Yahshua replies “When you make the two into one, and when you make the inner as the outer, and the upper as the lower, and when you make male and female into a single one, so that the male shall not be male, and the female shall not be female: . . . then you will enter [the kingdom].”  http://gnosis.org/thomasbook/ch24.html.     

Inspired writings speak of becoming one spirit with the Messiah and God, and overcoming the flesh, not joining flesh together sexually to become one as we see in 1 Cor 6: 12 to 20, which is evidence that these verses are likely an interpolation.  In 1 Cor 6:15 & 16, Paul contrasts using ones body to be members of the Messiah or a joining with a prostitute, which is alluding to sex because it isn’t talking about marriage, is said to be becoming “one flesh” quoting Gen 2:24.  In verse 17 it says “he who unites himself with the Lord is one with him in spirit”, then verse 18 is again about sex with Paul saying “flee from sexual immorality.  Every other sin a man can commit is outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against his own body.”  He goes on to say “your body is a temple of the holy spirit” in verse 19, and “you were bought at a price, therefore glorify God with your body” in verse 20.

The opposing sides of good and evil are represented by the spirit and the flesh respectively.  Yahshua warned that “the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak”.  Paul explains that only those who walk according to the Spirit are pleasing to God, the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God, for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is unable to do so, in Romans 8: 1 – 14.  When Adam was created a ‘living being’ in Gen 2:7 he was flesh and blood, a mortal body which Paul calls “this body of death” in Romans 7:24.  Yahshua told his followers to “allow the dead to bury their own dead” in Luke 9:60, because his disciples are led by the Spirit not the flesh.  When Adam called the Mighty Fire “flesh from my flesh” in Gen 2:23 he revealed his choice, and his desire to have the Mighty Fire by his side apart from Yahweh v. 24.

When taking a closer look at eth (Strong’s 853) in fact #146 , which I originally accepted as being a non-translatable mark as stated by Strong’s Concordance in the translation of Genesis 1 and 2, before I realized it contains a covenant element that is critical to fully understanding the text.  Reviewing the  28 occurrences in Gen 1:1 to 2:3,  which I believe is a prophecy of ages until the end of time, we see god’s covenants first with the light v. 4, the firmament v. 7, the sleeping (shenayim translated ‘two’) lights v. 16, set in the heavens to shine upon the earth v. 17, the sea creatures and every living thing v. 21, to fatten filling the waters and the earth with living according to their kind v. 22 & 25, the man in image (Yahshua), male and female (those who become Yahshua’s bride) v. 27, to fatten them to fill the earth and subject and rule in fish the sea and birds v. 28, with all herbs yielding seed lord upon face all the earth and all the tree lord in it fruit yielding seed to consume v. 29, all living the earth and all birds the air and all creepers the earth lord in it soul life all green herb to consume v. 30, on the day made clean (shishshi translated as ‘six’) god’s saw everything made was very good v. 31, god and the sons of god in covenant rested on the day of rest (shebii translated as ‘seven’) Gen 2:3.

In Gen 2:4 to 15, we see man’s covenant with Yahweh change and man form a covenant with Satan.  To begin with, the man was not a slave in covenant with the ground v. 5, then man formed a covenant with Satan whose vapour rose up from the earth and irrigated/poisoned in covenant with all face the ground v. 6, resulting in forming Yahweh gods in covenant with the man the dust from the ground v. 7.  Then planted Yahweh gods garden in Eden from aforetime and appointed name in covenant with the man lord formed v. 8, river (eminency) went forth from Eden to irrigate/give drink in covenant with the enclosure and from appointed place parted and became sprawling overlords v. 10, appointed name set apart selfish pride encircles in covenant with all land v. 11, And appointed place the river (eminency) the sleeping burst forth, it surrounds in covenant with  the whole land fat v. 13.  As a result, seized Yahweh gods in covenant with the man and cast down him in garden of Eden to serve and take heed to self v. 15.

In Gen 2: 18 – 24, we see how the man devises a plan to have the mighty toward fire (ishshah translated as ‘woman’) form a covenant with him. And say Yahweh Gods “not good become the man, separation I will make if only help opposite” v. 18, And formed Yahweh gods from the ground every living the field and in covenant with every bird the air and entered upon the man to first see what proclaim if and all lord proclaim if the man soul living his name/fame v. 19.  And cast down Yahweh gods chastise upon the man and he slept and seized kindred [echad] from lame side and isolate flesh underneath.  And build/repair Yahweh gods in covenant with the lame side seized from the man to mighty toward fire and come upon the man v. 22.  And said the man “in covenant with now, self of my self, and flesh from my flesh”, proclaim mighty toward fire because from mighty one (ish translated ‘man’) to take covenant with v. 23, upon therefore forsake mighty one covenant with his principal and covenant with promise and join in his woman and become flesh apart v. 24. 

Looking again at Ezekiel 31:4, a verse which has striking alignment with the text of Genesis, the ‘four rivers’ verses in particular, we find two occurrences of eth translated as ‘with her/its’ and not translated, that reveals a covenant between Assyria (Adam) and the waters (mayim) of the deep (Satan) and the rivers (sprawling heads) running around the planting place (Eden), a covenant with (eth) therivulets (t’alah) stretching out upon all trees the field. 

Next, we will compare the text of Genesis 2:24, from the Hebrew Bible, with the Targum Onkelos and Samaritan Targum, using definitions from Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon’s to replace those provided by Strong’s Concordance which are often faulty.