Genesis 2:23 Then the man said,
“This one at last is bone of my bones
and flesh of my flesh;
this one will be called ‘woman,’
for she was taken out of man.”

Does naming imply authority?

‘No!’

Walton (NIVAC):

‘We would be mistaken to think that Adam names Eve here. He rather indicated what category she belongs in. When Adam named the animals in 2.19-20, a different vocabulary and syntax are used. Adam there was carrying out his function to ruling in that whatever he called a creature, that was its name. His naming of the animals was an exercise of authority. This same vocabulary is used with regard to Eve in Gen 3:20, but not so in Gen 2:23.’

Hartley:

‘It is important to note that “called” (niqra’) is in the passive and lacks the term shem, “name.” The man was not naming her but was identifying their commonness in difference (P. Trible, God and the Rhetoric of Sexuality [OBT; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1978], pp. 99–100). This is confirmed by the general terms of identification, “man” and “woman”; these terms convey the respective sexuality of each of them.’

Andrew Perriman concludes from texts such as Gen 3:20; 11:9; 16:11,13; 17:17,19; 28:17, 19, that ‘one person names another not because he or she has authority over the named person but because he or she is the right person to identify or determine the essential significance of the named person.’

Hess objects to the idea that naming implies authority.  He gives the following reasons:

First, the text nowhere states that the man exercised authority over the animals by naming them. Rather, he classified them and thereby continued the work of the first three days of creation in chapter 1, where God divided the elements of matter.

Second, there is no obvious way in which the man exercised any authority over either the animals or the woman.

Third, Genesis 2:23, where the man designates the woman, begins with an affirmation of equality, “bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh”.

Fourth, the second part of Genesis 2:23 is a chiasm (concentric structure) in which the words for “woman” and “man” are positioned at the center, suggesting a corresponding and equal relationship to one another.

(Discovering Biblical Equality, formatting added)

David Firth concurs:

‘It might be objected that the adam’s earlier naming of the animals emphasises his authority over them, and that when God brings the woman to him (at which point we can truly speak of man and woman) he also names her (Gen 2:23). Does this not suggest authority? However, we should note that there is an important distinction drawn with the naming of the animals (Gen 2:19 – 20). Not only were none of these a suitable helper, but a very different phrase is used in Gen 2:23. Previously, the man has granted each animal a name but here the man does not grant a name to the woman but rather recognises who she is as “woman,” as one taken from “man.”‘

‘Yes!’

For others, however, the naming implies the authority of the husband over the wife: he names her woman and later Eve (3:20), just as earlier he had named the animals (19). This concept of the man’s headship is made explicit elsewhere in the Bible. (e.g. 1 Cor 11:3; 1 Pet 3:1-6).

Harper’s Bible Commentary notes that

‘the naming of the animals by the human being (vv. 19–20) is J’s way of indicating human dominion over the created world (as in Gen 1:28–30); it recalls the divine name giving in Genesis 1.’  That author, however, neither affirms nor denies that the same applies to the man’s naming of the woman (although the writer does do on to say that ‘the creation of woman from man does not imply subordination, any more than the creation of the man from the earth implies subordination.’)

Ramsey (‘Is Name-Giving and Act of Domination in Genesis 2:23 and Elsewhere?’ in The Catholic Biblical Quarterly Vol. 50, No. 1, 50th Anniversary Volume (January, 1988), pp. 24-35) cities von Rad as confirming that ‘name-giving in the ancient Orient was primarily an exercise of sovereignty, of command.’  He further cites Trible as affirming that whereas in Gen 2:19b ‘through the act of naming, the animals are subordinated to the earth creature’, v23 does not record an act of naming, and therefore cannot be used to support the authority of a man over a woman.  (Ramsey’s own view is v23 is an instance of naming, but that the acting of naming does not imply authority of the namer over the named).

Grudem (Biblical Foundations for Manhood and Womanhood):

‘When Adam says, “she shall be called Woman,” he is giving a name to her. This is important in the context of Genesis 1–2, because in that context the original readers would have recognized that the person doing the “naming” of created things is always the person who has authority over those things.’

Against some egalitarians, such as Bilezikian, Grudem affirms that this is naming language (as in Gen 1:5,8,10; 2:19, 20).  Moreover, such naming does imply authority, as when parents name their children (see Gen 4:25–26; 5:3, 29; 16:15; 19:37–38; 21:3), and when God renames a person (see Gen 17:5, 15).

Wenham:

‘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).’

Waltke and Fredricks:

‘The man’s twofold naming of his wife entails his authority in the home (Gen 3:20; cf. Num. 30:6–8). In ancient times the authority to name implied authority to govern (Gen. 1:5; 2:19).’

Joe Rigney suggests that

1. ‘Naming is an act of delegate authority.’  Adam is not asked to simply repeated names that God has given to the creatures.  Rather, God brings the creatures to Adam to see what he would call them, v19.
2. ‘Naming involves ordered creativity.’  It reflects interplay between God’s creative work and man’s creative imagination.  Adam has freedom to name; but this freedom is within boundaries of the reality established by God.
3. ‘Naming is our great privilege.’  It is an extension and outworking of our bearing of God’s image.  Naming things is the beginning of so much human endeavour – in music, art, engineering, mathematics, business, education, and preaching.  It is the beginning of speech itself.  It is the gateway to communication with, and about, our Creator.