So, we end up at the third chapter of a book that has been misinterpreted in so many ways, by so many people, always with the same result: There must be a creator named in the book.
Take a couple of things into account:
1. The guiding force is history/the ancestors of man
2. commanding/saying relates to: Telling/naming/identifying
3. The garden, refers to knowledge from the east (eastward of eden, eden is the birthplace and a writer would automatically take his/her own origin as base location, also the scrolls have been found mostly in these places. East of eden, would be east of the Middle East or Persia, point towards India and China, so generally Asia). Why not a physical garden? Because there is clear indication it is not about physical entities. The first chapter is about the awareness level of human kind. The second chapter continues on this quest, but within a society/socially committed group. The smallest always existing group is a family: Parents and child. This also comes out very clear, when you look at Adam as the new person/every new man (hence child of the previous generation, referring back to the ancestors and as such the history that has led to the creation of the child)
4. Adam refers to every new man, where Eve refers to every new woman.
So to continue our unraveling of the scriptures, to show that there is deity, just a misinterpretation of the meaning, which in itself hides the teachings that can be gotten from it about history.
Imagine the ‘snake’ to be the ‘male’ snake, trying to win the woman for coming of age as well. Sexual tension with a man who is ‘forced’ by his hormones and instinct to procreate, will try to convince a woman to agree to consume with him. This consummation is the end of childhood, it brings responsibility and in the old days (when this was written) it would almost certainly mean birth of the next generation (the life of the man and woman would be in dedication of the next Adam and/or Eve).