An Exegesis of Genesis 3:16 PDF

Preview

Summary

MIDWESTERN BAPTIST THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY GENESIS 3:16 AN EXEGETICAL PAPER SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE COURSE DR 30060-02 INTEGRATING CHRISTIAN FAITH AND PRACTICE BY MATTHEW ROBERT PERRY, D.MIN. KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI FEBRUARY 25, 2019 Introduction This paper analyzes a...

Description

MIDWESTERN BAPTIST THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY

GENESIS 3:16

AN EXEGETICAL PAPER SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE COURSE DR 30060-02 INTEGRATING CHRISTIAN FAITH AND PRACTICE

BY MATTHEW ROBERT PERRY, D.MIN.

KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI FEBRUARY 25, 2019

Introduction This paper analyzes and demonstrates that, for the woman, childbearing is not a consequence of the Fall; rather, the pain that comes not only in childbearing but also in the entire gestational period will increase. Also, this paper seeks to analyze the post-Fall relationship that now exists between Eve and Adam and its implications for the relationship from the wife to the husband. The desire that the woman will have is, first, that of a sexual desire for the man that will produce pregnancy and childbirth, a process that will bring sorrow but also produce an offspring who will bring joy. Second, the man and woman will have a desire to master and rule the other, but the woman will now remain subordinate due to her disobedience. The passage under examination is Genesis 3:16: To the woman he said, “I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children. Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you” (ESV). This passage occurs in the wake of the Fall of Man (Gen 3:1-13), when both Adam and Eve committed distinct but connected sins against God’s command to refrain from eating of the tree of knowledge of good and evil (Genesis 2:16-17). The three players in this scene that brought about the Fall (the serpent, Adam, and Eve) each received a respective consequence for disobedience. For the serpent (3:14-15), God levied a curse on him to crawl on his belly and to represent the animal “cursed above all the livestock and above all the beasts of the field.” Yet, in verse 15, God speaks to this serpent as he is, Satan Himself, with an adversarial relationship between their respective “seeds.” Satan’s ultimate task is to “bruise” the heel of this offspring,

2

Jesus, while God promises that His Son will eventually “bruise” (ESV) or “crush” (NIV) Satan’s head. This is known as the protoevangelium, the first “gospel,” planting the seed for how Christ will eventually rescue His redeemed from the clutches of the Adversary. Adam received his consequences because he chose to sin when he “listening to the voice of your wife and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you, ‘You shall not eat of it’” (3:17a). On the surface, listening to the voice of his wife seems innocuous; but Adam did so rather than to listen to the voice of God who made the command he violated--and who also made him! While the serpent was cursed when receiving his sentence, Adam was not, but rather, “cursed is the ground because of you” (17b, emphasis mine). God permitted the man to enjoy the fruit of his labor except one tree, the tree of knowledge of good and evil: “You shall not eat [of it], for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die” (2:17). As Atkinson noted, “Instead of the freedom of man’s authority over the natural order and animals, the estate manager now finds that the blessing of work becomes a toil. . . . Mankind’s relationship with the natural world now takes on the features of a struggle.”1 This struggle to which Atkinson refers is one found in the dynamics of the two most important relationships in Eve’s life: marriage and parenthood. The majority of this paper speaks to Eve’s consequences, but before this area is addressed, this paper explores how the Fall happened.

How Did This Fall Happen? In Genesis 3, the serpent entered the scene described as “more crafty (‫ ) ָﬠרוּם‬than any other beast of the field that the LORD God had made” (Genesis 3:1a). He displayed this subtle

1

David Atkinson, The Message of Genesis 1-11: The Bible Speaks Today (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1990), 95.

3

shrewdness through one simple but deadly question: “Did God actually say, ‘You shall not eat of any tree in the garden’” (1b)? This question is the basis for all sin—questioning the commands of God. John D. Currid shows where Eve made her mistake: “She exaggerates the prohibition (“neither shall you touch it”), she minimizes the privileges (“we may eat” rather than “you may eat freely”), and she minimizes the penalty (“lest you die” rather than “you will certainly die”).2 Eve (with Adam conspicuously absent) adds her own interpretation to God’s command: “God said, ‘You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die’” (3:3, italics added)! The serpent continued to question Eve about the goodness of God’s motives, presenting a different narrative of what would happen should she choose to eat, and (most temptingly) she would “be like God, knowing good and evil” (3:5). Thus, with the threefold enticement of the temptation (the tree was good for food, a delight to the eyes, and would make her wise), she ate the fruit, then gave Adam the fruit, and he also ate (3:6). The eyes, which were informed by Satan’s narrative and found delight in the fruit, were opened to their naked condition which moved them to sew coverings consisting of a loincloth made of fig leaves (3:7). However, the most tragic consequence of this action was the fractured relationship they now possessed with their Creator. Rather than rejoicing in hearing His voice and knowing that fellowship with Him would take place, they hid out of fear and shame, no longer “naked and not ashamed” (Gen 2:25). God asked the man, “Where are you” (Genesis 3:8)? Why the man and not both of them? God had placed man in the Garden as the head with the woman as the helper. God did not inquire about man’s geographical location (since God is omniscient and omnipresent). God knew from their reaction that they had eaten from the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

2

John D. Currid, “Genesis,” The Gospel Promised: A Biblical-Theological Introduction to the Old Testament, Miles V. Van Pelt, Ed. (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2016), 53.

4

A blame game then ensued, with Adam blaming not only Eve but also God for putting Eve in his life, more evidence that their actions fractured their relationship previously marked by unity of care and purpose. As Brueggeman notes, “In God’s garden, as God wills it, there is mutuality and equity. In God’s garden now, permeated by distrust, there is control and distortion. But that distortion is not for one moment accepted as the will of the Gardener.”3 Moving forward, this next section addresses and examines the first line of Genesis 3:16: “I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing.”

Multiplying Pain… When? Genesis 3:16 begins, “I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing” (Genesis 3:16a, ESV), which depicts an aspect of how the Fall affected Eve’s role in the creation order. Adam encapsulated her role in the giving of her name: “The man called his wife's name Eve, because she was the mother of all living” (Gen 3:20). While the woman was certainly able to experience the joy of childbearing as “the mother of all living,” the rigors of the gestation period would mar her and all mothers until the end of time. This section contends that the pain includes not only physical pain but also an anxious toil not just during the act of childbearing, but throughout the pregnancy. David Shapiro brings to light a conversation that occurs among those of the Jewish faith in answering the question as to whom the duty of procreation was given—only to women or primarily to men? One more ancient side holds that the males were given the primary duty of procreation because of their role of dominion and subduing the earth.4 Yet, Rabbi Yochanan ben

3

Walter Brueggemann, Genesis (Louisville, KY: John Knox Press, 1982), 50.

4

David Shapiro, “Be Fruitful and Multiply,” Tradition: A Journal of Orthodox Thought 13 no 4 -14 no 1 Spr - Sum 1973, 48. “[T]he Sages hold that the duty of procreation applies to the male sex since the Biblical text is speaking of activities that require boldness and aggressiveness. Mastering the earth properly belongs to men, since it

5

Berokah contended that, since both Adam and Eve were made “in our image, after our likeness” (Genesis 1:26-27), God blessed both, giving both strength for the task, as outlined in Genesis 1:28.5 This conversation comes to an important conclusion: after examining Genesis 1:26-28, one sees equality among both male and female, where God blessed them and told them to be fruitful and multiply, not just Adam and not just Eve. Raymond C. Van Leeuwen notes, “Genesis 1:28 is not a commandment, but a blessing. It does not refer to what humans must do to please God, but what God does for and through humankind. . . . The filling of the Earth is a gift of God’s wisdom and shows forth his glory as Creator (Ps. 104:24, 31, Isaiah 6:3).”6 Because Adam could not perform this task alone, God formed Eve to provide that help, that companionship, that one who is suitable. Scripture states that Eve was created because of Adam’s solitary situation (Gen 2:18). While Eve’s arrival from Adam’s rib achieves numerous solutions to complete Adam, biologically God provided Eve to make possible their ability to fulfill God’s command to “be fruitful and multiply.” Eve continued this role after the Fall, with grace extended in that she was allowed to live.7

Anxious Toil and Pain in Childbearing While equality existed between Adam and Eve, Eve clearly bore the brunt of the pain and toil regarding childbearing, from the conception of the child until birth. To recognize the gravity of the consequences of the Fall, one must recognize the nature and roles of Adam and Eve before

involves prowess and relentless expenditure of physical energy. All activities included in the text, since they are associated with mastery of the earth, thus become functions of masculinity.” 5

Ibid, 48.

6

Raymond C. Van Leeuwen, “Be fruitful and multiply: Is this a command or a blessing?”, Christianity Today, November 12, 2001, 59-60. 7

Kenneth A. Mathews, Genesis 1-11:26, Vol. 1A: The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1996), 249.

6

the Fall where God placed Adam in the garden to subdue and have dominion over the earth. As equal imagebearers created by God, Adam would provide the seed and Eve would serve as the vessel for bringing more imagebearers into the world, thereby fulfilling the mutual role of having dominion and subduing the earth (cf. Genesis 1:28). In this role, “God blessed them.” The word “blessed” comes from V‫( בָּ ַר‬barak), which serves as an antithesis for the curses that resulted from the Fall (Genesis 3). God set Adam and Eve apart for the purpose of bringing other imagebearers in to continue fulfilling the Creation mandate. This blessing applied to only Adam and Eve and none other in the created order. Why was there no blessing extended [to the vegetation]? Obviously a blessing directed toward the inanimate world would be meaningless since it has no raison d’etre for independent existence. Once animate life emerged, the Divine blessing could become operative and meaningful. Vegetation was to serve as food for both man and beast. The blessings bestowed upon the latter would ultimately redound to plant life which was to function as the means of sustenance for all living creatures.8 Thus, God intended for Adam and Eve to receive this blessing as imagebearers of God. All of creation from day one to day five sought to provide our First Parents with all they needed to fulfill God’s dual role for them—a role assigned to humanity after the worldwide flood of Genesis 6-8 (Gen 9:1, 7). Eve, and all women who would follow, would serve as the vessel for bringing more imagebearers into the world to fulfill the mutual role of having dominion and subduing the earth. One sees a parallel between the consequences given to Adam and Eve. God commanded Adam to work and keep the garden, while Eve was provided the privilege and honor of bearing children. What would now accompany this joy? Pain. Pain in working and keeping the garden for Adam, pain multiplied in childbirth for Eve,. While the sentencing of Adam lies beyond the

8

Shapiro, 43.

7

scope of this paper, turning the attention toward the episode of the Fall will inform the reason behind the particular sentencing of Eve. Genesis 3:16a says, “I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing” (ESV), which indicates an intensifying of toil and pain that comes not just at the birthing of a child, as the modern English translations indicate, but throughout the gestational period. Yet, even with the accompanying toil of the pregnancy, the joy of Eve and all women bringing children into the world to continue fulfilling the Creation mandate still exists through the graciousness of God. Jacques van Ruiten takes umbrage with most translations of Genesis 3:16, beginning with the multiplication of intensity in the act of what many modern translations interpret “childbearing.” Yet, van Ruiten contends the word ‘ ‫ ‘הֵ ָריוֹן‬should be translated as “conception,” believing that translating this as “childbearing” misses the point because it does not address the end of pregnancy, but from conception through the entire gestation period as well. He’s not alone. Carol Meyers concludes, “It would hardly be appropriate to use a word for the pain or anguish of childbirth in the first part of verse 16b . . . since the second object of this clause is ‘pregnancy’ or ‘conception,’ not ‘birth.’ That is, even if pain were an appropriate description of the birth process, it is not an accurate or suitable description of pregnancy.”9 When this word ‫( הֵ רוֹן‬a hapax when alone) is connected with ‫( הֵ ָריוֹן‬see Hosea 9:11; Ruth 4:13), the term means “to conceive” or “to become pregnant”—which, van Ruiten believes, gives credence to how this is more about the beginning than the end of the pregnancy.10 Thus, the modern translation from the KJV, “Thy sorrow in thy conception,” comes closer to the original Hebrew translation.

9

Carol L. Meyers, “Gender Roles and Genesis 3:16 Revisited,” in Carol L. Meyers and M. O’Connor, eds., The Word of the Lord Shall Go Forth: Essays in Honor of David Noel Freedman in Celebration of his Sixtieth Birthday (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1983), 345. 10

Jacques Van Ruiten, “Eve’s Pain in Childbearing? Interpretations of Gen 3:16a in Biblical and Early

8

The construction of “I will greatly increase” (‫ְרבֵּ ה‬ ַ‫ )ה‬is an infinitive absolute that emphasizes the gravity of the consequences of Eve’s disobedience. Yet, finding a consensus of this translation provides a challenge for scholars, as is demonstrated in various English translations. The traditional interpretation, as found in the New Jewish Publication Society (NJPS) translation (in accordance with the commonly held opinion in academia), is “I will make most severe your pangs in childbirth.” 11 Yet, Novick notes that scholars have challenged to this interpretation. The word ‫ְר ָ ֤בּה‬ ַ‫ ה‬is translated “will surely multiply” (ESV, KJV, NASB), “intensify” (CSB), or “very severe” (NIV). While Genesis 1:28 called for the First Parents to “be fruitful and multiply” imagebearers, this same word is used in a multiplication and intensity of pain in the process of the fruitful multiplication in the Creation mandate. The word translated “pain” in Genesis 3:16 (‫ )ֵ ֣ﬠְִצּבוֹנ‬has no other known forms in other Semitic languages from which translators may draw, yet in the OT this word occurs twice: once in Genesis 3:17 and then in Genesis 5:29, both dealing with the aspect of toil, specifically “hard unpleasant work, physically exhausting.”12 God made a seemingly parallel pronouncement regarding Adam’s sentencing in Genesis 3:17 as Adam is told he will eat from the ground he cursed “in pain” (ESV; ‫)ﬠִ צָּבוֹן‬, which deals with anxious toil or hardship—also paralleling the pain Eve will experience. In Genesis 5:29, when Lamech bore Noah, one sees the Genesis 3 language of cursing in this passage, with a twist: “Out of the ground that the LORD has cursed, this one shall bring us relief from our work and from the painful toil of our hands” [emphasis added]. Noah, the instrument of deliverance of the human race in the midst of God’s judgment, Jewish Texts,” Eve’s Children: The Biblical Stories Retold and Interpreted in Jewish and Christian Traditions, Luttikhuizen, Gerard P. (Ed.), http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/mbts-ebooks/detail.action?docID=253620, 4. 11

Tzvi Novick, “Pain and Production in Eden: Some Philological Reflections in Genesis iii 16,” Vetus Testamentum 58 (2008), 235. 12

Van Ruiten, 5.

9

would provide relief from the “painful toil,” which is the same word used in Genesis 3:16 and 17. Therefore, the sense of this word is that of ‫ ﬠִ צָּבוֹן‬which comes from toil and hardship. Van Ruiten notes that, outside Genesis 3:16a, this term is “never related to pregnancy or childbearing, except in 1 Chron 4:9-10, but this text seems to be an echo of Gen 3:16.”13 In this case, with hard work and toil, the woman will “bring forth” (‫ )ילד‬children, not simply pain that one would sense comes from injury, that is, physical pain—though Meyers holds that the root of the above passage refers to mental or emotional pain rather than physical,14 which is an untenable conclusion, for both physical and emotional aspects are obviously at play. Curley and Peterson contend that of the 16 times the word above appears, “all but three depict emotional pain/grief.”15 These scholars echo others who are working diligently to overturn the centuries-old belief of largely translating this as physical pain but emphasizing the notion of emotional pain. But Curley and Peterson note that “both physical and emotional aspects of the curse on humanity resulting from the fall seem to be implied,” even as they agree with the influential Meyers who rules out the notion of physical pain altogether.16 If physical pain is not an option here, why did Jesus Himself speak about the pain regarding childbirth? “When a woman is giving birth, she has

13

Ibid., 5.

14

Carol Meyers, Discovering Eve: Ancient Israelite Women in Context (New York: Oxford Press, 1988), 103-105. Meyers’ translation of Genesis 3:16 demonstrates her leanings: “I will make great your toil and many your pregnancies; with hardship shall you have children. Your turning tis to your man/husband, and he shall rule/control you [sexually].” Meyers’ work presented itself prominently in numerous articles on this topic. 15

Christine Curley and Brian Peterson, “Eve’s Curse Revisited: An Increase of ‘Sorrowful Conceptions,’” Bulletin for Biblical Research 26.2 (2016), 161. 16

Ibid., 160.

10

sorrow because her hour has come, but when she has delivered the baby, she no longer remembers the anguish, for joy that a human being has been born into the world” (John 16:21). Physical and emotional pain both play a part in the post-Fall experience of childbearing. Is this a hendiadys, as E.A. Speiser believes, when he renders this literally as “your pains and your childbearing” but idiomatically as “your pangs that result from your pregnancy?”17 Novick believes so, arguing for a hendiadys as he translates this, “the shaping of your conception”18 as does Skinner, who at first acknowledges a strict translation of “I will cause thee to have much suffering and pregnancy,” only to concede that a hendiadys is in effect, thus translating this, “the pain of thy conception,” with the latter prepositional phrase serving as an “explanatory clause which follows.”19 Curley and Peterson address the angle of the sorrow in conception when women are faced with barrenness.20 Thus, the case is made for this phrase to serve as a hendiadys. Speiser and Novick bring to our attention an important distinction: Is t...