Local Church Discussions - View Single Post

Evangelical · 08-31-2017, 08:17 PM

To me Jane's line of logic is puzzling. There is no reason why she can't simply explain the true meaning of "he shall rule over you" like Gotquestions.org does with a caveat about its potential misuse:

It is important to note that this judgment only states what will take place. God says that man and woman will live in conflict and their relationship will become problematic. The statement “he shall rule over you” is not a biblical command for men to dominate women.

Why does Jane take the view of Satan-inspired male-biased translation committees for which there is no evidence? That just casts doubt on every bible translation with an all-male committee.

As my previous analysis has found, there is no correlation between the translation of Genesis 3:16 and the number of women on a bible translation panel.

Jane's claim that "translations of certain words, terms or phrases were affected by all-male translation committees" is doubtful.

But she is possibly correct that the word "desire " should be translated as turning according to the early manuscripts.

I found this website which gives a comprehensive review of the translation of Genesis 3:16

http://margmowczko.com/teshuqah-desire/

It is possible that the word "desire" should be translated as "turning". But it does not mean the word desire is wrong, or that the meaning of the verse is affected. Nor does it mean Satan is affecting God's Word via the translators just because they are male. Nor does it mean that changing the word will get rid of the "innate male bias" in every man.

The most straightforward meaning of Genesis 3:16 is to say that there will be increased conflict between men and women.

Jewish websites also say this:
http://www.jewishanswers.org/ask-the...rule-over-you/

GotQuestions.org takes this viewpoint as well
https://www.gotquestions.org/desire-husband-rule.html

Interestingly, the same word in Hebrew used in Genesis 3:16 is the same word used in the verse about Cain:

I’ll mention as an aside that the exact same phrasing (take a look and compare them, it’s very striking) is found in the words of G-d to Cain, when he speaks to him about his jealousy of his brother Abel. G-d says, “Sin crouches at the door, and his desire is to you, and you should rule (timshol) over him.” Just as Man lost the smooth functioning of his relationship with Woman, he also lost the smooth functioning of his relationship with his own desires. He was supposed to be the leader over his faculties, and he still can be, but now there’s going to be a lot more resistance.

Both Jewish and Christian folk seem to agree that the verse is about the increased conflict between men and women. The verse should not be used to say that men can control their wives, but at the same time there is no real conspiracy of male-biased translators deliberating twisting the Word of God to make it say that.

I think Jane has misplaced the cause of the problem between men and women. She seems to blame the bible translators and their male bias. I don't think there is anything much wrong with the translation as "desire", and bible versions which have female translation committee members don't seem to have a problem with it either.

I think it's not the male bias of the translators, but the male bias in every man which misinterprets the verse as a command for men to rule women, rather than as a statement of fact that conflict between men and women is a result of the fall. So maybe it's not a lemon, but a grape which is used in a sour way.

08-31-2017, 08:17 PM	#43
Evangelical Member Join Date: Aug 2016 Posts: 3,965	The meaning of Genesis 3:16 To me Jane's line of logic is puzzling. There is no reason why she can't simply explain the true meaning of "he shall rule over you" like Gotquestions.org does with a caveat about its potential misuse: It is important to note that this judgment only states what will take place. God says that man and woman will live in conflict and their relationship will become problematic. The statement “he shall rule over you” is not a biblical command for men to dominate women. Why does Jane take the view of Satan-inspired male-biased translation committees for which there is no evidence? That just casts doubt on every bible translation with an all-male committee. As my previous analysis has found, there is no correlation between the translation of Genesis 3:16 and the number of women on a bible translation panel. Jane's claim that "translations of certain words, terms or phrases were affected by all-male translation committees" is doubtful. But she is possibly correct that the word "desire " should be translated as turning according to the early manuscripts. I found this website which gives a comprehensive review of the translation of Genesis 3:16 http://margmowczko.com/teshuqah-desire/ It is possible that the word "desire" should be translated as "turning". But it does not mean the word desire is wrong, or that the meaning of the verse is affected. Nor does it mean Satan is affecting God's Word via the translators just because they are male. Nor does it mean that changing the word will get rid of the "innate male bias" in every man. The most straightforward meaning of Genesis 3:16 is to say that there will be increased conflict between men and women. Jewish websites also say this: http://www.jewishanswers.org/ask-the...rule-over-you/ GotQuestions.org takes this viewpoint as well https://www.gotquestions.org/desire-husband-rule.html Interestingly, the same word in Hebrew used in Genesis 3:16 is the same word used in the verse about Cain: I’ll mention as an aside that the exact same phrasing (take a look and compare them, it’s very striking) is found in the words of G-d to Cain, when he speaks to him about his jealousy of his brother Abel. G-d says, “Sin crouches at the door, and his desire is to you, and you should rule (timshol) over him.” Just as Man lost the smooth functioning of his relationship with Woman, he also lost the smooth functioning of his relationship with his own desires. He was supposed to be the leader over his faculties, and he still can be, but now there’s going to be a lot more resistance. Both Jewish and Christian folk seem to agree that the verse is about the increased conflict between men and women. The verse should not be used to say that men can control their wives, but at the same time there is no real conspiracy of male-biased translators deliberating twisting the Word of God to make it say that. I think Jane has misplaced the cause of the problem between men and women. She seems to blame the bible translators and their male bias. I don't think there is anything much wrong with the translation as "desire", and bible versions which have female translation committee members don't seem to have a problem with it either. I think it's not the male bias of the translators, but the male bias in every man which misinterprets the verse as a command for men to rule women, rather than as a statement of fact that conflict between men and women is a result of the fall. So maybe it's not a lemon, but a grape which is used in a sour way.