Quote:
Originally Posted by Drake
In Jane Anderson's reasoning the lemon verses were influenced by Satan working through male biased translators for the purpose of subjugating women to prevent them from fulfilling their God designated role.
First, what I agree with... Satan wants subjugate women and prevent them from fulfilling their God designated role.
I disagree with the argument that the tools of Satan were the male bias of the translators. I don't believe that male bias in translators is relevant anymore than the translators were farmer biased. When Jane's reasoning on Genesis 3:16 is applied to the similar verse of Genesis 4:7 her whole argument falls flat, crashes through the floor, and into the basement. Here the two verses are juxtaposed for clarity:
3:16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
4:7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.
Applying Jane's lemon reasoning in Gen 3:16 to Gen 4:7 leads to the idea that Satan used the farmer (Cain) bias of the translators to subjugate the cattlemen (Abel) in order to keep them from fulfilling their God designated role.
Of course that is an argument lacking credibility.
Drake
|
That's a good point. If there was bias in translating the word teshuqah as desire in Gen 3:16, then there would also be bias in translating the same word used in 4:7.
http://margmowczko.com/teshuqah-desire/
In Genesis 3:16 and 4:7 in the Septuagint (LXX), the Greek Old Testament, teshuqah is translated as apostrophē.[15][16] The etymology of apostrophē gives the meaning “a turning away”, but it is has a broader range of meanings, some of which are conflicting.
Liddell, Scott and Jones (LSJ), arguably one of the best lexicons of Ancient Greek, has several definitions for apostrophē. Most don’t fit the context of Genesis 3:16 at all. For definition III, however, the LSJ says that apostrophē is used rhetorically when one turns away from all others to one person and addresses him specifically.[17] This meaning makes good sense in the contexts of Genesis 3:16 and 4:7.
Since the preposition pros (“towards”) also occurs in Genesis 3:16 (“your turning (apostrophē) will be towards (pros) your husband”), I think the meaning of a woman turning away from others to turn towards, or even long for, her husband may well be what is intended here.[18]
The interpretation that Jane takes is this one:
“But there is another translation stream arising through the LXX, the Syriac Pe****ta and Coptic translations. This stream views the rare Hebrew word teshuqah as “turning,” not “lust.” If this stream is correct, then the word in Genesis 3:16 is about Eve’s mistake of “turning” her principle devotion toward Adam rather than God. Eve makes Adam her priority . . . .”[19]
For Cain, Cain's mistake would be of turning his principle devotion towards his sin rather than God.
Whether it means turning or desire, does not change the second part of the verse: "he shall rule over thee".
Translated "desire", it implies the man's ruling is positive - most Christian and Jewish scholars take this view, and bible translators (men and women). This is the patriarchal view.
Translated "turning", it implies the man's ruling is negative ie "If you turn towards your husband he shall rule over you".
Then again "turning" and "desire" can also mean the same thing, and have no bearing on whether the man's rule is positive or negative.
Considering Cain, if Jane is correct, that Gen 3:16 means "If you turn towards your husband he shall rule over you".
Then when this interpretation is applied to Cain:
"And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him."
It doesn't really make sense.
In other words
If Eve turning toward her husband and her husband ruling over her is a bad thing
Then Cain turning away from sin and ruling over his sin is a bad thing.