Quote:
Originally Posted by John
Let me show the verse translation by Bushnell which Jane uses, and see for yourself if the whole context is about childbearing:
Unto the woman He said, "A snare has increased thy sorrow and thy sighing. In sorrow thou shalt bring forth children. Thou art turning away to thy husband and he will rule over thee. |
If you compare Bushnell's version with other reputable versions (I'll simply provide ASV, but KJV and virtually all others agree with this grammatical construct) you can see a very striking difference relative to this question of context. Virtually every translation separates the clauses with either a comma or semi colon, Bushnell is one of very few translators that separates "In sorrow thou shalt bring forth children" with "thou art turning away to thy husband". The International Standard version, the one that Jane uses to bolster the translation of "turning toward" combines the two clauses with "since" showing a very clear and explicit context to the statement. ASV joins them with "and" again showing an explicit connection.
16Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy pain and thy conception; in pain thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. (American Standard Version)
16He told the woman,
“I’ll greatly increase the pain of your labor during childbirth.
It will be painful for you to bear children,
“since your trust is turning[u] toward your husband,
and he will dominate you.” (International Standard version)
In conclusion "turning to" may be a valid translation of the words, but taking the statement and turning it into two separate sentences without any connecting conjunction is something else that makes Bushnell's translation a unique interpretation of this verse from all other translations.