Verse I Didn't Get (VIDG) #1

I'm hoping to revive my blog in a somewhat meaningful fashion! This is an attempt to start a series (possibly weekly or monthly) on interesting or difficult verses that I come across in my reading of the Bible. I am doing this mostly as a personal exercise, although in sharing this I do hope that others may benefit from hearing another point of view! By no means do I claim any of my own authority - and of course, I call on other resources in order to aid with my understanding. But in writing these things down, I find myself accountable to others to correct and criticise my understanding/exegesis. These verses inevitably have proven quite challenging - so much so that they take several re-reads in order to understand, often requiring a closer look at the original language composition/construction and the context surrounding them. One might want to check out John Piper's "Desiring God" blog, and a few of these links for more on regular reading (and how to read).

• 8 Profitable Ways to Read the Bible
• Brothers, let us query the Text
• PDF file on Biblical Exegesis

On a side note - it's interesting to read that John Piper was arrested! His post here shows how passionate he is about the rights of the unborn child. It is sad to contemplate the limbo-state of the unborn - their life and identity remains utterly fragile and at the mercy of those who would not recognise their existence as anything greater than a piece of flesh. The complexity of the issue is huge, however, and well beyond the scope of where I want to go with this post - can of worms for another time, keep it shut for now. Anyhow - enough of a digression - without further ado, the first VIDG!


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."

This is a hard text! While a coincidence, it is intriguing to note that there are many books of the Bible whose 16th verse in the 3rd chapter stands out as interesting - cf. John 3:16 and 1 John 3:16 to cite two of the most famous ones. I've chosen this one because it challenged me thoroughly, as a verse that appeared quite abhorrent and difficult to accept. Here, in Genesis, the first book of the Bible, we encounter a decree from God to the first woman, Eve, saying that as a result of sin (i.e. disobedience to God), He would:

• multiply her pain in childbearing
• her desire will be for her husband, and he will rule over her

This twofold decree sounds like a harsh punishment! In the first instance, pain is added to childbearing - why is it that the woman must endure this, and not the man? Secondly, she is to be insubordinated to her husband - which creates in her an inner turmoil, since her desire is for him! There is much to be said against this twofold decree, particularly in today's age where gender equality is the dominant stance.

Yet not is all as it seems.

Briefly, the first part of this verse is straightforward - pain in childbearing is truly evident in human experience; what this tells us is that it is by God's decree that this is so, and that this suffering is prescribed as a response to sin. That modern medicine (and perhaps alternative therapies) are able to provide considerable relief from this suffering is by God's grace.

The second part of this verse is far more difficult to accept and understand. On first reading, this appears to be decreed or mandated insubordination of women! In many ways, history bears this out. Indeed, reading the Bible seems to bear this out as well - just look at the narrative of the patriarchs through Genesis. Male dominance in society is fairly well assumed in a lot of history, and across the vast majority of cultures. It is easy for one to see that this verse can be abused by those seeking to exercise male dominance over women. However - does God decree that insubordination of women is right and good?

Here, we are reminded of the primacy of the man, Adam. Eve followed, and she was created as a helper for Adam - thus the order of the first couple determines the pre-existing nature of their relationship. The leadership was given to Adam in the first place. Closer examination of the first phrase in the last sentence of Genesis 3:16 ("your desire shall be for your husband") reveals that this has a parallel in Genesis 4:7 - the same word for "desire" is used here to describe sin's "desire" for Cain. This "desire" should therefore not be interpreted in the usual way - rather, it is a term that is imperfectly translated into English, one that encompasses the sense that the woman will desire to control her husband - and then, the verse goes on to decree that "he shall rule over you". The picture here is one of struggle, or one of conflict, or strain, within the marriage relationship. Note also that this verse describes marriage (the term "husband" is used), and not the relationship of all women to all men - therefore, this does not connote a mandate or decree by God that men are to rule over women in every circumstance.

For more on the marriage relationship, Ephesians 5:25-33 is positively helpful. Here, Paul describes marriage as an analogy for the relationship between Christ and the church. True sacrificial love (after the pattern of Christ) is encouraged. Right submission (which is mutual, see Ephesians 5:21) is to characterise all inter-Christian relationships, including marriage. The headship expressed by husbands in marriage is not to be of the domineering type.


Summary:

• suffering is decreed by God because of human disobedience (sin)
• there will be conflict within the marriage relationship (also as a result of sin)
• there is no decree by God that men as a whole shall rule over women
• there is, however, a right order (the husband's headship) in marriage, which is to be characterised by sacrificial love

Till next time, God bless!