The role of women in Genesis 3:16 has often been disputed in the modern day. Genesis 3:16 (NIV) states: ‘To the woman he said, “I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.”’ With “modern day” feminism, as Foh’s modern day is 1975, a growing phenomenon, woman’s rights and the understanding of women’s roles in marriage are changing. The church has to reevaluate the marital relationship between men and women. Foh attempts to show the “proper understanding of Genesis 3:16 is crucial to this reconsideration of the Biblical view of the woman.” Foh argues that the notion that women were made to be subservient to men and
…show more content…
All of the difficulty and ambiguity seem to lie with the translation of a specific word in Hebrew. There are three usual interpretations of the passage according to her. The first is known as sexual desire, or ‘the woman’s craving for her husband “will be so strong that as to satisfy it she will be ready to face all the pains and sorrows of childbearing.”’ This is saying that women need and want their husbands in a sexual way so badly that they are willing to go through the pains of childbirth just as consequence of having those feelings. The second type of common interpretation is the “immense, clinging, psychological dependence on a man.” “Clarence J. Vos would not exclude from it the woman’s desire for the man’s protection.” The third type of Common Interpretations would be that women do not have control over her own wants and only want that which her husband wants. It would be through this understanding that women would no longer have rule over herself, only her husband …show more content…
However, if the woman’s desire maker her a willing slave of her husband, or if she has no desires except for her husband’s, the hardship of punishment in Genesis 3:16b is absent, because the woman willingly submits herself to her husband’s rule.”
There are similarities between the understanding of the Hebrew word being disputed in both Genesis 3:16 and Genesis 4:7. In 4:7, it is Cain and Abel, and “the meaning in this context of the fourth chapter is that what sin desires is what Cain will carry out.” It is then due to say that there are more similarities between the desire and sin of women and the desire of Cain: “The woman has the same sort of desire for her husband that sin has for Cain, a desire to possess or control him.” This is where the conflict between the two was addresses. Foh points out, “As Cain did not rule over sin, so not every husband rules his wife, and wives have desires contrary to their husbands’ and often have no desire (sexual or psychological) for their
All of the difficulty and ambiguity seem to lie with the translation of a specific word in Hebrew. There are three usual interpretations of the passage according to her. The first is known as sexual desire, or ‘the woman’s craving for her husband “will be so strong that as to satisfy it she will be ready to face all the pains and sorrows of childbearing.”’ This is saying that women need and want their husbands in a sexual way so badly that they are willing to go through the pains of childbirth just as consequence of having those feelings. The second type of common interpretation is the “immense, clinging, psychological dependence on a man.” “Clarence J. Vos would not exclude from it the woman’s desire for the man’s protection.” The third type of Common Interpretations would be that women do not have control over her own wants and only want that which her husband wants. It would be through this understanding that women would no longer have rule over herself, only her husband …show more content…
However, if the woman’s desire maker her a willing slave of her husband, or if she has no desires except for her husband’s, the hardship of punishment in Genesis 3:16b is absent, because the woman willingly submits herself to her husband’s rule.”
There are similarities between the understanding of the Hebrew word being disputed in both Genesis 3:16 and Genesis 4:7. In 4:7, it is Cain and Abel, and “the meaning in this context of the fourth chapter is that what sin desires is what Cain will carry out.” It is then due to say that there are more similarities between the desire and sin of women and the desire of Cain: “The woman has the same sort of desire for her husband that sin has for Cain, a desire to possess or control him.” This is where the conflict between the two was addresses. Foh points out, “As Cain did not rule over sin, so not every husband rules his wife, and wives have desires contrary to their husbands’ and often have no desire (sexual or psychological) for their