home | what's new | other sites | contact | about

  

 

Word Gems 

exploring self-realization, sacred personhood, and full humanity

 


Eve's "curse" of Gen. 3:16

 

 

return to previous page

 

 

Was Eve cursed with a desire for her husband?

Gen. 3: 16: "... and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee." (KJV)

Many traditionalists see in this verse a license to dominate and domineer a wife; that, Eve was "cursed" with desire toward her husband.

But here's the sticky part. In the nearby verses of Gen. 2: 23, 24 we are given the purpose of romantic love: Lovers are to "cling" (Hebrew: "gluing") to each other and become One Person.

How would it be possible to satisfy such a purpose, to create that kind of cosmic intimacy, without a strong attraction to one's mate?

 

"I've waited so long"

 

We have seen that male and female are designed by God to fulfill each other's strongest desires; but now, after all this custom-designing to make these Sacred Two want each other; after requiring them to seek "gluing" as One Person for eternal romance; now, suddenly, we're turned on our heads and told that it's all a sham, a curse, delivered by an Angry God!

I don't think so; something is really wrong with this picture - with a little help from the churchmen, as we'll see.

 

 

 

obstetrical anesthetics are of the devil 


Dr. Carl Wickland, Gateway Of Understanding:


"In 1847 when the Scotch physician advocated the use of anaesthetics in obstetrical cases he was met by a storm of opposition. From pulpit to pulpit Simpson's use of chloroform was denounced as impious and contrary to Holy Writ; texts were cited abundantly, the ordinary declaration being that to use chloroform was 'to avoid one part of the primeval curse on woman.'"

 

 

what a difference a little pronoun makes

  • Gen. 3: 16: "... and he shall rule over thee."

James R. Beck comments on the Hebrew text:

  • "Overlooked [as a credible translation] is to read the [Hebrew] pronoun as a neuter 'it' rather than a masculine 'he.' The wife's desire will be for her husband, and it will dominate her. This nicely fits the context." Editor's note: In other words, "it" is her sacred desire for her husband which will dominate her life.

Traditional religion, which produced the Authorized Version 400 years ago, was predisposed toward a Wrathful Celibate Father cursing Mother Eve. Much of biblical translation is more art than science, and, without careful self-monitoring, one's private views, editorial comments, will inevitably creep into the new translation.

In Gen. 3:16 I don't think God is cursing anyone - of course not; God never curses anyone - as Father Benson would say, the very idea is "a stupid and wicked fiction."

I think the psychic-shaman author of this verse is merely stating a fact and also offering a bit of advice.

There are two things that might unduly influence the woman's judgment. A mashal view would indicate "desire" and "sorrow" for each of these:

(1) Her desire for children: (see the first part of Gen. 3:16) Despite the pain and sorrow related to both childbirth and child-rearing, the natural maternal desire for babies can consume a woman. For the unenlightened female, she might believe that love for child is more important than love for mate, even her eternal Twin Soul. This is misguided. Silver Birch warns against this. Children are designed for a temporary relationship with parents and will "leave father and mother" to fulfill their own destinies. But some women allow an instinctual mammalian protective love for children to dominate all other concerns. This will not end well. 

(2) Her desire for her lover: Unless she is self-respecting and strong within herself, she might want and need him too much. She might give of herself too much and too easily, even in an abusive way. This psychological dysfunction can represent a neurotic need to be accepted by him at any cost. A craving for acceptance, bought with the currency of sexual favor, is what many call romantic love.

Gen. 3: 16, construed in this new manner, would have God explaining two pitfalls of life, plus offering some gentle advice: 

  • Natural inclinations, if allowed to rule, if taken too far, without wisdom, could be Eve's undoing. Maternal instincts are a good thing, but not at the expense of compromising one's inner soul-guidance, of becoming One Person with one's sacred Twin; both of which, not childbearing, are her primary life's purposes. Accept no substitutes.

 

Editor's note: If this is Eve's warning about female propensities run amok, what might be the male's penchant weakness? That's an easy one, I think. He needs to understand how much he needs to love Woman. His natural leaning toward independence and fortitude, which supplies to him a grit to persevere, alone, if need be, in a hostile world, can make him insensitive; even, to his own inner cries for her tenderness and spiritual sensibilities.

 

I just can't leave him, I need him too much 

Recently, I was speaking to a young single mom who's expecting her third baby. The father is a hot-head, drinks too much, will soon be fired from his job, and has treated her abusively; yet, against her own better judgment and stated plans, she often visits him and "tries to make things work."

This was the warning of Gen. 3:16. The fellow under review, as all unenlightened males, has his own problems, and bigger ones. He deludes his macho self into believing that shrewdness and calculation, without love - always seeking his own advantage - will make its way in the world. Good luck to him. Both male and female have their lessons to learn, and, when their eyes open, will help each other by adding balance to natural propensities.

My friend, the single mom, her third baby to be delivered in two weeks, just phoned; and I paraphrase:

"He [the father] just won't stop drinking! I don't know why he won't just be happy with me. I know I should not see him as he is so destructive in his behavior, but I just can't let him go. I need him too much!"

This is pure Gen. 3:16 -- if she's not very aware of what's happening, if she's not respecting herself and with the wrong person, "it [your natural desire to please him] shall rule over you" - and will ruin you.

 

 

summary

For many hundreds of years, Eve's so-called "curse" of Gen. 3:16 has been a battleground tenet. Misogynist patriarchal translators of Genesis have bludgeoned women with this dark teaching.

Does it make sense?

On the level of literary logical flow, it’s pure nonsense. Look at the context: We have a statement asserting that woman’s desire will be toward her husband; so far so good. But what comes next is utterly disconnected: and he will rule over her.

Really? She’s so thrilled to be with him because he lords it over her? Name one woman, suffering in this way, anywhere in the world or in history, who is tickled pink to play the role of brow-beaten wife. It never happens. Yes, we find women who are co-dependent, beaten down, believing themselves to be doing God’s will, running the clock out, who put up with this draconianism, but to say that they’re thrilled about it, that it's their "desire," is something else again.

Misogynist patriarchal churchmen will defend the traditional view of "Eve's curse" with: “This pictures Christ ruling over his bride, the church, with a rod of iron, and the believing wife finds peace in this dominion as she does God’s will.” Only the hard-core misogynist patriarchal churchmen would believe in this kind of drivel. The real Jesus would laugh in their faces at the suggestion; well, he’d be too polite to make a scene, but he’d be thinking about it.

But here’s The Becker Living Translation of Gen. 3:16:

Pleasing your true love, making him happy, will become your joy, and will always be uppermost on your mind. This desire to love him with your whole heart and soul will dominate your thinking, define your life as a woman, and issue as your “reason to stay alive for” [as his reason will be exactly the same, toward you].

 

 

 

Editor's last word: