Once More, with Feeling!

To the woman He said, “I will greatly increase your sorrow and your conception – bring forth children in pain.  And your desire is for your husband, and he does rule over you.”  Genesis 3:16  (translation SRI)

Greatly increase – It’s been several years since I published my book about the Hebrew view of woman (Guardian Angel).  I think it’s time to review once more the tremendous impact Masoretic vowel pointing has on the way we read the Bible.  No better example can be found than this verse from the story of the fall.  The Masoretes did more than add vowels to the reading of the text.  They systemized the text.  They basically decided how the text should be read by choosing what vowels go with what consonants and where the syllables begin and end.  Of course, they may have been following long-established traditions (which, by the way, are still in place today), but their interpretation of the proper reading of the text came more than 1500 years after the text was written.  Did they get it right?  Well, aside from the fact that there are discrepancies with the Dead Sea scrolls which are at least 1000 years earlier than the Masoretic text, there are theological problems as well.  Let’s look at just one.

Perhaps we have become so numb to the story of the woman’s “punishment” that we just don’t ask any questions about it.  We’ve heard about “Eve’s curse” so many times that we simply assume this is what the text says.  But maybe we need to ask some very big questions about this text, particularly in light of what this translation suggests about God.

The problem with this translation is the vowels and the syllables.  Hebrew has no vowels or syllable markings, so any translation will have to add vowels to the consonants in order to decide not only what the words mean but also what words are actually in the text.

There are two biblical possibilities for syllable and vowel construction in the consonants that make up the phrase translated “greatly increase.”[1] Translators usually assume that the consonant construction Resh-Bet-Hey, a verb meaning, “to be many,” is repeated, producing the translation “to be many, many,” or “greatly multiply.”[2]  But a small shift in the pointing in the second word changes the meaning entirely.  Now it is not a repetition of Resh-Bet-Hey but rather a new word, Aleph-Resh-Bet.  This word, ‘arab, occurs more than thirty times in the Tanakh.  It means, “to lie in wait, to ambush.”  If this second word is ‘arab and not a repetition of rabah, then the meaning would be “has caused to increase the lying-in-wait your sorrow.”  Semantically rearranged in English, God says, “The one who ambushed you has multiplied your sorrow.”  This makes a huge difference!

Bushnell offered this alternative nearly 100 years ago.[3]  It was ignored.  Why?  Because for Christianity, the weight of church tradition could not imagine that God didn’t curse Eve.  There is nothing impossible about this translation of the Hebrew.  The difficulty is that it exposes 1800 years of misogyny perpetrated by the church.

Bushnell’s suggestion has further merit when we consider some other elements of this passage.  In the TDNT, Meyers points out that the proper understanding of the consequences for the woman is not childbirth but rather raising children.  That means this text can’t be about the conclusion of pregnancy.  Viewing the text as a comment about the struggle within relationships is far more consistent with the fabric of the story.  In a “measure for measure” world, Havvah’s experience of toil is just as prolonged as Adam’s.  It lasts a lifetime.  The “curse” (actually, the Hebrew is clear that neither the man nor the woman are cursed) isn’t about pain in childbirth at all.  It’s about the disruption of relationships.  For the man, it’s the disruption of the relationship with the earth from which he came.  For the woman, it’s about the disruption of the relationships with her husband (see below) and her offspring.  Sin destroys the relationship.  It doesn’t make having children more painful.

This fits neatly with the consequences concerning “desire” and the husband. Personal relationships are at stake here—precisely the same issue behind the serpent’s attempt to eliminate Adam.  God is not issuing a curse.  He is stating a fact.  Disobedience will bring a mess and that mess will extend to relationships with both children and husband.  She was designed as the relationship guide.  Her ‘atsav will be found in the same arena.  Who is responsible for all this?  It’s not ḥāvvâh alone.  The serpent did the deceiving.  ḥāvvâh* listened, but the serpent spoke.  Now we can see why God says, “I will put enmity between you and the serpent.”  What He is saying is this:  I am going to make it very difficult for you to ever be deceived again by this creature.  I am going to make him something other than a walking, talking, resplendent, almost human-like beast.  Now he will be revolting.  You will never listen to him again.”  In other words, from now on, any future encounters with the serpent are going to become fearful and repugnant.  The walking, talking, naked snake is going to look like something horrible.  You won’t be listening to him anymore.

In a way, God’s announcement concerning the woman is a signal of protection, not punishment.  This is what we expect from a loving, benevolent God, a God who forgives both of these human beings and re-establishes the relationship with them.  Pagan gods punish.  The Hebrew God reproves with the intention of reversing the break.  Haven’t you ever asked yourself, “Why would God want to punish the woman with painful childbearing?”  Does that sound like a God who is anxious to forgive?

And all of this because we accepted two tiny dots under a Hebrew consonant as God’s word.

“Unless and until we are forced by strict philological evidence to regard a certain reading as secondary or corrupt, we have to look upon conflicting readings in our primary sources as alternative readings, none of which must be considered as superior to the other, simply because it is contained in one special tradition (such as the Septuagint).”[4]

Topical Index: ‘ezer kenegdo, rabah, ‘arab, greatly, ambush, Katherine Bushnell, Genesis 3:16

*This is the name given the woman by Adam, not God.  It also has a lot of hidden meaning.

[1] The consonants are Hey-Resh-Bet-Hey and Aleph-Resh-Bet-Hey.  The two words look almost the same; the only difference being the initial consonant.  The usual assumption is that both words come from the same stem.

[2] The Hebrew is harba arbe with the usual vowel pointing.  The Resh in the first word is pointed with a Sheva so that it closes the syllable Hey-Reshin the word Hey-Resh-Bet-Hey.  The Resh in the second word continues the same closed syllable pointing.  But the pointing was added hundreds of years after the written text.  If the second word is pointed without the Sheva, then Resh begins a new syllable and the word changes from a repetition of rabah to the word ‘arab.

[3] Katherine Bushnell, God’s Word To Women (God’s Word to Women Publishers, Mossville, IL) 1923, p. 51.

[4] M.H. Goshen-Gottstein, “The History of the Bible-Text and Comparative Semitics–A Methodological Problem,” VT 7 (1957): 198.