What does God mean by his words in Genesis 3?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lead_Me_Home
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Lead_Me_Home

Guest
Gen 3:15 I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel."
I don’t believe God is promoting domestic violence, but it is hard to understand this passage. Does God mean a constant struggle for power?
Gen 3:22 Then the LORD God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever”–
When God says “us” does he mean “we/I” (the blessed trinity) or the angels/demons and him.

I’m curious:)
 
God promises man a redeemer. Redemption has two meaning: liberation from enemies and restoration of life. Israel was expecting a literal liberation from Rome and restoration of its kingdom, but God in Jesus Christ not only did this but also liberated man from Satan’s power and restored in man the Divine Life through the forgiveness of sins, which is the power of His Love and Mercy.

God uses the royal We, which shows He is Triune.
 
I don’t believe God is promoting domestic violence, but it is hard to understand this passage. Does God mean a constant struggle for power?

When God says “us” does he mean “we/I” (the blessed trinity) or the angels/demons and him.

I’m curious:)
The word “us” or “we” relates to the head of a group speaking on behalf of the whole.
A divine “We” is the same thing.

It isn’t completely clear that the “we” here is the divine one – but in fact may be the angels who were commissioned with tasks involved in creation. It makes more sense in my mind that the “we” here includes those whom have fallen, eg: satan, for the phrase “knowing good and evil” indicates a participation in evil, which God himself does not do.

The immediate upshot of this conversation is the Serpent appearing in the Garden and tempting Eve (you both, not her alone) to eat the forbidden fruit so that their eyes would be opened to sin.

As to the enmity, there are two aspects of it: By joining in our flesh through the fall – the serpent eats dust and corruption, the dead. So, there is an internal struggle against the devil whom has some power over the body which he has wounded.

I would hardly consider striking a venomous snake bent on killing as the same as domestic violence. Nor, in the final analysis, do we see Christ Crushing the head of the serpent from the cross itself as a figure. This battle is in the “midst” of the people of the serpent and those of the Woman; offspring with mutually exclusive requirements. I’m not sure how else to probe the issue, although there is much more metaphorical information to analyze.
Good luck.

–Pax Tecum
–Andrew.
 
In the first one, Gen 3:15, God is pronouncing sentence on the serpent. These are the literal words you read, but there are deeper spiritual and allegorical meanings to the passage. The point of it is that it can have several different meanings. The most simple meaning is that serpents will be reviled as creatures. Indeed, many people dislike snakes of any sort.

Another is that this enmity symbolizes a constant struggle between man (as in mankind) and evil, where sometimes man will conquer evil, and on another day evil will conquer man. Yet another is that the “seed of Eve” is a metaphor for righteous men, and “seed of the serpent” is a metaphor for evil men or spirits, and the two oppose each other. There are even interpretations that this is a foreshadowing of Christ coming and His conquering death. There are tons of them, really.

In the second verse, 3:22, it is translated as “is become as one of us to know good and evil…” but there is no Hebrew word “us” in the text. It is a series of words that if you took them and translated each one literally and made a sentence it would read something like this: “become united of (or among) to know (by seeing) good bad.” If you try and capture the essence of what those words together mean, you come up with a translation that forces the word “us” into it because of the other words around it.

Without delving into spiritual or allegorical meanings, it’s not really speaking of God in more than one person as in a Trinity, it’s speaking more to the idea of man (mankind) has attempted (by eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil) to be united with God, but in a devious or deceptive way. In other words, man had tried to achieve divinity (equality with his Creator) through disobedience, an obvious contradiction. Also, consider that God had already declared that the penalty, should they eat that fruit, was that they “would surely die.”

So here in this verse you have basically a statement by God of what man did (or tried to), and a sentiment that if not punished more of the same behavior could be expected (lest he put out his hand and take of the tree of life…), and in the next verse they are tossed out of the garden. The construct of the sentence is very similar to a judge in a courtroom saying to a guilty person, “You knew it was wrong to drive while drunk, so before you kill someone, (sentence).”
 
I don’t believe God is promoting domestic violence, but it is hard to understand this passage. Does God mean a constant struggle for power?
God is telling this to the serpent (that is, Satan), not to Adam her husband.

I assume you thought this since you said “domestic” violence… sorry if I misinterpreted your question! :o
When God says “us” does he mean “we/I” (the blessed trinity) or the angels/demons and him.
I’m curious:)
As for Genesis 3:22, DOShea explained it very well!! 👍
 
I don’t believe God is promoting domestic violence, but it is hard to understand this passage. Does God mean a constant struggle for power?
The verse you are referring to is a crucifixion prediction.

he shall bruise your head” = a prediction of the cross of Christ piercing the ground at “Skull Place,” to save us from sin. “Bruise your head,” “Skull Place.” Get it?

you shall bruise his heel” = a prediction of the nail going through His feet at the same time. Get it?
 
Thanks. I realized that a lot of my confusion came from not understanding who was talking to whom. The bruise you skull and bruise your heal; I thought was Go talking about Adam (man) and Eve (Woman. HOwever, it was God talking about Adam (mankind) and the Serpent (Evil men/beings)

Thanks!
 
Thanks. I realized that a lot of my confusion came from not understanding who was talking to whom. The bruise you skull and bruise your heal; I thought was Go talking about Adam (man) and Eve (Woman. HOwever, it was God talking about Adam (mankind) and the Serpent (Evil men/beings)

Thanks!
Ahh!
But there is more.

Genesis 3:22 Repeats the assertion that the divine beings “know” good and evil; as one of us Highlighting again the awkwardness of the assertion that “we” is the divine “we” of the trinity.

But look closely as the cursing phase of the encounter: Genesis 3:16

Each of the cursing is a result of the actions taken: Genesis 3:14-15 reflects the malice with which the serpents lie has engendered in the offspring of man. All children of Adam and Eve fall and suffer because of what the serpent did – and thus there is just reason for anger between the innocent and the guilty.
Whether demon offspring, or men whom take their origin from the Devil as father.
This is a natural consequence of how their philosophies are incompatible and mutually exclusive and destructive. There is a unity implied between the serpent and its offspring, and the woman and her offspring. But also notice, as a minor point, that the woman has emnity with the serpent itself – as it exists in the garden at that moment.

I had thought this was perhaps, Jewish poetic repetition, but notice that the idea flows immediately into another evil – the relationship between man and wife.
Genesis 3:16.

In this passage, the offspring united to their mother are spoken of first in continuation of the previous idea. There is the bothersome idea of an “increase” in pain – as in, there would have been pain of some kind had the fall not happened; but that which is to come will be worse. Since the last reference to pain is the striking of the serpent at the heel – there is a loose association with the devil’s power over the body implied here.

The following sentence “Your yearning shall be toward your husband, yet he will lord it over you.” is rather cryptic in english. The CCC 400 simply says of it: the union of man and woman becomes subject to tensions, their relations henceforth marked by lust and domination.

But the Greek LXX (And I am starting to study the Hebrew) makes a peculiar set of comments here. Adam had listened to his wife back in v.3:12 – the woman’s eyes were not opened when she ate, but only after she tempted her husband to eat.
Just so, the woman listened to the serpent before she ate – and it did not occur to her that nothing good came of her eating the fruit – so she went the full way to see if her husband was required to make the Serpents promise come true.

There is a very deep relationship being expressed in v3:16 and v3:19 where the return to their origins are remarked upon – but not that of the serpent.
Adam came from dust – and to dust he shall return having broken the unifying principle of his body. Just so, Eve was not from dust – but rather from her husband – and in v3:16 God says her ‘Yearing will be toward her husband, but he shall rule over her.’

It is this idea of a return to origins which is so prevalent in the curses. Man was taken from dust, woman was taken from Man. English does not do justice to the phrase rendered in v3:16 – for what it is saying is that the woman will “apostrophe” toward her husband, and he shall “κυρι-ευ-σει” Lord WELL over her. That is the normal word for a master husband, a GOD.

To apostrophe is to turn/return to the reference point of an endless cycle. Often, in plays, it means to turn away from the audience and speak to an invisible God who causes all to happen – begging for an audience, counselling the uncouncilable.

It is in this phrase that the church says that marriage will be marked with “Lust and Domination.” The Lust, or “Seduction”, being the womans part – and the domination being the Man’s; though a reversal is not at all impossible.

The pattern of domestic abuse, that is of usuery of one person by another for gratification, sperm donation, or other utilitarian goals is intimately tied to the acceptance of the serpent into the flesh of our first parents. These are the antithesis of Gift; for they are begging, demanding, and extorting the needs which we were designed to give freely in solidarity with our spouses.

–much to think about.
Peace.
–Andrew.
 
The best thing to do when it is hard to understand a particular passage is to check the footnotes. Be sure to check footnotes above and below the passage in question.

When it comes to the Book of Genesis, it is very important to read the whole chapter so that one understands the context. In fact, anytime there is an one or two verse quote, read verses before and after.

The footnotes for Genesis 3:15 includes references to other parts of Scripture for clarification. The serpent was regarded as the devil, himself, whose eventual defeat is implied. Read 1 John 3:8: “Whoever sins belongs to the devil, because the devil has sinned from the beginning. Indeed, the Son of God was revealed to destroy the works of the devil.” In other words, the passage in Genesis can be understood as the first promise of salvation for fallen mankind. The woman’s offspring refers to Jesus Christ, the Redeemer.

God loved us so much that He immediately promised salvation.

Blessings,
granny

All human life is worthy of profound respect from the moment of conception.
 
I don’t believe God is promoting domestic violence, but it is hard to understand this passage. Does God mean a constant struggle for power?

Hard ? It means, in essence, that from then on:​

  • men will be pitted against serpents
  • relations within the family have been spoiled (as per your suggestion :))
Man and serpent “got above themselves” - now they are being thrust back within limits. The story is one of trans-gressing, “crossing boundaries”. A great deal is being said. 🙂
When God says “us” does he mean “we/I” (the blessed trinity) or the angels/demons and him.
I’m curious:)

The alternatives:​

  • plural of majesty
  • God addressing the Divine Assembly
  • plural to show deliberation
I’ll go with the last. 🙂

The OT is an OT book - NT mysteries derived from the Appearing of Christ aren’t to be found in it.
 
My favorite explanation of Genesis 3:15 is found here.
"…In most editions of the Douay-Rheims Bible, Genesis 3:15, in which God is addressing the serpent, reads like this:
“I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.”
In the New American Bible, as in all other modern Bibles, it reads like this:
“I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; He will strike at your head, while you strike at his heel.”
The essential difference between these two renderings – or at least the one people always ask about – concerning who will crush the serpent’s head and who the serpent is trying to strike. The Douay-Rheims uses feminine pronouns – she and her – implying that the woman is the person being spoken of in this part of the verse. All modern translations use masculine pronouns – he and his – implying that the seed of the woman is the of that part of the verse.

The reason for the difference in the renderings is a manuscript difference. Modern translations follow what the original Hebrew of the passage says. The Douay-Rheims, however, is following a manuscript variant found in many early Fathers and some editions of the Vulgate (but not the original; Jerome followed the Hebrew text in his edition of the Vulgate). The variant probably originated as a copyist error when a scribe failed to take note that the subject of the verse had shifted from the woman to the seed of the woman.

People notice this variant today because the expression found in the Douay-Rheims has been the basis of some popular Catholic art, showing a serene Mary standing over a crushed serpent.

This is because Christians have recognized (all the way back to the first century) that the woman and her seed mentioned in Genesis 3:15 do not simply stand for Eve and one of her righteous sons (either Abel or Seth). They prophetically foreshadow Mary and Jesus. Thus, just as the first half of the verse, speaking of the enmity between the serpent and the woman, has been applied to Mary, the second half, speaking of the head crushing and heel striking, has also been applied to Mary due to the manuscript variant, though it properly applies to Jesus, given the original Hebrew.

This does not mean that the idea cannot be validly applied to Mary as well. Through her cooperation in the incarnation of Christ, so that the Son of God (who, from the cross, directly crushed the head of the serpent) became her seed, Mary did crush the head of the serpent. In the same way, the serpent struck at Christ on the cross, and indirectly struck at Mary’s heart as well, who had to witness the death of her own Son (cf. John 19:25-27). As the holy priest Simeon had told her years before:
“Behold, this child is set for the fall and rising of many in Israel, and for a sign that is spoken against – and a sword will pierce through your own soul also – that thoughts out of many hearts may be revealed” (Luke 2:34b-35).
Thus Jesus crushed the serpent directly and was directly struck by the serpent; Mary, through her cooperation in the incarnation and her witnessing the sufferings and death of her Son, indirectly crushed the serpent and was indirectly struck by the serpent.
This has long been recognized by Catholics. The footnotes provided a couple of hundred years ago by Bishop Challoner in his revision of the Douay state, “The sense [of these two readings] is the same: for it is by her seed, Jesus Christ, that the woman crushes the serpent’s head.”
 
Thank you, kepha1, for explaining so clearly the different renderings of the verse in question. If you’re not a teacher, you should be one.
 
I don’t believe God is promoting domestic violence, but it is hard to understand this passage. Does God mean a constant struggle for power?

When God says “us” does he mean “we/I” (the blessed trinity) or the angels/demons and him.

I’m curious:)
We (LDS) think that by the “seed of the woman” is meant Jesus Christ, who by His atonement crushed the serpent’s head, thus freeing mankind from the grasp of Satan and redeeming them. In a more general sense it refers to all the righteous posterity of Adam and Eve who by their faith in Christ overcome Satan and obtain salvation in the kingdom of God.

By “us” we think is also meant Jesus Christ, as He existed in His pre-mortal state as the Son of God. God the Father is conversing with the Son during the creative process.
 
The pagan symbol for eternity is a dragon that swallows it’s tail. The end is swallowed up in the beginning and that marks a new age or era. This symbolizes the cyclic construct of time and human experience the pagan had reasoned as true. This symbol is expanded on by anthropamorphizing the tail into a human foot. The end of the age is not swallowed up in the beginning according to this symbol. This symbol effectively destroys the cyclic construct of time by viewing the dragon head as the enemy. The pagan acknowledgement of eternal cycles is revealed as acknowledging an enemy as a friend.
 
My favorite explanation of Genesis 3:15 is found here.
It seems the link is broken today – perhaps you have another?
But assuming it is the same as the Douay commentary, there are a couple of points that I think are being overlooked. (I don’t know what to make of Benadam’s comments, but those are interesting…).

In the text itself there are two levels of enmity. That of the adults and that of the offspring. The Jerusalem bible Readers Edition 1966, which I would take to be a modern version renders “It will strike your head, and you will strike its’ heel”.
If you have a copy of any of these textual variants, or a link – either the Greek or Hebrew, I would be much obliged if you would share them – I haven’t seen them and am always wanting to learn more.

But, what is interesting is the mixture of the enmities. The Woman – if taken to be Eve – is to be an enemy of the serpent at that moment in time. Indeed, he has taken a certain control over her body – and she is going to struggle with mastering her own body and thus the serpent. But even if seen as two distinct creatures, there is to be a battle over the exclusive objectives of these two creatures – the woman and the serpent.

The second part of the phrase is also problematic if interpreted solely on the foreshadowing of Christ – for it says that God will put enmity between the Offspring of each the serpent and the woman. But the text does not state the obvious grammatical connection – rather it contradicts it. The offspring of the serpent is not mentioned in the striking – yet that is where the future enmity would logically apply. The curse is between the “seed” as well as betwixt Eve and the serpent.
Yet these are different sets of creatures. What then, to make of the serpent at the time of Eve being crushed – rather than its offspring?

One can propose various solutions to this logical inconsistency – and I don’t intend to do so at this premature point. But I will offer a vista that is perhaps not often viewed – One has to group the offspring of the serpent as either actual serpents (demons) themselves or as human children who lost the battle with the serpent, and are thus his. And in a battle between an actual serpent and a human where the flesh itself is used to crush the viper – it is clear that for most poisonous serpents, the parent or child thus striking would be committing a suicide mission to protect others from the viper. Although it is possible for the viper to miss, that usually does not happen when something as large and slow as a heel goes to crush that which is already sprung into striking motion.

If anyone has watched “the God’s must be Crazy” – I can’t imagine the Hebrews and descendants of Seth being any less bright than the Aboriginals who knew enough to teach their children that serpent were “all right” as long… well watch the movie. So, I question why God, in his wisdom, chose to prophecy about the ending in this fashion? There does appear to be more to the metaphor than is presently explained.

All sinned in Adam is Cryptic – but then shall all crush in Eve have a meaning?
Surely Eve fought the serpent in some way – or there could be no “enemies”.
Again the focus of the battle shifts immediately to the production of the army of offspring – and it is here where the first time the Husband – NOT NAMED AS ADAM – is brought into the discussion; and the result of this marriage is pain in child-brearing.

Each curse is related to the office of the one cursed – to the farmer, producer of food, the soil becomes his suffering. To the “woman” the producer of children – the births become her suffering. And to the serpent, a creature to be tended by man – he becomes the least of all creatures – lower than a cow, and I wonder – why a COW?

hmm…
–Andew.
 
Thanks. I realized that a lot of my confusion came from not understanding who was talking to whom. The bruise you skull and bruise your heal; I thought was Go talking about Adam (man) and Eve (Woman. HOwever, it was God talking about Adam (mankind) and the Serpent (Evil men/beings)

Thanks!

I agree with D O Shea on Gen.3:22 and Kepha on Gen.3:15
Also, " enmity between you and the woman "
Jesus twice used the word ‘woman’ a term of honour] speaking to His mother thus identifying her as the "woman " of Gen. 3:15 this verse is called the protoevangelium ]
She is the woman promised by God to have enmity against the serpent [Satan]
the ‘woman’ who never sinned .
"between your seed and her seed "
Jesus, the Son of Mary overcame Satan by his crucifixion and death on the cross
As He hung on the cross He said to his mother " Woman, behold thy son "
making Mary the mother of all his followers throughout history
So all christians are her offspring
which are at enmity with Satan and the powers of darkness till the end of time.
😃
 
From the Haydock commentary of the Douay-Rheims’s correct rendition of “I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.”:
Ver. 15. She shall crush. Ipsa, the woman: so divers of the fathers read this place, conformably to the Latin: others read it ipsum, viz. the seed. The sense is the same: for it is by her seed, Jesus Christ, that the woman crushes the serpent’s head. (Challoner) — The Hebrew text, as Bellarmine observes, is ambiguous: He mentions one copy which had ipsa instead of ipsum; and so it is even printed in the Hebrew interlineary edition, 1572, by Plantin, under the inspection of Boderianus. Whether the Jewish editions ought to have more weight with Christians, or whether all the other manuscripts conspire against this reading, let others inquire. The fathers who have cited the old Italic version, taken from the Septuagint agree with the Vulgate, which is followed by almost all the Latins; and hence we may argue with probability, that the Septuagint and the Hebrew formerly acknowledged ipsa, which now moves the indignation of Protestants so much, as if we intended by it to give any divine honour to the blessed Virgin. We believe, however, with St. Epiphanius, that “it is no less criminal to vilify the holy Virgin, than to glorify her above measure.” We know that all the power of the mother of God is derived from the merits of her Son. We are no otherwise concerned about the retaining of ipsa, she, in this place, that in as much as we have yet no certain reason to suspect its being genuine. As some words have been corrected in the Vulgate since the Council of Trent by Sixtus V. and others, by Clement VIII. so, if, upon stricter search, it be found that it, and not she, is the true reading, we shall not hesitate to admit the correction: but we must wait in the mean time respectfully, till our superiors determine. (Haydock) Kemnitzius certainly advanced a step too far, when he said that all the ancient fathers read ipsum. Victor, Avitus, St. Augustine, St. Gregory, &c. mentioned in the Douay Bible, will convict him of falsehood. Christ crushed the serpent’s head by his death, suffering himself to be wounded in the heel. His blessed mother crushed him likewise, by her co-operation in the mystery of the Incarnation; and by rejecting, with horror, the very first suggestions of the enemy, to commit even the smallest sin. (St. Bernard, ser. 2, on Missus est.) “We crush,” says St. Gregory, Mor. 1. 38, “the serpent’s head, when we extirpate from our heart the beginnings of temptation, and then he lays snares for our heel, because he opposes the end of a good action with greater craft and power.” The serpent may hiss and threaten; he cannot hurt, if we resist him. (Haydock)
Note the Douay-Rheims gives the only correct English translation out of all the Catholic and Protestant bibles!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top