Desire and Rule: The Parallel Constructions of Genesis 3:16 and Genesis 4:6-7

For Derek's presentation of the issue, see comments to the discussion of Article IX.

Derek warns quite correctly that the translation is tricky. The Hebrew, with whose translation we generally are familiar, is somewhat ambiguous. The Septuagint, well-known to some interpreters, is somewhat different. Clement's Letter to the Corinthians, for instance, uses the Septuagint version.

So let's first put forth translations of the relevant passages:

Hebrew (I'm using the KJV, since I do not trust the Revised English Bible I use generally here):

Genesis 3:16

Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

Genesis 4:6-7

And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen? If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him. [Other versions suggest "but thou art able" is a better translation for "and thou shalt." Others suggest sin shall rule over Cain.]

LXX ( Brenton Edition )

Genesis 3:16

And to the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy pains and thy groanings; in pain thou shalt bring forth children, and thy [f] submission shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

Genesis 4:6-7

And the Lord God said to Cain, Why art thou become very sorrowful and why is thy countenance fallen?
Hast thou not sinned if thou hast brought it rightly, but not rightly divided it? be still, to thee shall be his submission, and thou shalt rule over him.

The controversy between the Hebrew and the LXX is that in the former, sin [lit. sin-offering] is personified as being ruled by Cain on account of his desire for Cain, whereas in the latter, Cain is told he will rule over Abel.

The first step we should take is discard the LXX, which seems to be making some sort of sacrificial commentary in 4:7 that cannot be justified as a translation concordant with the Hebrew. [Note carefully the usage here. The LXX always is important to keep in mind, since it seems to have been the authoritative version for many of the ante-Nicene Fathers.] Hence, we are left with the Hebrew. Honestly, I cannot see anything in 3:16 of particular interest as to usage. But 4:5-4:7 work very interestingly together.

First, in 4:5 Cain essentially is described as angry and hanging his head (lit. falling face). In 4:6, God asks why Cain is angry and is hanging his head in a rhetorical fashion. Oddly enough, Cain is the first character described in the Bible as angry. God's anger is assumed by others throughout Genesis, but God first is described as angry by the omniscient narrator in Exodus. But more importantly, God next effectively says, "If you had done well ["to me" is perhaps understood or not, Hebrew is ambiguous that way], you would have been uplifted." The word the KJV translates as "accepted" almost always has the sense of elevation. For instance, the swellings associated with leprosy often are described using this word. Hence, God is making a pun, "Why are you so angry and downcast? If you had done right, you would hold your head up high." Finally, God says, "If you do not do well, sin lies down before your door..." The word for "lies down" is always used for animals and abstracts, especially for sheep. Humans who lie down do so using another verb. I omitted the last part because it is translated so variably and its translation really depends on the clause previous to it and its parallel construction with Genesis 3:16.

So what are we to make of sin lying down at the door? I see two possibilities. One: Sin is some sort of wild animal that lies in wait to pounce on Cain. Two: Sin is being problematized as a bride. [This came out of thin air to me.] In Ruth 3, Ruth lies down at the feet of Boaz in a way particularly prescribed by Naomi. My Oxford Study Bible claims the interactions of Ruth and Boaz here are a reflection of traditional marriage customs. Hence, could we imagine sin as a potential bride lying at the door of Cain's tent, since presumably no desert nomad would sleep with their "back" to the door. Hence, sin is waiting at Cain's door for Cain to extend his protection over sin like Boaz or any groom of that culture and era would spread his robes over his bride, thus signifying his protection.

I don't think we can decide between these possibilities on the basis of 4:6-7 alone, but I suspect that the parallel between 3:16 and 4:6-7 is founded on the idea in 4:7 that sin is a potential bride of Cain. And thus by doing evil, he and any other human being marries sin and places it under his protection. Moreover, if this marriage imagery is correct, the sinner and sin become one flesh. But theoretically, man chooses this union by his own ordinance. We continue in sin by the self-willed ordinance of our ancestors in which we likewise participate. Thus what man hath joined together, God could put asunder.

This is unlikely to be Paul's inspiration for Romans 7:1-6. But if sin enters into a marital union with us, it does explain the general intimacy of corruptibility within us, not merely in what we generally call "sins of the flesh" but those things that Paul calls the "works of the flesh." Yet in this exegesis, our marriage to sin is a free contract we make. It is not some heritable stain or infirmity at birth, yet we possess some vulnerability to it. The pairing of human being and sin is nearly as primal as between male and female. To use Catholic language, original sin in this exegesis might consist in man being "valid matter" for sin after the Fall. And yet this vulnerability stems somehow from that apple, which gave us knowledge of good and evil.

But we must beware constructing anything out of the exegesis of a few problematic verses. However, I think this little exercise certainly has provided interesting insight for me about Genesis' account of the origin of sin. Yet I would love to hear any other ideas for exegesis of this passage.

Until next time, the Holy Brothers pray that sin may be divorced from your bed and board and that at the Last Day you shall put on the fullness of incorruptibility, thus depriving sin of the object of its lust.