Mark

Now what about Cheryl’s assumption that Eve left the garden (so not banished) because of Gen 3:16. The verse said this
Gen 3:16 To the woman he said, “I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children. Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you.”

And Cheryl therefore believes that Eve left because of her desire for him. I will show that this is a wrong assumption and does not fit with what the verse means.

1. First of all, we need to remember that this verse is within the corpus of punishment and curse. Therefore to assume that anything in these verses is ‘positive’ neglects the context. I say this to comps as well, since some believe that this verse is a remedy to the fall (that the husband shall rule over wives). This is wrong. This is a judgment on Eve and Adam therefore nothing here should be considered positive. Eve’s desire is not positive, nor is the husbands rule.
2. The above translation does not correctly translate the ‘ ‘el’ or ‘for’ your husband. It is true that the preposition here could translate as ‘for’ or ‘to’ but I think the best translation which fits the context should be ‘against’. Therefore the text should read “your desire shall be against your husband.”
   The reason I believe this is simple. There are only 2 occurrences of this precise construction, that is ‘desire’ (teshuqah) with ‘’el’ as well as with the rest of the verse with the ‘rule’ of husband. The other construction is found very near by in chapter 4. Let me put the 2 side by side
   Gen 3:16 To the woman he said, “I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children. Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you.”
   Gen 4:7 If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door. Its desire is for you, but you must rule over it.”

In Gen 4, God is saying to Cain that sin is crouching at the door, and then we come to the important construction “its ‘desire (teshuqah) is ‘for’ (‘el) you, and you must ‘rule’ over it. It is non negotiable here that the desire is a negative thing since it is sin. For Cain, sins desire is against him (as it is all of us), but Cain must rule over it.

Therefore the preposition in 3:16 would be better translated as against (which is of course one of its many meanings) since the intention is the same. Eve’s desire will be against her husband (namely trying to dominate him) but he will rule (lord over negatively) her. Since again the context is in the middle of punishment this is the intended meaning of the verse. With sin, Adam and Eve’s relationship is destroyed. She will try to usurp his authority and he will lord it over her. It is a complete corruption of the original design.

Again Cheryl’s view conflicts with mainstream egalitarianism. Richard Hass agrees on this particular meaning for verse 16- quote “Susan Foh suggests that woman’s desire here is not a sexual desire but a desire to dominate, just as sin has a ‘desire’ to ‘rule over’ Cain (Gen 4:7). Applying the basic hermeneutical principle of translating an expression in one context by the same expression in a nearby and related context…Foh seems to have gotten it right…” (pg 92 Discovering Biblical Equality). It is not good enough for Cheryl to use 3:16 as her proof text for why Eve left the garden. In fact it has nothing to do with the sort. Verse 16 is a punishment and prophecy of the woman. Rather than a perfect relationship, she will now desire against her husband- to dominate him.

Summary
Therefore we must conclude that Eve leaving the garden was not simply because her desire was for Adam, and Cheryl’s proof text must be disregarded as bad exegesis. There is no reason to deduce this as the reason why Eve was no longer in the garden. Therefore we now have to conclusions.
1. Eve was a guilty sinner
2. Eve desire was against her husband not for him (negative context remember)