I think an implication of God cursing woman with a desire to dominate her husband is the fact that God would be “effectively causing” women to sin. Of course, we know that the fall did mess up a lot of things including the relationship between husbands and wives. But what we must be careful not to do is to read into this curse something that isn’t there. God cannot tempt anyone with evil. He cannot sin and will not effectively cause anyone to sin. Christ died on the cross in order to cleanse people from their sin. If God effectively caused Eve to have a new desire, then He would be culpable for that sin and, therefore, women could have an excuse for their sin. 

I remember the first time I heard someone explain Genesis 3:16. It was in a seminar on marriage. Their view of this passage which is popular in conservative circles was simple, Eve, as a result of God’s curse would have pain in child-bearing and that she would want to usurp her husband’s authority and dominate the relationship. Therefore, the man concluded marriages struggle because of what we see in Genesis 3:16. While I agreed that marriages struggle because of sin, I didn’t see that as a result of the curse in Genesis 3:16.

While commentators agree that God has cursed women with pain in childbearing, there is trouble and disagreement over the words of explanation that follow the curse. Perhaps the most common view of this verse, in my circles, has been that a wife will have a desire to dominate her husband. Recently, Crossway has decided to add this interpretation to their new update of the ESV, and they have decided to change the text from, “Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you,” to “Your desire shall be contrary to your husband, but he shall rule over you.”

Despite the fact that the interpretation of this verse is a pet peeve of mine I completely grant that this is a minor issue and one that people can disagree with (although I do believe that adding interpretation to a Bible translation can be a big problem).

As I’ve heard this verse explained I have found that Dr. Busenitz at the Master’s Seminary has given a very compelling interpretation of this passage.

I believe that God is simply saying that, despite the fact that the wife will have pain in childbearing, she will still desire to have intimacy with her husband and this will, of course, result in having children with him. Therefore, despite the temptation she will face in avoiding the curse by not having children, God is saying that her desire for intimacy will supersede her desire to avoid pain in childbearing. Simply put, there is no connotation of domination in the word “desire” and it is definitely not implied in the text.

Of course, we know that many marriages have been in shambles ever since that fateful day, but I do not think that God cursed woman with this, and I have four important reasons why.

1. Genesis 4:7 is Figurative

Genesis 4:7 records God’s conversation with Cain right before he is about to kill his brother, Abel. In it, he says the famous line, “…sin is crouching at the door, and its desire is for you, but you must master it.”

This is the second occasion where this Hebrew word is used. There are only three occurrences in all of Scripture.

Over the years, it was determined that because of the proximity with Genesis 3:16, that this use of the word desire is of a similar nature. Therefore, since sin’s desire is to dominate Cain, or any human being, therefore God curses Eve with the desire to dominate her husband.

The Bible does talk about sin’s incredible power and its effect on people. One could insinuate that since the Devil is like a lion, therefore, sin is as well— and its desire is to take over someone and make that person its slave. But that does not mean that the word desire is in it and of itself a negative one. In other words, desire is a neutral word that becomes negative if the thing you desire, or the one desiring you, is sinful. If I desire a house for my family to live in, it’s ok, but if I desire your house for my family to live in, it’s not. Same goes with this word if sin wants me. then it’s going to be bad for me; therefore, I must resist it.  But, if it is my wife who wants me, then that’s a good thing that is blessed by God, and I’d be a fool to resist that.

2. Song of Solomon 7:10

This passage has the third and last use of the word that we find in Genesis 3:16. “I am my beloved’s, and his desire is for me.” It’s pretty obvious what the word means here when you look at the context. There is no connotation of domination, and there is nothing that would show this to be negative in any way. In fact, this is a positive.

Read More