- RSS FeedSubscribe
- « Previous PostA La Carte (5/16)
- Next Post »LeechBlock Changed My Life
Her Desire, His Rule
- 05/16/11
- 13
Last week I took a brief look at the first part of Genesis 3:16, a verse which describes the consequence of the woman’s role in the fall into sin. In the first part of God’s judgment on the woman he declared that bearing children would now be painful and traumatic. Her primary life function would be full of toil. Today I want to look at the second part of that judgment where God says "Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you." Here God declares that the woman’s primary relationship—the relationship to her husband—would also be disrupted. The marriage relationship, the relationship that was to be central in family, in culture, in church--the very building-block relationship of human beings, would suffer the effects of the Fall. There are two things of importance here: first, what it means that a woman's desire shall be for her husband, and second, what it means that he shall rule over her.
Her Desire
First let's look at what it means that a woman's desire shall be for her husband. "Your desire shall be for your husband." What is this desire? Some have taught that this is a kind of sexual desire, that part of the consequence for a woman's sin is that she would have a sexual desire for her husband or a kind of abnormal sexual desire for him. These people look to Song of Solomon where this word desire is used; there the woman says, "I am my beloved's, and his desire is for me." That does speak of a kind of longing, a kind of sexual desire. But this hardly sounds like a consequence for sin. Quite the opposite is true. A woman who feels sexual desire for her husband is blessed by God. This is a good desire, a desire a woman should long to have. So what else can it mean?
This is a case where we can follow one of those great principles of interpreting the Bible and simply let a more clear passage help us interpret a less clear passage. When Moses wrote Genesis he gave us a very helpful way to understand what is meant by the woman's desire. We need only look to Genesis 4:6-7. Here Cain has had his offering rejected by God while his brother Abel has had his offering accepted by God. Cain is furious; his whole countenance has changed. Jealousy and murder are rising up in his heart. The Lord comes to Cain and gives him a rebuke, a kind warning. He says, "Why are you angry, and why has your face fallen? 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." Here is that same word--desire.
In this verse sin is described in animal terms--like a lion or tiger hiding by a door. You open the door, and there it is, coiled and ready to pounce. Or maybe the author wants us to think about a snake here, a serpent like the devil. The moment that door is opened, Wham!, Sin pounces all over you. Sin wants to dominate and destroy you. It is out to get you by dominating you.
Keeping that in mind, we can go back to Genesis 3 where God tells the woman, "Your desire shall be for your husband." What we see is that God is not referring to a good sexual desire, but about that bad, sinful desire, just like in his warning to Cain. A woman's desire shall be to dominate her husband just like sin seeks to dominate all of us. In place of the family structure God calls us to, with a husband lovingly leading his wife and the wife joyfully submitting to his leadership, there would now be a power struggle, a struggle to dominate.
A woman's desire for her husband shall be a desire to push him out of his place of leadership. It should not be lost on us that this is exactly what happened when man fell--the woman was led by a creature and the man was led by his wife. The whole God-ordained leadership structure was reversed. And that is how it continues today. A wife struggles to submit to her husband. The ESV puts a little note in the text explaining that the word for could also be translated against. The woman's desire shall now be against her husband--against his God-given position of leadership and authority. Her heart will rebel against what God has said is good. The woman will engage a lifelong battle against this sin. It's part of her sinful nature.
And this is true today, isn't it? God created something good, something perfect, when he created the marriage relationship, when he said that Adam was to lead his wife and that she was to joyfully follow him. And yet every wife can testify to the struggle it is to submit to her husband's leadership. Of course in a perfect world it should have been perfectly easy. But in this world a wife's submission means that she must sinlessly submit to a sinful man. That is a difficult thing to do. But it is exactly what God calls her to.
His Rule
The husband, too, will be prone to sin. The text says, "Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you." The loving leadership of the husband will be replaced with a desire to rule, to master, to exercise a kind of lordship. This is not the kind of leadership that places the wife's concerns on the front burner or that seeks her good above his own. Instead, it is the kind of leadership that dominates, that squelches, that cares foremost about self. While the wife seeks to usurp the man's position, he will love himself more than he loves his wife. He will make it very difficult for her to submit to him. Not all the time; man will still love his wife in a genuine way. But sin will be crouching outside his door, too, seeking to overtake him.
This is something for men to take note of: In your sinful state you are prone to lead your wife badly, to dominate her, to treat her poorly, to treat her like a slave instead of a wife. Even while you love her you will sin against her. In fact, you will sin against your wife more than against any other person.
No longer co-equals, no longer different in function but equal in value and worth, God’s judgment foretold that a husband and wife would now battle one another for control. The wife would consider herself more valuable than the husband who would consider himself more important than the wife. This was the consequence of their sin. The woman's lot would be one of suffering. Amidst all the joys of marriage and family there would be the pain of bearing children and the pain of an imperfect, sin-marred marriage.
Here is life after the Fall--womanhood and motherhood after the Fall. Here is the consequence for the woman's sin. Her life which had been perfect and perfectly easy would now be marred by pain. Instead of having trouble-free and pain-free pregnancies, bearing children and raising them would be traumatic. Instead of being her husband's helper she would now be prone to being his nemesis. Instead of leading his wife, a man would dominate her.

I am a follower of Jesus Christ, a husband to Aileen and a father to three young children. I worship and serve as a pastor at
Releasing on April 1, The Next
Comments (13)
That’s make sense. Makes you really see how the sin and root of divorce was planted in the beginning. Naturally we are subject to that strife between wife and husband, makes me praise God that much more for setting my wife and I free from that bondage.
It’s a reflexive statement. It turns back on itself. In other words, “your (woman’s) desire will be to rule over him, but he’ll have the rule over you.”
Or, “sin’s desire is to rule over you, but you must rule over sin.”
While we surely still battle with this consequence/curse from the Fall, and it is good to point it out and identify our struggles, let’s not forget the gospel now gives us the power to serve in our roles the way God intended. Christ is the perfect leader, laying down His very life for His bride (the church). He also perfectly submits to His Father’s rule. Likewise, by His saving grace and the power of His Holy Spirit, we can reflect the gospel by following the One who perfectly fulfilled our roles. I think this is what Paul was getting at in the 1 Timothy verse that was brought up in the last article.
It’s beautiful to see how, in conversion to Christ, God is now remaking both husband and wife to function, by grace, according to His original design. Ephesians 5:22-33 is the remedy to the Genesis 3:16 problem. In Christ, and the power of the Spirit, the wife may now learn to joyfully submit to her husband and the husband may now learn to love his wife as Christ loves the church. Lord, help us each to walk by Your empowering grace each day so that the world may see the love of Christ through our marriages!
Great pair of posts, Tim - thank you.
I’d be interested in your thoughts on an alternative interpretation of the second part - the “he will rule over you” bit. I had always understood it the way you have explained, but I have recently been weighing the merits of another option: that God is simply announcing to the woman that her sinful desire and machinations will ultimately not succeed.
That is, God’s original design was for the man to rule/govern in the context of the family - “rule” in the good, kind, responsible and “for their best” sense. From a quick scan, the verb used here has no inherent negative connotation (it first appears in 1:18 to describe the God-given function of the “lights” in the sky to rule over the day and the night). Woman will, in a fallen world, try to overturn this divine order; but it will be in vain: man — perhaps simply by virtue of his superior physical strength — will continue to rule. (In the context, this does not necessarily imply a good rule, but neither does it imply a bad one: it simply states the fact.) God’s order wins.
This perhaps fits with the curses on the other parties, too: The serpent tried to wrest control, but is condemned to be the lowest of the low, and destined to be defeated eventually by the woman’s “seed”. The man will continue to subdue the earth, but it will be hard and painful toil.
Having suggested this alternative, the importance of what you said in your second part doesn’t diminish one iota (and is amply supported by the whole of Scripture). Men need to hear Eph. 5:25-33, not take it on themselves to apply Eph. 5:22-24 to their wives.
Interested in your thoughts.
Tim, I would like to encourage at least the consideration that “desire” in Gen 3:16 and Gen 4:7 does not mean and should not be taken in the negative way as normally presented today. Calvin’s Commentary goes into great detail on both of these verses to explain the proper role of the wife looking to the Husband for leadership as indicated in Gen 3:16 (nothing sexual) and that the right of primogeniture is in view in Gen 4:7 (Abel’s role with Cain.) That rather than a curse upon marriage God is clarifying and affirming the roles intended between husband and wife. What was joyful pre-fall is now affirmed by command. The same could be said of Cain and Abel in that if Cain does right, Abel is in the proper position of second born.
This understanding of teshuquah, desire, is supported by Calvin, Matthew Henry, Gill, Geneva Bible Notes and others. But I don’t see it in the more modern commentaries.
For further explanation and to read Calvin on this see:
http://taste-that-which-is-good.blogspot.com/2010/01/geneva-bible-desire…
When I saw the topic of the post I read it with curiosity to see where you land. Thanks for your treatment of what has since the Feminist movement become a popular view. I agree with Scott D. Andersen that I don’t think it has been the historic view, nor, I would add, do the Scriptures require such a view.
Personally I am more of the persuasion that “desire” simply means a “longing to be with” - which can be clearly negative as in Gen 4 (sin wanting to be with Cain in order to destroy) or clearly positive in SoS 7:10 (husband’s desire to be with his wife in order to please her). It is true that Gen 4 is contextually closer to Gen 3, but Gen 3 still needs to be taken in its own context to determine if this desire is positive or negative. I see a correlation between “you desire shall be for you husband” (v16) and “you shall eat the plants of the field” (v18) as God ending each curse with a preserving statement in spite of the curse. Something like: “Woman, you will experience pain in childbirth, but still experience the environment of wanting to be with your husband and experience his care” and “Man, you will experience hardship in survival, but still experience the blessing of living off the provision of the land.”
It remains an interesting study. Although I certainly agree with the observation of our current culture, I would still hesitate to add it as part of the specific curse on the woman. Since the Fall a reversal of roles in all levels of society have become the norm rather than the exception. It is, however, not something imposed by God specifically on the woman as part of the curse.
God bless your work!
Thanks Tim. Such a clear explanation of a passage that is often dealt with in a much less careful way.
Once again in agreement with you, Tim.
There are so many women that I have spoken with about struggles with their husbands and often the problem is that they (myself included) are desiring their husband to lead in a way he isn’t. Or they desire him to do something that they want and he doesn’t. So sometimes, we women decide we’d just do it better. Or argue the point to death. Which isn’t biblical.
Commentor Paul had it right too. Add I’d add that because of Christ’s death and resurrection, we are no longer in bondage to this sin. We live under the curse, and under sin that seeks to ensnares us. But because of Him we have hope and faith to fight. God didn’t just say here’s what going to happen and let us to wallow in it all. He gives us a means to fight….through His Word, the Holy Spirit, through grace, His Church, through counsel of others, etc.
We don’t deserve such tools to fight. By His mercy and grace, He has supplied.
Thanks for that Aimee. This awesome post as a diagnosis resonates but leaves me hanging and needing to hear presciptive hope: that Christ is perfect submission.
I think the ‘power’ we have lies in an awareness of how sin still battles to have it’s way, that it is constantly raging.
For us, the power of the resurrection is our hope but not fully realized yet.
We can *know* and look forward to resurrection with hope and longing (sometimes in groans). I certainly do not have perfect ‘victory’ over this pull in my marriage. ‘…I myself in my mind am a slave to God’s law, but in my sinful nature a slave to the law of sin.’ Rom 7.
This is our ‘new creation.’ A body of sin combined with a mind and heart awake to God.
It’s interesting that you would write a post on this today when I had just been thinking about this verse and what it means. I find it intriguing, if not a bit disconcerting, that modern evangelicals interpret this differently than historical figures such as John Calvin. I have always read this thinking that it said a wife would desire to have her husband cherish and protect her, but that now because of sin, he would be tempted to dominate and oppress her. Perhaps because I’m a women, I read it that way; whereas men will tend to read it Tim’s way??It’s amazing how many preconceived ideas we can bring to our reading of Scripture, or how modern issues can have the potential to cloud our understanding. Well, I’m just going to have to study this one out.
Great thoughts. I think you can especially see the breakdown in our society of the role of men and women…
Amen! This point was missing in the article.