 |
Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > (No Subject)
| Forum Quick Jump
|
 | 
JEE
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2004
Total Posts : 1466
| Posted 11/4/2004 8:38 AM (GMT -6) |   | quote:
Originally posted by lock
quote:
Gen. 4:7 God tells Cain, "And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door; and its desire is for you, but you must master it."
I have read this translation of Gen 4:7 in many posts. What bible or in who's translation is it found?
Not sure precisely which translation that is from, but it would seem that the overwhelming majority of scholars would agree with the translation, "you must master it."
Here's a few:
Gen 4:6 Then the LORD said to Cain, "Why are you angry? And why has your countenance fallen?
7 "If you do well, will not {your countenance} be lifted up? And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door; and its desire is for you, but you must master it." NASB
6 The LORD said to Cain, ‘Why are you angry, and why has your countenance fallen? 7If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin is lurking at the door; its desire is for you, but you must master it.’ NRSV
6"Why are you so angry?" the LORD asked him. "Why do you look so dejected? 7You will be accepted if you respond in the right way. But if you refuse to respond correctly, then watch out! Sin is waiting to attack and destroy you, and you must subdue it." NLT
6 Then the LORD said to Cain, "Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? 7 If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must master it." NIV
6 GOD spoke to Cain: "Why this tantrum? Why the sulking? 7If you do well, won't you be accepted? And if you don't do well, sin is lying in wait for you, ready to pounce; it's out to get you, you've got to master it." (The Message)
6And the Lord said to Cain, Why are you angry? And why do you look sad and depressed and dejected?
7If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin crouches at your door; its desire is for you, but you must master it. (The Amplified Bible)
6Then the Lord said to Cain, "Why are you angry? And why are you looking down? 7Will not your face be happy if you do well? If you do not do well, sin is waiting to destroy you. Its desire is to rule over you, but you must rule over it." (New Life Version)
6 Then the LORD said to Cain, "Why are you furious? And why are you downcast? 7 If you do right, won't you be accepted? But if you do not do right, sin is crouching at the door. Its desire is for you, but you must master it. (Holman Christian Standard Bible)
6The LORD said to Cain, "Why are you angry, and why has your face fallen? 7If 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." (English Standard Version)
6 Then the Lord said to Cain, "Why are you angry? Why are you looking so sad?
7 Do what is right. Then you will be accepted. If you don't do what is right, sin is waiting at your door to grab you. It longs to have you. But you must rule over it." (NIRV)
http://revivaltheology.net | | Back to Top | | |
|
JEE
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2004
Total Posts : 1466
| Posted 11/4/2004 10:35 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by lock
quote:
Originally posted by JEE
[quote]Originally posted by lock
I noticed that some say rule over it and others master it, do you consider these to mean the same? Also, do you believe God is telling Cain that he is able (no pun intended) to do this, master sin?
"Rule over" and "master" convey the same basic sense to me. I certainly don't think God stuttered when He said this. It is rather obvious that God is telling Cain he must not give in to this temptation to hate his brother.
John
[/quote]
So by context, this refers to only this particular sin of Cain hating his brother Able?
As God speaks of sin in a personalized way (some commentators say it conveys the sense of a crouching predator-like demon ready to pounce), it would not make sense for God to say essentially, "You know, Cain, you can't help but sin in some way, but in this instance, when your temper is flaring, you can master this temptation if you will."
If such a sin of passion could be resisted (according to God's gracious admonition to Cain), then any other sin could be resisted, with the help of God's grace, too. The basic thrust of this verse is supported throughout Scripture, in the theme of blessing for obedience/faith and cursing for disobedience/unbelief.
John
http://revivaltheology.net | | Back to Top | | |
|
lock
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2004
Total Posts : 701
| Posted 11/4/2004 10:50 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
If such a sin of passion could be resisted (according to God's gracious admonition to Cain), then any other sin could be resisted, with the help of God's grace, too. The basic thrust of this verse is supported throughout Scripture, in the theme of blessing for obedience/faith and cursing for disobedience/unbelief.
So judging by this one statement in Gensis 4:7, which is only agreed on by modern scholars and contradicts with how earlier scholars translate the same verse, we are to assume that we are able to master any type of sin? I do not see the thrust of how this verse is interpreted supported throughout scripture, but instead the opposite. I see many OVer's using this one statement in Gen. 4:7 to interpret the rest of scripture.
His achievement are we, being created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God makes ready beforehand, that we should be walking in them. | | Back to Top | | |
|
JEE
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2004
Total Posts : 1466
| Posted 11/4/2004 10:58 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by lock
quote:
If such a sin of passion could be resisted (according to God's gracious admonition to Cain), then any other sin could be resisted, with the help of God's grace, too. The basic thrust of this verse is supported throughout Scripture, in the theme of blessing for obedience/faith and cursing for disobedience/unbelief.
So judging by this one statement in Gensis 4:7, which is only agreed on by modern scholars and contradicts with how earlier scholars translate the same verse, we are to assume that we are able to master any type of sin?
Why would we not be able to? What if Cain were instead facing a temptation to rape one of his sisters? Why couldn't he be able to resist?
Here's how the NET Bible renders it:
4:6 Then the Lord said to Cain, "Why are you angry, and why is your expression downcast? 4:7 Is it not true1 that if you do what is right, you will be fine?2 But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching3 at the door. It desires to dominate you, but you must suppress it."4
(footnote for "suppress it" ) :
4 tn Heb "and toward you [is] its desire, but you must rule over it." As in Gen 3:16, the Hebrew noun "desire" refers to an urge to control or dominate. Here the desire is that which sin has for Cain, a desire to control for the sake of evil; but Cain must have mastery over it. The imperfect is understood as having an obligatory sense. Another option is to understand it as expressing potential ("you can have [or "are capable of having"] mastery over it."). It will be a struggle, but sin can be defeated by righteousness. In addition to this connection to Gen 3, other linguistic and thematic links between chaps. 3 and 4 are discussed by A. J. Hauser, "Linguistic and Thematic Links Between Genesis 4:1-6 and Genesis 2-3, " JETS 23 (1980): 297-306.
As is clear on their website these scholars are definitely NOT Open Theists.
quote:
I do not see the thrust of how this verse is interpreted supported throughout scripture, but instead the opposite. I see many OVer's using this one statement in Gen. 4:7 to interpret the rest of scripture.
I obviously can't speak for anyone but myself, but it is certainly not the case that I take this one statement and interpret the rest of Scripture by it. Moses' second giving of the Law near the end of his life in Deuteronomy 30 says essentially the same thing as Gen 4:7. So does the first chapter of Joshua. The command to obey (and not disobey) is the very fabric of the OT prophetic writings.
Time would fail if I were to try to list all the "if you obey, then I will bless you" passages in Scripture. I trust you are sufficiently aware of them to at least acknowledge their presence, even if you deny their import.
Sincerely,
John
http://revivaltheology.net | | Back to Top | | |
|
lock
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2004
Total Posts : 701
| Posted 11/4/2004 4:20 PM (GMT -6) | | John-
Here are a few things to consider when translating Gen 4:7.
1. God is speaking to Cain about his sacrifice, not his anger, "If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted?" Compare v. 5.
2. "sin" is chata which is feminine, whereas "lieth" (rabats) is masciline, meaning that it cannot be "sin" which is "lying" at the door.
3.Rabats (which you point out the NET translates as "crouching") is not crouching ready to attack, but instead lying down or reclining. Here are a few verses with rabats from the NASB...
Gen 29:2 He looked, and saw a well in the field, and behold, three flocks of sheep were lying there beside it, for from that well they watered the flocks. Now the stone on the mouth of the well was large.
Gen 49:25 From the God of your father who helps you, And by the Almighty who blesses you {With} blessings of heaven above, Blessings of the deep that lies beneath, Blessings of the breasts and of the womb.
Exd 23:5 "If you see the donkey of one who hates you lying {helpless} under its load, you shall refrain from leaving it to him, you shall surely release {it} with him.
Deu 29:20 "The LORD shall never be willing to forgive him, but rather the anger of the LORD and His jealousy will burn against that man, and every curse which is written in this book will rest on him, and the LORD will blot out his name from under heaven.
Isa 13:21 But desert creatures will lie down there, And their houses will be full of owls; Ostriches also will live there, and shaggy goats will frolic there.
Even this last verse which speaks of wild animals which may crouch to attack, but instead it is crouch to lie down and also note Ex. 23:5 adds "helpless" to lying down.
When it comes to correctly translating Gen 4:7, I am going to side with Bullinger and Young and others who translate chata as "sin offering". What was crouching at the door was a suitable sacrafice, which we learn from verse 4 and Abel's example, was a MALE firstling, which corrensponds with rabats (#2 above). Just as is in the grand type of Christ, God here provided for Cain a suitable sacrifice which would have restored Cain. It is only through blatant mistranslation that one can conclude that this verse (Gen. 4:7) is God teaching us through Cain's example, that we can "master" sin.
His achievement are we, being created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God makes ready beforehand, that we should be walking in them. | | Back to Top | | |
|
JEE
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2004
Total Posts : 1466
| Posted 11/4/2004 5:28 PM (GMT -6) | | Originally posted by lock
quote:
John-
Explain to me how Young's translation is universalistic...
Gen 4:7 Is there not, if thou dost well, acceptance? and if thou dost not well, at the opening a sin-offering is crouching, and unto thee its desire, and thou rulest over it.'
It is not universalistic, though it is certainly obscure and not nearly as comprehensible as the majority of versions which reflect up-to-date evangelical scholarship. Even if we take "sin" in this verse as a "a sin offering," the fact that God tells Cain he will be accepted if he does right and will be rejected if he does not is still present, even in Young's awkward rendering.
quote:
My belief as to whether or not man can "master" sin has little to do with what I believe is the ultimate outcome of the universe. There are those who believe man can master sin along with universal reconciliation. The clear facts I presented above were not my own, but are the product of studying what the "scholars" say concerning the translation of Gen 4:7.
The observable fact that you are totally dismissive of any scholars who might differ with your treasured "man is unable to do right" doctrine, as well as any recent scholarship, gives pause to me. From what I have seen, your steadfast belief in man's moral inability works right in tandem with your other steadfast belief in universalism, probably due to the fact that your own conscience affirms the slanderous implications of God commanding man, on pain of Hell, to avoid that which He knows full well man can't possibly avoid.
John
http://revivaltheology.net | | Back to Top | | |
|
lock
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2004
Total Posts : 701
| Posted 11/5/2004 3:05 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Even if we take "sin" in this verse as a "a sin offering," the fact that God tells Cain he will be accepted if he does right and will be rejected if he does not is still present, even in Young's awkward rendering.
Judging by the context of the section involved, acceptance and rejection is based upon the offerings given in verse 3 and 4, not sin waiting to happen.
quote:
The observable fact that you are totally dismissive of any scholars who might differ with your treasured "man is unable to do right" doctrine, as well as any recent scholarship, gives pause to me.
Now you are being unfair. I should change my statement to it is hard for you to let go of the preconceptions you hold concerning MY belief. Whether or not I side with a bible scholar does is not based on his or my beliefs, but the facts. Plus, you don't give full credit to my belief in that a person lead by the flesh is unable to please God. A person is able to do good. God's law is written in his/her conscience. There are many non-believers who do many good things for society. But unless saved and lead by the spirit, a person cannot meet the requirements for God's glory, but fall short.
quote:
From what I have seen, your steadfast belief in man's moral inability works right in tandem with your other steadfast belief in universalism, probably due to the fact that your own conscience affirms the slanderous implications of God commanding man, on pain of Hell, to avoid that which He knows full well man can't possibly avoid.
It is clear that you disagree with facts presented because my beliefs do not line up with yours.
His achievement are we, being created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God makes ready beforehand, that we should be walking in them. | | Back to Top | | |
|
Armchair Theologian
Registered Member
Date Joined May 2004
Total Posts : 43
| Posted 11/5/2004 4:35 AM (GMT -6) | | What do real Hebrews say about the Hebrew language of Genesis 4:7?
http://www.uscj.org/Bereshit_57646247.html
quote:
The Rabbis taught in a beraita “you shall place (‘v’sam-tem’) these words on your heart” read as ‘sam-tam,’ a perfect elixir. Torah is compared to a life-giving elixir. An analogy can be drawn to a man that dealt his son a great blow and then places a bandage upon his wound saying to him: ‘My son, so long as this bandage remains on your wound, you may eat whatever you desire, drink whatever you desire, and bathe in hot or cold water, and you need not fear that any harm will come to you by these actions. But if you remove this bandage, your wound will surely fester. So too has the Holy Blessed One said to Israel, ‘my children, I have created the evil inclination and I have created Torah as its antidote. If you involve yourselves in Torah, you will not be delivered into its hand, as it says in Genesis 4:7, “certainly if you correct yourself, you will prevail.” But if you do not involve yourselves in Torah, you will be delivered into its hand, as it says in Genesis 4:7, “it rests at the door.” And what is more, all the pursuits of the evil inclination concern you, as it says there, “and you are its desire.” But if you wish, you can master the evil inclination, as it says there, “but you can conquer it.” Talmud Kiddushin 30b
http://tiwestport.org/torah/5765/bereshit.html
quote:
Cain, the proud first born, is devastated by this. Perhaps this is the first time that he has faced a rebuke. God attempts to use this to teach him a lesson - a lesson about human beings in general and how they should conduct themselves. God tells him that "sin couches at the door. Its urge is toward you yet you can be its master" (Genesis 4:7). Temptation is an integral part of human nature but it can be overcome.
http://www.gatherthepeople.org/Downloads/SD01BERESHIT.pdf
quote:
If you do good, shall it not be lifted up?And if you do not do good, sin reposes at the door;and to you is its desire, but you may rule over it.
These Jewish teachers of the Torah may actually know Hebrew. 
Job 1:8 The LORD said to Satan, "Have you considered My servant Job? For there is no one like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man, fearing God and turning away from evil."
Luke 1:
5 In the days of Herod, king of Judea, there was a priest named Zacharias, of the division of Abijah; and he had a wife from the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth.
6 They were both righteous in the sight of God, walking blamelessly in all the commandments and requirements of the Lord.
James 2
25 In the same way, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way?
"The LORD said to her,
'Two nations are in your womb; And two peoples will be separated from your body'" | | Back to Top | | |
|
Armchair Theologian
Registered Member
Date Joined May 2004
Total Posts : 43
| Posted 11/5/2004 8:01 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by lock
It does not surprise me that this teaching is found in the teachings of Jewish Rabbis'.
What you're saying is, they don't bring your presuppositions to scripture.
The point is, they know Hebrew, you don't.
If someone who knows Hebrew translates a passage different than you, then probably your presuppositions are wrong.
Luke 1:
5 In the days of Herod, king of Judea, there was a priest named Zacharias, of the division of Abijah; and he had a wife from the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth.
6 They were both righteous in the sight of God, walking blamelessly in all the commandments and requirements of the Lord.
James 2
25 In the same way, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way?
Jesus also, was justified by keeping the Law.
"The LORD said to her,
'Two nations are in your womb; And two peoples will be separated from your body'" | | Back to Top | | |
|
Armchair Theologian
Registered Member
Date Joined May 2004
Total Posts : 43
| Posted 11/5/2004 8:22 AM (GMT -6) | | Let me get this straight, 99.99999999999999% of Christian bible translators AND Jewish Hebrew experts translate Genesis 4:7 one way,
gym teacher lock, sitting at home with a dictionary, translates it a different way.
hmmmmm....
Even Bullinger lets you down on this one
quote:
Bullinger cites Genesis 4:7 (“Sin crouches at the door”) as an example of personification. Although the verb rabats, “to couch,” may signify human activity, it more frequently is used of animals, especially of lions, ready to pounce. Moreover, the figure should also be interpreted in light of the command to mankind to have dominion over the animals. If so, then God is commanding Cain to rule over sin which threatens him like a lion. If this interpretation is right, the figure employed is a zoomorphism.
http://www.christianleadershipcenter.org/616/fospeech.htm
"The LORD said to her,
'Two nations are in your womb; And two peoples will be separated from your body'" | | Back to Top | | |
|
Armchair Theologian
Registered Member
Date Joined May 2004
Total Posts : 43
| Posted 11/5/2004 4:44 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by lock
As the author cites, Bullinger classifies this under personification. The author goes to explain how it is zoomorphism. What you have attributed to Bullinger is really what the author is writing, not Bullinger.
He's quoting Bullinger, in red.
quote:
Bullinger cites Genesis 4:7 (“Sin crouches at the door”) as an example of personification. Although the verb rabats, “to couch,” may signify human activity, it more frequently is used of animals, especially of lions, ready to pounce. Moreover, the figure should also be interpreted in light of the command to mankind to have dominion over the animals. If so, then God is commanding Cain to rule over sin which threatens him like a lion. If this interpretation is right, the figure employed is a zoomorphism.
That's what the " and " mean.
Now, sin zoomorphised as a crouching lion, ready to pounce, makes sense for "it desires/threatens you" AND "you must rule over it".
But a sin-offering (he'd already presented his offering but with the wrong attitude) crouching at the door as a lion threatening Cain and he must master it, doesn't make sense.
It wasn't their offerings, it was their attitudes.
Hebrews 11:4 By faith Abel offered to God a better sacrifice than Cain, through which he obtained the testimony that he was righteous, God testifying about his gifts, and through faith, though he is dead, he still speaks.
It was Abel's faith that made it a better sacrifice.
1 John 3:12 not as Cain, who was of the evil one and slew his brother. And for what reason did he slay him? Because his deeds were evil, and his brother's were righteous.
Cain didn't need another sin-offering, he needed another attitude.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Genesis 4:7 "If you do well, will not your countenance be lifted up? And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door; and its desire is for you, but you must master it."
let's diagram this:
If you do well --> your countenance will be lifted up
If you do NOT do well --> ?
If you do NOT do well, a sin-offering is crouching at the door (as a lion) desiring you? LOL
NO, if you do NOT do well, sin is crouching at the door (as a lion), desiring you.
"If you do NOT do well" needs a negative, a contrary.
("do well" and "do NOT do well" are contraries)
Otherwise, you have
"If you do well" --> good things happen
"If you do not do well" --> good things happen
Are you saying that, if you give an offering with a BAD attitude, God will provide a good enough offering instead, to go along with your BAD attitude, but if you bring an offering with a GOOD attitude ("by faith") as Abel did, God doesn't have to provide an offering?
God's more interested in the merchandise? Doesn't make sense.
Of course you're entitled to your own ideas but they aren't supported by any kind of coherent thought that I (and others) can see.
"The LORD said to her,
'Two nations are in your womb; And two peoples will be separated from your body'" | | Back to Top | | |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 11:55 AM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|