Genesis 3:1-5

The Temptation and the Fall

3:1 Now ¹  the serpent ²  was more shrewd ³ 

than any of the wild animals ⁴  that the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, “Is it really true that ⁵  God ⁶  said, ‘You must not eat from any tree of the orchard’?” ⁷  3:2 The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat ⁸  of the fruit from the trees of the orchard; 3:3 but concerning the fruit of the tree that is in the middle of the orchard God said, ‘You must not eat from it, and you must not touch it, ⁹  or else you will die.’” ¹⁰  3:4 The serpent said to the woman, “Surely you will not die, ¹¹  3:5 for God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will open ¹²  and you will be like divine beings who know ¹³  good and evil.” ¹⁴ 

Genesis 25:29-34

25:29 Now Jacob cooked some stew, ¹⁵  and when Esau came in from the open fields, he was famished. 25:30 So Esau said to Jacob, “Feed ¹⁶  me some of the red stuff – yes, this red stuff – because I’m starving!” (That is why he was also called ¹⁷  Edom.) ¹⁸ 

25:31 But Jacob replied, “First ¹⁹  sell me your birthright.” 25:32 “Look,” said Esau, “I’m about to die! What use is the birthright to me?” ²⁰  25:33 But Jacob said, “Swear an oath to me now.” ²¹  So Esau ²²  swore an oath to him and sold his birthright ²³  to Jacob.

25:34 Then Jacob gave Esau some bread and lentil stew; Esau ate and drank, then got up and went out. ²⁴  So Esau despised his birthright. ²⁵ 

Exodus 16:3

16:3 The Israelites said to them, “If only we had died ²⁶  by the hand of the Lord in the land of Egypt, when we sat by ²⁷  the pots of meat, when we ate bread to the full, ²⁸  for you have brought us out into this desert to kill ²⁹  this whole assembly with hunger!”

Numbers 11:4-6

Complaints about Food

11:4 ³⁰ Now the mixed multitude ³¹  who were among them craved more desirable foods, ³²  and so the Israelites wept again ³³  and said, “If only we had meat to eat! ³⁴  11:5 We remember ³⁵  the fish we used to eat ³⁶  freely ³⁷  in Egypt, the cucumbers, the melons, the leeks, the onions, and the garlic. 11:6 But now we ³⁸  are dried up, ³⁹  and there is nothing at all before us ⁴⁰  except this manna!”

Psalms 78:17-20

78:17 Yet they continued to sin against him,

and rebelled against the sovereign One ⁴¹  in the desert.

78:18 They willfully challenged God ⁴² 

by asking for food to satisfy their appetite.

78:19 They insulted God, saying, ⁴³ 

“Is God really able to give us food ⁴⁴  in the wilderness?

78:20 Yes, ⁴⁵  he struck a rock and water flowed out,

streams gushed forth.

But can he also give us food?

Will he provide meat for his people?”

Hebrews 12:16

12:16 And see to it that no one becomes ⁴⁶  an immoral or godless person like Esau, who sold his own birthright for a single meal. ⁴⁷ 

[3:1]  ¹ tn The chapter begins with a disjunctive clause (conjunction + subject + predicate) that introduces a new character and a new scene in the story.

[3:1]  ² sn Many theologians identify or associate the serpent with Satan. In this view Satan comes in the disguise of a serpent or speaks through a serpent. This explains the serpent’s capacity to speak. While later passages in the Bible may indicate there was a satanic presence behind the serpent (see, for example, Rev 12:9), the immediate context pictures the serpent as simply one of the animals of the field created by God (see vv. 1, 14). An ancient Jewish interpretation explains the reference to the serpent in a literal manner, attributing the capacity to speak to all the animals in the orchard. This text (Jub. 3:28) states, “On that day [the day the man and woman were expelled from the orchard] the mouth of all the beasts and cattle and birds and whatever walked or moved was stopped from speaking because all of them used to speak to one another with one speech and one language [presumed to be Hebrew, see 12:26].” Josephus, Ant. 1.1.4 (1.41) attributes the serpent’s actions to jealousy. He writes that “the serpent, living in the company of Adam and his wife, grew jealous of the blessings which he supposed were destined for them if they obeyed God’s behests, and, believing that disobedience would bring trouble on them, he maliciously persuaded the woman to taste of the tree of wisdom.”

[3:1]  ³ tn The Hebrew word עָרוּם (’arum) basically means “clever.” This idea then polarizes into the nuances “cunning” (in a negative sense, see Job 5:12; 15:5), and “prudent” in a positive sense (Prov 12:16, 23; 13:16; 14:8, 15, 18; 22:3; 27:12). This same polarization of meaning can be detected in related words derived from the same root (see Exod 21:14; Josh 9:4; 1 Sam 23:22; Job 5:13; Ps 83:3). The negative nuance obviously applies in Gen 3, where the snake attempts to talk the woman into disobeying God by using half-truths and lies.

[3:1]  ⁴ tn Heb “animals of the field.”

[3:1]  ⁵ tn Heb “Indeed that God said.” The beginning of the quotation is elliptical and therefore difficult to translate. One must supply a phrase like “is it true”: “Indeed, [is it true] that God said.”

[3:1]  ⁶ sn God. The serpent does not use the expression “Yahweh God” [Lord God] because there is no covenant relationship involved between God and the serpent. He only speaks of “God.” In the process the serpent draws the woman into his manner of speech so that she too only speaks of “God.”

[3:1]  ⁷ tn Heb “you must not eat from all the tree[s] of the orchard.” After the negated prohibitive verb, מִכֹּל (mikkol, “from all”) has the meaning “from any.” Note the construction in Lev 18:26, where the statement “you must not do from all these abominable things” means “you must not do any of these abominable things.” See Lev 22:25 and Deut 28:14 as well.

[3:2]  ⁸ tn There is a notable change between what the Lord God had said and what the woman says. God said “you may freely eat” (the imperfect with the infinitive absolute, see 2:16), but the woman omits the emphatic infinitive, saying simply “we may eat.” Her words do not reflect the sense of eating to her heart’s content.

[3:3]  ⁹ sn And you must not touch it. The woman adds to God’s prohibition, making it say more than God expressed. G. von Rad observes that it is as though she wanted to set a law for herself by means of this exaggeration (Genesis [OTL], 86).

[3:3]  ¹⁰ tn The Hebrew construction is פֶּן (pen) with the imperfect tense, which conveys a negative purpose: “lest you die” = “in order that you not die.” By stating the warning in this way, the woman omits the emphatic infinitive used by God (“you shall surely die,” see 2:17).

[3:4]  ¹¹ tn The response of the serpent includes the infinitive absolute with a blatant negation equal to saying: “Not – you will surely die” (לֹא מוֹת תִּמֻתען, lo’ mot tÿmutun). The construction makes this emphatic because normally the negative particle precedes the finite verb. The serpent is a liar, denying that there is a penalty for sin (see John 8:44).

[3:5]  ¹² tn Or “you will have understanding.” This obviously refers to the acquisition of the “knowledge of good and evil,” as the next statement makes clear.

[3:5]  ¹³ tn Or perhaps “like God, knowing.” It is unclear how the plural participle translated “knowing” is functioning. On the one hand, יֹדְעֵי (yodÿ’e) could be taken as a substantival participle functioning as a predicative adjective in the sentence. In this case one might translate: “You will be, like God himself, knowers of good and evil.” On the other hand, it could be taken as an attributive adjective modifying אֱלֹהִים (’elohim). In this case אֱלֹהִים has to be taken as a numerical plural referring to “gods,” “divine beings,” for if the one true God were the intended referent, a singular form of the participle would almost certainly appear as a modifier. Following this line of interpretation, one could translate, “You will be like divine beings who know good and evil.” The following context may favor this translation, for in 3:22 God says to an unidentified group, “Look, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil.” It is probable that God is addressing his heavenly court (see the note on the word “make” in 1:26), the members of which can be called “gods” or “divine beings” from the ancient Israelite perspective. (We know some of these beings as messengers or “angels.”) An examination of parallel constructions shows that a predicative understanding (“you will be, like God himself, knowers of good and evil,” cf. NIV, NRSV) is possible, but rare (see Gen 27:23, where “hairy” is predicative, complementing the verb “to be”). The statistical evidence strongly suggests that the participle is attributive, modifying “divine beings” (see Ps 31:12; Isa 1:30; 13:14; 16:2; 29:5; 58:11; Jer 14:9; 20:9; 23:9; 31:12; 48:41; 49:22; Hos 7:11; Amos 4:11). In all of these texts, where a comparative clause and accompanying adjective/participle follow a copulative (“to be”) verb, the adjective/participle is attributive after the noun in the comparative clause.

[3:5]  ¹⁴ sn You will be like divine beings who know good and evil. The serpent raises doubts about the integrity of God. He implies that the only reason for the prohibition was that God was protecting the divine domain. If the man and woman were to eat, they would enter into that domain. The temptation is to overstep divinely established boundaries. (See D. E. Gowan, When Man Becomes God [PTMS], 25.)

[25:29]  ¹⁵ sn Jacob cooked some stew. There are some significant words and wordplays in this story that help clarify the points of the story. The verb “cook” is זִיד (zid), which sounds like the word for “hunter” (צַיִד, tsayid). This is deliberate, for the hunter becomes the hunted in this story. The word זִיד means “to cook, to boil,” but by the sound play with צַיִד it comes to mean “set a trap by cooking.” The usage of the word shows that it can also have the connotation of acting presumptuously (as in boiling over). This too may be a comment on the scene. For further discussion of the rhetorical devices in the Jacob narratives, see J. P. Fokkelman, Narrative Art in Genesis (SSN).

[25:30]  ¹⁶ tn The rare term לָעַט (la’at), translated “feed,” is used in later Hebrew for feeding animals (see Jastrow, 714). If this nuance was attached to the word in the biblical period, then it may depict Esau in a negative light, comparing him to a hungry animal. Famished Esau comes in from the hunt, only to enter the trap. He can only point at the red stew and ask Jacob to feed him.

[25:30]  ¹⁷ tn The verb has no expressed subject and so is given a passive translation.

[25:30]  ¹⁸ sn Esau’s descendants would eventually be called Edom. Edom was the place where they lived, so-named probably because of the reddish nature of the hills. The writer can use the word “red” to describe the stew that Esau gasped for to convey the nature of Esau and his descendants. They were a lusty, passionate, and profane people who lived for the moment. Again, the wordplay is meant to capture the “omen in the nomen.”

[25:31]  ¹⁹ tn Heb “today.”

[25:32]  ²⁰ tn Heb “And what is this to me, a birthright?”

[25:33]  ²¹ tn Heb “Swear to me today.”

[25:33]  ²² tn Heb “and he”; the referent (Esau) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[25:33]  ²³ sn And sold his birthright. There is evidence from Hurrian culture that rights of inheritance were occasionally sold or transferred. Here Esau is portrayed as a profane person who would at the moment rather have a meal than the right to inherit. He will soon forget this trade and seek his father’s blessing in spite of it.

[25:34]  ²⁴ sn The style here is typical of Hebrew narrative; after the tension is resolved with the dialogue, the working out of it is recorded in a rapid sequence of verbs (“gave”; “ate”; “drank”; “got up”; “went out”). See also Gen 3:1-7 for another example.

[25:34]  ²⁵ sn So Esau despised his birthright. This clause, which concludes the episode, is a summary statement which reveals the underlying significance of Esau’s actions. “To despise” means to treat something as worthless or with contempt. Esau’s willingness to sell his birthright was evidence that he considered it to be unimportant.

[16:3]  ²⁶ tn The text reads: מִי־יִתֵּן מוּתֵנוּ (mi-yitten mutenu, “who will give our dying”) meaning “If only we had died.” מוּתֵנוּ is the Qal infinitive construct with the suffix. This is one way that Hebrew expresses the optative with an infinitive construct. See R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 91-92, §547.

[16:3]  ²⁷ tn The form is a Qal infinitive construct used in a temporal clause, and the verb “when we ate” has the same structure.

[16:3]  ²⁸ sn That the complaint leading up to the manna is unjustified can be seen from the record itself. They left Egypt with flocks and herds and very much cattle, and about 45 days later they are complaining that they are without food. Moses reminded them later that they lacked nothing (Deut 3:7; for the whole sermon on this passage, see 8:1-20). Moreover, the complaint is absurd because the food of work gangs was far more meager than they recall. The complaint was really against Moses. They crave the eating of meat and of bread and so God will meet that need; he will send bread from heaven and quail as well.

[16:3]  ²⁹ tn לְהָמִית (lÿhamit) is the Hiphil infinitive construct showing purpose. The people do not trust the intentions or the plan of their leaders and charge Moses with bringing everyone out to kill them.

[11:4]  ³⁰ sn The story of the sending of the quail is a good example of poetic justice, or talionic justice. God had provided for the people, but even in that provision they were not satisfied, for they remembered other foods they had in Egypt. No doubt there was not the variety of foods in the Sinai that might have been available in Egypt, but their life had been bitter bondage there as well. They had cried to the Lord for salvation, but now they forget, as they remember things they used to have. God will give them what they crave, but it will not do for them what they desire. For more information on this story, see B. J. Malina, The Palestinian Manna Tradition. For the attempt to explain manna and the other foods by natural phenomena, see F. W. Bodenheimer, “The Manna of Sinai,” BA 10 (1947): 1-6.

[11:4]  ³¹ tn The mixed multitude (or “rabble,” so NASB, NIV, NRSV; NLT “foreign rabble”) is the translation of an unusual word, הֲָאסַפְסֻף (ha’safsuf). It occurs in the Hebrew Bible only here. It may mean “a gathering of people” from the verb אָסַף (’asaf), yielding the idea of a mixed multitude (in line with Exod 12:38). But the root is different, and so no clear connection can be established. Many commentators therefore think the word is stronger, showing contempt through a word that would be equivalent to “riff-raff.”

[11:4]  ³² tn The Hebrew simply uses the cognate accusative, saying “they craved a craving” (הִתְאַוּוּ תַּאֲוָה, hit’avvu ta’vah), but the context shows that they had this strong craving for food. The verb describes a strong desire, which is not always negative (Ps 132:13-14). But the word is a significant one in the Torah; it was used in the garden story for Eve’s desire for the tree, and it is used in the Decalogue in the warning against coveting (Deut 5:21).

[11:4]  ³³ tc The Greek and the Latin versions read “and they sat down” for “and they returned,” involving just a change in vocalization (which they did not have). This may reflect the same expression in Judg 20:26. But the change does not improve this verse.

[11:4]  ³⁴ tn The Hebrew expresses the strong wish or longing idiomatically: “Who will give us flesh to eat?” It is a rhetorical expression not intended to be taken literally, but merely to give expression to the longing they had. See GKC 476 §151.a.1.

[11:5]  ³⁵ tn The perfect tense here expresses the experience of a state of mind.

[11:5]  ³⁶ tn The imperfect tense would here be the customary imperfect, showing continual or incomplete action in past time.

[11:5]  ³⁷ tn The adverb “freely” is from the word חָנַן (khanan, “to be gracious”), from which is derived the noun “grace.” The word underscores the idea of “free, without cost, for no reason, gratis.” Here the simple sense is “freely,” without any cost. But there may be more significance in the choice of the words in this passage, showing the ingratitude of the Israelites to God for His deliverance from bondage. To them now the bondage is preferable to the salvation – this is what angered the Lord.

[11:6]  ³⁸ tn Heb “our souls.”

[11:6]  ³⁹ sn The Hebrews were complaining both about the bland taste of the manna and dehydration – they were parched in the wilderness.

[11:6]  ⁴⁰ tn Heb “before our eyes,” meaning that “we see nothing except this manna.”

[78:17]  ⁴¹ tn Heb “rebelling [against] the Most High.”

[78:18]  ⁴² tn Heb “and they tested God in their heart.” The “heart” is viewed here as the center of their volition.

[78:19]  ⁴³ tn Heb “they spoke against God, they said.”

[78:19]  ⁴⁴ tn Heb “to arrange a table [for food].”

[78:20]  ⁴⁵ tn Heb “look.”

[12:16]  ⁴⁶ tn Grk “that there not be any,” continuing from v. 15.

[12:16]  ⁴⁷ sn An allusion to Gen 27:34-41.