Genesis 2:17

2:17 but ¹  you must not eat ²  from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when ³  you eat from it you will surely die.” ⁴ 

Genesis 26:16

26:16 Then Abimelech said to Isaac, “Leave us and go elsewhere, ⁵  for you have become much more powerful ⁶  than we are.”

Genesis 3:3

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, ⁷  or else you will die.’” ⁸ 

Genesis 3:5

3:5 for God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will open ⁹  and you will be like divine beings who know ¹⁰  good and evil.” ¹¹ 

Genesis 3:11

3:11 And the Lord God ¹²  said, “Who told you that you were naked? ¹³  Did you eat from the tree that I commanded you not to eat from?” ¹⁴ 

Genesis 3:17

3:17 But to Adam ¹⁵  he said,

“Because you obeyed ¹⁶  your wife

and ate from the tree about which I commanded you,

‘You must not eat from it,’

cursed is the ground ¹⁷  thanks to you; ¹⁸ 

in painful toil you will eat ¹⁹  of it all the days of your life.

Genesis 3:22

3:22 And the Lord God said, “Now ²⁰  that the man has become like one of us, ²¹  knowing ²²  good and evil, he must not be allowed ²³  to stretch out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.”

Genesis 23:6

23:6 “Listen, sir, ²⁴  you are a mighty prince ²⁵  among us! You may bury your dead in the choicest of our tombs. None of us will refuse you his tomb to prevent you ²⁶  from burying your dead.”

Genesis 48:19

48:19 But his father refused and said, “I know, my son, I know. He too will become a nation and he too will become great. In spite of this, his younger brother will be even greater and his descendants will become a multitude ²⁷  of nations.”

[2:17]  ¹ tn The disjunctive clause here indicates contrast: “but from the tree of the knowledge….”

[2:17]  ² tn The negated imperfect verb form indicates prohibition, “you must not eat.”

[2:17]  ³ tn Or “in the very day, as soon as.” If one understands the expression to have this more precise meaning, then the following narrative presents a problem, for the man does not die physically as soon as he eats from the tree. In this case one may argue that spiritual death is in view. If physical death is in view here, there are two options to explain the following narrative: (1) The following phrase “You will surely die” concerns mortality which ultimately results in death (a natural paraphrase would be, “You will become mortal”), or (2) God mercifully gave man a reprieve, allowing him to live longer than he deserved.

[2:17]  ⁴ tn Heb “dying you will die.” The imperfect verb form here has the nuance of the specific future because it is introduced with the temporal clause, “when you eat…you will die.” That certainty is underscored with the infinitive absolute, “you will surely die.”

[26:16]  ⁵ tn Heb “Go away from us.”

[26:16]  ⁶ sn You have become much more powerful. This explanation for the expulsion of Isaac from Philistine territory foreshadows the words used later by the Egyptians to justify their oppression of Israel (see Exod 1:9).

[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).

[3:5]  ¹³ 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]  ¹⁴ 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]  ¹⁵ 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.)

[3:11]  ¹⁷ tn Heb “and he said.” The referent (the Lord God) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[3:11]  ¹⁸ sn Who told you that you were naked? This is another rhetorical question, asking more than what it appears to ask. The second question in the verse reveals the Lord God’s real concern.

[3:11]  ¹⁹ sn The Hebrew word order (“Did you from the tree – which I commanded you not to eat from it – eat?”) is arranged to emphasize that the man’s and the woman’s eating of the fruit was an act of disobedience. The relative clause inserted immediately after the reference to the tree brings out this point very well.

[3:17]  ²¹ tn Since there is no article on the word, the personal name is used, rather than the generic “the man” (cf. NRSV).

[3:17]  ²² tn The idiom “listen to the voice of” often means “obey.” The man “obeyed” his wife and in the process disobeyed God.

[3:17]  ²³ sn For the ground to be cursed means that it will no longer yield its bounty as the blessing from God had promised. The whole creation, Paul writes in Rom 8:22, is still groaning under this curse, waiting for the day of redemption.

[3:17]  ²⁴ tn The Hebrew phrase בַּעֲבוּרֶךָ (ba’avurekha) is more literally translated “on your account” or “because of you.” The idiomatic “thanks to you” in the translation tries to capture the point of this expression.

[3:17]  ²⁵ sn In painful toil you will eat. The theme of eating is prominent throughout Gen 3. The prohibition was against eating from the tree of knowledge. The sin was in eating. The interrogation concerned the eating from the tree of knowledge. The serpent is condemned to eat the dust of the ground. The curse focuses on eating in a “measure for measure” justice. Because the man and the woman sinned by eating the forbidden fruit, God will forbid the ground to cooperate, and so it will be through painful toil that they will eat.

[3:22]  ²⁵ tn The particle הֵן (hen) introduces a foundational clause, usually beginning with “since, because, now.”

[3:22]  ²⁶ sn The man has become like one of us. See the notes on Gen 1:26 and 3:5.

[3:22]  ²⁷ tn The infinitive explains in what way the man had become like God: “knowing good and evil.”

[3:22]  ²⁸ tn Heb “and now, lest he stretch forth.” Following the foundational clause, this clause forms the main point. It is introduced with the particle פֶּן (pen) which normally introduces a negative purpose, “lest….” The construction is elliptical; something must be done lest the man stretch forth his hand. The translation interprets the point intended.

[23:6]  ²⁹ tn Heb “Hear us, my lord.”

[23:6]  ³⁰ tn Heb “prince of God.” The divine name may be used here as a means of expressing the superlative, “mighty prince.” The word for “prince” probably means “tribal chief” here. See M. H. Gottstein, “Nasi’ ‘elohim (Gen 23:6),” VT 3 (1953) 298-99; and D. W. Thomas, “Consideration of Some Unusual Ways of Expressing the Superlative in Hebrew,” VT 3 (1953) 215-16.

[23:6]  ³¹ tn The phrase “to prevent you” has been added in the translation for stylistic reasons.

[48:19]  ³³ tn Heb “fullness.”