The following comes from:
Gregory R. Lanier, Apocryphal Prophets and Athenian
Poets: Noncanonical Influences on the New Testament (Brentwood, Tenn.: B&H
Academic, 2024), 248–252.
Romans 16:20 and Revelation 12:1–13, crushing
Satan
In certain theological circles the curse pronounced on
the serpent in Gen 3:15 is considered a vital protevangelium that anticipates the victory of a future messianic
figure over the offspring of Satan. For something so significant, it is
surprising that it is never unambiguously cited in the NT. The only solid
candidates are Rom 16:20 and Rev 12:1–13, each of which shows the influence of
noncanonical developments in terms of both textual and interpretive tradition.
Let us take them in turn.
For Rom 16:20, commentators are evenly divided about
whether it is a legitimate allusion to Gen 3:15b, though some early fathers
like Jerome certainly thought it was. The dispute stems from the fact that
Paul’s wording lacks any wording alignment with the OG tradition—particularly
the verb—and introduces a plural “you” (=church) into the picture. The key data
are as follows, with the chief verbs under question underlined:
Rom 16:20
The God of peace will crush Satan beneath your
[pl.] feet quickly.
ὁ δὲ θεὸς τῆς εἰρήνης συντρίψει τὸν σατανᾶν ὑπὸ τοὺς πόδας ὑμῶν ἐν τάχει.
|
Gen 3:15b MT
|
Gen 3:15b OG
|
|
[God said to the serpent,] “He will bruise your
head, and you will bruise his heel.”
|
[God said to the serpent,] “He will observe your
head, you will observe his heel.”
|
|
הוא ישופך ראש
ואתה תשופנו עקב
|
αὐτός σου τηρήσει
κεφαλήν, καὶ σὺ τηρήσεις αὐτοῦ πτέρναν.
|
The Genesis situation itself is challenging. The precise
meaning of the twice-repeated and otherwise rare verb שוף is unclear, particularly since it is
applied to both the offspring of the woman and offspring of the serpent.
Moreover, the Greek translator’s decision to use τηρέω is unusual as well, transforming what
seems to be a scene of battle (and victory) in Hebrew into more or less a
staring contest. In fact, the difficulty of the Hebrew caused the transmission
history of Gen 3:15b to be all over the place, as various translators (ancient
and modern) decided whether to (1) respect the sense of the Hebrew but use two different verbs to bring it out, or
(2) respect the repetition of the
Hebrew but use a single verb that perhaps modifies the sense. The upshot for
Romans is that Paul clearly did not adopt τηρέω; and this fact alone may cause scholars
to avoid affirming the allusion here, especially if they only compare Rom 16:20
with, say, the Genesis text of Rahlfs-Hanhart. But if we expand the window of
evidence, a different possibility emerges. Other Greek versions use the
following for each verb (lexical form given):
|
Aquila
|
προστρίβω
(“inflict”)
|
|
Symmachus
|
θλίβω
(“afflict”)
|
|
Coislianus (M)
|
τρίβω
(“bruise”)
|
|
Graecus Venetus
|
πλήσσω
(“trample”)
|
All of these postdate the writing of Romans but might
still be considered independent evidence for alternative Greek renderings of
Gen 3:15b already in circulation, the first three of which are in a similar
vein to Paul’s use of συντρίβω. It
is plausible, then, that Paul was indeed adapting Gen 3:15b but via a separate
textual stream. Possible corroboration might be offered by Paul’s second appeal
to Genesis 3: “the serpent deceived Eve with his cunning [πανουργίᾳ]” (2 Cor 11:3). Old Greek Gen 3:1
describes the serpent as “more crafty [φρονιμώτατος] than all the beasts,” but
Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion read that he was “more cunning [πανοῦργος ἀπό or πανουργότερος]”—reflecting, perhaps, a textual tradition
with which Paul was also familiar.
The plural sense of Rom 16:20, where Satan is trampled
under the feet of the saints, points us to another place where the scene in Gen
3:15 is echoed, namely, the apocalyptic vision of the conflict between the
dragon, the woman, her son, and the saints at large in Rev 12:1–17. The
passage’s use of an Eve-like “woman” (γυνή),
“offspring” (σπέρμα),
and “serpent” (ὄφις)
undoubtedly points the reader to the same terminology in OG Gen 3:14–15. But
the conclusion of the battle scene is intriguing: after the woman’s son is
born, escapes the onslaught of the serpent, and ascends to heaven, the serpent
changes tactics:
Rev 12:17
He went off to make war with the rest of her offspring
[λοιπῶν τοῦ σπέρματος αὐτῆς] who observe the commandments of God
[τῶν τηρούντων τὰς ἐντολὰς τοῦ θεοῦ].
Three shifts are interesting when we compare this passage
to Gen 3:15b: (1) the timeline has moved forward eschatologically
(post-ascension); (2) the “offspring” now are plural, rather than singular (OG αὐτός); and (3) they are the ones (not a
singular Messiah-figure) who “observe”—using the same verb τηρέω discussed above—God’s commandments
rather than the serpent’s head. These changes are a marked development relative
to the Hebrew and Greek traditions of the passage. They could, of course, be
the creative work of the author of Revelation. But it is also possible that
they reflect (in addition to Paul’s pluralization in Rom 16:20) a Jewish
tradition already underway that is eventually captured in the targumic
evidence:
Tg.
Onq.
Gen 3:15b
He will remember
what you did to him from the
beginning, and you will guard against
him unto the end [לסופא].
Tg.
Ps.-J. Gen 3:15b
When
the
sons of the woman become keepers
of the commandments of the law [נטרין מצוותא דאורייתא], they
will aim and strike you on your head; but when they forsake the commandments of the law, you will aim
and bite them on their heels. However,
for them there will be healing, but for you there will be no healing. And they
will make appeasement for the heel in the days of King Messiah.
Tg.
Neof. Gen 3:15b
And
when her sons become keepers of the law [נטרין אורייתא] and
doers of its statutes, they will aim
at you and strike you on your
head and kill you; but when they forsake
the statutes of the law, you will aim and bite them on the heel and make them sick. However, for her sons there will be healing, but
for you, O serpent, there will be no healing. And they will make appeasement
for the heel in the day of King Messiah.
Onqelos is, as usual, the most restrained but still adds
an eschatological flavor to the text. The others show all three developments:
future shift, pluralization, and a change from the battle being between serpent
and Messiah (who plays a different role in these glosses) to being between
serpent and the “keepers of the commandments.” Though the targums are, of
course, quite late relative to the NT, it would be surprising for these
interpretive developments to appear out of nowhere. Perhaps they, along with
Romans and Revelation, testify to an early Jewish pattern of glossing the
translation of Gen 3:15.
To Support this Blog:
Email for Amazon Gift card: ScripturalMormonism@gmail.com
Email for Logos.com Gift Card: IrishLDS87@gmail.com
