Genesis 3:5
Woken Up: Elohim Ate Elohim
For mighty ones saw that within the Day, he ate yourselves from out of ourselves!113 And the eyes of yourselves have been opened, and you all became as mighty ones, those who are perceiving the good one and evil one!"
One tree, the good side, and the evil side of himself/herself.
"Within the middle of the Broadway of herself and of the torrent brook, from this side and from that side, a tree of Zoe-Life, that which makes twelve fruits, down to every moon, each one that which gives back the Fruit of self, and the Leaves of the Tree into a healing one of the Companies of People." (Revelation 22:2 RBT)
For God is knowing in the day of your eating from it, and your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as God, knowing good and evil.
for God knows that in the day you eat of it, your eyes shall be opened, and you shall be as God, knowing good and evil.
Error retrieving verse.
For God knew that in whatever day ye should eat of it your eyes would be opened, and ye would be as gods, knowing good and evil.
Footnotes
| 112 | To Perceive (Know) with the Eyes Strong’s #3045, yada. To perceive with the eyes [i.e to know]. Feurst: “to perceive with the organs of sight”. Gesenius: “to see, to observe with the eyes”. The meaning has to do with gaining understanding, knowledge. Hence to be “blind” is the euphemism for being “unable to discern”. The signification is found in Isaiah: “And he is saying, Walk, and you have said to the People of This one, Hear to hear, but they are not understanding. See to see, but they are not perceiving [yada].” Isa. 6:9 literal |
| 113 | The Extraordinarily Profound Paradox Genesis 3:5 is surely one of the most challenging verses to translate in the Bible due to the syntax that doesn't seem to "fit" any coherent sense. It follows that, unless one should "lift their eyes," the human bias is bound to ruin the profundity, especially when governed by a fear that puts the eyes down. In the case of the scholars, they followed a bias, and put everyone's eyes to the ground. There are very meaningful words within this saying that must be paid attention to: והייתם is in the perfect/complete: and you all have become ידע is also in the complete perfect: he has seen/has known The Hebrew phrase "כי ידע אלהים כי ב יום אכלכם ממנו" translates literally to "for elohim has seen that in the day, he has eaten yourselves from out of us/him". He Ate You The construct אכלכם occurs only one time in all of scripture. Morphologists have marked it as an infinitive with a possessive suffix: your eating. This might be plausible, but this is non-standard, atypical, "exceptional" Biblical Hebrew, as suffixes attached to verbs are primarily to be taken as direct objects (accusative). The proper morphology combines the perfect "אכל" (akhal), meaning "he ate," with the second-person plural direct object suffix "כם" (-khem), indicating "you all" (masculine or mixed-gender group). This is written to be distinct from the singular construct used previously "אכלך" "your eating/he ate you." So, "אכלכם" (akalkhem) can be understood as "he has eaten you all" addressing a group of people. Attempting to translate the verse any other way also defies the logic of the conjunction כי "for/that". But translators were faced with a lot of puzzling aspects, and ultimately a verse way over their heads, and instead of translating objectively and honestly, they opted to delete and change the words to be in accordance with traditional fear-based contexts. All the standard English translations of Genesis 3:5 obscure the syntactical coordination introduced by the conjunctive ו in כי ביום אכלכם ממנו ונפקחו עיניכם. This conjunction coordinates two distinct events — "he ate you" and "your eyes were opened" — rather than subordinating the latter as a temporal or causal consequence of the former. The conjuction, by the traditional interpretation, leaves the reader with a cut off saying, "that in the day of your eating from out of him, and" which is incoherent. Thus they omit or gloss over the ו, insert the word "when" and conflate these events into a single temporal clause ("when you eat... your eyes will be opened"). To respect the conjunctions, and not force anything onto the text, אכלכם should be recognized as a verb.
What? The form אכלכם as "he ate you" demonstrates the standard rule that pronominal suffixes on verbal forms—including infinitive constructs—function as direct objects in the accusative, not as possessives or genitives. As Gesenius observes, “The pronominal suffixes appended to the verb express the accusative of the personal pronoun” and are “less closely connected with the verb than the possessive pronoun (the genitive) is with the noun” (§58a, §58h). Waltke & O’Connor likewise state: “With the suffixes, no matter what their form is (§65a), the object must be also regarded as being in the accusative. Consequently, if the suffix of an inf. cst. refers to the object of the action, it is assumed to be in the accusative; if it refers to the subject of the action, it is in the genitive” (§124). This means that when a suffix is attached to an infinitive construct, it is by default understood to be the object of the action — i.e., in the accusative case, unless context clearly shows otherwise. Waltke & O’Connor note the ambiguity of examples like that found in 2 Sam 16:7 – קִלְלְךָ, does it mean “he cursing you” (accusative)? or “your cursing” (genitive)? They say one would probably expect a different form (e.g., קִלְלָתוֹ) for clarity if it meant “his cursing.” Clarity versus ambiguity and confusion is what is at stake. Thus, it has been left to the present authorities to decide for the people what is what, often creating simplified heuristic (rule of thumb) to "aid beginners": “If an infinitive‑construct has -ל plus a suffix, treat the suffix as object; otherwise treat it as subject.” (BibleArc Hebrew III) This is an instructional shortcut, designed to reduce cognitive load for students encountering lots of "bizarre" Hebrew paradigms simultaneously. This is also why countless Bible students choke under the weight of crushing confusion. Two thousand years of textual-criticism filling countless libraries around the world still has not deciphered even half of the usage of the divine language. By contrast, Gesenius, Waltke & O’Connor, Joüon‑Muraoka, and other standard grammars derive their rules from comprehensive corpus analyses, not from classroom convenience. They show:
Waltke & O’Connor (§124d) admit that ultimately, you just have to resort to your contextual bias: “It is sometimes difficult to determine whether the suffix is the subject or the object… Context must decide.” 1 Gesenius, Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar, ed. E. Kautzsch & A. E. Cowley, §58a, 58h. ממנו can mean either "from out of us" or "from out of him" cf. Genesis 31:40 where a similar construct is used אכלני חרב "the sword/drought consumed me" (i.e. this would not be translated as "my eating") |