Is the ground still affected by the curse of Genesis 3:17-19?

⮜ Answered Questions

Background facts

To begin with, here are some facts which form the background to this issue, which I hope can be accepted by most readers.

1. Human "work" -- even hard work -- is good, a blessing from God, and integral to the tasks which he gave mankind from the beginning:28 God blessed them. God said to them, “Be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth, and subdue it. Have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the sky, and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” Genesis 1:28WEB
   5 No plant of the field was yet in the earth, and no herb of the field had yet sprung up; for YHWH God had not caused it to rain on the earth. There was not a man to till the ground, Genesis 2:5WEB
   15 YHWH God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to cultivate and keep it. Genesis 2:15WEB
2. The second law of thermodynamics -- entropy and related processes -- was operating prior to the Fall/Gen.3:17 curse, and is a good part of God's creation.
3. Natural "decay" processes, (such as bacterial and fungal growth, oxidation/rust) and nutrient recycling were designed by God and operating prior to the Fall. They are a good part of God's creation.
4. A "weed" is simply a name for a plant which we don't want to use at that time, which is growing in or near a place which makes harvesting a wanted plant take a bit more time and effort. Weeds are usually plants that grow aggressively after the stable ground biome is disturbed in some way, such as by animal overgrazing, wild pig rooting, natural fires, plowing, etc. The (so-called) weed species are quick to germinate and quickly begin "healing" the disturbance, creating a protective vegetative/root system cover which reduces topsoil erosion and moves that local soil disturbance back towards the natural productive balance for that particular biome. This is a beautiful part of God's creation, and is analogous to the complex process which God designed into the human body to heal wounds. I submit that "weeds" are very good, and I have no doubt that they were designed into creation and operating before the Fall. I focus so much time on this, because I want to show how God cares for his creation through things like weeds and decay processes which men often dismiss as some type of "evil" (either because they haven't studied the creation thoroughly, or they only focus on a limited, "human convenience" perspective).
5. Thorns are a good part of God's creation. They serve the well-known function of physically deterring animals from eating a plant. These plant defensive measures are important features maintaining a balance between plants and animals in the natural symbiosis. Blackberries, for example, grow on my land. When I pick them, I sometimes get poked by the thorns, because I choose not to wear gloves. And I thank God for thorns on blackberries, because I am able to harvest more blackberries than I would if they didn't grow thorns.

The curse on the ground

Let's look at our "inciting verses": 17 To Adam he said, “Because you have listened to your wife’s voice, and have eaten from the tree, about which I commanded you, saying, ‘You shall not eat of it,’ the ground is cursed for your sake. You will eat from it with much labor all the days of your life. 18 It will yield thorns and thistles to you; and you will eat the herb of the field. 19 You will eat bread by the sweat of your face until you return to the ground, for you were taken out of it. For you are dust, and you shall return to dust.” Genesis 3:17-19WEB

The Reformed Baptist interpreter John Gill (who was also a Hebrew scholar) comments on this passage about v. 18:

Not for his advantage, but to give him more trouble, and cause him more fatigue and sorrow to root them up: these include all sorts of noxious herbs and plants, and troublesome weeds, which added to man's labour to pluck up, that those more useful might grow and flourish: and Rabbi Eliezer was of opinion, that if there had not been a new blessing upon the earth, it would have brought forth nothing else, as that which is rejected and nigh unto cursing does, ( Hebrews 6:8 ) and this curse continued, at least it was not wholly removed, until the times of Noah, (Genesis 8:21) which made it hard and difficult to the antediluvian patriarchs to get their bread. [emphasis added]

Why would John Gill suggest that this curse was removed by the Flood?

Post-Flood removal of the curse

Gill cites Gen. 8:21, so let's look at that verse: 21 YHWH smelled the pleasant aroma. YHWH said in his heart, “I will not again curse the ground any more for man’s sake because the imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth. I will never again strike every living thing, as I have done. Genesis 8:21WEB

On this verse, John Gill writes:

I will not again curse the ground for man's sake, or drown it for the sin of man, as he had cursed it for the sin of Adam, and which continued till this time; but now was taken off, and it became more fruitful, and very probably by means of the waters which had been so long upon it, and had left a fructifying virtue in it, as the waters of the Nile do in Egypt ... [emphasis added]

This verse record's YHWH's reaction to the sacrifice ("smelled the pleasant aroma") which Noah made right after coming out of the ark. Literally, the Hebrew of this phrase is "restful savour". The Hebrew root here is linguistically related to both the name of Noah and the description of the ark coming to "rest" on the mountains of Ararat (Gen. 8:4).

YHWH promises "I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake," despite acknowledging that "the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth." YHWH had already cursed the ground, making it very difficult for Adam and his descendants to get food. I assert (agreeing with John Gill) that YHWH's statement should be understood in the context of the previous "curse on the ground" having been removed, and that part of this Noahic promise was that he would never again do what he did in Gen. 3:17-18. Nothing about man's "evil" nature had changed, when YHWH restarted humanity with Noah and his family. But YHWH's promise seems to be responding to two things:

1. the cleansing of the corruption (Gen. 6:11-13) of the earth by the Flood event
2. the acceptable sacrifice of Noah

Here, Noah's sacrifice is probably functioning as a type of Christ's sacrifice (which removed the curse of death).

What about other scriptural evidence for this interpretation? Let's look at a prophecy which was spoken when Noah himself was born:

28 Lamech lived one hundred eighty-two years, then became the father of a son. 29 He named him Noah, saying, “This one will comfort us in our work and in the toil of our hands, caused by the ground which YHWH has cursed.” Genesis 5:28-29WEB

The word commonly translated "comfort" in this verse is a wordplay on the name "Noah."

But there is another clue in the verse which ties Lamech's prophecy to Adam's curse. Robert Alter explains:

Most translations render this as "our toil, our work," or something equivalent. But the second term itsavon, does not mean "labor" but rather "pain," and is the crucial word at the heart of Adam's curse, and Eve's. Given that allusion, the two terms in the Hebrew — which reads literally, "our work and the pain of our hands" — are surely to be construed as a hendiadys, a pair of terms for a single concept indicating "painful labor." It should be noted that the "work of our hands" is a common biblical collocation while "pain of our hands" occurs only here, evidently under the gravitational pull of "work" with which it is paired as a compound idiom. Equally noteworthy is that the word itsavon appears only three times in the Bible (other nominal forms of the root being relatively common) — first for Eve, then for Adam, and now for Noah.

Noah's father thus prophesied that his son would give "us" (referring, obviously, to "mankind" generally, because only Noah and his descendants would survive the Flood) "comfort" from the effect caused by the curse. Comfort is a direct reversal of this curse. This prophecy fits perfectly with the interpretation that the curse was removed by the Flood (possibly in combination with Noah's post-Flood sacrifice).