The Effect of Eve's Sin on Women
- Thread starter ValleyAnt
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
What you are bumping up against is this simple truth: the Law was added. It was not in God's original plan to create the Law. It was added because of the Jew's disobedience.
So when the Pharisees reference the Law, Jesus trumps their "trap" with the original standard of God: man and wife are "one flesh". By this view, God's original standard, the Law is neutralized and is of no effect.
The freedom Jesus Christ provides is freedom from the Sinai Law that condemns. He makes it possible for us to return to God's original standard: He is our Father we are His sons. We are to do what He tells us.
So when the Pharisees reference the Law, Jesus trumps their "trap" with the original standard of God: man and wife are "one flesh". By this view, God's original standard, the Law is neutralized and is of no effect.
The freedom Jesus Christ provides is freedom from the Sinai Law that condemns. He makes it possible for us to return to God's original standard: He is our Father we are His sons. We are to do what He tells us.
May I ask why?
Jesus asked them what Moses had commanded them, and then he quoted the command from Genesis 2:24 in answer to his own question.
What is your interpretation of that?
Seriously, I am not trying to be contentious or to win an argument. If we have disagreements, and we obviously do, then we can at least try to hash them out civilly and respectfully.
Jesus asked them what Moses had commanded them, and then he quoted the command from Genesis 2:24 in answer to his own question.
What is your interpretation of that?
Seriously, I am not trying to be contentious or to win an argument. If we have disagreements, and we obviously do, then we can at least try to hash them out civilly and respectfully.
I totally agree with you that the Mosaic law, as in that which was given at Mt. Sinai, was added.
I also totally agree with you that what Jesus quoted from Genesis 2:24 was the original standard of God, but this does not negate the fact that Jesus called it a command. He also called it a command in the context of that which was lawful.
Do you agree with this? If so, then there is no contention among us, but only agreement.
I also totally agree with you that what Jesus quoted from Genesis 2:24 was the original standard of God, but this does not negate the fact that Jesus called it a command. He also called it a command in the context of that which was lawful.
Do you agree with this? If so, then there is no contention among us, but only agreement.
I just noticed the beginning of the letter
“Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the commandment of God our Saviour, and Lord Jesus Christ, which is our hope; unto Timothy, my own son in the faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God our Father and Jesus Christ our Lord.”
1 Timothy 1:1-2
the only argument you can make is now speculation “ we’ll Paul didn’t really write it or pul wrote it but someone else added that sentance ect
The difference is I’m just accepting that it’s true like the rest of the Bible . The only speculation is to begin suggesting Paul didn’t write it
Paul definately knew the law he wrote the most about it in the New Testament more then Jesus and the other apostles put together
the argument oaul didn’t write it is not a good argument . Nor that Paul didn’t know the law. Neither holds water is all I’m saying
airs not a good method when we disagree with scripture to suggest , the apostle didn’t understand it or that he didn’t write it .
i think the better answer is to try to reconcile what he said there with what he says here
“For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.”
Galatians 3:27-29 KJV
In the ot under the law of Moses women were definately under men’s authority without question but it wasnt Gods design he made them partners in the beginning both male and female made in his image and both had his authority over them there wasnt need for one to rule over the other God was ruling over all
Eve followed the lie first is Paul’s argument which resulted in the curse of painful childbearing and also submission under and to be ruled by her husband
christ takes away the curse bringing man back to Gods original design where male and female really have no meaning but one’s heart for God matters male and female is irrelevant in Christ
It’s a remnant of the curse of the law when God places adam
Over eve because of transgression it remained the same until Christs redemption of mankind both male and female
“Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the commandment of God our Saviour, and Lord Jesus Christ, which is our hope; unto Timothy, my own son in the faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God our Father and Jesus Christ our Lord.”
1 Timothy 1:1-2
the only argument you can make is now speculation “ we’ll Paul didn’t really write it or pul wrote it but someone else added that sentance ect
The difference is I’m just accepting that it’s true like the rest of the Bible . The only speculation is to begin suggesting Paul didn’t write it
Paul definately knew the law he wrote the most about it in the New Testament more then Jesus and the other apostles put together
the argument oaul didn’t write it is not a good argument . Nor that Paul didn’t know the law. Neither holds water is all I’m saying
airs not a good method when we disagree with scripture to suggest , the apostle didn’t understand it or that he didn’t write it .
i think the better answer is to try to reconcile what he said there with what he says here
“For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.”
Galatians 3:27-29 KJV
In the ot under the law of Moses women were definately under men’s authority without question but it wasnt Gods design he made them partners in the beginning both male and female made in his image and both had his authority over them there wasnt need for one to rule over the other God was ruling over all
Eve followed the lie first is Paul’s argument which resulted in the curse of painful childbearing and also submission under and to be ruled by her husband
christ takes away the curse bringing man back to Gods original design where male and female really have no meaning but one’s heart for God matters male and female is irrelevant in Christ
It’s a remnant of the curse of the law when God places adam
Over eve because of transgression it remained the same until Christs redemption of mankind both male and female
I definately leave it because next time you read a verse which is obvious then someone tells you “ those verses aren’t real . At that point I think you’ll feel the same way I do now , knowing that it fits perfectly with what the ot says
Here’s what happened
“And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: for God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.
( so far what Paul said is exact and accurate )
And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done?( because of what she did ) And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat. Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; ( painful childbearing ) and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;”
Genesis 3:4-6, 13, 16-17 KJV
here’s what Paul said
“Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
For Adam was first formed, then Eve. ( truth ) And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. ( truth )
Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing,( the curse ) if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.”( same for men gotta keep the faith )
1 Timothy 2:11-15
what im sayong is Paul is saying exactly what happened . some don’t agree so they say “ that scripture is added “
It happens here often that someone claims that’s scripture isn’t real many subjects but each time you examine the scripture it always turns out correct like above there paul is only talking about what actually happened
abut notice sometimes Paul says “ thisnis what I think and what I do “ other times he says “ Thisnos what the lord says not me but the lord “
“And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband:”
1 Corinthians 7:10 KJV
other times he’s saying something but telling them “ this isnt an unbreakable commandment but a suggestion “
“But I speak this by permission, and not of commandment.”
1 Corinthians 7:6
there are a lot of nuances to the words in the Bible especially by far , pauls words can be nuanced and complex requiring us to read sections rather than verses
sometimes he speaking his own thought other times revelation from the lord other times a command from the lord often he points it out sometimes he doesn’t each time
notice he is telling Timothy “ I do not alllow women to teach “
Here’s what happened
“And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: for God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.
( so far what Paul said is exact and accurate )
And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done?( because of what she did ) And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat. Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; ( painful childbearing ) and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;”
Genesis 3:4-6, 13, 16-17 KJV
here’s what Paul said
“Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
For Adam was first formed, then Eve. ( truth ) And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. ( truth )
Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing,( the curse ) if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.”( same for men gotta keep the faith )
1 Timothy 2:11-15
what im sayong is Paul is saying exactly what happened . some don’t agree so they say “ that scripture is added “
It happens here often that someone claims that’s scripture isn’t real many subjects but each time you examine the scripture it always turns out correct like above there paul is only talking about what actually happened
abut notice sometimes Paul says “ thisnis what I think and what I do “ other times he says “ Thisnos what the lord says not me but the lord “
“And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband:”
1 Corinthians 7:10 KJV
other times he’s saying something but telling them “ this isnt an unbreakable commandment but a suggestion “
“But I speak this by permission, and not of commandment.”
1 Corinthians 7:6
there are a lot of nuances to the words in the Bible especially by far , pauls words can be nuanced and complex requiring us to read sections rather than verses
sometimes he speaking his own thought other times revelation from the lord other times a command from the lord often he points it out sometimes he doesn’t each time
notice he is telling Timothy “ I do not alllow women to teach “
May I ask you a sincere question?
How can you claim that Adam's placement over Eve is a remnant of the curse of the law in the light of the following?
Eph 5:25
Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
Eph 5:26
That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,
Eph 5:27
That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.
Eph 5:28
So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself.
Eph 5:29
For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church:
Eph 5:30
For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.
Eph 5:31
For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.
Eph 5:32
This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.
Eph 5:33
Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband.
Here, Paul called the husband and wife relationship a great mystery in that it was originally ordained to show the relationship of Christ and his church to the world, and it was ordained before sin ever entered into the world. How then is this allegedly a remnant of the curse of the law?
Let me pause for a moment to quickly address the massive elephant in the room.
From what I see in scripture, a husband, as the head of his own wife, is called to lay his life down for her as Christ laid his life down for the church while nourishing and cherishing her as his own flesh. In other words, this headship is not a matter of "Hey, Babe! I am the king of this castle! Now, go and make me a sandwich!" Instead, it is a man having to demonstrate the most sacrificial type of love to his own wife that this world has ever known or that which mimics Christ's sacrificial love for his church. That is a tall order. I am not married, but if I was, then I would wish that I had been born a woman as opposed to being the man that I am. Why? Because the wife has it much easier in the marriage relationship in that she needs to revere her husband who is sacrificially and selflessly laying his life down for her. Granted, a wife will have to make sacrifices of her own, and especially if children become a part of the equation, but God place more accountability upon the husband as the head.
I think that these types of conversations go astray quickly because of a wrong understanding of what headship entails. It is not abusive dominance, but sacrificial selflessness instead. Are there many cases of abuse? Unfortunately, there are, but this is not what God sanctioned, and I am certainly not sanctioning the same here either. Abuses aside, we should not throw out the proverbial baby with the bathwater. In other words, there still is God-ordained authority within the confines of a marriage, and if followed properly, no women will be abused.
How can you claim that Adam's placement over Eve is a remnant of the curse of the law in the light of the following?
Eph 5:25
Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
Eph 5:26
That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,
Eph 5:27
That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.
Eph 5:28
So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself.
Eph 5:29
For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church:
Eph 5:30
For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.
Eph 5:31
For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.
Eph 5:32
This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.
Eph 5:33
Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband.
Here, Paul called the husband and wife relationship a great mystery in that it was originally ordained to show the relationship of Christ and his church to the world, and it was ordained before sin ever entered into the world. How then is this allegedly a remnant of the curse of the law?
Let me pause for a moment to quickly address the massive elephant in the room.
From what I see in scripture, a husband, as the head of his own wife, is called to lay his life down for her as Christ laid his life down for the church while nourishing and cherishing her as his own flesh. In other words, this headship is not a matter of "Hey, Babe! I am the king of this castle! Now, go and make me a sandwich!" Instead, it is a man having to demonstrate the most sacrificial type of love to his own wife that this world has ever known or that which mimics Christ's sacrificial love for his church. That is a tall order. I am not married, but if I was, then I would wish that I had been born a woman as opposed to being the man that I am. Why? Because the wife has it much easier in the marriage relationship in that she needs to revere her husband who is sacrificially and selflessly laying his life down for her. Granted, a wife will have to make sacrifices of her own, and especially if children become a part of the equation, but God place more accountability upon the husband as the head.
I think that these types of conversations go astray quickly because of a wrong understanding of what headship entails. It is not abusive dominance, but sacrificial selflessness instead. Are there many cases of abuse? Unfortunately, there are, but this is not what God sanctioned, and I am certainly not sanctioning the same here either. Abuses aside, we should not throw out the proverbial baby with the bathwater. In other words, there still is God-ordained authority within the confines of a marriage, and if followed properly, no women will be abused.
-
1
- Show all
Well, yes.
A lot of bad religion has been created because we insert "the Law given at Sinai" whenever we read the word "commandment". The gospel is about divine representation whereby mankind may be reconciled to God as sons of God.
"..Adam, the son of God."
Before man was created, we see The Lord commanding the Holy Spirit to bring about the earth and all creation.
"..darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. And God said..."
There's much more I could go on to say about this. My point is: any direction we receive from God is a command.
A lot of bad religion has been created because we insert "the Law given at Sinai" whenever we read the word "commandment". The gospel is about divine representation whereby mankind may be reconciled to God as sons of God.
"..Adam, the son of God."
Before man was created, we see The Lord commanding the Holy Spirit to bring about the earth and all creation.
"..darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. And God said..."
There's much more I could go on to say about this. My point is: any direction we receive from God is a command.
-
1
- Show all
Exactly.
The fall of man was the direct result of a violated commandment of God.
Gen 2:16
And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
Gen 2:17
But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
The fall of man was the direct result of a violated commandment of God.
Gen 2:16
And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
Gen 2:17
But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
6 To the woman He said:
“I will greatly multiply your sorrow and your conception;
In pain you shall bring forth children;
Your desire shall be [e]for your husband,
And he shall rule over you.”
Here is something many people don't see in what GOD is saying. Remember, God is Spirit, and he speaks Truth always.
The physical pain in giving birth is not absolute; many people give birth and have no pain. Very true.
God is saying this because of Sin has now entered the human race. The sorrow the mother will see brings her child into a sinful, now fallen world. FYI, one born after this sufferer is the same thing. The Hebrew can read like this.
After you give birth to your child, the real pain begins. Sin will produce things you never saw before.
1. the first murder
2. the first flood
And on and on it goes down to us today. Sin rules over you. Not your husband. Women rebel against their husbands every day and come out from under their rule. But not sin.
But thanks be to God for our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ the curse of SIN has been broken !!!
Galatians 3:13-14 says Jesus became the curse for our sins. We were condemned to hell, but because of Jesus' sacrifice, the curse was broken. Fallen man was given the opportunity to become redeemed man, redeemed woman.
praise GODwe can be free from the curse of SIN today.
“I will greatly multiply your sorrow and your conception;
In pain you shall bring forth children;
Your desire shall be [e]for your husband,
And he shall rule over you.”
Here is something many people don't see in what GOD is saying. Remember, God is Spirit, and he speaks Truth always.
The physical pain in giving birth is not absolute; many people give birth and have no pain. Very true.
God is saying this because of Sin has now entered the human race. The sorrow the mother will see brings her child into a sinful, now fallen world. FYI, one born after this sufferer is the same thing. The Hebrew can read like this.
After you give birth to your child, the real pain begins. Sin will produce things you never saw before.
1. the first murder
2. the first flood
And on and on it goes down to us today. Sin rules over you. Not your husband. Women rebel against their husbands every day and come out from under their rule. But not sin.
But thanks be to God for our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ the curse of SIN has been broken !!!
Galatians 3:13-14 says Jesus became the curse for our sins. We were condemned to hell, but because of Jesus' sacrifice, the curse was broken. Fallen man was given the opportunity to become redeemed man, redeemed woman.
praise GODwe can be free from the curse of SIN today.
-
1
- Show all
In furtherance of this: THIS is the law that God writes on the hearts and minds of the people of faith, NOT the Law given at Sinai. The law that existed before Sinai was the law "The Father loves the son. The son only does what He sees His Father doing."
"For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put My laws in their mind and write them on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people."
"For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put My laws in their mind and write them on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people."
Wrong. My argument is on the basis of coherence. Since there is no "law" in the Law requiring women to be silent, and Paul knew the Law better than we do, it doesn't make sense that he would appeal to such a statement. Further, he knew well enough that not every woman was married, and that not every husband was a believer, so to direct curious women to "ask their husbands at home" doesn't make any sense either.
There's no problem with accepting it's true, until you apply some critical thought to it. When you do, you'll see the incoherence.
There's no problem with accepting it's true, until you apply some critical thought to it. When you do, you'll see the incoherence.
And on and on it goes down to us today. Sin rules over you. Not your husband. Women rebel against their husbands every day and come out from under their rule. But not sin.
.
● Gen 3:16c . .Your desire shall be for your husband,
The Hebrew of that passage is apparently somewhat difficult as even the
great rabbis Rashi and Ramban were in disagreement how best to interpret
it.
The Hebrew word translated "desire" shows up so infrequently in the Bible
that it's difficult to get a good feel for it. In point of fact, other than here in
Genesis, the only other places it's used is Gen 4:7 and Song 7:10.
I'm thinking the Hebrew word implies allure. In other words; Eve could be
just as immodest, just as daring, and just as provocative in private with her
husband all she wanted; but not in public for the eyes of other men.
That rule can be a bit frustrating for beautiful women filled out in all the
right places because they typically yearn for their goods to be admired
everywhere by everybody; and the more revealing, and the more public,
the better.
Well; I recommend that they satisfy that yearning while still young and
uncommitted because marriage is a possessive kind of relationship wherein
the partners' physical charms should be considered off the shelf rather than
remaining on display for others to examine.
● 1Cor 7:4 . .The wife's body does not belong to her alone but also to her
husband. In the same way, the husband's body does not belong to him alone
but also to his wife.
_
● Gen 3:16c . .Your desire shall be for your husband,
The Hebrew of that passage is apparently somewhat difficult as even the
great rabbis Rashi and Ramban were in disagreement how best to interpret
it.
The Hebrew word translated "desire" shows up so infrequently in the Bible
that it's difficult to get a good feel for it. In point of fact, other than here in
Genesis, the only other places it's used is Gen 4:7 and Song 7:10.
I'm thinking the Hebrew word implies allure. In other words; Eve could be
just as immodest, just as daring, and just as provocative in private with her
husband all she wanted; but not in public for the eyes of other men.
That rule can be a bit frustrating for beautiful women filled out in all the
right places because they typically yearn for their goods to be admired
everywhere by everybody; and the more revealing, and the more public,
the better.
Well; I recommend that they satisfy that yearning while still young and
uncommitted because marriage is a possessive kind of relationship wherein
the partners' physical charms should be considered off the shelf rather than
remaining on display for others to examine.
● 1Cor 7:4 . .The wife's body does not belong to her alone but also to her
husband. In the same way, the husband's body does not belong to him alone
but also to his wife.
_
“How can you claim that Adam's placement over Eve is a remnant of the curse of the law”
“Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:”
Galatians 3:13 KJV
“For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.”
Galatians 3:27-29
I’m saying that sin ( breaking of the commandment ) is why Adam was placed over eve because that’s what God said when he cursed her just before he cursed Adam
to be clear im sayong “ Paul is talking about this in the disputed verses and it’s accurate “ you can reject this part also and say someone else added it but that’s the error in rejecting verses we don’t like
“Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children;
and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. ( God said this to the woman because of what she did ) And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it:
( Eves words led Adam astray just as the serpents words led her astray into the cirse from the blessing they already were under )
cursed is the ground for thy sake; ( to Adam he’s saying it’s because of what Adam did now because he’s talking to Adam ) in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.”
Genesis 3:16-17, 24 KJV
paul is discussing this event and he is saying “ I don’t allow women to teach “ and then he makes his argument for why , to Timothy , by speaking about Sam and eve and the curses they received . In another place in Roman’s chaoter five he discusses adams fault and curse of sin and death he brought .
paul didn’t allow women to teach and then he explains his reasoning but what I’m saying is everything he said is accurate.
If a women has a good message from God I’ll sit and listen until she’s done speaking friend . But the scripture is all correct it always lines right up with whatever old testsment thing they are discussing in the new whether Adam and Eve there or Adam here
“Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: (for until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.”
Romans 5:12-14 KJV
They are usually discussing things from the Old Testament like that
Im not making the argument that women shouldn’t be allowed to speak and teach , I’m saying Paul eas clearly making that argument and supporting it with the events in Eden between Adam and Eve and Satans temptations and deceptions
“Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:”
Galatians 3:13 KJV
“For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.”
Galatians 3:27-29
I’m saying that sin ( breaking of the commandment ) is why Adam was placed over eve because that’s what God said when he cursed her just before he cursed Adam
to be clear im sayong “ Paul is talking about this in the disputed verses and it’s accurate “ you can reject this part also and say someone else added it but that’s the error in rejecting verses we don’t like
“Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children;
and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. ( God said this to the woman because of what she did ) And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it:
( Eves words led Adam astray just as the serpents words led her astray into the cirse from the blessing they already were under )
cursed is the ground for thy sake; ( to Adam he’s saying it’s because of what Adam did now because he’s talking to Adam ) in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.”
Genesis 3:16-17, 24 KJV
paul is discussing this event and he is saying “ I don’t allow women to teach “ and then he makes his argument for why , to Timothy , by speaking about Sam and eve and the curses they received . In another place in Roman’s chaoter five he discusses adams fault and curse of sin and death he brought .
paul didn’t allow women to teach and then he explains his reasoning but what I’m saying is everything he said is accurate.
If a women has a good message from God I’ll sit and listen until she’s done speaking friend . But the scripture is all correct it always lines right up with whatever old testsment thing they are discussing in the new whether Adam and Eve there or Adam here
“Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: (for until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.”
Romans 5:12-14 KJV
They are usually discussing things from the Old Testament like that
Im not making the argument that women shouldn’t be allowed to speak and teach , I’m saying Paul eas clearly making that argument and supporting it with the events in Eden between Adam and Eve and Satans temptations and deceptions
Not true.
Mar 10:3
And he answered and said unto them, What did Moses command you?
Jesus said unto them, What did Moses command you?
He did not say, What command can I formulate based upon a reality described in Genesis?
After God had made Eve from one of Adam's ribs, Moses said, Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. From Jesus' perspective, implicit in those words was the command for a man to not put asunder what God has joined together. I will stick with Jesus' understanding of this command from Moses, and you are free to do otherwise.
Mar 10:3
And he answered and said unto them, What did Moses command you?
Jesus said unto them, What did Moses command you?
He did not say, What command can I formulate based upon a reality described in Genesis?
After God had made Eve from one of Adam's ribs, Moses said, Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. From Jesus' perspective, implicit in those words was the command for a man to not put asunder what God has joined together. I will stick with Jesus' understanding of this command from Moses, and you are free to do otherwise.
“Wrong. My argument is on the basis of coherence.”
right remove the verses because your so coherent lol 😂
What’s more coherent the Bible is all true ?
or the conspiracy theory that God allowed someone to change a sentance in a letter because you don’t agree and are coherent ?
especially when what paul says , we can read happening for ourselves in genesis chapters 1-3 ?
wouldnt it be biblically coherent to read those and see if Pauls word about it makes sense ? That’s what I try to do rather than explain why the verses aren’t real when I disagree
right remove the verses because your so coherent lol 😂
What’s more coherent the Bible is all true ?
or the conspiracy theory that God allowed someone to change a sentance in a letter because you don’t agree and are coherent ?
especially when what paul says , we can read happening for ourselves in genesis chapters 1-3 ?
wouldnt it be biblically coherent to read those and see if Pauls word about it makes sense ? That’s what I try to do rather than explain why the verses aren’t real when I disagree