Genesis 3:16 He will rule over you.

There is a lot to say on this topic but Mr. JohnR7 you have missed a very important point. It is the wifes responcibility to submit to Christ FIRST and then out of obedeince to Christ she should submit to her husband and it doesn't matter how submisive to Christ her husband is, because her walk with Christ is more important to Christ then her husbands walk with Christ. This doesn't make the wife a lesser form of life because the wife and husband are equal in the eyes of God. The same goes for the Husband. His ultimate responsibility is to put Christ FIRST and foremost in his life and out of Obedience to Christ he will treat his wife with respect and loving kindness just as Christ treated the church. The husbands walk with God doesn't keep his wife from going to heaven or hell. Only she has the authority over her own life's decisions and the same applies for the husband.
The wife submitting to the husband is the role set out By God for the wife and the Husband cherishing, respecting, protecting and loving his wife as Christ loved the church is the role set forth for the husband by God.

No He didn't for a lot of reason but one reason He didn't accept the Gaul is because it was laced with drugs. The idea of the Cross was to make the person on the cross suffer a long and painful death and the drugs were intended to do what drugs do. They would have cut down on the pain causing to person on the cross to suffer longer with less pain. Not to mention that it probably tasted pretty nasty.

Very interestingly, God also tells the same to Cain:

Genesis 4:7, KJV: If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

Looks like this isn't about Cain and Abel, but about Cain and sin, however, it's the same sentence, like the curse repeats.

Genesis 4:7, ESV: If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door. Its (sin's) desire is contrary to you, but you must rule over it."

I think here it meant, "the choice is yours", as in, "resist the devil and he will flee".
Then Cain slays Abel.

I don't know why is Adam being exalted over this verse, because even if Eve was deceived, God states that Adam didn't do any better than her. Based from what was said to Cain, it's clear that God was saying to Adam, it was your job to stop her, you knew better than this. Furthermore, Eve admits that she was deceived and sinned, but Adam has the guts to blame Eve and God for what he did "this woman YOU gave me"... etc.

Sorry, doesn't make the case for Adam displaying a stellar or superior behavior... looks more brazen to me.
But Eve was subjected because of what he said, because he blamed Eve and God for his own doings.
I believe God makes Adam the leader, in order to leave Adam without excuse.

Before the event Adam and Eve were innocent in their thinking. Adam had never known sin or understood what God meant when he used the word death. I believe Adam knew he was doing something wrong when he accepted the fruit but he didn't realize the severity of the action he was about to take and he wasn't street smart so he couldn't discern that he was being conned by satan through his wife and the love he had for her. God commanded Adam to take care of his wife and he failed in that task as he knowingly disregarded the instructions of God that were given to him before Eve was created.
I don't believe for a minute that Adam would have chosen death if he had realized what he was doing and after all Adam and Eve didn't actually die did they. The process by which they would die was started when Adam disregarded the instructions of God.

Indeed marriage is a very special relationship. Its the only relationship between two people where all five Biblical words for Love are exercised.

i think you should re-evaluate that

if Adam was conned, he was deceived. if Adam didn't think taking the fruit would result in death, he was deceived. if he didn't know what he was doing, he was deceived. if he thought the tree was desirable for attaining wisdom, he was deceived.

if Adam wasn't deceived, he was brilliant. he was incredibly smart. here's three pieces of additional evidence of that: he named every animal, he did not take of the tree of life after eating of the tree that results in death, and when he heard the judgement, he understood it so well that he changed Woman's name to Eve, and at this the LORD said behold! -- which is a word used when something absolutely amazing has taken place or is about to be revealed. i believe Adam has amazing insight.

i don't think God meant for Adam to build a fence around the tree, or keep his wife on a leash. i don't believe she was created a danger to herself and others - she was created for and from a very intelligent man, the first man, and as such i doubt she was a dummy. nevertheless she was deceived and sinned, taking and eating the fruit. so Adam when he saw this was faced with a decision, to join her in sin and death or to abandon her to it. what will God do if he doesn't take the fruit also?

i believe Adam knew exactly what he was doing, because i believe he wasn't deceived, and i believe he wasn't deceived because 1 Timothy tells me that. that makes these events a lot more complex than caveman-Adam was too dumb to build a wall around God's trees or not smart enough to hover over his wife's shoulder at all times making sure she didn't do something equally dumb. i don't believe he was complicit in her sinning and i believe his sin is all that much more grave because he sinned without being deceived but with full knowledge of what he was doing and what the consequences were.

i do not believe that God was in error saying the very day they eat of it, that day dying, they shall die.

Who is 'we'? If it is me and you, then that implies we have the same wrong understanding. Is it the sae? If you think you understand it wrong, why post your understanding then?



A lot of people have a problem with all of those things, at least carrying them out.

Submit to one another could mean each person is to submit to the proper other person. The passage continues to wives to submit to husbands, slaves to submit to masters, and children to obey parents-- three categories of people who are to submit, respectively, to three other categories of people in some way.

Do you see men in 'wife-beater' t-shirts standing around on street corners demanding their wives submit to them in a very demeaning way? What is your experience with this? We should encourage one another to obey the word of God. The Bible says to exhort one another daily lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin. For those who have families, it is easier to exhort one another because we have other believers to exhort. It is not wrong for a man to exhort his wife to obey the teaching of scripture to submit to him. It does not have to be done in an ungodly way.

I remember hearing a preacher talking a bit about how wives are supposed to submit to their husbands back in the '70's or early '80's and how uncomfortable that topic was. I heard probably a few sermons that mentioned that in the '80's.

But several years ago, I heard a sermon on marriage where the pastor read from Ephesians 5, and when he got to the part about wives submitting to husbands, he said, 'We have all heard a lot of preaching on that", skipped the subject and focused on telling the men to love their wives, and talked a lot about how communication was important.

I thought, no we haven't heard a lot on that. I haven't. Not at church. It's a topic some preachers avoid, and there are churches with converts who came to faith in recent decades who haven't heard it taught that they are to submit to their husbands. There are some very conservative churches that teach it quite a bit. This church was a megachurch that was a bit on the seeker sensitive side that I went to for a little while before we found somewhere else after we moved there.

In the meantime, women watch TV and movies set in the past where a woman is a heroine for rebelling against her husband or other shows where lack of submission to one's husband is presented as a positive thing and the husband is presented as a tyrant, especially in films set in the past. They are surrounded by women who do not believe in submitting to their husbands in many cases, at work, and hear them talk.

I can agree, disgruntled is a little much, what he said below, I never said he is abandoning her but might of thought, but if he did he forgave her on the spot.

Gen 3
12And the man answered, “The woman whom You gave me, she gave me fruit from the tree, and I ate it.”

since you said it now I have to ask you, where did you get or think Adam had a decision to make?

Q
You say incredibly smart, brilliant, amazing insight, you are kind of throwing in all the stops about a man who listened to his wife.

I don’t mean to harp, but did God create Himself in Adam to sin against Himself and banish Himself from the garden He created?

that is what that is when your saying something like God took the fruit it goes beyond a lot of things that would have to be if God was Adam, I’m not understanding that statement?

Eve knew what was going also

Gen 3
2The woman answered the serpent, “We may eat the fruit of the trees of the garden, 3but about the fruit of the tree in the middle of the garden, God has said, ‘You must not eat of it or touch it, or you will die.’”

By "we" I mean the Church (the members in the body of the Lord Jesus Christ) in general. For the most part, I do not believe we understand the instruction given in Eph 5:22.

presidente said:

Submit to one another could mean each person is to submit to the proper other person. The passage continues to wives to submit to husbands, slaves to submit to masters, and children to obey parents-- three categories of people who are to submit, respectively, to three other categories of people in some way.

Click to expand...

Yes, and the notion that we are to submit is difficult for some.

presidente said:

Do you see men in 'wife-beater' t-shirts standing around on street corners demanding their wives submit to them in a very demeaning way? What is your experience with this?

Click to expand...

I have seen men demeaning their wives ... I have seen women demeaning their husbands. I believe you have seen the same things I have if you think about it.

presidente said:

We should encourage one another to obey the word of God. The Bible says to exhort one another daily lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin. For those who have families, it is easier to exhort one another because we have other believers to exhort. It is not wrong for a man to exhort his wife to obey the teaching of scripture to submit to him. It does not have to be done in an ungodly way.

Click to expand...

Exactly.

presidente said:

I remember hearing a preacher talking a bit about how wives are supposed to submit to their husbands back in the '70's or early '80's and how uncomfortable that topic was. I heard probably a few sermons that mentioned that in the '80's.

But several years ago, I heard a sermon on marriage where the pastor read from Ephesians 5, and when he got to the part about wives submitting to husbands, he said, 'We have all heard a lot of preaching on that", skipped the subject and focused on telling the men to love their wives, and talked a lot about how communication was important.

I thought, no we haven't heard a lot on that. I haven't. Not at church. It's a topic some preachers avoid, and there are churches with converts who came to faith in recent decades who haven't heard it taught that they are to submit to their husbands. There are some very conservative churches that teach it quite a bit. This church was a megachurch that was a bit on the seeker sensitive side that I went to for a little while before we found somewhere else after we moved there.

Click to expand...

Yep.

presidente said:

In the meantime, women watch TV and movies set in the past where a woman is a heroine for rebelling against her husband or other shows where lack of submission to one's husband is presented as a positive thing and the husband is presented as a tyrant, especially in films set in the past. They are surrounded by women who do not believe in submitting to their husbands in many cases, at work, and hear them talk.

Click to expand...

I think nowadays the husband is made out to be a bumbling fool, the wife is idolized, and the kids rule the roost. Totally not what God intended the marriage/family dynamic to be.

JamOn said:

Eve knew what was going also

Gen 3
2The woman answered the serpent, “We may eat the fruit of the trees of the garden, 3but about the fruit of the tree in the middle of the garden, God has said, ‘You must not eat of it or touch it, or you will die.’”

Click to expand...

Yes, God instructed Adam:

Genesis 2:16-17 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: 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.


And Adam told Eve as is revealed in Gen 3 (the verses you submitted in Post #94).


satan deceived Eve:

1Timothy 2:14 ... but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.


Adam was not deceived. He willingly ate of the tree of knowledge of good and evil and joined Eve in her transgression:

1Timothy 2:14 And Adam was not deceived ...



Adam left his Father and joined his wife:

Genesis 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father ..., and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

If that were true, then no one should ever disagree with anyone else's comment...because you can't say something is false unless you know what is true.

"For in this way in former times the holy women also, who hoped in God, used to adorn themselves, being submissive to their own husbands; just as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord, and you have become her children if you do what is right without being frightened by any fear"
-1 Pet 3:5-6

Diakonos said:

If that were true, then no one should ever disagree with anyone else's comment...because you can't say something is false unless you know what is true.

Click to expand...

I started dating my husband when I was 17. We married when I was 20. We both turned to the Lord together (I was 19, he was 20) and we grew up together in the Lord. My husband passed away when I was 58.

We learned to live Eph 5:22 - 29 ... and there were times when we did not completely understand the instruction. And God worked in our hearts and brought us to understanding of me submitting to my husband and my husband loving me the way Christ loves the church.

I do not believe my husband and I were the only ones who understand the marriage relationship. I do believe that in general there is a lack of understanding of the instruction in Eph 5 concerning the marriage relationship.

As stated in Post #35, the instruction concerning the proper marriage relationship comes in the "walk circumspectly" portion of the instruction revealed in Ephesians 5. First learn to walk in love (Eph 5:1-7), then learn to walk in light (Eph 5:8-14), then learn to walk circumspectly (Eph 5:15-33).

We're missing the boat if we think we can submit one to another and then further wife submit to your own husband and husband love your wife as Christ loved the church without first walking in love then walking in light then walking circumspectly.

And you are free to disagree with me ... you are free to give your own understanding of Eph 5:22.

No wait a minute. "Dying you shall die" is a misnomer. So which is it??? Did they die or did they begin to die?? It is a contradiction, one can't be dying while living and be dead at the same time. You can't have both at the same time. Logically speaking your either dying or your dead.
So I looked up the word "die" in my Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon and the word "die" is talking about an affliction put on them by God for their disobedience. I don't think Adam and Eve actually had a life expectancy and were intended to live perhaps for every. But sin found its way into their lives and sin is death though death doesn't occur suddenly but over a period of time in this example. The heart of Adam and Eve never stopped beating, they never stopped breathing and they never fell down as if they were dead.
The Strong's number I used is H4191 and did not give the same info as you have given.
"Dying you shall die" is actually talking about dying and dying over a peroid of time always leads to death. Hence from the day we are born we begin to die and our whole life is spent in the process of dying until our time has come and we die. That is what the words "Dying you shall die" is talking about.

Sorry but no re-evaluating here. The plan truth is we have no idea of what Adam was actually thinking at the moment of his first sinful act and only God knows what both of them were thinking. Any opinion of what they might have been thinking is purely assumption with no scripture to back it up. Including my opinion. So please take a step back and judge yourself and admit that you are not God and have no proof to back up your assertions. Who said that God was in error? I know I didn't.