Genesis 3:16 Bible Old Testament. Surah 4:34 (Quran)

[Hazelelponi]

Here is your earlier claim:

"5. Husbands would have authority over wives, and wives would need to submit to their own husband. "

Here is what God says in Genesis 3:16: "Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.”

God said nothing about giving authority to men or requiring submission from women in that verse, so no, that is definitely NOT "exactly" what it says. You are the one contradicting Scripture. What it says is "he (the man) will rule over you". "Will" is not a statement of extended authority at all. It is a statement of certainty. Ungodly men WILL rule over their wives; there is no "must" or "should" in there. Your interpretation merely confirms the truth of God's statement.

Again, in order to be consistent, you must believe that men are disobedient to the Scripture if they are not sweating and in pain when eating or working to earn a living. I'm sure you don't. Maybe you should ask yourself why.

To add - when God says " will" as in " the man will have x" then that is God revealing what he has implemented.

Whether it's intended to be a punishment or a blessing, it's God's revealed world order.

Specifically in Eve's case, she clearly needed a check on her own will, seeing as she was first to be tempted and fall, who then automatically turned temptress. She needed someone in charge, much like a wayward child, and Adam clearly needed to find his own backbone to be able to say "no.. that's wrong!"

And they, being our parents, brought this world order to our doorstep.

As another besides, God also said nothing about women having to hate it. I appreciate my husband, he has told me no twice in the last decade on a matter where I was in disagreement, but I'll be honest there's times I appreciate his ability to watch over me, because God knows I'm not perfect and two heads are better than one.

But there can't be two leaders, someone in the home must get the final say in matters of disagreement. God determined this final say to be had by men.

 

[proverbs35]

To add - when God says " will" as in " the man will have x" then that is God revealing what he has implemented.

Whether it's intended to be a punishment or a blessing, it's God's revealed world order.

Specifically in Eve's case, she clearly needed a check on her own will, seeing as she was first to be tempted and fall, who then automatically turned temptress. She needed someone in charge, much like a wayward child, and Adam clearly needed to find his own backbone to be able to say "no.. that's wrong!"

And they, being our parents, brought this world order to our doorstep.

As another besides, God also said nothing about women having to hate it. I appreciate my husband, he has told me no twice in the last decade on a matter where I was in disagreement, but I'll be honest there's times I appreciate his ability to watch over me, because God knows I'm not perfect and two heads are better than one.

But there can't be two leaders, someone in the home must get the final say in matters of disagreement. God determined this final say to be had by men.

The Hebrew word for that gets translated into rule in Genesis 3:16 is Strong's Concordance 4910 Mashal. It means to have dominion - dominate. Dominante has the connotation of absolute power.

When you are in charge of something or rule it, you have dominion over it. The most famous use of the word occurs in the Christian Bible, when God grants people dominion over other animals.
If you know the word domination, then you won't be surprised that dominion also has to do with a type of ruling over others. This is an old-fashioned and Biblical-sounding word for having power. A king has dominion over his kingdom. You'd never say the President has dominion, because we live in a democracy. Dominion implies more power than that — even absolute power. A dominion can also be an area or territory controlled by a larger country or state.
Source: https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/dominion

So God implemented that men would dominate women and have absolute power over women?

God implemented that husbands would dominate and have absolute power over their wives?

I have heard a lot of people say that husbands get the final say? What Bible verse states that husbands get the final say when couples disagree?

I am not pulling these examples out of thin air. I read some heartbreaking stories this week.

A couple marries with the understanding and agreement that they both share the same core Christian values like monogamy, after many years of marriage and several kids, the husband decides that he wants to be a polygamist, does he get the final say?

https://www.premiumtimesng.com/ente...hocked-as-nigerians-yul-edochies-brother.html

A couple marries with the understanding and agreement that they both share the same core Christian values. After several years of marriage and several kids, the husband decides that he wants to renounce Christianity and join a cult. He demands that the wife and kids renounce Christianity and follow him into the cult/idolatry, does he get final say?

https://sportafriq.com/jesus-delive...ren-from-hebrew-israelism-🙌🏾❤️🙏🏾-bree-beaden/

If the husband wants to take money out of the household and use it to take care of his mistress, does he get final say? :

https://www.christianpost.com/news/...d-spent-over-100k-on-extramarital-affair.html

Unfortunately, there are Christian women struggling with situations like these, and many people are telling them to submit to whatever the husbands wants. I have read some of those comments.

 

[Dino246]

What do you believe words like submission and rule mean?

Submission is not mentioned in Genesis 3:16 at all, so there is no point in discussing it.

Rule means (noun) control of or dominion over an area or people. And (verb) exercise ultimate power or authority over.

That might make sense if God said to the man, "You shall rule over your wife". However, He did not say that. The only time God says to person A that person B will rule over them is when it is a bad thing, a consequence of sin. The entire context of God's address in Genesis 3 is consequences for sin. Do you really think that God would give now-sinful man "authority" over women? Um, no. He's neither stupid nor cruel.

The only real difference I see between the posters own words and the exact words of the Bible is sin. If God grants someone authority over you and you refuse to submit to that authority then have you not sinned?

As God did not "grant" authority to the man over the woman, she is not required to submit, and she is not sinning.

It would be expected of a woman professing faith in Christ to naturally submit to her husband's God given authority the same as it's naturally expected of the Christian man to not abuse that authority.

True, but Genesis 3:16 is not talking about Christians. Rather, it is speaking the sad truth of human relationships: that men will enforce rule over women.

 

[Dino246]

To add - when God says " will" as in " the man will have x" then that is God revealing what he has implemented.

Whether it's intended to be a punishment or a blessing, it's God's revealed world order.

Specifically in Eve's case, she clearly needed a check on her own will, seeing as she was first to be tempted and fall, who then automatically turned temptress. She needed someone in charge, much like a wayward child, and Adam clearly needed to find his own backbone to be able to say "no.. that's wrong!"

You have a dim view of women, and a distorted view of men.

And they, being our parents, brought this world order to our doorstep.

As another besides, God also said nothing about women having to hate it. I appreciate my husband, he has told me no twice in the last decade on a matter where I was in disagreement, but I'll be honest there's times I appreciate his ability to watch over me, because God knows I'm not perfect and two heads are better than one.

But there can't be two leaders, someone in the home must get the final say in matters of disagreement. God determined this final say to be had by men.

Only someone who doesn't understand equality makes such a claim.

You are completely overlooking the context of consequences. God told Eve and then Adam what the consequences of their sin would be. He told Adam that he would obtain his food by pain, sweat, and toil, and would fight thorns and thistles. Does that sound like the "revealed world order" that God desires? If it does, give your head a shake.

 

[Katia]

So you would rather believe those who attack the Bible than those who believe it. Since Moses was on earth around 1500 B.C. you are off by about 800 years. And since both Orthodox Jews and conservative Christians believe that Moses wrote the Torah, you are in a very small minority.

Getting back to Genesis 3:16, it is not exactly rocket science. So let's see what it says and believe that what was written was divinely inspired: Unto the woman [Eve] he [God] 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.

So what we see is that Eve -- being the first woman who sinned -- brought a curse upon all women.
1. Sorrows would be increased for women in many way
2. Conceptions would also increase so women could bear many children
3. Child-bearing would be painful
4. The wife's desire would be towards her husband
5. Husbands would have authority over wives, and wives would need to submit to their own husband. [This teaching is also found in the New Testament].

And, in the Quran (Surah 4:34) for me it is essentially the same, or at least very similar. Feminism in America has been very destructive. I believe that we are all flawed and wonder what it would have been like if men and women both were more Godly.

Do you believe Jesus is God?

I don't need to know that. It's been many years since I studied the difference between Trinitarianism and Non Trinitarianism. People have died in that argument. Peace to you.

 

[Hazelelponi]

You have a dim view of women, and a distorted view of men.

You do understand I AM a woman yes? Lol.

What I'm not is a liberal. I'm conservative in my views.

Here's a nice article:

https://www.gotquestions.org/wives-submit.html

 

[Dino246]

You do understand I AM a woman yes? Lol.

Yes, I do understand that. Does the blue pill have a particular flavour?

What I'm not is a liberal. I'm conservative in my views.

And you're bringing this up because...?

 

[Hazelelponi]

And you're bringing this up because...?

Generally speaking conservative Christians view the Bible quite - conservatively.

 

[Dino246]

Generally speaking conservative Christians view the Bible quite - conservatively.

Again... relevance?

 

[Dino246]

You do understand I AM a woman yes? Lol.

What I'm not is a liberal. I'm conservative in my views.

Here's a nice article:

https://www.gotquestions.org/wives-submit.html

With regard to the article, it is misleading in this part:

"Even before sin entered the world, there was still the principle of the headship of the husband (1 Timothy 2:13). Adam was created first, and Eve was created to be a "helper" for Adam (Genesis 2:18–20)."

1 Timothy 2:13 does not address "headship" at all; it merely states that Adam was formed first.

Genesis 2:20 does use the word "helper" but there is no subservience implied. Indeed, God is called the "helper" of Israel several times. The concept of "subordinate assistant" is completely wrong.

 

[Hazelelponi]

Again... relevance?

I find no need to pick at scripture until I can convince myself it says all I prefer to hear...

 

[Hazelelponi]

And, in the Quran (Surah 4:34) for me it is essentially the same

I feel the need to honestly speak to this.

The verse you have above quoted condones the beating of wives.

There is nothing in the Bible that even remotely condones such a thing.

When I was married to my former husband, we were both very good Muslims. When I had a problem I went to the Imam for marital counseling etc. When my husband hit me I went to the Imam for counseling.

I was always told I just needed to be a better wife and that my husband was just trying his best to do his duty. This wasn't some extremist Imam either, this was a mainstream mosque.

There is a reason women in the middle east lack so many rights people living in the west take for granted, and that reason is Islam - not the women, and not even the men. When a Muslim man is abuse, it's simply overlooked because Islam itself condones it.

The treatment of women under Christian submission, is a far cry from Islam. The reason western women have so much freedom in the west is because of Christianity and it's influence on society.

 

[Dino246]

I find no need to pick at scripture until I can convince myself it says all I prefer to hear...

Lemme guess, that’s your passive-aggressive attempt at insulting me? Lady, you’re so far off base that you’re playing in the next county.

 

[posthuman]

So what we see is that Eve -- being the first woman who sinned -- brought a curse upon all women.

It's not a curse. It's chastisement, for our good. His judgements are for the benefit of His children

 

[Dino246]

The reason western women have so much freedom in the west is because of Christianity and it's influence on society.

Here we agree. Consider though how common the abuse of wives is under all non-Christian cultures (including Western secular culture), and you may begin to see that my interpretation of Genesis 3:16b is sound.

 

[Nehemiah6]

It's not a curse. It's chastisement, for our good. His judgements are for the benefit of His children

There was a curse placed upon the earth and upon humanity at that time: 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 (Gen 3:17)

Not only was the ground cursed, but everything stated in Genesis 3:14-19 was included in that curse. Thus we read in Romans 8:20-22 that the whole creation was cursed and brought into the bondage or corruption, decay, and death: For the creature [creation] was made subject to vanity*, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope, Because the creature [creation] itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.

That word "vanity" includes the term instability (which is expressed as entropy in thermodynamics).

*Strong's Concordance
mataiotés: vanity, emptiness
Original Word: ματαιότης, τητος, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: mataiotés
Phonetic Spelling: (mat-ah-yot'-ace)
Definition: vanity, emptiness
Usage: vanity, emptiness, unreality, purposelessness, ineffectiveness, instability*, frailty; false religion.

Entropy = a thermodynamic quantity representing the unavailability of a system's thermal energy for conversion into mechanical work, often interpreted as the degree of disorder or randomness in the system:

 

[posthuman]

There was a curse placed upon the earth and upon humanity at that time

No curse on Adam or Eve. The Serpent is cursed and for Adam's sake ((benefit)) the ground is cursed.

Nothing in the text calls humankind cursed. They were judged, chastised and covered with the shed blood of an innocent animal, clothed by His very own hand. God stationed angels to keep the way to the tree of life. None of those things are curses. God chastised His children. If He did not they would not belong to Him.

They confessed their sin and He covered them. He promised salvation to them. Adam believed and professed his faith, changing his wife's name, and God said he had become like Him for this. It is righteousness.
Salvation is not a curse, nor are any of our momentary light afflictions as we wait for Him.

 

[posthuman]

Not only was the ground cursed, but everything stated in Genesis 3:14-19 was included in that curse. Thus we read in Romans 8:20-22 that the whole creation was cursed and brought into the bondage or corruption, decay, and death

do not despise His chastising.

 

[posthuman]

That word "vanity" includes the term instability (which is expressed as entropy in thermodynamics).

you are correct; entropy entered the universe at this moment.

but it is not a curse on mankind. mankind is offered salvation through it.
this is for our benefit. it is for our redemption.
death will be destroyed.

Adam was not cursed. the dirt he was made partially from was cursed.
Adam is not merely dirt - he became a living soul, just like every other animal, because in addition to dust he was given the breath of life.
the breath of the spirit of life.
the breath of God.
Adam is a type of Christ. explicitly; Romans 5:14. Christ became a curse for us, to redeem the dust. not to redeem the breath of God.
the breath of God needs no redemption; it is redemption.
behold! He makes all things new!
amen

God's breath is not cursed; it is blessed.

IMO you are not far off, yet not 100% correct on this topic.

 

[Katia]

It is discouraging that so many see hard times as chastising. Many others see hard times as God teaching us lessons. Christians should see that, and in Islam it is more explicitly stated.
In my opinion, creationism and evolution are knit together. As Creation matures, and various creatures time comes to an end perhaps we could learn? I have encountered various people, some well educated who attempt to use that process to say that the Creator does not exist. Sad.