The Effect of Eve's Sin on Women

My point was it should be translated wives, not women. That would avoid any confusion

There are a couple of NT passages that are not well-attested because they are not found in the most reliable manuscripts, MK 16:9-20 and JN 7:53-8:11, but otherwise we must assume they are innocent until proven guilty, such as OT passages portraying God as hateful toward Gentiles that do not jibe with NT teaching that God is all-loving.

Yeah people have a lot of different opinions things.

“And he said, It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel:

I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth.”
‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭49:6‬ ‭

.
FAQ: Shouldn't Christians be supporting equal pay for equal work?

REPLY: No.

FAQ: Why Not?

REPLY: Because it makes juniors equal to seniors; and circumvents the
firstborn's preeminence.

The Christian version of gender hierarchy is based primarily upon origin and
primogeniture irrespective of marriage and/or family.

For example: the man was created in the image of God, whereas the woman
was created in the image of the man, viz: the man was a discrete specimen
created with material taken from the Earth's soil, whereas the woman was
constructed with material taken from the man's body, thus she was the flip
side of the same coin instead of made a whole other coin of her own, viz: he
was the senior of the two on the one coin and she the junior, viz: the man
and the woman weren't siblings: their relationship was more along the lines
of a father and daughter than brother and sister.

* Women will never be truly equal with men except artificially by means of
man-made statutes because the divine scheme of things is a fixed frozen
sea, i.e. I doubt God has any plans to go back and do it over so as to
appease progressive women's complaints about their station in life.

bFAQ: Don't Christians believe in the separation of Church and State?

REPLY: Whereas the Bill Of Rights prevents the US Government from
establishing a nationwide religion to which all US citizens must conform; the
Bill does not prohibit US citizens from applying a religion's spiritual values in
their personal political philosophies.

FAQ: So in your spiritual opinion; equal pay for equal work is a humanistic
aberration of the divine blueprint, so to speak?

REPLY: Yes; and we should not be surprised seeing as how it is in man's
nature to resist God's meddling. (Rom 8:5-8)
_

I really do not give a care about what you are 'gonna'. For some reason you decided to respond to my post but you have attempted to abrogate what I actually stated. Assuming that the average person responding in this forum has at least a nominal ability to comprehend what someone writes, which would hopefully include you, your passive aggressive 'lols' and red herring subject matter, indicates an unwillingness to discuss anything but content unrelated to my actual post which had nothing to do with anything the apostle Paul wrote and, more pointedly, nothing whatsoever to do with you.

There are all kinds of personalities represented here and my comments addressed a certain type of person and not anyone in particular. There was zero need for you to defend Paul, the Bible or yourself. Interesting that you did so though.

The attempt to control others is not a manifestation of the Holy Spirit. It is alarming how many people attempt to do that very thing though and try to create the impression that they alone understand scripture and the rest of us had better pay attention.

Yes “for some reason “

the reason was I was wondering what you thought of what Paul taught there if it was narcissistic because of what you had said.

but I thought that’s how a discussion forum worked , it’s my mistake we should never ask a question bout what someone said to clarify anything ….. that seems way out of line

Paul did not "expand the scope"; his words to Timothy were in a completely different context and had no relationship to the words attributed to him from 1 Corinthians 14.


Hogwash and codswollop. There are no "betters" among Christians.

Webers.Home said:

Debbie was neither a priest nor a member of the Sanhedrin;

Click to expand...

It's "Deborah", not "Debbie". Maybe try not to be quote so blatant in your denigration of women.

Webers.Home said:

Paul appealed to "the law" as the basis for 1Cor 14:34. ... Exactly where in the covenant that women are forbidden to speak in an assembly I don't know.

Click to expand...

Exactly; you don't know because it's not there anywhere. Paul knew the Law and wasn't in error here. These two verses (34-35) are most likely a quotation in the letter to which he is responding. Verse 36 makes good sense in light of this.

Both man and woman created in the image of God.

Isaiah 49
14 “I have kept silent from ages past; I have remained quiet and restrained. But now I will groan like a woman in labor; I will at once gasp and pant.

"The husband is the head of the wife" is a better translation and doesn't open up the ridiculous interpretation that all men are the head over all women.

I look forward to the day when some "Christian" misogynist tries to be the "head" over my wife....

You're doing the same thing to him that you did to me: not reading carefully and jumping to ridiculous, unwarranted conclusions.

"Arrogant" and "misogynist" are perhaps better terms for such people. They don't necessarily "hate" women, but consider them at least slightly inferior to themselves and to men in general. Further, they typically consider anyone who doesn't believe exactly as they do in all things spiritually inferior and are quick to label anyone who questions them as "rebellious". If they have no formal "authority" over the "rebel" they will accuse them of rebelling against God. Pride and self-righteousness are at the root of the problem.

alright I suppose I’m victimizing you two by quoting from the words of paul and the words in genesis you don’t agree with….

I know you have trouble with reading comprehension, but try not to be an idiot.

According to Heb 1:3, Christ is the exact image of God, yet we're told by
1Cor 11:3 that Christ and God are not equals; and if I'm reading 1Cor 15:28
correctly; the hierarchy in the Divinity is permanent.
_

I’ll do that lol are you finished arguing now ?

I've learned a lot of things from the Bible that are relevant but that are not politically correct. I won't share most of them now since I don't think most people can handle them. But I'm going to ask everyone on this thread to not debate or argue.

I've been kicked out of only two churches (yeah only, right?). The second time was by a prophet who was so eager to be above as many people as possible that he said women cannot minister (in any measure); that immediately put half the world's population beneath him. It was an open venue church where anyone could speak at any time, so I asked him to speak and when he let me I spoke only about thirty seconds, explaining that women can indeed minister according to both OT and NT. I kept it very short.

Everyone in the church, especially the women, was murmuring in agreement. As the murmurs got louder, the prophet responded by telling me to get out of the church, and so I did. In the OT, we have female leaders; and in the NT we have female leaders. But there is a lot of nuance in really almost everything, and this is obvious when dealing the Bible (spiritual things) and when dealing with dynamics between men and women. I'll follow a woman if God moves me to (and yes, there are times when God will expect males to follow females (ask me for my meaning before disagreeing)), but I know when following is proper and when it's improper.

The fact is that God is so just, fair, and impartial that our human minds (as unjust, unfair, and partial as ever) cannot comprehend it. When a man and woman commit the same crime, we (men) punish the man and rescue the woman from consequence. God is not like this at all and metes out punishment as deserved. Our carnal minds cannot understand this. Our partiality is why the justice system (men) hate punishing females who commit crimes but punish men-- because we don't have a justice system; we have a punishment/vengeance system. If it was about justice, we wouldn't mind dealing it to whoever deserves; but we have a hard time dealing it to women because we dole out punishment, not justice. (Take a close look at the court system, at least in the West: from crimes to divorce to child-rearing, women are absolved of all guilt and men are punished even when innocent.)

Numbers 12 I believe is one of the greatest pieces of evidence that God is just and humans are not. In that story, both Aaron and Miriam speak against Moses. But only Miriam receives a punishment. Why wasn't Aaron punished too? That story shows that a.) either God hated/hates women or b.) Miriam was guilty of something deserving of punishment that Aaron wasn't guilty of. The answer is the second, but I believe that only the Holy Spirit can reveal this fact as you read the story. Miriam was punished but Aaron wasn't because God is just. In the case of Ananias and Sapphira both ended up dead, but the husband had to face the music first, because God is just.

Finally, we see a council in Acts 15 that was convened to contemplate and discern God's will on several issues that were problematic, obscure, or hotly debated. Ladies and gentlemen, we need many such councils-- ie. mature believers who are able to hear from and discern God's will on any given issue. Some people fight over little things when there are actual quandaries out there that would totally stomp them. Here's one:

A married christian man goes to war and leaves a wife and two little children behind. He goes missing during war and is presumed dead. His wife remarries has one or two kids with her new husband, and then her first husband reappears. He had been a POW for several years in another country and never died. But his wife didn't know. Now she's another man's wife. As far as spiritually (and maybe literally), she has two husbands. What is God's solution here? Nobody knows. But God knows. He has an answer for everything and a solution for every problem. The part of christians is to go and 'retrieve' these answers and solutions from Him. That was one of the foundational purposes of elders in the early Church and was meant to continue that way but unfortunately has not. Because we don't have elders or mature believers who play this role, most christians are in the dark or confusion or uncertainty about most things. We speculate rather than knowing; we guess rather than understanding. God purposely didn't make these issue plain so that we would rely on Him the same way parents enjoy it when their little children need them. Trying to fight out these answers individually will not and doesn't have the effect of unity and peace, and without unity and peace we can't experience the abundant life Jesus came to give, promised only to corporate bodies ("Where two or [more] are gathered") and not to individuals. (Read Psalm 133.)

Everyone here is saying relevant things on the issue(s), but it's all jumbled up without the Holy Spirit present as the umpire. When there is no umpire or referee, whatever sport you play (football, MMA, car racing, etc.) is no longer playing. It's fighting because there's no governor, umpire, or mediator. Without a mediator, people should do more agreeing than disagreeing because there's no buffer (umpire, mediator, referee) for disagreements.

That quote is not IS 49:14, but GL 3:28 ("There is neither male nor female, for you are all one [equally forgiven] in Christ Jesus.") indicates that we should not divorce A&E, who disobeyed God's Word together and reaped the result together, although differing because of the difference in their sexes but NOT because one was better than the other.

Adam was Eve's "better" by means of his seniority. (see Webster's definitions
of better as a noun)
_

.
● Gen 3:6 . .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.

FAQ: Supposing Adam had declined to taste the forbidden fruit?

REPLY: When the woman tasted the fruit, nothing happened. She went right
on in the nude unashamed as usual. It wasn't till Adam tasted the fruit that
her self-awareness underwent a radical adjustment and she began cobbling
together some fig leaves to cover up her pelvic area. In other words: the
woman herself, acting alone, was immune to the consequences of eating the
fruit.

FAQ: Their fall, and subsequent eviction from the garden, was on Adam?

REPLY: It was apparently God's decision that if sin and death were to come
into the world, they would do so by means of the solo actions of one person,
just as life and righteousness would come into the world by means of the solo
actions of one person. (Rom 5:12-21)
_