The Effect of Eve's Sin on Women

  • 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.
Oct 19, 2024
991
278
63
.
The Bible teaches that men were made in the image and glory of God. (1Cor
11:7a) Does that make men equal to God? No. The Bible also teaches that
women were made in the image and glory of men. (1Cor 11:7b) Does that
make women equal to men? No. In neither example does "image and/or
glory" indicate equality when it's only meant to indicate origin and status.


What was at the very root of the woman's fall from innocence? It was
basically her desire for equality with God (Gen 3:4-6) So the proliferation of
Eve's daughters fighting for equality should not surprise us. It's simply each
succeeding generation of fallen women handing off Eve's torch to the next.


* Incidentally, Eve went off-reservation before she became infected with the
so-called fallen nature. So her sin was the act of an innocent woman rather
than the act of a fallen woman. Well; today's women have never at all
experienced innocence, no, they're all born in a fallen condition; which only
serves to reinforce their resistance to the divine scheme of things.


What instigated Suffrage? What instigated Feminism? What instigated ERA?
What instigated equal pay for equal work? Why is the average woman so
intent upon equality with men? Duh.


"The natural mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can
it do so. Those controlled by the natural mind cannot please God." (Rom 8:7-8)
_
1CR 11:1-16 is a problematic passage, coming as it does after Paul just finished instructing folks not to judge or make a bone of contention about secondary issues such as eating and drinking, something he also taught in RM 14. Thus, it seems odd that he would make such a big deal about hair length. And his rationale saying only males are in the image of God does not jibe with GN 1:27. I can only think Paul must have been having a bad hair day!
 
Jun 30, 2015
25,470
13,782
113
.
The Bible teaches that men were made in the image and glory of God. (1Cor
11:7a) Does that make men equal to God? No. The Bible also teaches that
women were made in the image and glory of men. (1Cor 11:7b) Does that
make women equal to men? No. In neither example does "image and/or
glory" indicate equality when it's only meant to indicate origin and status.

While it's true that being made in the image of God does not make man into God, the above loudly implies a lower status for women than men.

What was at the very root of the woman's fall from innocence? It was
basically her desire for equality with God (Gen 3:4-6) So the proliferation of
Eve's daughters fighting for equality should not surprise us. It's simply each
succeeding generation of fallen women handing off Eve's torch to the next.
* Incidentally, Eve went off-reservation before she became infected with the
so-called fallen nature. So her sin was the act of an innocent woman rather
than the act of a fallen woman. Well; today's women have never at all
experienced innocence, no, they're all born in a fallen condition; which only
serves to reinforce their resistance to the divine scheme of things.


What instigated Suffrage? What instigated Feminism? What instigated ERA?
What instigated equal pay for equal work? Why is the average woman so
intent upon equality with men? Duh.


"The natural mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can
it do so. Those controlled by the natural mind cannot please God." (Rom 8:7-8)
_
The above is nothing but religious-sounding misogyny.

Eve did not go "off-reservation"; she was deceived. Eve was never charged with sin in the Bible (not saying she was sinless, just that this initial momentous act is never called sin). It's that simple, and there is no need to reinterpret those words or imply that they apply to every female (as so many "religious" misogynists do). Women are no more sinful than men.
 
Nov 18, 2024
21
5
3
I should have read more carefully earlier; Clement and Aquila are males. Chloe and Priscilla are probably the names you meant.
Ol, you know what i mean, Phebe, Chloe , how about Mary( not the mother of Jesus)synthece and Euodia( Philippians ch 4 vs 2-3
 
Nov 18, 2024
21
5
3
Ol, you know what i mean, Phebe, Chloe , how about Mary( not the mother of Jesus)synthece and Euodia( Philippians ch 4 vs 2-3
I have no argument with you. ;)
I believe that , if Paul use these women and more to spread the "gospel", Paul believed that these women played an important role in his Ministry.So in conclusion, someone must of taught them right! Like Lydia in Philippi . Which says Z"God opened her heart to hear the things of "Paul", what things?THE GOSPEL .So someone taught Lydia, and it was the (man) Paul
 
Nov 18, 2024
21
5
3
I believe that , if Paul use these women and more to spread the "gospel", Paul believed that these women played an important role in his Ministry.So in conclusion, someone must of taught them right! Like Lydia in Philippi . Which says Z"God opened her heart to hear the things of "Paul", what things?THE GOSPEL .So someone taught Lydia, and it was the (man) Paul
So women are so important in our lives. I mean it was a woman, that gave us "Jesus"
 
Sep 2, 2020
14,137
5,720
113
You feel what you feel, but your assessment is completely incorrect. I am disagreeing with you because I am confident that your position is wrong and warrants refutation.


Cite one "basic statement" that you think I "can't acknowledge".


Rabbit hole? This topic has important and lasting implications for our ecclesiology so it is worth getting correct.


Incoherence is to be questioned regardless of its location. If a plain reading of Scripture does not make sense, it must be considered that the plain sense is not the correct interpretation.


Why are you yelling?


"Like" has nothing to do with it. I am well aware of those words, but they have nothing to do with my argument.


You seem to consider any challenge to your interpretation as "rejecting Scripture". That's just argumentative on your part.


I'm not offended by Scripture at all. I consider your interpretation of Scripture incoherent. Maybe the big bold words will get your attention and you won't keep misrepresenting my response.

Go and look up the definition of the word INCOHERENT, as you still haven't done so.


I'm not taking any of this personally. I'm rather enjoying shooting down your position because it is so ridiculous.


You're trying to defend the wrong thing, but despite me telling you repeatedly, you haven't understood it.


Wife, not "woman". That's an important distinction, and regardless, Christians aren't under the Law of Moses, so it is functionally irrelevant.


We disagree. You have no good evidence for your interpretation other than your interpretation of Genesis 3:16, which makes your reasoning circular and therefore fallacious.
“You feel what you feel, but your assessment is completely incorrect. I am disagreeing with you because I am confident that your position is wrong and warrants refutation.”

your trying to refute scripture lol

“We disagree. You have no good evidence for your interpretation other than your interpretation of Genesis 3:16, which makes your reasoning circular and therefore fallacious.”

This is fallacious ?

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. 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 ‭3:16-17‬ ‭KJV‬‬

Which part of those scriptures isn’t true ?
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.

And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.”
‭‭1 Timothy‬ ‭2:12-15‬ ‭KJV‬‬

Why aren’t those ones true ?

Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.

And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church. What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only? If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.”
‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭14:34-37‬ ‭KJV‬‬

why does the apostle Paul continually teach this “ fallacious “ thing ?

Do you think it’s possible you are wrong and the scripture is actually clear and repetetive ? You should consider you own ability to be absolutely wrong and also possibly might want to look into what the term “ humility “ means biblically . You seem very proud.



Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ. But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head. But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered. For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.

For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man.

Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.

For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.”
‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭11:1, 3-10‬ ‭

Paul taught this stuff anyone who says he didn’t has the issue I’m okay with accepting and learning from the scriptures . I certainly don’t go on rampages against what it says and argue with people who accept it.

But I really dont have the time to waste arguing for the sake of it with you. That’s not why I come here for the past three years. It’s to reconcile things like the above that pul taught , The law taught ect

with what’s been done for both men and women in Christ. When you get to the born again part

“For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.

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 ‭3:26-29‬ ‭KJV‬‬

You’re missing the forest because you’re trying to chop down a tree with a wooden axe. Smokey bear says “ pour the cold water on the fire before you leave the campground it spreads “
 

Webers.Home

Well-known member
May 28, 2018
5,817
1,072
113
Oregon
cfbac.org
.
Col 1:15 . . He is the firstborn over all creation.

FAQ: How is Christ in the position of the supreme firstborn when so many of
his ancestors came before him? Shouldn't he be their junior and they his
seniors?


REPLY: Jesus would normally be pretty low on the primogeniture totem pole
were it not that the position of the firstborn isn't set in concrete, rather, it's
possible to circumvent the eldest and give his seniority to a junior, for example:


Ishmael to Isaac (Gen 20:11-12) Esau to Jacob (Gen 25:23) Reuben to
Joseph (Gen 49:3-4, 1Chr 5:1) and Manasseh to Ephraim (Gen 48:13-14)


FAQ: Supposing a man's daughter is his eldest child. Wouldn't that eo ipso
make her his firstborn?


REPLY: The top position of the Bible's primogeniture hierarchy is restricted to
males. For example let's say a man produces five daughters before finally
producing a son. The boy's five big sisters will be his juniors and he the
senior of his father's six offspring regardless of how much older than the lad
his five sisters might be.


NOTE: The position of the firstborn isn't limited to family circles. For example
Jacob's people are God's firstborn among the nations (Ex 4:22) and David is
God's firstborn among the world's heads of state (Ps 89:20-27)
_
 
Nov 14, 2024
90
31
18
Kansas
Jesus refers to Abel as "righteous Abel":

"..that on you may come all the righteous blood shed on the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar."

Interestingly, in the passage He is condemning the religious leaders of the day. He adds to their crimes the killings of Abel, Zachariah, and "prophets, wise men, and scribes" sent by God. None of these men knew Abel or Zachariah who was murdered. This is a spiritual matter: the murder in their hearts for God's people has existed since the time of Abel. It was ancient.
Correct. I was thinking of 'the religious spirit' just yesterday along with 'the Pharisee spirit' (I use these distinctions only because they're distinct; it's not necessarily the correct terms). After responding to comments, I'll be writing a post about the religious and Pharisee spirits. The former rejects God in practice and the latter persecutes Him whenever it can. In my opinion, it's very important to distinguish between the two.

So, were you in the other comment referring to Abel's biological bloodline or to his spiritual bloodline? You wrote about the spiritual (ie. spiritual Cains persecute spiritual Abels) in the comment above but I also wonder about the biological as the spiritual, good and bad, travels down biological (generational) lines as well.
 
Nov 14, 2024
90
31
18
Kansas
Yes.

Man lives by bread (Jesus Christ is the bread from heaven) every rhema (word) from God. That is: the word that Our Father continues to speak.

To claim that the written law is our best guide is to claim that we are unable to hear God's rhema word.

In John 13, when speaks, it is recorded that He used the word for commandment: entolē. His authority was the same as His Father because all authority was given to Him.

I actually wrote about the significance of this new commandment here: https://christianchat.com/bible-dis...aism-in-the-church.214178/page-2#post-5247546
Yep. I'll check out that link.

Also, I was speaking spiritually in distinguishing 'command' and 'commandment' (as I will be distinguishing the 'religious spirit' from the 'Pharisee spirit'). The distinction isn't necessary in the words themselves but in what the words are communicating. So, the words themselves aren't different.
 
Jun 30, 2015
25,470
13,782
113
“You feel what you feel, but your assessment is completely incorrect. I am disagreeing with you because I am confident that your position is wrong and warrants refutation.”

your trying to refute scripture lol

“We disagree. You have no good evidence for your interpretation other than your interpretation of Genesis 3:16, which makes your reasoning circular and therefore fallacious.”

This is fallacious ?

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. 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 ‭3:16-17‬ ‭KJV‬‬

Which part of those scriptures isn’t true ?
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.

And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.”
‭‭1 Timothy‬ ‭2:12-15‬ ‭KJV‬‬

Why aren’t those ones true ?

Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.

And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church. What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only? If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.”
‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭14:34-37‬ ‭KJV‬‬

why does the apostle Paul continually teach this “ fallacious “ thing ?

Do you think it’s possible you are wrong and the scripture is actually clear and repetetive ? You should consider you own ability to be absolutely wrong and also possibly might want to look into what the term “ humility “ means biblically . You seem very proud.



Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ. But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head. But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered. For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.

For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man.

Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.

For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.”
‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭11:1, 3-10‬ ‭

Paul taught this stuff anyone who says he didn’t has the issue I’m okay with accepting and learning from the scriptures . I certainly don’t go on rampages against what it says and argue with people who accept it.

But I really dont have the time to waste arguing for the sake of it with you. That’s not why I come here for the past three years. It’s to reconcile things like the above that pul taught , The law taught ect

with what’s been done for both men and women in Christ. When you get to the born again part

“For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.

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 ‭3:26-29‬ ‭KJV‬‬

You’re missing the forest because you’re trying to chop down a tree with a wooden axe. Smokey bear says “ pour the cold water on the fire before you leave the campground it spreads “
You aren't paying attention to what I'm saying. Instead, you are yelling, repeating yourself, and completely misrepresenting my position. There's no point in trying to communicate with you when you refuse to 'listen'.
 
Sep 2, 2020
14,137
5,720
113
You aren't paying attention to what I'm saying. Instead, you are yelling, repeating yourself, and completely misrepresenting my position. There's no point in trying to communicate with you when you refuse to 'listen'.
Ok sounds good we agree there’s no point in continuing this Grace and peace to you
 
Jun 30, 2015
25,470
13,782
113
.
Col 1:15 . . He is the firstborn over all creation.

FAQ: How is Christ in the position of the supreme firstborn when so many of
his ancestors came before him? Shouldn't he be their junior and they his
seniors?


REPLY: Jesus would normally be pretty low on the primogeniture totem pole
were it not that the position of the firstborn isn't set in concrete, rather, it's
possible to circumvent the eldest and give his seniority to a junior, for example:


Ishmael to Isaac (Gen 20:11-12) Esau to Jacob (Gen 25:23) Reuben to
Joseph (Gen 49:3-4, 1Chr 5:1) and Manasseh to Ephraim (Gen 48:13-14)


FAQ: Supposing a man's daughter is his eldest child. Wouldn't that eo ipso
make her his firstborn?


REPLY: The top position of the Bible's primogeniture hierarchy is restricted to
males. For example let's say a man produces five daughters before finally
producing a son. The boy's five big sisters will be his juniors and he the
senior of his father's six offspring regardless of how much older than the lad
his five sisters might be.


NOTE: The position of the firstborn isn't limited to family circles. For example
Jacob's people are God's firstborn among the nations (Ex 4:22) and David is
God's firstborn among the world's heads of state (Ps 89:20-27)
_
None of which has any bearing whatsoever on this topic.
 
Sep 2, 2020
14,137
5,720
113
Right. God doesn't curse (at least not now). At the time of the Fall, the Curse entered and God declared it (or made it known the same way He was only making known a spiritual law that had already long been in effect when He told Moses th.at the sins of the parents would continue through the children).

English and human language are limited. Try to find what the gems in what you read because gems are gems because they are rare and hidden.

And yes, after the Curse entered, walls were raised between male and female. One of those walls was raised by the Curse; the other wall God raised. These are all things that are not only in the Bible but that you experience daily. Asking God for eyes to see or to make sense of what you experience-- ie. everyday life-- shows you that the truths in the Bible are all around us still. Those truths are not only in the Bible; they are in all of Creation and existence.

I recall back in college when girls wanted to know how guys think and guys wanted to know how girls think. They wanted to understand each other better. I did my best to explain what was obvious or plain to me, but throughout college no one got it. It was years later when I realized why they couldn't see it: God hid it. When at the Fall sin entered, it made Adam and Eve immediately selfish. People became inclined to seek pleasure and to use others to get it. To mitigate each gender's ability to use the other, God hid from each party understanding about the other because He could no longer trust them with that information. You can see this around you today. A man can grow up surrounded by women-- sisters, aunts, friends, etc.-- and still not understand women; and a woman can experience a lot of attention and validation from men and still not understand men. This was not the case before the Fall. So, don't stay in the Bible and forget about natural, practical, everyday life. All the things in the Bible are relevant and operational right here and now just like all the past revivals are still alive (though not manifesting) and relevant today.
God set a blessing and curse before us and we cursed ourselves and all the earth breaking his covenant

“Behold, I set before you this day a blessing and a curse; a blessing, if ye obey the commandments of the LORD your God, which I command you this day: and a curse, if ye will not obey the commandments of the LORD your God, but turn aside out of the way which I command you this day, to go after other gods, which ye have not known.”
‭‭Deuteronomy‬ ‭11:26-28‬ ‭

“I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live:”
‭‭Deuteronomy‬ ‭30:19‬ ‭KJV‬‬



“And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: ( life )

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.”( death )
‭‭Genesis‬ ‭2:16-17‬ ‭

“The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant. Therefore hath the curse devoured the earth, and they that dwell therein are desolate: therefore the inhabitants of the earth are burned, and few men left.”
‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭24:5-6‬ ‭KJV‬‬

Christ saves people who believe from that curse we caused by the choice presented by the commandment by dying for thier sins under the law freeing them from it

“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 ‭
 
Nov 14, 2024
90
31
18
Kansas
A distinction without a difference. The same word entole is used throughout the NT to refer to commandment/command. They mean the same thing

commandment /kə-mănd′mənt/

noun
  1. A command
I wasn's speaking about the literal words; we need words to communicate, but "most communication is non-verbal" (or most communication can't be vocalized) because we have two immaterial parts (spirit and soul) and only one material part (body); therefore, naturally, most of our communication will be physically/vocally incommunicable. I was speaking spiritually. A command and commandment are the same and also different, distinctly different.

If you read books or articles about 'generational curses' and 'family curses', you'll find that the authors will define both those things as one thing. But if you happen to ask God if there is a distinction between the two, you will find that there is. On earth when we say those two phrases, we lump them together as the same thing. But in the spirit realm (ie. the realm where they see things as they in fact are and not how we might think they are (eg. "Jesus I know, and Paul I know, but who are you?")), those two things are two totally different things. They're two entirely different dynamics. We can use them to mean the same thing (ie. 'curses/sinful inclinations that passively pass down from generation to generation'), but they're not the same thing.

In English, we have only one word for snow. But the Inuit tribe(s) have at least 53 words for snow... because there are different types of snow. In English, we have only one word for 'love'. In Greek, we know of four words for love (agapao, storge, phileo, eros)... but there are far more than four different types of love (eg. the love you have for food is different/distinct from the love you have for nature, but both types of love aren't distinguished by words in English or Greek), therefore, one can legitimately make more words to fit each different type of love. The Bible doesn't talk about everything or spell everything out; but you can find and learn about everything in it through the tutorship of the Holy Spirit.

If someone's boss or a military officer gave an order, it can correctly be called a command. It would not be called a commandment. But the rules for that company (company where you work or military company, also two different things) can correctly be called commandments but not commands. You don't have to make [fine] distinctions if you don't want to. But it's important that I do. I don't limit myself to human language. Such limitations prevented Israel's religious leaders from recognizing, approving, acknowledging, and accepting Jesus and any truth outside their limited views (mindsets) and comfort (way of life).
 
Nov 14, 2024
90
31
18
Kansas
.
Gen 3:16 . . and he shall rule over you.

That particular rule has little to do with gender. It's all about primogeniture.

Adam was created first; and that was directly from dirt. Afterwards, Eve was
constructed but not directly from dirt-- instead, she was constructed with
material taken from Adam's body. So then, he was her senior and she was
his junior. Had Eve been constructed directly from dirt she would've been
Adam's equal but coming from his body makes her more like a daughter;
and to my knowledge; daughters are never equal to their daddy.


Gen 3:16 has yet to be rescinded, for example:

"But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the
head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God."


It never seems to fail that somebody will actually attempt to refute Paul's
instructions in a pie fight with other of his instructions, to wit:


"You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were
baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew
nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ
Jesus." (Gal 3:26-28)


(chuckle) Paul pitted against Paul; the clash of the titans, only in this event,
both titans are one and the same titan. Yes, men and women lose their
distinctions in the spiritual sphere, but not in the natural sphere.


For example Jesus and God are unified, yet there is a hierarchy in the
Divinity because the head of Christ is God. In like manner, men and women
are unified in Christ, yet there remains a hierarchy in humanity because the
man is the head of the woman.


NOTE: Beware becoming militant about this because it's neither a gender
issue, an intelligence issue, a competency issue, a strength issue, or a
maturity issue. This particular arrangement is based solely upon seniority.
(1Tim 2:12-13)
_
That's correct. All of it.
 
Nov 14, 2024
90
31
18
Kansas
.
Col 1:15 . . He is the firstborn over all creation.

FAQ: How is Christ in the position of the supreme firstborn when so many of
his ancestors came before him? Shouldn't he be their junior and they his
seniors?


REPLY: Jesus would normally be pretty low on the primogeniture totem pole
were it not that the position of the firstborn isn't set in concrete, rather, it's
possible to circumvent the eldest and give his seniority to a junior, for example:


Ishmael to Isaac (Gen 20:11-12) Esau to Jacob (Gen 25:23) Reuben to
Joseph (Gen 49:3-4, 1Chr 5:1) and Manasseh to Ephraim (Gen 48:13-14)


FAQ: Supposing a man's daughter is his eldest child. Wouldn't that eo ipso
make her his firstborn?


REPLY: The top position of the Bible's primogeniture hierarchy is restricted to
males. For example let's say a man produces five daughters before finally
producing a son. The boy's five big sisters will be his juniors and he the
senior of his father's six offspring regardless of how much older than the lad
his five sisters might be.


NOTE: The position of the firstborn isn't limited to family circles. For example
Jacob's people are God's firstborn among the nations (Ex 4:22) and David is
God's firstborn among the world's heads of state (Ps 89:20-27)
_
All correct.
 
Nov 1, 2024
684
181
43
If someone's boss or a military officer gave an order, it can correctly be called a command. It would not be called a commandment. But the rules for that company (company where you work or military company, also two different things) can correctly be called commandments but not commands. You don't have to make [fine] distinctions if you don't want to. But it's important that I do. I don't limit myself to human language. Such limitations prevented Israel's religious leaders from recognizing, approving, acknowledging, and accepting Jesus and any truth outside their limited views (mindsets) and comfort (way of life).
Actually, I don't think the difference is sublime or spiritual at all. We don't use the word commandment these days, so it sounds religious to us because the only place we really read it is in the bible. We use the word command for verbal orders and law, rule, regulation, etc for written ones. Nobody uses the word commandment except in reference to the bible, so basically it's an obsolete word.
 
Nov 14, 2024
90
31
18
Kansas
Actually, I don't think the difference is sublime or spiritual at all. We don't use the word commandment these days, so it sounds religious to us because the only place we really read it is in the bible. We use the word command for verbal orders and law, rule, regulation, etc for written ones. Nobody uses the word commandment except in reference to the bible, so basically it's an obsolete word.
Look for my post I will call 'Benefits of Purity of Heart' later tonight where I will again allude to the distinction between command and commandment. It is not the words I am distinguishing; it is the meaning of the words. The words are all we have, but words are limiting and restricting when talking about spiritual things. Those two words mean different things in our human dictionary; but in the spirit they are often used to explain two very distinct things.