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.
Correct. The reason for the overlap is because they both derive from the Latin verb commandare. The Romans preferred to differentiate between the verb and noun forms of a word by adding the -mentum suffix to it, ie, commandamentum, but the French apparently didn't have the same need and consequently a shorter form developed.
Yes, and we should not separate/discriminate between A&E, who disobeyed God's command/ment together and reaped the result together, although differing because of the difference in their sexes but NOT because one was better than the other. Cf. GL 3:28, "There is neither male nor female, for you are all one [equally forgiven] in Christ Jesus."
.
● 1Cor 14:34 . . Let the women keep silent in the churches; for they are not
permitted to speak, but let them subject themselves, just as the Law also
says.
It could be argued, with some merit, that this rule applies only to tongues
and prophecy; but Paul expanded its scope in a letter to his friend Timothy.
"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." (1Tim 2:11-13)
It's important to note that this is neither a gender issue, nor a competence
issue, nor an intelligence issue when it's so obviously a seniority issue. For
that reason it's an act of contempt for one's betters when Christian women
step up to govern Christian men in a Christian congregation.
FAQ: What about women like Anne Graham Lotz and/or Tara-Leigh Cobble?
Aren't they out of order?
REPLY: The instructions are limited to congregational meetings. They don't
include public venue's, e.g. forums, town squares, street corners, coliseums,
stadiums, convention centers, radio, television, or social media like YouTube
and/or Facebook.
FAQ: What about Deborah in the old testament book of Judges? Exactly how
was she an exception to the rule, if indeed she was?
REPLY: Things are quite a bit different now with Christ at the helm, i.e.
Christ's association with his church trumps Deborah's association with the
Jews. I do not recommend using her, or any other woman in the Bible, as an
excuse to circumvent Christ's instructions in matters pertaining to the
management of Christian congregations.
NOTE: Debbie was neither a priest nor a member of the Sanhedrin; her
involvement in the Jews' affairs was limited to her position as a judge, viz:
the Temple's sacred business was none of her business; that was strictly a
man's world.
* Paul appealed to "the law" as the basis for 1Cor 14:34. Normally when
Paul speaks of the law he's referring to the covenant that Moses' people
agreed upon with God as per Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy.
Exactly where in the covenant that women are forbidden to speak in an
assembly I don't know. However, it's quite obvious that the covenant is
very sexist, i.e. women were not installed in either the priesthood or the
Sanhedrin.
Moses' law doesn't always specifically address certain things. Sometimes the
law's rules and procedures imply principles that we call "the spirit of the
law". For example Jesus' critics were educated experts in the black and
white letter of the law relative to the weekly routine sabbath but they were
as illiterate as mannequins in regard to applying the spirit of the sabbath.
(e.g. Matt 12:1-13 & Mark 3:1-5)
_
● 1Cor 14:34 . . Let the women keep silent in the churches; for they are not
permitted to speak, but let them subject themselves, just as the Law also
says.
It could be argued, with some merit, that this rule applies only to tongues
and prophecy; but Paul expanded its scope in a letter to his friend Timothy.
"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." (1Tim 2:11-13)
It's important to note that this is neither a gender issue, nor a competence
issue, nor an intelligence issue when it's so obviously a seniority issue. For
that reason it's an act of contempt for one's betters when Christian women
step up to govern Christian men in a Christian congregation.
FAQ: What about women like Anne Graham Lotz and/or Tara-Leigh Cobble?
Aren't they out of order?
REPLY: The instructions are limited to congregational meetings. They don't
include public venue's, e.g. forums, town squares, street corners, coliseums,
stadiums, convention centers, radio, television, or social media like YouTube
and/or Facebook.
FAQ: What about Deborah in the old testament book of Judges? Exactly how
was she an exception to the rule, if indeed she was?
REPLY: Things are quite a bit different now with Christ at the helm, i.e.
Christ's association with his church trumps Deborah's association with the
Jews. I do not recommend using her, or any other woman in the Bible, as an
excuse to circumvent Christ's instructions in matters pertaining to the
management of Christian congregations.
NOTE: Debbie was neither a priest nor a member of the Sanhedrin; her
involvement in the Jews' affairs was limited to her position as a judge, viz:
the Temple's sacred business was none of her business; that was strictly a
man's world.
* Paul appealed to "the law" as the basis for 1Cor 14:34. Normally when
Paul speaks of the law he's referring to the covenant that Moses' people
agreed upon with God as per Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy.
Exactly where in the covenant that women are forbidden to speak in an
assembly I don't know. However, it's quite obvious that the covenant is
very sexist, i.e. women were not installed in either the priesthood or the
Sanhedrin.
Moses' law doesn't always specifically address certain things. Sometimes the
law's rules and procedures imply principles that we call "the spirit of the
law". For example Jesus' critics were educated experts in the black and
white letter of the law relative to the weekly routine sabbath but they were
as illiterate as mannequins in regard to applying the spirit of the sabbath.
(e.g. Matt 12:1-13 & Mark 3:1-5)
_
● 1Cor 11:3 . . 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.
There's way too many Christians out there ready to drag Paul into a pie fight
with himself by countering his instructions with other of his own instructions,
for example:
"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)
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. The hierarchy within humanity is based primarily upon
seniority. (1Tim 2:13)
_
-
1
- Show all
I think some are offended by the term command as if they don’t want authority over them
eveything God speaks comes in the form of a commandment but not looking at it from the perspective of one being commanded and oppressed what I mean is
“And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.”
Genesis 1:3, 9, 11 KJV
when the creator speaks creation obeys his commandment . Not because of oppression but because he is the source of it all his word is the source of creation so even later we see that his words are commands
He commands the winds and sea
“And he arose, and rebuked the wind, and said unto the sea, Peace, be still. And the wind ceased, and there was a great calm.”
Mark 4:39 KJV
He commands disease
“And Jesus put forth his hand, and touched him, saying, I will; be thou clean. And immediately his leprosy was cleansed.”
Matthew 8:3 KJV
He commands life and death
“And when he thus had spoken, he cried with a loud voice, Lazarus, come forth. And he that was dead came forth, bound hand and foot with graveclothes: and his face was bound about with a napkin. Jesus saith unto them, Loose him, and let him go.”
John 11:43-44
Everything God says is by its nature a command because he is God the creator and authority over all things when his word is spoken its commanding creation . I think mankind hears “ commandment “ and they take the view of a servant being ordered and bossed around
really his words are true and he’s telling us how to live and not die by commandment either way
eveything God speaks comes in the form of a commandment but not looking at it from the perspective of one being commanded and oppressed what I mean is
“And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.”
Genesis 1:3, 9, 11 KJV
when the creator speaks creation obeys his commandment . Not because of oppression but because he is the source of it all his word is the source of creation so even later we see that his words are commands
He commands the winds and sea
“And he arose, and rebuked the wind, and said unto the sea, Peace, be still. And the wind ceased, and there was a great calm.”
Mark 4:39 KJV
He commands disease
“And Jesus put forth his hand, and touched him, saying, I will; be thou clean. And immediately his leprosy was cleansed.”
Matthew 8:3 KJV
He commands life and death
“And when he thus had spoken, he cried with a loud voice, Lazarus, come forth. And he that was dead came forth, bound hand and foot with graveclothes: and his face was bound about with a napkin. Jesus saith unto them, Loose him, and let him go.”
John 11:43-44
Everything God says is by its nature a command because he is God the creator and authority over all things when his word is spoken its commanding creation . I think mankind hears “ commandment “ and they take the view of a servant being ordered and bossed around
really his words are true and he’s telling us how to live and not die by commandment either way
-
1
- Show all
Frankly, there is a pretty good possibility that some men who cannot tolerate any sort of questioning regarding their 'authority' over women, are actually narcissists. They will use the Bible like a weapon to excuse what they say and what they do. Oh that could not possibly be true with a Christian you say? You may be alarmed to find out it most certainly can and does happen. Christian pastors or any Christian man should not project superiority towards women or men for that matter.
Silencing people with supposed superior biblical knowledge is a sure sign that person does not have the capacity to love others as we are actually instructed to do. Some people might know what I am addressing here and some might be highly offended. In either case, it is simply to make others aware that there are or can be spiritual dimensions that you are not aware of and being aware of spiritual abuse is actually arming yourself to be able to defend yourself.
In the same instance, the word narcissist is overused and misused in today's jargon but nonetheless, actual narcissists do hurt people every single day and sadly quite a few are found in the pulpit or congregations where women (and sometimes men) are treated as though they are present for the support of the narcissist and exist only for their benefit.
Silencing people with supposed superior biblical knowledge is a sure sign that person does not have the capacity to love others as we are actually instructed to do. Some people might know what I am addressing here and some might be highly offended. In either case, it is simply to make others aware that there are or can be spiritual dimensions that you are not aware of and being aware of spiritual abuse is actually arming yourself to be able to defend yourself.
In the same instance, the word narcissist is overused and misused in today's jargon but nonetheless, actual narcissists do hurt people every single day and sadly quite a few are found in the pulpit or congregations where women (and sometimes men) are treated as though they are present for the support of the narcissist and exist only for their benefit.
-
2
- Show all
Yes, but the natural sphere should reflect the spiritual sphere as much as possible per the Lord's prayer for God's kingdom to come on earth as it is in heaven.
IOW, P's pie fight can be resolved by understanding that some of his pronouncements were for that specific Zeitgeist, while others were eternal moral principles, as indicated in EPH 5:25&33, "Husbands, love your wives just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her... Each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband."
IOW, P's pie fight can be resolved by understanding that some of his pronouncements were for that specific Zeitgeist, while others were eternal moral principles, as indicated in EPH 5:25&33, "Husbands, love your wives just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her... Each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband."
-
1
- Show all
.
● Matt 19:4-6 . . Have you not read? He who made them at the beginning
made them male and female and said: For this reason a man shall leave his
father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one
flesh. So then, they are no longer two but one flesh.
Women in one flesh with a man doesn't make them equal to a man any
more than Christians in one Spirit with Christ makes them equal to Christ;
for example:
"Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord; and you have become her
daughters if you do what is right without being frightened by any fear."
(1Pet 3:6)
In other words: Sarah's arrangement with Abraham was voluntary, viz: she
was neither coerced nor intimidated to be his subordinate and he her
superior, i.e. Abraham didn't have to break Sarah's spirit by violence,
neglect, or abuse. That's the point Peter is trying to get across, to wit:
seeing as how Christian women are under an honor system, instead of a
legal system, then they have to take the initiative to follow Sarah's example
rather than horse whipped.
"I urge you, brethren, in view of God's mercy, to offer your bodies as living
sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God-- this is your spiritual act of worship. Do
not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by
the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what
God's will is-- His good, pleasing and perfect will." (Rom 12:12)
* Sarah's original name was Sarai (Gen 17:15) which in Hebrew means
dominative, i.e. domineering. I can't imagine any parent tagging their little
girl with a bossy name like that, but apparently it was appropriate, viz; baby
Sarai must've been a demanding little tyke right from the get-go. But my
point is: if a strong-willed woman like Sarah can make up her mind to get
behind her man, then I should imagine it would be possible for most any
Christian woman do what is right by her man.
_
● Matt 19:4-6 . . Have you not read? He who made them at the beginning
made them male and female and said: For this reason a man shall leave his
father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one
flesh. So then, they are no longer two but one flesh.
Women in one flesh with a man doesn't make them equal to a man any
more than Christians in one Spirit with Christ makes them equal to Christ;
for example:
"Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord; and you have become her
daughters if you do what is right without being frightened by any fear."
(1Pet 3:6)
In other words: Sarah's arrangement with Abraham was voluntary, viz: she
was neither coerced nor intimidated to be his subordinate and he her
superior, i.e. Abraham didn't have to break Sarah's spirit by violence,
neglect, or abuse. That's the point Peter is trying to get across, to wit:
seeing as how Christian women are under an honor system, instead of a
legal system, then they have to take the initiative to follow Sarah's example
rather than horse whipped.
"I urge you, brethren, in view of God's mercy, to offer your bodies as living
sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God-- this is your spiritual act of worship. Do
not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by
the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what
God's will is-- His good, pleasing and perfect will." (Rom 12:12)
* Sarah's original name was Sarai (Gen 17:15) which in Hebrew means
dominative, i.e. domineering. I can't imagine any parent tagging their little
girl with a bossy name like that, but apparently it was appropriate, viz; baby
Sarai must've been a demanding little tyke right from the get-go. But my
point is: if a strong-willed woman like Sarah can make up her mind to get
behind her man, then I should imagine it would be possible for most any
Christian woman do what is right by her man.
_
-
1
- Show all
Would Paul be a narcissist for teaching this ?
“For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints. 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.
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 14:33-35, 37 KJV
Im Only asking about Paul’s doctrine here is there something wrong with it ?
notwithstanding of course some men would abuse this doctrine and abuse women treat them terribly and use it for an excuse , that’s acknolwedged some bad people misuse Gods true doctrines . And they will all be held to full account the day of judgement wo do.
What I’m asking is is what Paul’s teaching the church acceptable or is it something wrong ?
“For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints. 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.
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 14:33-35, 37 KJV
Im Only asking about Paul’s doctrine here is there something wrong with it ?
notwithstanding of course some men would abuse this doctrine and abuse women treat them terribly and use it for an excuse , that’s acknolwedged some bad people misuse Gods true doctrines . And they will all be held to full account the day of judgement wo do.
What I’m asking is is what Paul’s teaching the church acceptable or is it something wrong ?
-
2
- Show all
“Even if Paul wrote that passage, which I highly doubt,”
That’s what brought me into this thread that’s not a good position . You don’t believe Paul wrote Corinthians either ? As well as Timothy Or is your position tbat only tbat part he didn’t write ?
and you don’t think it’s possible you misunderstood or maybe “ feel “ this and just don’t want to accept it ? Rather than the scriptures in timothy and Corinthians and genesis ect are all wrong and not real ?
it seems like anywhere the Bible mentions that concept you obviously don’t like to hear , you claim it’s false scripture . That’s not a good position to set yourself up in
“No unmarried woman is subject to any man. Only married wives are subject to their husbands”
yeah that’s what he’s saying adam
And eve were husband and wife too ….your hearing an offensive thing that’s not there . He’s also specifically talking about church order and doctrine, not society. As if women are less than men or second class to God none of that’s true or what I’m saying .
That’s what brought me into this thread that’s not a good position . You don’t believe Paul wrote Corinthians either ? As well as Timothy Or is your position tbat only tbat part he didn’t write ?
and you don’t think it’s possible you misunderstood or maybe “ feel “ this and just don’t want to accept it ? Rather than the scriptures in timothy and Corinthians and genesis ect are all wrong and not real ?
it seems like anywhere the Bible mentions that concept you obviously don’t like to hear , you claim it’s false scripture . That’s not a good position to set yourself up in
“No unmarried woman is subject to any man. Only married wives are subject to their husbands”
yeah that’s what he’s saying adam
And eve were husband and wife too ….your hearing an offensive thing that’s not there . He’s also specifically talking about church order and doctrine, not society. As if women are less than men or second class to God none of that’s true or what I’m saying .
-
2
- Show all
Outstanding reply. aka knee jerk reaction. Indeed God is not the author of confusion, so why would you, how could you, possibly somehow conflate the apostle Paul with a narcissist? Please note, I am not holding my breath for an answer that would illustrate you have objectively understood what I wrote.
-
1
- Show all
it was a basic question of how you viewed Paul given what he taught and you said. Was curious so I asked a respectful question specifically about what Paul was teaching.
But lol I’m gonna have to guess that you said “ no “ Paul’s not narcissistic or mysoginistic for teaching that doctrine . At least thats what I can decipher from the response. Thanks
But lol I’m gonna have to guess that you said “ no “ Paul’s not narcissistic or mysoginistic for teaching that doctrine . At least thats what I can decipher from the response. Thanks
