pinklight

Thank you Cheryl for the fix!

hahaha! I can’t get the quotes work right LOL!! Sorry for the double post!

Mark, below I put a few of your words in caps to draw attention to them:

Verses 7-10 For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man. For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. That is why a wife ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.

Note the creational order…Verse 7 is the reason Paul gives for why a man (aner) should not cover his head- he is the image and glory of GOD. Again I think Genesis helps us understand Paul’s teaching here. Adam was made from the dust…and he bore the image of GOD (1:27). But note Paul’s addition of ‘glory’. ..The wife’s physical head here in Corinth needs to reflect her submission…Likewise the husband’s uncovered head ought to point to CHRIST whose IMAGE and glory he is.

If “God” is a reference to “the Father” in v3 then how can it be that “God” is a reference to “Christ” in v7? How can you justify Paul being inconsistent? How do you come up with the man is the image and glory of Christ and not God (Godhead) in the last sentence of your quote above?

Verse 11-12- Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man nor man of woman; for as woman was made from man, so man is now born of woman. And all things are from God.

Paul is careful not to leave his instruction on that note. Here in verse 11 we see the qualifier…Again the interdependence of husband and wife is closely knitted to the ‘one flesh’ union at creation. She is his glory and bears his authority, yet they are inseparabley one, and the man must never abuse his wife. Christ never does such things but instead lays down his life for his sheep. These verses imply the deep spiritual, emotional and sexual union shared by husband and wife- everything is from God. Also note that although the woman is under the authority of her husband, both are under the authority of God. Therefore however a husband sees his authority should be reflective of what he knows about God’s authority- that is he killed his own Son for his people. A husband’s authority should never be intimidation or abuse or lording.

What does any of v12 have to do with authority, period? In other words what is said about authority? There is nothing that I can see, so how have you manged to take v12 and get from it a husband’s authority and “the Father’s authority”?

“Add words to another person’s mouth is deception, pure and simple.”

It doesn’t get any more simple and clear than that!

“In fact, Jesus words, no matter which gospel account one reads, are never telling any believer to take authority of any kind over another believer – just the opposite – He warns against it.”

You are right Kay, but the problem is that women are viewed differently from or differientiated from being “just believers” since they are women (!) believers which is why Jesus’ words don’t carry the weight they ought to. There are believers and there are women believers.

I gotta go! 🙁

Botom line – if she knew the command God gave to Adam in the singular she wouldn’t have been deceived based on his craftiness, though she could have still been deceived based on her lack of knowledge.

I meant:

I have something to add to my last comment. According to the exact words that the serpent choose to use after his question which is when he next lies to Eve he is CONTINUING to twist the command that God gave to Adam.

I have something to add to my last comment. According to the exact words that the serpent choose to use after his question which is when he next lies to Eve he is also twisting the command that God gave to Adam.

The point is (which is a scary thought), Eve could not witness the craftiness that the serpent was pulling off which is part of why (other reasons why include that she lacked knowledge of the Creator and the created that Adam did not) she was deceived while on the other hand Adam could see it full blown because God gave the command to him when he was alone.

I don’t know if I get much of a chance to comment if at all for some days, but I just have to say that even though the serpent is asking the woman what God said regarding the both of them because he uses the plural “you”, the serpent is speaking to the command that was given to Adam which I can see by the precise word choice and the flip flop that he does to the command that was given to Adam.

The serpent places the words of God’s prohibiton “you must not eat” onto what God did give Adam for food “any tree in the garden”. If one compares the exact words God spoke to Adam and the exact words the serpent used when he asked Eve his question, one can see what the serpent is doing. Then add that to the fact that Adam was with her – now we have a situation where Adam knows what the serpent is referencing, but Eve does not, and that Adam did not speak up is part of the reason why Eve was deceived. Talk about a tangeled mess.

Put yourself in Eve’s shoes. God commanded you and your husband (or wife) at some point in time not to do something. But God commanded your husband (or wife) not to do something but of which you have no idea about. Then when the tempter asks something in relation to what God commanded your husband (wife) of which you know nothing about, and your husband (wife) is there with you but says nothing or deosn’t speak up, it would support or cause for an idea that going against the command is safe. Make sense?

For sure, there is aboslutely NO WAY that if Adam was with Eve, that he could have been deceived by the serpent’s craftiness since the serpent’s craftiness is revealed in his question when compared to the exact words God commanded the man. Adam knew the exact words of God that he was commanded and the serpent was twisting them which Adam could no doubt see.

So Eve gives a defense for God after the serpent asks her his question, Adam doesn’t speak up fully aware of what’s going on, Eve doesn’t think twice since her husband just goes along with it in the sense of not saying anything and bame she next looks at the fruit through deceived eyes. (But God did speak to her and Adam together according to her testimony and she also lacked knowledge about creation and the Creator that Adam did not lack therefore she was deceived into believing that the both of them (just like the serpent said) could become like God plus Eve was created after Adam so Adam was able to experience God acting as Creator yet again (his first experience was with the animals) when woman was made from him – so Adam knew the difference between Creator and created since he was created first.

Hope I expalined it well enough, but that’s the short of it!

“Now about Genesis 1, i am not ignoring it. God did speak to both of them about what they could eat. Chapter 2 however reveals what they can’t eat.”

On the timeline, chp 1 where God gives both food to eat (fruit with seed from trees on the face of the entire earth) comes after God commanded Adam when he was alone. Gen 1 which says that they can only eat fruit with seed reveals what they cannot eat – fruit without seed.

“If Eve was given a ‘seperate’ command where is it recorded in the bible?”

She was not given a seperate command alone at some point when she was not with Adam – because she says God commanded THEM (plural “you”).

“Why is her command such a distortion from the one God gave to Adam? Anyone who supports Cheryl’s view here needs to reconcile these things.”

Without a contradiction there is nothign to reconcile. “Difference” is far from what a contradiction is.

God said what Eve said he did to Adam as well yes, but when they were together (!) since Eve is using the plural “you”.

“This is not what God told Adam. So if you stick to this argument you are actually saying Eve lied by telling the serpent that God had said these things to Adam aswell, and thus she is sinful before the fall.”

The prohibiton that Eve said God said in not what God originaly told Adam. So what. God didn’t originaly tell Adam he could eat from all the trees on the face of the whole earth either!

“If you really believe what you are saying it is contradictory. Why, because what Eve saids, is not actually what God said to Adam-it is different.”

Mark, “different” is not the same thing as a contradiction. What Eve said God said does not contradict what God said to Adam when Adam was alone. What God said to both of them in Gen 1 also does not contradict what God said to Adam when he was alone. So that all three commands are different doesn’t matter.

Not only is there more given to eat, in Gen 1 (since Adam was only given garden trees vs all trees on the face of the earth) there is also more prohibtion when Eve quotes God. God can add and take away whenever he wants to.

Cheryl:“I am saying that Eve quoted God. She didn’t paraphrase Him by saying “God told me” she simply said “God said” and she quoted exactly what he told her. ”

Mark:”No, she misquoted God by introducing the words “and you must not touch it”.

Problem is Mark, the reason why she could not have misquoted God’s command given to Adam in Gen 2 is because when God speaks to Adam the “you” is singular and logicaly so. But when Eve quotes God she quotes God with the plural “you” since she is not quoting what God told Adam singularily as she wasn’t even created yet when God gave him the command, since there was no way for her to know what God commanded Adam. If she wanted to quote what God told Adam then she would of had to use the singular “you”. And the serpent did not even ask Eve what God commanded the man in the singular “you”. The serpent asked what God said about the both of them because the serpent too uses the plural “you”.

She ate because she believed the serpent’s lies while Adam on the other hand did not believe the lies about the fruit that the serpent told.

“you brought up another good point. Eve saw it as desirable for gaining wisdom. She is listening to the lies of the serpent, edging closer to him and falling further from God. All before she even eats the fruit and becomes a ’sinner’.”

Yes, that’s how she saw the fruit, Mark because she is deceived at that point by the serpent’s lies. She had told God that the serpent deceived her. This was the truth that she was deceived by the serpent’s lies. It is not surprising how she saw the fruit then. Her being deceived isn’t what made her a sinner, eating was, but she ate because she was deceived. So this all still goes to show at what point she was deceived by the serpent which was the point when she started believing what the serpent told her.

When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it.

spam word – vital

In Genesis 3 the text itself shows the time when Eve was deceived which was when she went to eat because of how she saw the fruit. The text shows her deception through her eyes. That’s the evidence that shows at what time she became deceived which wasn’t when she was just answering the seprent’s question.

ROTFLOL

“Now it is time to test all things by God’s word. What does it say?”

That women’s voices are filthy in church. 🙂

“So how did Eve know that she could teach Adam in the garden but certainly she couldn’t teach him in the “church” because that wasn’t allowed by creation?”

Maybe Eve knew that she could teach Adam but just not when God was present with them (under a tree).

“So how did Eve know that she could teach Adam in the garden but certainly she couldn’t teach him in the “church” because that wasn’t allowed by creation?”

Wow, now that’s a question!! 🙂

“Ultimately these things still fall under the spritual head of a man i.e pastor/elder adn i think that is the whole point. Women are still able to exercise their giftings, but I believe Paul restricts them where i have already said.”

I still want to talk about this! 🙂 I want to talk about what the whole point is.

“You just can’t forbid women from teaching in a church building and then link it to creation.”

Woman was created to not teach in a church building.

Says who, where and why?

LOL Dave!

“Pastors/Elders/ Deacons are all offices in the sense that they are positions/roles within the church structure.”

The ONLY picture of the church Mark, given in scripture of it’s “structure” is a BODY with different members – hands, head, eyes, feet etc, of which we are all memebers. Now if you can find a different picture portrayed by the scriptures themselves then I’d like to see this other kind of “structure”.

pinklight:“What is “the spritual head of a man” category? How do pastors and elders fall under this category? And how does a restriction on women teaching in church fall under this category??”

Mark:This category falls under the man i believe because men are the only ones aloud to be elders/pastors. We can engage in a discussion about the relevant texts for this but atm i’m trying to concentrate on these videos, but im sure we will get there at some stage. The restriction falls to women teaching because women are never given that position and Paul does not permit women to teach in those settings. Thats my position anyway.

Hi Mark,

Okay, so the pastor/elder fall under the category of the spiritual head of a man ( 1 Co 11 and Eph 5) because you believe that men only are the ones allowed to be pastors and elders. Now it sounds like your talking in circles! And then also say that women being restricted from teaching also falls under the category of the spiritual head of a man because they are never given that position? Which position? You mean since the wife is not the head of her husband and since the woman is not the head of the man therefore women are restricted from teaching? Is that what you were trying to convey above? Or were you saying that women are restricted from teaching which falls under the category of the spirtual head of the man because they are never given the position of pastor or elder? And what setting are you referring to above?

Go ahead and concentrate on the videos. I’ll just re-post this comment of mine soon so that we can pick up here when you can.

“the spritual head of a man” “i.e pastor/elder”

Mark, you say “the spiritual head of a “MAN” rather than “husband” and so I’m asking if you have 1 Co 11 in mind verses Eph 5 since without a doubt Eph 5 talks about husbands specificaly rather than unmarried men. You must have in mind at least one of those scriptures since they are the ONLY ones that use the term “head” regarding men. Or maybe I’m lost somewhere in bewteen your theology. And how do you connect either text to pastors and elders?

“Ultimately these things still fall under the spritual head of a man i.e pastor/elder adn i think that is the whole point. Women are still able to exercise their giftings, but I believe Paul restricts them where i have already said.”

If this is the whole point, Mark then that’s really what I want to talk about. 🙂