Mark

Cheryl,

I am glad you attempted to address all of my post, I give you credit for that. It seems that since I last logged on, comments have risen so I won’t have time to answer them all- but a few observations.

Why have you over emphasised what I said about Eve being technically made from the earth. Technically she is, since Adam was made from the earth, and Eve from him. However I am not trying to deny all the texts you raised. You have taken something you thought would help your view and pushed it way beyond my intentions, rather than engaging more fully with the more crucial matters.

Regarding ‘ha’adam’, we know in 3:9 it can only be referring to one man (not Eve) since the very next verse reveals this- only the man responds. However in immediately after the banishment, who is introduced, Adam and Eve- both of them. So the context helps determine who is intended, in 3:9 only the man, in 3:22ff both of them.

It saddens me that you dismiss even egalitarian scholars, rather than questioning whether it is in fact you who has it wrong. It is not good enough to simply blame them and me that it is comp ‘tradition’ that effects out exegesis. It might help you to know that I didn’t grow up in a Christian home or Church, so I am not affected by anything. If anything, the opposite is true, I grew up in a feminist culture. So it is not my past ‘traditions’ that are affecting me.

Also regarding your texts to disprove my point that Eve was not a ‘threat’. I asked you to show me a text that talks about ‘sin’ or even ‘sinners’ as not being a ‘threat’ to God, not to quote texts that talk about unintentional sin. There is a big difference here. Your conclusion draws that unintentional sin= not threat, which I think is wrong. Sin is an offense to God, whether it be intentional or not, if that were not the case there would be no need for sacrifice, either through Mosaic law or Jesus Himself. Did Jesus die once for ‘all’, or once for ‘intentional’ sin only? Also please engage with relevant biblical texts regarding sin, rather than simply saying they are ‘Calvinistic’. Either the text is saying no-one is righteous or it isn’t. It is either saying no one seeks God or it doesn’t. This isn’t a matter of theological preferences. Also why are Noah and Abraham declared ‘righteous’, is it because of their works or because of God’s grace? Remember how NT authors speak of these men- they are men of faith. Faith is a gift of God (Eph 2:8-9). So they are ‘righteous’ not because of themselves, but because of their faith which in itself is a gift of grace from God. Any declaration of being ‘righteous’ is purely merited to the grace of God. Paul conclusion therefore in Romans 3 is that by or in themselves, no one is righteous- “all have fallen short”. Notice the text does not say ‘except Eve’!
I can see now how you come to very wrong conclusions about sin in the fall narrative, since you don’t understand how sin is understood in the rest of the bible. Also it is not good enough for you to say that these sorts of issues are not relevant to the issue of women in ministry. The aspect of sin seems very relevant to your arguments right through the bible, so please don’t ignore them, when you yourself use them in your own arguments.