Cheryl Schatz

gengwall,

Cheryl – “The second witness would be his sin nature and the fact that men all around the world seem to have inherited the tendency to want to “rule” in the same way.”

It is this kind of reasoning that is really disturbing to me. You again are asserting that Adam’s “rule” is attested to by males everwhere – i.e. that Gen 3:16 is predictive of the entire male gender and its conduct not only in marriage but also in society as a whole – yet you insist that Eve’s “desire” applies to her and her alone.

That is right and the reason is because we sinful women also get our sin nature from Adam. Men take after Adam in a way that corresponds to their tendency to sin and women take after Adam in a way that corresponds to their own tendency to sin. None of us takes after Eve. Only the one seed of Eve is without sin and we cannot import sin to Eve when the Bible specifically says that it comes through Adam.

How can that be? How can the Adam side of Gen 3:16 be universally about males, especially in marriage, but the Eve side of Gen 3:16 be only about Eve and have nothing to do with any other females in marriage or anywhere else?

It isn’t that it has nothing at all to do with marriage, but all other marriages are two sinners molded into one. Eve’s marriage was not that way. It was one sinner molded onto one without a sin nature. That is unique and has never been replicated since.

Make sense?