Cheryl Schatz

Lin,
On the past post http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2010/03/07/why-was-eve-punished/comment-page-4 that we are now answering here on the issue of sin here, you said:

Syllogism of your premise

P1a – Adam’s sin nature is to be prone to rule over women
P2a – All who have a human father have Adam’s sin nature
Ca – All who have a human father are prone to rule over women

P1b – All who have a human father are prone to rule over women (Ca)
P2b – All women have a human father
Cb – All women are prone to rule over women

Interesting that I see Paula’s thinking in your comment. Did this come from Paula? Is so, she is welcome to come here and challenge me herself if she thinks I am wrong.

Now let’s look at the problems with what has been written.

P1a – Adam’s sin nature is to be prone to rule over women

This is not what is claimed. God said that Adam will rule over his wife. His nature is not to rule – his nature is to sin. One of the ways that he would sin would be to take an unauthorized rule over the woman. There has been no claim that he will take that rule over every woman.

P2a – All who have a human father have Adam’s sin nature

Adam’s sin nature does not mean that the person will commit every act of sin. It is a propensity to sin, not a propensity to do one particular sin just like Adam did.

Ca – All who have a human father are prone to rule over women

This is not the claim. This is the correct claim – All who have a human father are prone to sin.

P2b – All women have a human father
Cb – All women are prone to rule over women

This is just plain wrong and nothing like what I have claimed. Let’s not let Paula misrepresent my view. All women and men who have Adam as their ancestral father are prone to sin because they all inherit his sin nature. They don’t all inherit his way of ruling.

These are the inescapable conclusions of your arguments. They are valid syllogisms whose conclusions flow properly from the premises. The only way to change it, is to change the premise.

I recognize this as Paula’s writing. And usually Paula is wonderful in her logic as she is a very smart woman. She is very wrong on this one and she has claimed an invalid argument on my part. Perhaps she would like to come here herself to argue her point. That would be the logical and respectful thing to do if her argument has validity.

you must present scriptural support for claiming that women do not inherit this, or that only their eggs are sinless. Neither is supportable by scripture, or biology.

I am not claiming that women are sinless. I am claiming that all (including all women) are to be “shut up under sin” as the Scripture teaches. And I submit that Scripture states that the Messiah had to come only through the woman’s seed. If you disagree with this (and since biology cannot identify the sin nature gene) I would like to ask you why the Messiah had to come from the woman’s seed alone?

Here is my claim http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2006/11/20/adam-as-head-of-the-family/

You have redefined “sin nature” to mean a uniquely MALE quality, which females obviously cannot inherit, and that makes women devoid of a sin nature. That is the obvious conclusion of your premise.

Apparently Paula has not paid much attention to the post I keep linking to or she would not have made this statement. Females all inherit sin except for the first woman Eve who did not inherit Adam’s sin. It is only through her seed that the Messiah can come.

We must take a deep look at ‘inherited sin’. The Fall was horrible. It changed everything. Even for Eve.

Again I am assuming that this came from Paula. Scripture never says that the fall came through Eve or that sin came into the world through Eve. While she had great heartache because of the fall, she is never blamed. If we blame her, then we are doing so inappropriately for it was to be through the seed of the first woman that we could have salvation.

Lin,
I would really encourage you to leave Paula’s writing for her to present here if she would like. I am not sure why she would not come here herself to defend her own view. If she believes that she was created perfect and that she can stop from sinning because she has no sin nature, then she can come here and present her view.

Lin, thanks for always being willing to argue in a passionate way with grace and respect. It is very much appreciated on this blog.