Cheryl Schatz

I have had an extremely busy day so just got to all your wonderful answers.  I will start with the “last shall be first” answers (sorry about that Paula,  but you still get the prize for being the first one up in the morning with a brain worthy of giving logical answers).

Don,
Good answers, I especially liked #4 saying that it is dangerous to derive doctrines from bad examples.  Well said.

Lin,
I liked all of your answers, especially #3 about Adam worship.  I think we could say that the doctrine should be called Federal sinner not Federal head.  The only one that Adam was the head of was his wife as they are one flesh.  And Adam did not impute sin to his wife so the idea of federal “head” is a misnomer.

Paula,
I also liked all of your answers especially #2 where you said:

She wanted Adam. Not his alleged power, position, golf clubs or anything else, just him.

Are you sure about the golf clubs??  Very funny!  Also good point about Adam’s craving power.  The battle was not that Eve wanted to rule Adam but that she wanted to not be ruled.  This battle still continues today.  When one person takes rulership over another in marriage, it isn’t a one flesh union as it is supposed to be but a sinful reality of our fallen world.

Good job everyone!  Everyone gets an A+.