Cheryl Schatz

Mark,
You said to Kay:

It is completely against how one should interpret the bible. You can’t just pick and choose which pieces of history you like. If you want to see that naming someone means something other than an ‘authorative’ pattern it won’t work, because it is simple fact.

You are begging the question.

The fallacy of petitio principii, or “begging the question”, is committed “when a proposition which requires proof is assumed without proof.

You also said:

Regarding 3:16, no i don’t see it as a continuation of the way things were. I deal with this more in my next post with Cheryl, but quickly, essentially the context is punishment, therefore verse 16 is not a positive thing. The womans desire for her husband is not a good thing, nor is the husbands rule- this is a puinishment.

Are you saying that the man is being punished by giving him rule over the woman?

The Scripture is pretty clear when punishment is being meted out. God says “Because you have done this you are cursed…” (said to the serpent) and “Because you have …. cursed is the ground for your sake.” (said to the man). But where is the “Because you have done this” said to the woman? Where does God say that He will bring about a curse on the woman by putting her under her husband’s rule? Please prove your point instead of just assuming the point.

Basically it is a corruption of the original perfect relationship. But i expand more on that in another post soon.

I look forward to your further thoughts. But you will need to explain who brought about the “corruption” of the relationship? God or Adam?