Hey Paul, God Didn’t Say That!
Paul said in I Timothy 2:11-2:15:
“Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.”
But it seems God had other ideas.
Genesis 3:13 - “And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me and I did eat.“ This is a confession of the female ironically stating (given the “accusation” of Paul) that she was indeed “beguiled” or tricked, even deceived. She willingly spoke her truth before God. As such, this was a fallen but proven righteous female who a traditionally-minded Paul saw fit to lodge attack against anyway. She confessed in black and white to exactly what he is still accusing her of these many ages after, and we must ask, particularly in the face of continued subjugation of the female (even from the time of Paul), that's righteous? But what about her approved confession of Genesis 3:13, and how much greater would that teaching from him have been? That she was “beguiled” was all she confessed to, and all she proved having need to confess of in the garden before God.
I John 1:9 says, “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” Proverbs 28:13 says, “He that covers his sins shall not prosper, but whoever confesses and forsakes them shall have mercy.”
Despite the clear word of God, and despite a Christ who commands that we ourselves confess in order to be set free, the tradition of the Church falls in line behind a Paul to justify subjugation of a rightly confessed female before God. Note also, God asked her this question, and that God asked confirms that what she too said (and even in the presence of a man) would matter according to the plan of God. Unlike a Paul, even at a moment as critical as the fall, God did not prove to desire her silence (and particularly given that the man only saw fit to lodge accusation). If all she sought to do was learn from and then follow the example of an Adam, then she too would have, as did an Adam and like the enemy does, accuse the brethren. But she did not, operating with respect for her own separate “head,” she alone did not lodge accusation against the brethren but confessed truth to the glory of God instead.
Genesis 3:14 confirms His belief of her confession, saying, “Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life.” Here is where we know God had respect for her statement as a confession of truth. A soon to be punished Adam however did not confess a truth that a righteous God could act on. Who knew that the words “Because thou hast done this” by God in Genesis 3:16 proves a demonstration in righteousness by the female in Genesis 3:13, and even today according to the actual truth in word, stands (whether acknowledged by the traditional male pulpit or not) as our first biblical example of making a right confession before God? In the aftermath of the fall, with a stubborn Adam still rejecting God, she alone emerged as a model citizen! The male tradition certainly won’t teach us this, but astounding isn’t it? So whether intended or not, Paul actually launched attack against one justly walking in the righteousness of God (and even subjugated by the man), and it was an attack even first against God as it is his righteousness.
But Paul said, “And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.” Due to the male tradition, a blinded Paul proves not to comprehend that the transgression of Eve WAS obediently covered by confession of her sin before God. In a world where the God who created already knew it would fall, Eve proved to function according to call. She alone demonstrated respect and fear of God by justly confessing the truth of her sin, and doing so in right alignment with the provision of Confession already made available by God. Further, pride went before the fall, so how is it that the accusing, un-broken, proud attitude of a soon to be punished Adam, arrogant even while standing before God, is not evidence that he too was deceived (and even more so than a now confessed Eve) by the enemy? How selectively convenient of Paul. Yet at the Return of Christ, acting in like mind of a garden Adam will be enough to take each of us straight to Hell.
Genesis 3:15 says, “And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.” This confirms the difference God was only able to draw between the serpent and the “head” of the female but not also between the “head” of an Adam and the serpent.
In Genesis 3:16 God says to the female, “I will greatly multiply thy sorrow.” What we fail to note is that in order to “multiply” her sorrow, there must first be, in whole or in part, at least a seed of that sorrow to begin with, otherwise there is nothing to multiply. Hence we have proof of her sorrow (as even acknowledged by God) at the top of Genesis 3:16, a sorrow expressed by her in direct aftermath of the fall, confirming crucial repentance, and even a repentance first evidenced in her confession of Genesis 3:13. I am not getting into issues as to why Genesis 3:16 only represents consequences due to the fall itself for the female (even as it still does today for us) and not a personal punishment of her by God, except to say, given a confession of her sin in Genesis 3:13 which God proves respect for in Genesis 3:14, and then even that God acknowledged her repentance in Genesis 3:16 (saying that he would “multiply“ what was already her present “sorrow“), unless God is a liar and not who he says he is, a God proving faithful and just to forgive us our sins, she was not punished. There is a sound explanation in word inclusive of the Hebrew dismissing the issue of punishment in Genesis 3:16, but given that her confession and state of repentance was already fully endorsed by God at and prior to the beginning of Genesis 3:16, all other details regarding Genesis 3:16 are academic in nature only. God, who is no respecter of persons, did not position a proven unjust man to “rule over” (even) a female proving to walk in his righteousness. To do this, He might as well give Heaven to be ruled over by Hell as well. It sounds ridiculous, but it’s the same mind-set.
Genesis 3:20 says, “And Adam called his wife’s name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.” - Not only is this the first time the perspective of Adam in word acknowledges the female as his “wife,” but even post-fall she is still honored by God in name and title as an “Eve” meaning “life-giver” and “mother of all living” as a childless, virgin in a fallen garden.
Genesis 3:21 says, “Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them.“ What we must focus our attention on here is the word “also.“ The use of “also” in this verse makes the man Adam secondary in this work by God (symbolically covering sin) to the primary who is the female Eve. God only made “coats of skins” for two people, and he only referred to Adam in this process as an “also“ because his actions are actually first directed to the female Eve. Adam, her husband, again, is only referenced by God as “also.” This confirms that God was only able to cover the sin of both due to the just actions (confession/repentance) of the female alone and not a still stubborn Adam. Remember, Adam did not confess, he did not repent, and he alone was punished. How could God have justly used him for anything in such a state?
Genesis 3:24 says, “So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.” It was Adam alone who was driven out of the garden by God, never also a confessed and honored Eve. She left according to the call of God only to remain as a wife to Adam. In a confessed state she was not even barred from the tree of life, else then what does that say of us?
So when Paul says, “And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in transgression“ it is he and others thinking like him in obedience to the tradition, who prove themselves deceived and grossly, even dangerously, in transgression. Again I say to the Church, give me proof in word that your subjugation of the female is of God and not the work of subtle, clever, and manipulative unclean spirits, because if you are depending on Paul to do it, this isn‘t it.
What are your comments?
“Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.”
But it seems God had other ideas.
Genesis 3:13 - “And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me and I did eat.“ This is a confession of the female ironically stating (given the “accusation” of Paul) that she was indeed “beguiled” or tricked, even deceived. She willingly spoke her truth before God. As such, this was a fallen but proven righteous female who a traditionally-minded Paul saw fit to lodge attack against anyway. She confessed in black and white to exactly what he is still accusing her of these many ages after, and we must ask, particularly in the face of continued subjugation of the female (even from the time of Paul), that's righteous? But what about her approved confession of Genesis 3:13, and how much greater would that teaching from him have been? That she was “beguiled” was all she confessed to, and all she proved having need to confess of in the garden before God.
I John 1:9 says, “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” Proverbs 28:13 says, “He that covers his sins shall not prosper, but whoever confesses and forsakes them shall have mercy.”
Despite the clear word of God, and despite a Christ who commands that we ourselves confess in order to be set free, the tradition of the Church falls in line behind a Paul to justify subjugation of a rightly confessed female before God. Note also, God asked her this question, and that God asked confirms that what she too said (and even in the presence of a man) would matter according to the plan of God. Unlike a Paul, even at a moment as critical as the fall, God did not prove to desire her silence (and particularly given that the man only saw fit to lodge accusation). If all she sought to do was learn from and then follow the example of an Adam, then she too would have, as did an Adam and like the enemy does, accuse the brethren. But she did not, operating with respect for her own separate “head,” she alone did not lodge accusation against the brethren but confessed truth to the glory of God instead.
Genesis 3:14 confirms His belief of her confession, saying, “Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life.” Here is where we know God had respect for her statement as a confession of truth. A soon to be punished Adam however did not confess a truth that a righteous God could act on. Who knew that the words “Because thou hast done this” by God in Genesis 3:16 proves a demonstration in righteousness by the female in Genesis 3:13, and even today according to the actual truth in word, stands (whether acknowledged by the traditional male pulpit or not) as our first biblical example of making a right confession before God? In the aftermath of the fall, with a stubborn Adam still rejecting God, she alone emerged as a model citizen! The male tradition certainly won’t teach us this, but astounding isn’t it? So whether intended or not, Paul actually launched attack against one justly walking in the righteousness of God (and even subjugated by the man), and it was an attack even first against God as it is his righteousness.
But Paul said, “And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.” Due to the male tradition, a blinded Paul proves not to comprehend that the transgression of Eve WAS obediently covered by confession of her sin before God. In a world where the God who created already knew it would fall, Eve proved to function according to call. She alone demonstrated respect and fear of God by justly confessing the truth of her sin, and doing so in right alignment with the provision of Confession already made available by God. Further, pride went before the fall, so how is it that the accusing, un-broken, proud attitude of a soon to be punished Adam, arrogant even while standing before God, is not evidence that he too was deceived (and even more so than a now confessed Eve) by the enemy? How selectively convenient of Paul. Yet at the Return of Christ, acting in like mind of a garden Adam will be enough to take each of us straight to Hell.
Genesis 3:15 says, “And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.” This confirms the difference God was only able to draw between the serpent and the “head” of the female but not also between the “head” of an Adam and the serpent.
In Genesis 3:16 God says to the female, “I will greatly multiply thy sorrow.” What we fail to note is that in order to “multiply” her sorrow, there must first be, in whole or in part, at least a seed of that sorrow to begin with, otherwise there is nothing to multiply. Hence we have proof of her sorrow (as even acknowledged by God) at the top of Genesis 3:16, a sorrow expressed by her in direct aftermath of the fall, confirming crucial repentance, and even a repentance first evidenced in her confession of Genesis 3:13. I am not getting into issues as to why Genesis 3:16 only represents consequences due to the fall itself for the female (even as it still does today for us) and not a personal punishment of her by God, except to say, given a confession of her sin in Genesis 3:13 which God proves respect for in Genesis 3:14, and then even that God acknowledged her repentance in Genesis 3:16 (saying that he would “multiply“ what was already her present “sorrow“), unless God is a liar and not who he says he is, a God proving faithful and just to forgive us our sins, she was not punished. There is a sound explanation in word inclusive of the Hebrew dismissing the issue of punishment in Genesis 3:16, but given that her confession and state of repentance was already fully endorsed by God at and prior to the beginning of Genesis 3:16, all other details regarding Genesis 3:16 are academic in nature only. God, who is no respecter of persons, did not position a proven unjust man to “rule over” (even) a female proving to walk in his righteousness. To do this, He might as well give Heaven to be ruled over by Hell as well. It sounds ridiculous, but it’s the same mind-set.
Genesis 3:20 says, “And Adam called his wife’s name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.” - Not only is this the first time the perspective of Adam in word acknowledges the female as his “wife,” but even post-fall she is still honored by God in name and title as an “Eve” meaning “life-giver” and “mother of all living” as a childless, virgin in a fallen garden.
Genesis 3:21 says, “Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them.“ What we must focus our attention on here is the word “also.“ The use of “also” in this verse makes the man Adam secondary in this work by God (symbolically covering sin) to the primary who is the female Eve. God only made “coats of skins” for two people, and he only referred to Adam in this process as an “also“ because his actions are actually first directed to the female Eve. Adam, her husband, again, is only referenced by God as “also.” This confirms that God was only able to cover the sin of both due to the just actions (confession/repentance) of the female alone and not a still stubborn Adam. Remember, Adam did not confess, he did not repent, and he alone was punished. How could God have justly used him for anything in such a state?
Genesis 3:24 says, “So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.” It was Adam alone who was driven out of the garden by God, never also a confessed and honored Eve. She left according to the call of God only to remain as a wife to Adam. In a confessed state she was not even barred from the tree of life, else then what does that say of us?
So when Paul says, “And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in transgression“ it is he and others thinking like him in obedience to the tradition, who prove themselves deceived and grossly, even dangerously, in transgression. Again I say to the Church, give me proof in word that your subjugation of the female is of God and not the work of subtle, clever, and manipulative unclean spirits, because if you are depending on Paul to do it, this isn‘t it.
What are your comments?
Replies are closed for this discussion.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by James Pierce on
-
Dawn,
Yes, Adam was deceived by his wife, Eve. Paul was not denying that point. He was making a point of who was deceived first. Eve was deceived first, then Adam. Adam was not deceived first. Thats all that Paul means. -
-
Permalink Reply by Dawn Davidson on
-
Only Eve confessed, where in the bible does it say that he or she who was deceived first shall be condemned? At what point is confession no longer an issue? Further, the only example of Eve before Adam post-fall was of confession before God. How much more wicked was it of Adam to, as you say, follow the direction of the female in eating the fruit, but then see fit not to follow the female in her direction to submit truth to God. Paul was not just making a statement, repeating what actually happened in the garden, Paul was seeking to establish just reasons for the subjugation of the female. The word also does not prove what you say as correct. It only states:
"And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression." Paul doesn't even acknowledge that Adam was deceived here, he says that "Adam was not deceived." And by your logic, are you telling me that the first person deceived in the history of God people's, though rightly confessed, will be rejected by God, in whole or in part, because they were deceived first? -
-
-
Also, the foreknowledge of God knew the fall was coming, who was deceived first was never an issue before the God of life, all he wanted was a just confession of their sin from both in order to continue their lives. He only received that from an Eve, not an Adam.
I won't contest it here, as it changes the topic far too much, but Adam was deceived long before Eve. -
-
-
Sorry to keep coming back to you like this, but things just keep coming to me. Adam was present in Genesis 3:1-3:6, he silently listened to every word of both the female and the serpent, himself saying nothing. All the female did after eating the fruit herself was hand it to her husband. Just like he freely made a decision not to interfere in what he thought might be her fall (and even death), after seeing that she physically survived, he freely ate. But you are telling me that a man already capable of such evil deceit was not first already himself deceived by the enemy? That was God's spirit he was walking in then?
-
-
-
Brother Watson,
Again, your own words proceed you here:
You said: “Lastly, I definitely believe that God believed that what Eve told Him was true. There is no doubt about that.”
You said that Brother Watson. Remember? The last time I re-posted it in response to like statements made by you above, you made a hasty retreat. So explain to me then what did you mean in saying this, and if God believed what she said in response to his question saying: "What is this thou hast done?" if not a confession of truth what was it? She could have made a choice to lie, or like an Adam merely lodge accusation against the brethren. -
-
Permalink Reply by Hezekiah Ben Israel on
-
Eve is dead. Why are you stuck on Eve Sister? She will be raised in the last day. That is all that matters. Don't turn this into a single doctrine because is apart of doctrine. Go further. What about us keeping the commandments? Feats, and dietary law? What about all of that stuff?
-
-
-
Hezekiah,
Missed you. Eve is dead yes, but the daughters of Eve are yet still subjugated based upon a false interpretation of Eve in the garden. So what is the male tradition seeking to cover up? Adam is dead too, but the Church willingly subjugates the female based upon what they falsely think was true of him in the garden. In terms of the effect of both their lives, Adam and Eve within the eyes of the Church both still live because the Church appoves of exalting the male because of an Adam and subjugating women because of an Eve. These Church teachings, ignoring that God is no respecter of persons, are based upon the separate personal legacies, whether true or not, of Adam and Eve. You cannot now argue that one of the two principal people be removed from this equation because she in fact proves to have done well and then still benefit as a man from a falsely interpreted life of a punished Adam while still subjugating the female and preaching freedom. It's hypocrisy. -
-
Permalink Reply by newview on
-
Wow, Sister Dawn,
Some man out there has really put a hurtin' on you hasn't he?
But I hope the saints keep you in prayer.
Whatever is ailing you - Jesus can fix it...not Eve - the Man Christ Jesus. -
-
-
newview,
I pray that you elevate from consistantly making character assault and particularly in the absence of stating something of subtance pertaining to the word at hand. Jesus did fix it, that is the entire point of ending subjugation of the female. I do this because as of yet, the Blood of Jesus has not proved enough before men to end subjugation of the female. What you support is hypocrisy, and that you say it is right does not make it right in word unless you can prove it and especially given that the male tradition in word speaks against the integrity and righteounsness of God.
Instead of constantly showing up to express such disdain for me, consider what it is that you believe is true about God according to the teachings of tradition. Does it prove Him to be holy, does it exalt his righteousness? There is no reason why we cannot have a discussion here without attack. -
-
-
Brother Watson,
I take this to mean that once again you refuse to stand behind your own statement?
You said: “Lastly, I definitely believe that God believed that what Eve told Him was true. There is no doubt about that.”
It's your credibility on the line in this, not mine. You might not agree with what I say, but I don't attempt to misuse both sides of the argument to do so. I make it very clear what I believe. Having said this, who knows what you really believe now? -
-
-
You never addressed what you meant in that statement particularly given that now you are supporting the opposite. Yes Adam sought to pass the buck, Eve, making confession which God accepted, simply identified who the enemy in the garden really was without implicating an Adam who was himself present the entire time as well. In so doing, no she did not pass the buck.
No Adam did not take responsibility for his actions if he did then God would not have punished him and even with the death pronouncement. Yes Eve took responsibility for her actions and was alone found right before God. -
-
-
Brother Watson,
You said: "What you have done was to totally condemn Adam" And yet it was God who specifically spoke to Adam the death pronouncement, not me. Your words speak first against God. Further, after the garden even Adam saw his change, but as a garden man Adam was not approved by God, only the female Eve was. That doesn't make her better, it just means she chose to do what was ultimately better before God in the face of sin.
You said: "God never said not to touch the fruit, God said not to eat of the fruit. Eve LIED about that. Yes she did" Where in word does God tell the female ANYTHING about the fruit? Give me chapter and verse please.
You cannot claim greater priviledge for Adam because he arrived early and alone received the command but then hold him harmless when the female proves to inaccurately state the same command without the correction of an Adam himself standing there with her.
I stated God contradicted himself where? The issue is, you say God punished a female who he proved to believe in 3:14, to alone use in direct opposition to the serpent in 3:15, and to confirm the repentance of in 3:16, but then also honored in name and title post-fall as a childless virgin in 3:20 as an "Eve" (life-giver) and "mother of all living," (and unlike an Adam, God allowed, even provided her with, a name/title speaking to life). And despite all of this, you who would subjugate the female say I called God the hypocrite?
You said: "YOU, Sister Davidson, are doing the same thing, you are adding to what God did NOT say." Brother Watson like I said before, lest your own words accuse you, let me know chapter and verse where God speaks to the female about the fruit.
And if she lied (which she did not, she only spoke in error due to an Adam having added to the word himself) why did God prove to accept her statement (in full) of what happened in Genesis 3:14? Where was her name speaking to dishonor as the man Adam alone received from God in the garden? It is you and all of your like-thinking forefathers who make God into the hypocrite. -
© 2024 Created by Raliegh Jones Jr..
Powered by
