Though I would like to be done, the Lord led me to realize that in previous garden discussions I neglected to make reference to Genesis 3:14 which states:

“And the LORD God said unto the serpent, 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.”

The question is, when God says, “Because thou hast done this,” what specifically is he referring to? The preceding verse (Genesis 3:13) says:

“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.”

It is my assertion that God validates the truth of the female’s confession in Genesis 3:13 (and therefore true initial lack of intent to sin in Genesis 3:1-6) by saying to the serpent, “Because thou hast done this” in Genesis 3:14. That is, God proves to believe the female was tricked into this sin just as she confessed (and was subsequently proven honored in alignment with the will of God in Genesis 3:20).

But what do you think? Did the female speak the truth in Genesis 3:13 and God believed her? Or did she lie in Genesis 3:13 and make God into a fool because he proves to believe her by cursing the serpent in the very next verse saying “Because thou hast done this” (and even allowing her the honor to be called “Eve” (life-giver) and “mother of all living” in Genesis 3:20)? Or if you don’t believe God was speaking in Genesis 3:14 about the confession of the female in Genesis 3:13, what then in reference to the serpent was he speaking about saying, “Because thou hast done this?” What specifically did the serpent otherwise do?

Keep in mind Genesis 3:15 when God 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.”

Genesis 3:14 and 3:15 are written as one sentence (one complete thought/action of God) separated only by a colon (and even positioned as a direct response of God to the words of the female in Genesis 3:13). So we know whatever was the justification of God (a justification determined by the free-will and dominion of humans causing God to either destroy, save, punish, or honor) to punish the serpent in Genesis 3:14, and to even make a difference between his “seed” and her “seed” in Genesis 3:15, had nothing directly to do with Adam. In action, this is solely between the serpent and the female, otherwise Genesis 3:15 would have been inclusive of Adam yet it is not (though we know both sinned).

What do you think?

Views: 277

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Brother Watson, you are of unstable rest, and are unlearned.

You are an Israelite, but think that you are a gentile, I am sure. I wish you would listen, and read. Not think of your own heart, but what the scriptures say. I post scriptures, not my heart.
Brother Watson,

Has it ever occured to you, that there are many who sit in your congregation every Sunday (even as mature Christians) thinking as I do, even in their hearts, but who unlike me, won't speak it (and understandbly so given what I go through)? So who gets the glory in that, you or God? I used to be one of those silent women, I did it for years. But you are only content to teach me that I am free in a New Covenant but also as a female still held as hostage to an Old Testament word. My only plausible answer to that then is to make demand upon you to prove the garden word that the male tradition still feels justified in standing upon to subjugate the female.

So whether I am in fact right or wrong, I still prove better than the traditional male pulpit satisfied only to prove God as a hypocrite. But why stop there, if not because it benefits you the most as a man to do it? What you miss is that I don't have a need to control people to think as I do, I only raise questions, speak what I am thinking in an effort for us all to collectively get to what is the higher truth in all of this. You are short-sighted to isolate me as if as a female I am alone in thinking in like manner as this. There are many people in the Church, both men and women, not making this an issue but who themselves live as husband and wife under God rejecting subjugation of the female.

But what you are ultimately telling me is that even on the level of the Church, this is the best God can do according to his word. Muting me does nothing to resolve these issues and you know that. Why (even how) are you allowing a weapon formed against me as a female in the garden to prosper even under the New Covenant, Brother Watson?
Sister, you do have some way to go, but I can tell you really want to know the Lord. Go to this website either of these websites to watch their online live lessons because they teach the Bible.

Every Saturday at 1pm-3pm click that pic of that guy. He is the preacher. His name is Brother Daniel.

Every Saturday at 10am-12pm Click on the pic in the top left corner.

Have a Bible ready to read. This preacher is named Brother Buie
I do both of their lessons, and then go to my church, House of Jacob Peoria, IL.

I hope you try it out.
Brother Hezekiah,

I will check it out and thank you for this information. What I appreciate is your teaching spirit and the kind manner in which you do it. Many blessings to you.
Blessing be unto you sister, and keep your head up, and keep going.
NO i don't agree ,when we preach Christ ,that's what surfaces Christ and only Christ. I would say that's it's not us putting you through this . You have decided on your own to work agasn't the body of Christ. The bible says it will come a day when they persecute the chruch . That they think they do a God good thing , and that you do. There are many Great female leaders in the body of christ. Paula white, joyce myers, Dr. ray etc. Trust and believe they would not allow you and this hersey in thier church. ooppps I'am sorry there is one and it's a guy and his name is bishop carlton pearson
Pastor Valentine,

So if only Christ is surfacing why does the Church still condone subjugation based upon a weapon formed against the female in the OT? It was confirmed in earlier discussions that it was not according to the design of God but only due to effects of the fall. So upon what basis is the Church still doing it? And in answering this you cannot point back to an OT word, that becomes a circular argument. I love Paul, but he wasn't right to do it either. How can both co-exist?
The Body of Christ Jesus ]the church] does not subjugate man,woman,boy, or girl. Jesus the Christ does not subjugate man,woman,boy,or girl. The church has issues because the church is made up of flesh and blood. The church has isues becasue people do not study,pray, and seek the face of God.The Church will not be perfect until the return of Christ. That's why the bible says we are to know God for ourselves, To study and show ourselves approved unto God. To always fast and pray and to watch be led by the unction of the Holy Ghost. Stop looking for the perfect church no denomination or group has the perfect church. We must know and understand that we are the church. Also in the old testament we WERE under the Law. .We are now in the New Testament and are/is Under Grace. The old testament revealed ,the new testanent forfilled. The bible also says we are not to Touch God's anointed. So in what do you or I or anyone else stand inplace . To Question the teachings,preaching,anoitings, and the calling of .The apointing of Apostle Paul By Christ Jesus himself. I confess there are things in the Bible old and new I don't like. But if God said it , that settles it. .IN the Ot God showed man of his awsume creative power. God created man and woman,none above the other. Man and Woman fell on there on ,and were doomed. Yet God through his Grace and Mercy through out the OT pointed man and woman to a coming salvation. That salvation which came about with the birth,death,resurection, and coming again of .Our Lord and saviour Jesus the Christ. God knows I DO NOT HATE, YOU OR WISH YOU ILL I pray that you would come back to the Foundation. That was Laid by our Lord and Saviour Jesus the Christ.My prayers are that the Good Lord will continue to bless and keep you. These and all other Blessings I ask in that name that is above All Names Jesus the Christ
What is grace Brother Valentine?
Brother Valentine,

I didn't even consider that you actually hate me, and nor do I of you. In Christ I love you dearly whether we agree in full or not.

People can walk in the anointing of God and prove wrong about something as they are continuing to grow. This is a process for all of us. So taking nothing away from Paul, but only acknowledging that he was after all human, when what he says clearly creates contradiction in God we need to take a second look. I have said it before and will say it again, with all due respect, Paul is not our God and were our forefathers not judged by God for proving faithful to tradition and not God?

In so far as God's anointed is concerned, what earns true respect as the anointed of God is not merely the call, but their continued humbled pursuit of and in truth. Yet once you are proving to step outside of that truth, as the Church does in the garden, members of the Body are right to call it into question, and it is not disrespectful to do that. It only proves as sound judgment before who we know is a most holy God. Speaking to Doctrine, this is afterall about God and not man.

My adverse reaction to the continued subjugation of the female, in my opinion, proves my faith. It proves that I believe God is who he says he is, holy and just, and that subjugating a female under the New Covenant based upon an Old Testament word that man can't even prove is not of God, it never was. I am right to want no part of it and neither should you. You should not be comfortable in it.

If based upon the word of God, I know or suspect better, I make myself ripe for judgment by not putting you to the test. We are all admonished in word to study to show thyself approved, a workman who needeth not to be ashamed rightly dividing the word of truth. We are always to respect and submit to leadership, but that same leadership must simultaneously prove to teach the word of God in right alignment of truth. Some of us are paying attention.
Brother Watson,

You said: "I do have one particular question for you. Do you have a problem with the New Testament? Thanks."

No I certainly do not and nor have I said anything to that effect. Anything I have said about Paul in relation to the female is to only refute that God not be made the hypocrite given the contradiction created as man teaches and preaches with one foot on the neck of the female in the OT, and with the other foot planted in the NT, claim to have received the full revelation in Christ that all have been made free.
You know what folks, amidst this interesting conversation, the Holy Spirit has just brought something to me. I really think the key to figuring out the 'Paul' controversy is found in 1 Corinthians 7 where Paul says, 'but I say this as a concession, not as a commandment' (1 Cor. 7:6).

Why does anyone think that statement was put in there? What is the Most High teaching us with regard to Paul more or less proclaiming, 'this is of 'me' i.e. human wisdom rather than of God?' Think about that.

Elsewhere he again states, 'But to the rest I, not the Lord but I say...." (vs. 12).

Think about what Paul is saying. What is the Holy Spirit teaching us via even putting those two comments in there? I mean, we know 'all Scripture is profitable...' for a variety of reasons so what is the profit in Paul proclaiming that certain of his ideas come from his human understanding and not the Lord?

I think it was put there to show that we must use wisdom in deciphering the words of the Bible. Afterall, the 'letter killeth' says Scripture but the Spirit giveth life.

What that means is, we have to let the Holy Spirit teach us the Living Word amidst the 'letter of the word.'

There are precious, sacred secrets and LIBERTY amidst the Living word versus the letter of the law that consists of bondage.

As so, this then would extend to the 'garden' words as well. The Holy Spirit must teach the in-depth meaning that the captive may go free.

Oh, I could say so much more but I invite all involved in this conversation to think on what the Holy Spirit sought to teach us via putting Paul's statements of 'human reason' versus the commands of God that came through Him.

I think that's the key to figuring out the seemingly inconsistent statements of Paul with regard to the woman's role.

I'd like to hear EVERYBODIES' point of view on this.


© 2024   Created by Raliegh Jones Jr..   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service