Adam and Eve Equal Partners

[MysticSang'ha]

If Adam is symbolic of the masculine (logical, reasoning mind) and Eve is the feminine (emotional mind), than we may say "At one point in time, the masculine and feminine both ruled equally in the mind, but after the fall (mind wants to serve itself), the masculine ruled over the feminine. thus, the logical mind determines the emotional state of a human." And if the logical mind were not in harmony with the divine, than the emotional state of a person would be negative, and all ideas born from that way of thinking would be negative. The feminine births the child (new idea in mind, result of thoughts) through suffering, because the masculine is not in harmony with the divine anymore. It makes sense to me anyway.

Interesting perspective!

And welcome to RF. :foryou:

 

[Avoice]

I think you are missing what I was saying.
Woman was not made subject to man. Man was not given dominion over woman. Rule Over is a mistake, in Hebrew it says Rule With.

Is the Hebrew: mâshal?

Strong's Hebrew Dictionary says it means: A primitive root; to rule: - (have, make to have) dominion, governor, X indeed, reign, (bear, cause to, have) rule (-ing, -r), have power.

Perhaps govern is better interpretation but, in any post-fall union one must have a decision maker. It should be God in moral disagreements.

 

[Avoice]

Personally I don't think it says that - but - even if it did say he would rule over her - how can males take that to mean all women are to be lorded over by males? It was concerning Adam and Chavvah - no one else.

Their pattern of sin and their punishment is ours to bear until Messiah returns ours to a godly society where God rules all of us.

 

[Flat Earth Kyle]

really? Are you really asking if i think God made a mistake??? Do you even follow along with these discussions???? :sarcastic


I think your view is mistaken.

I'm am only asking you if you think God made a mistake because what you are saying makes it sound like you believe God made a mistake.

 

[Flat Earth Kyle]

Yaddo, God is speaking to Cain here. He is saying that sin is crouching at Cains door...sin is crouching at Cains door because Cain is showing hatred for his brother.

Can i say that one more time... "Sin is crouching at Cains door"

And if cain doesnt do something about his attitude, Cain will rule over it. He will rule over sin! Do you see the implication of 'ruling over' in the passage? its not a good implication... its very negative!




where do you get this one from? The bible doesnt say Eve was more bad....it actually says Eve was deceived, but the man was not deceived. So if Eve did something because she was being deceived, she is less guilty then Adam who did the crime with full knowledge.



And what did Cains 'dominating over Able' result in? Anything good???

So you are claiming that the "him" in this verse is referring to sin because sin is being personified, so it is an error in translation because in English it should of translated to be "it" instead of "him". That is interesting, interesting wording though, ruling over sin. Do you have any other references where the term ruling over sin is being used?

It isn't my belief, but the belief that Eve sinned more than Adam is stemmed off of who received the most punishment.

 

[Pegg]

So you are claiming that the "him" in this verse is referring to sin because sin is being personified, so it is an error in translation because in English it should of translated to be "it" instead of "him". That is interesting, interesting wording though, ruling over sin. Do you have any other references where the term ruling over sin is being used?

well the same was said about Adam with regard to his wife... 'he will rule over you'

It isn't my belief, but the belief that Eve sinned more than Adam is stemmed off of who received the most punishment.

God didnt punish Eve. I think you are misinterpreting Gods words to Eve as his punishment upon her. But actually its not God giving her punishment. God is telling her how the consequences of independence will adversely affect her.

 

[crossfire]

So you are claiming that the "him" in this verse is referring to sin because sin is being personified, so it is an error in translation because in English it should of translated to be "it" instead of "him". That is interesting, interesting wording though, ruling over sin. Do you have any other references where the term ruling over sin is being used?

Compare Gen 4

Now Abel kept flocks, and Cain worked the soil. 3 In the course of time Cain brought some of the fruits of the soil as an offering to the Lord. 4 And Abel also brought an offering—fat portions from some of the firstborn of his flock. The Lord looked with favor on Abel and his offering, 5 but on Cain and his offering he did not look with favor. So Cain was very angry, and his face was downcast.
6 Then the Lord said to Cain, “Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? 7 If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must rule over it.”​

Sin desires to rule over us, and will still try to do so!


Psalm 19

10 They are more precious than gold,
than much pure gold;
they are sweeter than honey,
than honey from the honeycomb.
11 By them your servant is warned;
in keeping them there is great reward.
12 But who can discern their own errors?
Forgive my hidden faults.
13 Keep your servant also from willful sins;
may they not rule over me.
Then I will be blameless,
innocent of great transgression.​

Psalm 119

129 Your statutes are wonderful;
therefore I obey them.
130 The unfolding of your words gives light;
it gives understanding to the simple.
131 I open my mouth and pant,
longing for your commands.
132 Turn to me and have mercy on me,
as you always do to those who love your name.
133 Direct my footsteps according to your word;
let no sin rule over me.
134 Redeem me from human oppression,
that I may obey your precepts.
135 Make your face shine on your servant
and teach me your decrees.
136 Streams of tears flow from my eyes,
for your law is not obeyed.​

Romans 6

6 What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? 2 By no means! We are those who have died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? 3 Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.
5 For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we will certainly also be united with him in a resurrection like his. 6 For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body ruled by sin might be done away with,[a] that we should no longer be slaves to sin— 7 because anyone who has died has been set free from sin.

​

Hmm, "you shall surely die...."

It isn't my belief, but the belief that Eve sinned more than Adam is stemmed off of who received the most punishment.

Man shall rule over woman just as sin rules over man? LOL.

Adam dominated Eve because of Eve's desire towards her husband Adam, just as when Eve's desires for the fruit dominated her, leading her to eat the fruit.

 

[Flat Earth Kyle]

well the same was said about Adam with regard to his wife... 'he will rule over you'

Where is this said?

By the way I agree with you, pain in childbearing and all that other womanly stuff were consequences not punishments.

 

[Pegg]

Where is this said?

By the way I agree with you, pain in childbearing and all that other womanly stuff were consequences not punishments.

Genesis 3:16 says it

'he shall rule over thee'

Glad we agree on at least one point

 

[Me Myself]

Where is this said?

By the way I agree with you, pain in childbearing and all that other womanly stuff were consequences not punishments.

If they were consequences and our argument is that it says they will rule together, then before this they must not have ruled together.

We do know they ruled the garden though, to the very least Adam ruled the garden, aside God's prohibition.

So either they both ruled together and then they did not, or one ruled the other one and then they ruled together.

If you say first they rule together and then they ruled together, then what consequence are you speaking of? It is the same. For it to be a "consequence" it would have to be different.

I mean, I dont believe in the literal garden at all, but what you are proposing is not coherent. (Unless you propose that first Adam ruled over Eve and then as a consequence of the act they ruled together. Not extremely coherent... Bt a bit less incoherent than what you propose now)

 

[Me Myself]

I believe it is sad when anybody is forced to be personally ruled over, man or woman.

Yes and no. Children are forced to be ruled over by parents, and the people are forced to be ruled over by a bunch of entities and elected personal that may very well not be those that the person wanted to rule over her.

Some forced ruling over is impossible to avoid ( though on the ruling over because of gender/sex, sure, shouldnt happen)

 

[Flat Earth Kyle]

Compare Gen 4

Now Abel kept flocks, and Cain worked the soil. 3 In the course of time Cain brought some of the fruits of the soil as an offering to the Lord. 4 And Abel also brought an offering—fat portions from some of the firstborn of his flock. The Lord looked with favor on Abel and his offering, 5 but on Cain and his offering he did not look with favor. So Cain was very angry, and his face was downcast.
6 Then the Lord said to Cain, “Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? 7 If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must rule over it.”​

Sin desires to rule over us, and will still try to do so!


Psalm 19

10 They are more precious than gold,
than much pure gold;
they are sweeter than honey,
than honey from the honeycomb.
11 By them your servant is warned;
in keeping them there is great reward.
12 But who can discern their own errors?
Forgive my hidden faults.
13 Keep your servant also from willful sins;
may they not rule over me.
Then I will be blameless,
innocent of great transgression.​

Psalm 119

129 Your statutes are wonderful;
therefore I obey them.
130 The unfolding of your words gives light;
it gives understanding to the simple.
131 I open my mouth and pant,
longing for your commands.
132 Turn to me and have mercy on me,
as you always do to those who love your name.
133 Direct my footsteps according to your word;
let no sin rule over me.
134 Redeem me from human oppression,
that I may obey your precepts.
135 Make your face shine on your servant
and teach me your decrees.
136 Streams of tears flow from my eyes,
for your law is not obeyed.​

Romans 6

6 What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? 2 By no means! We are those who have died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? 3 Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.
5 For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we will certainly also be united with him in a resurrection like his. 6 For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body ruled by sin might be done away with,[a] that we should no longer be slaves to sin— 7 because anyone who has died has been set free from sin.

​

Hmm, "you shall surely die...."
Man shall rule over woman just as sin rules over man? LOL.

Adam dominated Eve because of Eve's desire towards her husband Adam, just as when Eve's desires for the fruit dominated her, leading her to eat the fruit.

Um, these are all instances where sin ruled over man, show me an instance where it says man will rule over sin.

It is one thing for sin to command man to pick up this rock and throw it at this man, it is something very different for man to command sin to pick up a rock.

 

[Flat Earth Kyle]

Genesis 3:16 says it

'he shall rule over thee'

Glad we agree on at least one point

Actually it say's he shall rule with thee. Big difference.

 

[Flat Earth Kyle]

If they were consequences and our argument is that it says they will rule together, then before this they must not have ruled together.

We do know they ruled the garden though, to the very least Adam ruled the garden, aside God's prohibition.

So either they both ruled together and then they did not, or one ruled the other one and then they ruled together.

If you say first they rule together and then they ruled together, then what consequence are you speaking of? It is the same. For it to be a "consequence" it would have to be different.

I mean, I dont believe in the literal garden at all, but what you are proposing is not coherent. (Unless you propose that first Adam ruled over Eve and then as a consequence of the act they ruled together. Not extremely coherent... Bt a bit less incoherent than what you propose now)

This is telling Eve that she will bare children, which will not be an easy task, but she will have her husband to help support her as an equal partner to help parent their children, (something that was going to be a new experience for them.) Man and woman are to be equal partners in parenting their children.

 

[Me Myself]

This is telling Eve that she will bare children, which will not be an easy task, but she will have her husband to help support her as an equal partner to help parent their children, (something that was going to be a new experience for them.) Man and woman are to be equal partners in parenting their children.

This wouldnt make sense without a "still" or a "but"

Where this non existent in the language? Cause I would be very skeptic of that.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Yes and no. Children are forced to be ruled over by parents, and the people are forced to be ruled over by a bunch of entities and elected personal that may very well not be those that the person wanted to rule over her.

I was specific in my post. "Personally" ruled over....man or woman (i.e. grown adults)

Not politically. Not because one is a minor. PERSONALLY ruled over by another grown adult just because of the gender. FORCED to be ruled over, too.

Some forced ruling over is impossible to avoid ( though on the ruling over because of gender/sex, sure, shouldnt happen)

That was my point.

 

[Me Myself]

I was specific in my post. "Personally" ruled over....man or woman (i.e. grown adults)

Not politically. Not because one is a minor. PERSONALLY ruled over by another grown adult just because of the gender. FORCED to be ruled over, too.



That was my point.

Ah, I didnt understant "personally" in that way, but now that you explain it it does make sense

 

[outhouse]

No matter how its argued, or been argued. This was a primitive time and from a primitive people.

Women did not have the same rights and were considered property, and this scripture reflects this primitive time.

 

[ChristineES]

Kind of off topic, but many years ago, I found out that the "rib" they talk about taking out of Adam could also be translated as "side". If it is translated as "side", then that would suggest that Adam and Eve were equal- at least that's the way I see it. (It was a footnote in the NIV bible I was reading, btw).

 

[Me Myself]

Kind of off topic, but many years ago, I found out that the "rib" they talk about taking out of Adam could also be translated as "side". If it is translated as "side", then that would suggest that Adam and Eve were equal- at least that's the way I see it. (It was a footnote in the NIV bible I was reading, btw).

Which would make it less credible that the "consequence" was them ruling equally, given that this was already happening. Thus what would make sense is that the god of that story said man will rule over woman.