Posted by: minnow | March 16, 2008

Adam’s Sin

 Where was Adam while the serpent was talking to the woman?  According to Genesis 3:6 he was standing with her.  Did the woman argue with Adam?  Did she try to persuade Adam to eat the forbidden fruit?  Or, did she hide the fruit and sneak it to him mixed with a bunch of other fruit?  No.  After talking to the serpent she picked the fruit handed it to Adam, and they ate.  Adam did not so much as say, “Hey wait a minute, honey.  It looks a little green.  Maybe we shouldn’t.”

The truth of the Genesis story is that both Adam and the woman chose to eat what was forbidden.  And, even though the woman was not yet formed when God told Adam about the Tree of Knowledge we can safely assume based on the dialogue between the serpent and the woman that she knew which fruit was forbidden.  The consequences of Adam’s and the woman’s sin was immediate.  Their eyes were opened; awareness of their new state–their nakedness–set in and they tried to cover themselves.  Then they became afraid and they tried to hide.  Finally, Adam began a pattern that would continue to this day–he shifted the blame, “The woman You put here with me,” he said, “she gave me some fruit from the tree and I ate.”  If it was not God’s fault it was at least the woman’s. 

Curiously as God confronts the serpent, the woman, and Adam He curses both the serpent and the ground but He does not curse humanity.  He declares that her pain will increase in childbirth and his in working the fields.  He also tells the woman, “Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.”  And, to Adam he says, “Because you listened to your wife–”  But wait a minute!  The woman didn’t talk to Adam.  What could God possibly be saying here?  When did Adam listen to his wife?  Well, he listened while she was talking to the serpent.  He listened but he did not say anything.  Could God possibly be making reference to that? Might God be saying to Adam, “Because you listened but did not speak up, because you did not remember my commandment but instead ate you will suffer the consequences.”  Yes, that is exactly what God is saying.  And, earlier God revealed to the woman that even though she will still desire to be the helpmate (partner) to her husband his choice will be to rule over her.  God is not saying, “I will make him ruler  over you” but rather, “The consequence of sin will cause Adam to take control and he will choose to rule over you.” 

The traditions of man, not scripture, determine a woman’s role within the church. In the very beginning God warned the woman what life would be like for her and for her daughters, at least until Jesus came to turn the traditions of man upside down. If we bother to read the gospels carefully we will see that every time they mention Christ’s interaction with women He proceeds to remove the bondage women have lived under since the fall. Sadly, the customs and attitudes which shaped a women’s condition did not simply disappear because Jesus arrived on the scene and began treating them with compassion and respect. Nevertheless, Christ’s declaration that he came to set the captives free included women.

Advertisements

Responses

  1. Minnowspeaks,

    We disagree on many foundational issues. But to answer your question to CMP I posted the following on Parchment and Pen on the Emerging Orthodoxy Part 1 Post regarding CMP’s comment to me on #49:

    CMP: “If you are not comfortable with irenics, then I understand.”

    I’m comfortable with irenics. However, I may define it differently than you do. Furthermore, it’s a subjective assessment. (As I have mentioned more than once). And I give credence to substance more than you do.

    CMP: “But, you really sound like you would be happier in the Catholic Church where questions, real questions, cannot be asked.”

    (1) Your assertion that real questions cannot be asked in the Catholic Church is an insult to Catholics and to the Catholic Church. That is such a false assertion.

    In fact, Pope B16 is considering whether Luther should be considered a heretic. That is a real question and it’s being asked and considered by the Vatican.

    (2) Strawman. I have noted earlier on this thread that you are prone to constructing strawmen, and then burning down your caricatured strawmen as part of your rhetoric.

    Nobody said or asserted that questions can’t be asked. I know I haven’t. Yet your strawman that you’ve built for your rhetorical argument says that questions can’t be asked.

    Here’s something for you to consider:

    Your emoting is short-circuiting the depth of your reasoning. Similar to an adolescent who keeps saying that he’s not permitted to ask questions. Of course, he can ask questions.

    The real key is to extend the horizon of your thinking a bit further. I hope this is not revelatory for you, but the key understanding is to realize that more often than not, there are GREAT answers to honest real questions.

    What’s apparently hidden from you is that despite these great answers (from historical orthodoxy), these liberal POMO emergers often keep falsely asserting that they’re oppressed from asking honest real questions. As a lawyer would say, “Asked and answered.”

    The next thing that you hide from yourself is the realization that many liberal POMO emergers DON’T LIKE the great answers they receive, and they will continue to agitate and divide over the rubric and disguise that they are asking honest questions. And they continue agitating and dividing until they justify what THEY WANT. (which is frequently antinomianism).

    In short, they either say that they’re being oppressed from asking real, honest questions or that the answers are insufficient and unsatisfactory.

    IT IS NOT about saying that people cannot ask questions. If you want to cling to your false strawman, then go ahead.

    CMP: “You don’t sound to me like an evangelical at all.”

    This is an inappropriate judgmental statement.

    For someone who proclaims the supreme value of being irenic, and that solid biblical reasoning must be pursued when reclaiming the mind, I know that you are capable of far more than what you wrote and showed in #49. Aren’t you disappointed in yourself?

    Hope this does not come across wrong, but I think it is important for you to see.
    ——————–

    I find it terribly ironic that while I’m being falsely accused of being afraid of real questions, the Parchment and Pen blog is afraid of my real questions to CMP.

    Obviously, this is hypocritical behavior.

    (Since you adore CMP and ignore my disagreements with both you and he, it would not surprise me in the least to have you delete this comment. Just like CMP did.)

  2. TU…&D
    Even though your comment has nothing what so ever to do with my post my policy is to print all comments unless they are vulgar, fabrications I can prove, or name calling.
    I will say to you that disagreeing with your point of view is not the same as ignoring it. I do not believe that it is your Truth that Unites and Divides but is Gods. I have found some of your comments on other posts to be confused about that particular fact.

  3. This is a wonderful interpretation of the Adam and Eve situation, minnowspeaks. I wonder how many Christians feel, though, that we MUST believe that an actual Adam and Eve existed? Is it possible to be “just as Christian” and believe that this story is an allegory? I know that a lot of evangelical folks would not care to hear what the Catholic Church says about this, but I know from an earlier conversation over on the Parchment and Pen blog that the Catholic Church states we can choose to believe it as an allegory or not. The Catholic Church leaves it open as to whether Adam and Eve truly existed or whether this is allegorical. Personally, I like having that choice.

    I started reading an online book that Greg over on the Parchment and Pen blog recommended and although it started out well, saying that both males and females are made in God’s image and equally valuable, it soon went into the thing of but “Adam was made first.” I don’t have time to read the 800 page book right now, but if the idea of Adam being made first is going to drive the conclusions made about men and women, I don’t know that I am going to be particularly interested.

    Joanie D.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: