Genesis, how are women supposed to be treated?

[ScottA]

I think that divine omnipotence is a major theological mistake and unbiblical. God is not a cosmic dictator, predetermining teh jot and tittle of everything. We have freedom and that means we have to decide for ourselves, God cannot decide for us. A major, if not the major, claim in the Bible is that creation is rebelling against God, not doing what God wants. Hence, God is no dictator with complete and totally monopolistic control over the universe. I think God is more like a president presiding over a democracy, power over powers, participating in the free self-decisions of creatures. I think it takes far more talent to govern over a democracy than to run a dictatorship.
Men, males, obviously did write Scripture. It was definitely not all dictated by God, not with there being at least 100 major contradictions. Plus there is continual argument over what is or is not Scripture . Did God order both the Septuagint and the Masoretic, or just the Masoretic? Does or does not the Apocrypha belong in the Bible?

Oh, you are sadly mistaken - all the world, the universe...is finished. This is just the story, His story...in which, it may appear that we have freedom, but it is an illusion. But, to hear you, I am afraid you will not see it until the end. Enjoy, for it all ends sooner than you know.

 

[ScottA]

One of us has a distorted idea... but which one is not something we can establish in this thread. I can only put forward my ideas for others to weigh.

My point was that it is absolutely clear that humankind, male and female, are in the image of God. You cannot deny that without rejecting Genesis 1:27. Women are not an aside but necessary for the completion of the good creation of humankind (man alone is the first thing God describes as "not good" in all of creation).

That God is over both, I agree. But that maleness somehow equals God, in a way that femaleness does not... frankly I think that's a form of idolatry, worshipping masculinity rather than realising that no part of the creation ought to be worshipped.

Believe what you will, but you do Him no service telling it wrong: Your interpretation of Genesis 1:27, conveniently leaves out the correct proportions of Genesis 2:22. God is God, and what you think, is error.

 

[ScottA]

Again, your conjecture does not represent the truth, leaving you with a distorted view of God and the nature of women.

It (again) is not conjecture - but the word of God, and His direct word to me, of which I am a witness (Thus says the Lord).

 

[ScottA]

That's a misrepresentation. The Bible says: "When God created man, he made him in the likeness of God. Male and female he created them, and he blessed them and named them Man when they were created." (Gen 5)

I can only guess that the two-stage creation described in Genesis 2 is to help husbands appreciate their wives more.

The explanation in its proper and actual proportions, as the women being a small part taken out of the man, are as follows:

18 And the Lord God said, “It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him.” 19 Out of the ground the LordGod formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them. And whatever Adam called each living creature, that was its name. 20 So Adam gave names to all cattle, to the birds of the air, and to every beast of the field. But for Adam there was not found a helper comparable to him.

21 And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall on Adam, and he slept; and He took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh in its place. 22 Then the rib which the Lord God had taken from man He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man. Genesis 2

But...again...this does not describe women only, but all of humanity before God - we ALL are a SMALL part taken out of God...to be His help mate, to be His bride.

 

[brinny]

God Himself describes a Godly woman, in Proverbs 31.

What i find most profound (in answer to your question), lies in this verse:

"Her children arise up, and call her blessed; her husband also, and he praiseth her." ~Proverbs 31:28

 

[Hoghead1]

It (again) is not conjecture - but the word of God, and His direct word to me, of which I am a witness (Thus says the Lord).

I beg to disagree. You are over-indentifying your thinking with God. Often happens. The Bible does not say that creation is finished. If anything, the Bible points to a continual evolution. The Israelites went from being slaves to being a mighty nation. According to the Bible, God is continually shaking up teh status quo, leading us to move forward in a new direction. When major biblical personages interact with God, their lives definitely evolve in that they are transformed, enter into whole new avenues of existence.

 

[Hoghead1]

Oh, you are sadly mistaken - all the world, the universe...is finished. This is just the story, His story...in which, it may appear that we have freedom, but it is an illusion. But, to hear you, I am afraid you will not see it until the end. Enjoy, for it all ends sooner than you know.

In addition to what I just said in a previous post, I add that minute to minute the universe is in fact changing and we are changing.

 

[hedrick]

But you are wrong: Adam was created, and Eve, though fully human in stature, was a mere part and taken out of the man. You make them proportionately equal in your own mind - but God made the women as an aside - which I see as great, because He then compares us all, male and female, to being His own bride. In such a comparison, men are not over women, but God is over both...as it should be. But if you make women equal to men - you make them equal to God, which is a grievous error.

Again...your conjecture does not represent the truth, leaving you with a distorted idea of the nature of God.

I think you miss the point of Gen 2. God starts out to make a partner for Adam. He tries animals, but they don't do. They're not capable of being partners. It's only Eve, who is bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh, who becomes one flesh with him, that can be a partner.

 

[ScottA]

I beg to disagree. You are over-indentifying your thinking with God. Often happens. The Bible does not say that creation is finished. If anything, the Bible points to a continual evolution. The Israelites went from being slaves to being a mighty nation. According to the Bible, God is continually shaking up teh status quo, leading us to move forward in a new direction. When major biblical personages interact with God, their lives definitely evolve in that they are transformed, enter into whole new avenues of existence.

In addition to what I just said in a previous post, I add that minute to minute the universe is in fact changing and we are changing.

A tree is known by its fruit. You speak of the world, because you are of the world. And you and I do not agree, because I am not of the world.

 

[hedrick]

A tree is known by its fruit. You speak of the world, because you are of the world. And you and I do not agree, because I am not of the world.

This is ad hominem. I normally assume that people who resort to ad hominem have lost the argument.

 

[ScottA]

I think you miss the point of Gen 2. God starts out to make a partner for Adam. He tries animals, but they don't do. They're not capable of being partners. It's only Eve, who is bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh, who becomes one flesh with him, that can be a partner.

And as Genesis goes and the world, so goes the story. But that story is not of Adam and Eve, but is a revelation of Jesus Christ and His bride.

So, then, if you want to stop in your understanding at the point of mankind, fine. But if you want to know God, and have ears to hear - you will hear what the spirit says - and then...there is no matter of gender, but only a matter of God and humanity.

Take, then, from it, what you will.

 

[Hoghead1]

A tree is known by its fruit. You speak of the world, because you are of the world. And you and I do not agree, because I am not of the world.

Oh, baloney, plus salami. You are just as worldly as the rest of us. Yu are going on fundamentalaistic ideology, a collection of human-made assumptions, which is about as worldly as you can get.

 

[Hoghead1]

This is ad hominem. I normally assume that people who resort to ad hominem have lost the argument.

Amen to that. Plus it is incredibly arrogant.

 

[Hoghead1]

And as Genesis goes and the world, so goes the story. But that story is not of Adam and Eve, but is a revelation of Jesus Christ and His bride.

So, then, if you want to stop in your understanding at the point of mankind, fine. But if you want to know God, and have ears to hear - you will hear what the spirit says - and then...there is no matter of gender, but only a matter of God and humanity.

Take, then, from it, what you will.

What bride? Scripture never says that Jesus had a bride or was even married.

 

[Hoghead1]

Was.

And even by the standards of the Episcopal Church of the USA, he was a little, shall we say, extreme. He argued with C. S. Lewis over Christology, for example. Pittenger denied the deity of Christ, and seems to have remarkably cavalier about misquoting and misrepresenting Lewis in his multiple attacks. I'm not sure in what sense one can actually describe Pittenger as "Christian."



Wasn't he the guy who famously said that the god of process theology was "too weak"? That process theology "doesn't give a strong enough picture of God's relationship to created reality to make God the ground of hope, or to give an account of God as the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who raised Jesus from the dead"?

Attacking someone's character, especially when one was a bishop, is a major no-no in theological discussions. Also, your information on Pittenger is inaccurate. He did not deny teh Deity of Christ. Where on earth did you get that idea. Have you actually read any Pittenger?

Some critics have argued that the God of process is "too weak," true . Our response is that your God is "too big." Some believe that a God unable to predetermine everything, a God who is not a cosmic dictator and who can absolutely guarantee everything, is too small to be a God. However, there is the matter of freedom, which is being overlooked here. If we have genuine freedom, then God cannot decide everything for us. God cannot decide our decisions for us. We have to decide for ourselves, choose to what extent we will follow God's aims for us. Therefore, it is often up for grabs what will happen. We could end up destroying ourselves in a nuclear holocaust, or we could go on to realize more of the Kingdom. It's up to us. Democracy is about the worst form of government, until you consider the alternative. Hence, I view the universe as more like a democracy than anything else. It takes more talent to govern a democracy than to be a dictator. Hence, God is the ideal model of power, power over powers, participating in the free self-decisions of others.

 

[Hoghead1]

Oh, I'm okay with some aspects of process theology; the idea of creation which unfolds with a degree of freedom makes a lot of sense alongside apparently random aspects of the observed universe. It's the identification of creator with creation which edges over into more worrisome space for me.

I didn't know of Pittenger, though, so thanks for the recommendation.

I think you will enjoy him. He is a lot more solid that some previous posts make him out to be.
About the identification of the universe with God. That is al lot that needs to be said here. I don't want to get into a long post, however. So, for now, I will just say that the universe is not fully identifiable with God, in process. A blanket equation cannot be drawn between the two. The universe is the body of God, and is God in that sense, just as yours and my bodies are us. However, there is also a big difference. God transcends the universe, just as our minds transcend out bodies.

 

[aiki]

The Bible does not say that creation is finished. If anything, the Bible points to a continual evolution. The Israelites went from being slaves to being a mighty nation. According to the Bible, God is continually shaking up teh status quo, leading us to move forward in a new direction. When major biblical personages interact with God, their lives definitely evolve in that they are transformed, enter into whole new avenues of existence.

Sounds here like you're equivocating a bit. Creation, that is, the sum total of the physical universe is complete and finished as a physical reality. What happens within it may shift and change, live and die, deplete and renew, but ScottA is correct that Creation in the sense of the entirety of physical reality is a finished work of God. Scripture also indicates as much:

Genesis 2:1-3
1 Thus the heavens and the earth, and all the host of them, were finished.
2 And on the seventh day God ended His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done.
3 Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made.

Exodus 20:11
11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.

Selah.

 

[Hoghead1]

Sounds here like you're equivocating a bit. Creation, that is, the sum total of the physical universe is complete and finished as a physical reality. What happens within it may shift and change, live and die, deplete and renew, but ScottA is correct that Creation in the sense of the entirety of physical reality is a finished work of God. Scripture also indicates as much:

Genesis 2:1-3
1 Thus the heavens and the earth, and all the host of them, were finished.
2 And on the seventh day God ended His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done.
3 Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made.

Exodus 20:11
11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.

Selah.

If it is going to shift and change, then, yes, most definitely it is still evolving.

 

[Radagast]

Attacking someone's character, especially when one was a bishop, is a major no-no in theological discussions.

I stand by what I said. Pittenger denied much of the Creed, he published multiple attacks on C. S. Lewis, and those attacks contained multiple misquotes and misrepresentations.

Have you actually read any Pittenger?

Yes. Pittenger taught that Jesus was merely "One in whom God was active."

Some critics have argued that the God of process is "too weak," true . Our response is that your God is "too big."

I stand by the Creed.

 

[Radagast]

What bride?

Mark 2:19 and Ephesians 5:22-33, among other passages.