Women's ultimate responsibility for world's sin

JackRT said:

I see it, at least in part, as an attempt to shore up patriarchy by blaming the woman as a "weaker vessel". Patriarchy is slowly dying and thank God it is. I regard it as one of the worst evils humanity has ever inflicted on itself.

Click to expand...

Weaker vessel does not speak of a woman's physical weakness.

By God's design a woman is a 'responder.' Hence, she is designed to be a help meet. "To respond." That means the woman will have an insatiable desire when not having a point to be having her purpose fulfilled. Its one reason why woman can be so deeply devoted to the teaching when the Word of God is being well taught, and men can become macho in attitude. Like with the women and the disciples of Christ were. The women were the first ones at the tomb to see the risen Christ.

Weaker vessel = she needs to be filled. In the ideal, God designed the righteous woman to have a desire to be a helper for her husband. Even if its just to help him enjoy living. And, the righteous husband will likewise desire to always be responding to the Lord.

Its a chain of command of Divine design.

Being the weaker vessel does not mean Adam is not weak before the Lord. It does not say she is the weak vessel. But the 'weaker."

She is the "weaker" vessel. Both man and women before God are weak.

The woman is just the weaker.

For by design she needs to double-depend for her sense of fulfillment. Yet, if her man has learned to be fully dependent upon the Lord for his life? His fulfillment in the Lord will reflect back unto her, and they will both will know great joy and happinesses that 'independent souls ' never will know existed.

We need sound doctrine to fully depend upon the Lord. These clever false teachings we find everywhere are designed to obstruct and confuse.,... and mislead... Its the Devil's new fruit, designed to draw us away from the Tree of Life found only in sound doctrinal teachings. Bitterness in attitude has no place in God's household. Feminism is bitter fruit.

LaBèlla said:

Adam could have intervened. He had many opportunities to do so before she ate. His complicity and inaction was duly punished.

A feminist could turn your argument on its head and lay the blame at his feet because he failed to man up and protect her. They would call his behavior passive and probably digress into diatribes about beta males ad nauseam.

God charged both with sin. Our natural reason doesn’t set aside His wisdom. I am not a feminist but I can see a litany of holes in your theory. Let’s stick with His instead.

Click to expand...

imo, who cares what a feminists opinion is on this? This is not a woman's studies course, lol.
What does the Bible say? It was Eve that was deceived, Adam chose to bend to the desire of his wife and chose to disobey GOD's command. Both are guilty of disobedience, but it is important to note that the bible states that it was Eve who was deceived by Satan. I think the criticism mostly done by females that Adam failed to protect Eve are just a deflection of their gender guilt and a failure of owning up to the fact that it was Eve who was deceived by Satan and it was she who looked on the fruit of this forbidden treee , & thought it lovely and picked the fruit and then offered it to her mate Adam. He had a choice to at that moment in his God-given authority , to reprove Eve for her suggestion to disobey GOD , but he didn't. Adam chose to eat of the fruit and rebel against God's word.
Genesis 3:13
"Then the LORD God said to the woman, "What is this you have done?" "The serpent deceived me," she replied, "and I ate."

LaBèlla said:

Surrender is my aim. The clay has chosen and yielded to the Potter. He sees the final product. I embrace the shaping and sanctification He requires to reach that point.

Click to expand...

That quote NT actually just mentions vessels made for honour and dishonour.

Man and woman become one flesh in His eyes. The individual is sloughed and refined while the inner transmutes. It is the becoming that is beauteous and sacrosanct. That is the holiness He’s crafting.

Click to expand...

When viewed from the perspective of the new creation looking back on the shadow takes the correct form. Without the new creation in view that just makes no sense because it doesn’t happen without the transformation into Christ.

The vessels are the avenue for its creation. He uses other elements too. But the friction of togetherness when undertaken with His precepts yields a glorious hue. We are buffing the other lovingly one day at a time.

Click to expand...

Idealistic. I remember thinking that way when I was young, how I really wanted to experience what God meant in comparing marriage to being one with Him. Then life happened. Now, being one with Him actually means a true relationship that places Him above all else.

This is many layered. It harkens back to Paul’s words about being a bondservant and the deeper meaning of the captivity we’ve embraced. It is the greater understanding of the yoke upon our person. When the two are wholly digested and received our metamorphosis is welcomed for its hewing effect on our person.

Click to expand...

Embracing captivity goes against the reason Christ said that He came. To set the captives free.

We bear the yoke and we love it.

Click to expand...

Being yoked to Christ is what is being offered in the New Covenant.

The other is but an aspect of Him in a lesser state whose existence is being transformed like our own. And we want it. We crave the end result of His hands.

Click to expand...

Whose existence is being transformed like our own?

So we endure it willingly. Lovingly pressing our form against his until the two are no longer visible and oneness has taken shape.

Click to expand...

Ya kinda mixing metaphors there.

You cannot yield to another until you’ve yielded to Him. When you’re able to present your alabaster (your sacred cows) to the other and forsake its contents in deference to the becoming (the ‘we’). You’re ready.

Click to expand...

You’re ready? Get back to me when your actually living your dream in a married state.

genez said:

Weaker vessel does not speak of a woman's physical weakness.

By God's design a woman is a 'responder.' Hence, she is designed to be a help meet. "To respond." That means the woman will have an insatiable desire when not having a point to be having her purpose fulfilled. Its one reason why woman can be so deeply devoted to the teaching when the Word of God is being well taught, and men can become macho in attitude. Like with the women and the disciples of Christ were. The women were the first ones at the tomb to see the risen Christ.

Weaker vessel = she needs to be filled. In the ideal, God designed the righteous woman to have a desire to be a helper for her husband. Even if its just to help him enjoy living. And, the righteous husband will likewise desire to always be responding to the Lord.

Its a chain of command of Divine design.

Being the weaker vessel does not mean Adam is not weak before the Lord. It does not say she is the weak vessel. But the 'weaker."

She is the "weaker" vessel. Both man and women before God are weak.

The woman is just the weaker.

For by design she needs to double-depend for her sense of fulfillment. Yet, if her man has learned to be fully dependent upon the Lord for his life? His fulfillment in the Lord will reflect back unto her, and they will both will know great joy and happinesses that 'independent souls ' never will know existed.

We need sound doctrine to fully depend upon the Lord. These clever false teachings we find everywhere are designed to obstruct and confuse.,... and mislead... Its the Devil's new fruit, designed to draw us away from the Tree of Life found only in sound doctrinal teachings. Bitterness in attitude has no place in God's household. Feminism is bitter fruit.

Click to expand...

If you would take the time to look up helpmeet you would find that most references are to God as helper and very few to women.

Pedra said:

imo, who cares what a feminists opinion is on this? This is not a woman's studies course, lol.
What does the Bible say? It was Eve that was deceived, Adam chose to bend to the desire of his wife and chose to disobey GOD's command.

Click to expand...

Adam did not bend to his wife's desire. She was simply telling him what he already wanted to hear!
Satan studied them and knew their desires. The woman was a responder. Designed to do what she was told to do. Adam knew what he wanted. He wanted to be as wise as the Lord. Who would not? It was a good desire gone bad when Satan distorted the means.

LoreneDD said:

If you would take the time to look up helper you would find that most references are to God as helper and very few to women.

Click to expand...

Man and woman were both designed in His image. God is a helper. The woman reflects this attribute in how God designed her.

Pedra said:

I think the criticism mostly done by females that Adam failed to protect Eve are just a deflection of their gender guilt and a failure of owning up to the fact that it was Eve who was deceived by Satan and it was she who looked on the fruit of this forbidden treee

Click to expand...

I am not in possession of the guilt you’ve mentioned or encountered others who’ve echoed the same.

4 questions asked by God for BOTH Adam and Eve to be accountable/own up to what they did
God knew the answers but wanted them to confess

Why did God ask where Adam was?

LoreneDD said:

You’re ready? Get back to me when your actually living your dream in a married state.

Click to expand...

You asked for my opinion and I provided it. I needn’t confirm the reality of those words to you or someone else. They weren’t forged through idealism but things I’ve lived firsthand. You are welcome to your perspective. But in this matter I’ll rest on the one I know.

LaBèlla said:

You asked for my opinion and I provided it. I needn’t confirm the reality of those words to you or someone else. They weren’t forged through idealism but things I’ve lived firsthand. You are welcome to your perspective. But in this matter I’ll rest on the one I know.

Click to expand...

Because you didn’t read the rest of the post?

LoreneDD said:

Because you didn’t read the rest of the post?

Click to expand...

Because your assumptions don’t mean an absence of understanding or experience. I broach the subject from a different vantage point. That doesn’t mean I’m clueless, idealistic or whatever else you may surmise. I needn’t mimic your expression to grasp the concept.

Are you seeking agreement or sharing an opinion? I did the latter. You don’t have to validate my perspective.

LaBèlla said:

Because your assumptions don’t mean an absence of understanding or experience. I broach the subject from a different vantage point. That doesn’t mean I’m clueless, idealistic or whatever else you may surmise. I needn’t mimic your expression to grasp the concept.

Are you seeking agreement or sharing an opinion? I did the latter. You don’t have to validate my perspective.

Click to expand...

I offered that as Christians we are vessels of honour, our yoke is to Christ, it is He who set the captives free. Our transformation is to Christ and He is the substance of the shadow that we are being transformed into and not the shadow. Your expressing views from another religion, Judaism. And while that is the lead to transformation it is actually conformation to an image. So, no, my aim is not to validate your perspective but to show you another perspective from a higher vantage point.

Conformation is a kind of change that causes us to behave according to socially acceptable conventions or standards. It comes when external pressures are applied. On the other hand, transformation is a change from the inside out. It's what God does in us to make us more like Christ.


Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will. – Romans 12:2


The change comes from the inside out not from the outside in.

LoreneDD said:

Your expressing views from another religion, Judaism. And while that is the lead to transformation it is actually conformation to an image. So, no, my aim is not to validate your perspective but to show you another perspective from a higher vantage point.

Click to expand...

That is incorrect. I referenced Paul and the yoke (Christ) for a reason. You are attempting to educate me on a principle I already know and accept.

genez said:

Adam did not bend to his wife's desire. She was simply telling him what he already wanted to hear!
Satan studied them and knew their desires. The woman was a responder. Designed to do what she was told to do. Adam knew what he wanted. He wanted to be as wise as the Lord. Who would not? It was a good desire gone bad.

Click to expand...

lol, Typical of the tactic to let Eve off the hook. No where does the Bible say Eve was designed as a responder.
Imo, people miss gaining any wisdom from what took place to cause the fall, if they reject the facts of the matter as the Bible states it. Interesting that you are projecting innocence onto Eve and projecting selfish motive upon Adam.

The Bible states Eve was deceived by Satan, she took and ate of the fruit and offered it to Adam and Adam ate it disobeying GOD.
It is a cautionary tale for any who have ears to hear it.

LaBèlla said:

I am not in possession of the guilt you’ve mentioned or encountered others who’ve echoed the same.

Click to expand...

Your opinion supports the feminist view, it white-washes Eve's actions & puts the blame on Adam.
That is not what the Bible states.

genez said:

Adam did not bend to his wife's desire. She was simply telling him what he already wanted to hear!
Satan studied them and knew their desires. The woman was a responder. Designed to do what she was told to do. Adam knew what he wanted. He wanted to be as wise as the Lord. Who would not? It was a good desire gone bad when Satan distorted the means.

Click to expand...

Tell yourself whatever you want, But you are just projecting on to the scripture what is not there.

Pedra said:

Your opinion supports the feminist view, it white-washes Eve's actions & puts the blame on Adam.
That is not what the Bible states.

Click to expand...

My perspective and person have never been aligned with feminist teachings. If your opinion leads you to believe this you are welcome to do so. It is my belief that both erred.

Pedra said:

Tell yourself whatever you want, But you are just projecting on to the scripture what is not there.

Click to expand...

Insight does not manifest with something that is already in plain sight.



.

I've not found the eisegesis method to interpret scripture accurate or helpful. It psycho-analyses & assigns motives etc....rather then sticking with he facts that have been presented in the scripture.

LaBèlla said:

My perspective and person have never been aligned with feminist teachings. If your opinion leads you to believe this you are welcome to do so. It is my belief that both erred.

Click to expand...

What you stated is the common modern feminist argument.