Did God err in making Adam ruler over Eve?

What do they believe? What do you think? Talk about religion as it exists today.
User avatar
Gnostic Bishop
Posts: 443
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 2:57 pm

Did God err in making Adam ruler over Eve?

Post by Gnostic Bishop » Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:58 pm

Did God err in making Adam ruler over Eve?

Scripture are clear. Sin and death entered this world through Adam, and he was thus to blame for original sin.

Yet God rewarded Adam with dominion over Eve even though Eve was not responsible for sin and death entering the world. Gen3:16 and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

This shows God continuing the policy of punishing the innocent instead of the guilty that is shown in scriptures. 1Peter 1:20 He was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake.

God seems to be rewarding Adam for sin while punishing Eve for the events in Eden even though she was innocent of sin as she did not have any evil intent and was deceived by Satan, a force that she could not possibly resist thanks to God giving Satan the power to deceive the whole world after God put Satan in Eden with Eve.

If making man ruler over women that was an error, it would help explain the 5,000 years of war we have had to endure with undeserving men as rulers.

Gnostic Christianity, a Universalist belief system, believes in full equality for all souls. Christianity obviously does not believe in equality if it preaches that men are to perpetually enjoy ruling over women. Not to mention the inequality of gays.

Did God err in making Adam ruler over Eve and thus punishing the innocent instead of the guilty?

Regards
DL

Nasruddin
Posts: 63
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Did God err in making Adam ruler over Eve?

Post by Nasruddin » Thu Nov 02, 2017 5:16 pm

In the story, Eve ate the fruit first and then offered it to Adam. Therefore she stood in the same relationship to Adam as the serpent did to her. As such, she was not 'innocent' when she offered Adam the fruit. Once she had tasted the fruit, she had the knowledge of good and evil, so she knew that she was tempting Adam to sin, but did so anyway.

User avatar
Gnostic Bishop
Posts: 443
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 2:57 pm

Re: Did God err in making Adam ruler over Eve?

Post by Gnostic Bishop » Fri Nov 03, 2017 6:20 am

Nasruddin wrote:
Thu Nov 02, 2017 5:16 pm
In the story, Eve ate the fruit first and then offered it to Adam. Therefore she stood in the same relationship to Adam as the serpent did to her. As such, she was not 'innocent' when she offered Adam the fruit. Once she had tasted the fruit, she had the knowledge of good and evil, so she knew that she was tempting Adam to sin, but did so anyway.
Why is knowing good and evil a sin? Is that not a virtue?

Why do you think Christianity calls that a fall when the original Jewish interpretation was that it was an elevation of man and not his fall?

http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/10/ ... -theodicy/

"Judaism preaches the Rise of man: and instead of Original Sin, it stresses Original Virtue, the beneficent hereditary influence of righteous ancestors upon their descendants’.

Regards
DL

User avatar
Gnostic Bishop
Posts: 443
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 2:57 pm

Re: Did God err in making Adam ruler over Eve?

Post by Gnostic Bishop » Fri Nov 03, 2017 6:24 am

Nasruddin wrote:
Thu Nov 02, 2017 5:16 pm
In the story, Eve ate the fruit first and then offered it to Adam. Therefore she stood in the same relationship to Adam as the serpent did to her. As such, she was not 'innocent' when she offered Adam the fruit. Once she had tasted the fruit, she had the knowledge of good and evil, so she knew that she was tempting Adam to sin, but did so anyway.
Eve did not use words to tempt Adam the way Satan or the talking serpent did, so I reject your making Eve equivalent to Satan.

You did not state it but I take it you do not think God erred in making Adam ruler over Eve.

Is that your position?

Are women meant to be ruled by men?

Regards
DL

Nasruddin
Posts: 63
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Did God err in making Adam ruler over Eve?

Post by Nasruddin » Fri Nov 03, 2017 12:54 pm

I pointed out that your statement that Eve "was innocent of sin as she did not have any evil intent" ignored the sequence of events. Eve had the knowledge of good and evil when she offered the fruit to Adam. Whether she was acting in evil thoughts or with good intentions is indifferent to the sequence - she knew that she was tempting Adam, just as the serpent knew he was tempting Eve.

Equally when you say "Eve did not use words to tempt Adam", you divert from the account in Genesis 3:17 where God says to Adam “Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten of the tree." So Eve did speak to Adam when offering him the fruit, therefore she stood in the same relationship to Adam as the serpent stood to her.

But whether knowledge of good and evil is a sin was not part of your OP. You said that "God seems to be rewarding Adam for sin", so what was the sin that Adam was guilty of? If your OP is arguing that Adam is guilty but Eve innocent, what did Adam do that Eve didn't? Both were led by another to break God's commandment; both ate the fruit; both hid their nakedness.

I gave no judgement over the justification of Adam ruling over Eve. But you equated it with God rewarding the guilty and punishing the innocent. I don't believe the Genesis story supports that equation.

But for the record, I think it doesn't matter what you think God did or didn't do. It's human choices that count.

User avatar
Gnostic Bishop
Posts: 443
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 2:57 pm

Re: Did God err in making Adam ruler over Eve?

Post by Gnostic Bishop » Sat Nov 04, 2017 8:13 am

Nasruddin wrote:
Fri Nov 03, 2017 12:54 pm
I pointed out that your statement that Eve "was innocent of sin as she did not have any evil intent" ignored the sequence of events. Eve had the knowledge of good and evil when she offered the fruit to Adam. Whether she was acting in evil thoughts or with good intentions is indifferent to the sequence - she knew that she was tempting Adam, just as the serpent knew he was tempting Eve.
I did not ignore the sequence of events but merely pointed out that Eve had no evil intent. She likely wanted to give Adam the same moral sense that she had gained. Do you value your moral sense?

If so, would you not have eaten of the tree of knowledge of everything?

Certainly the serpent knew she was tempting Eve. That was the reason God put her there.

If you think otherwise, tell me why God put Satan/talking serpent there, knowing she would tempt Eve and knowing that Eve could not resist God's own power of persuasion flowing into Satan.
Equally when you say "Eve did not use words to tempt Adam", you divert from the account in Genesis 3:17 where God says to Adam “Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten of the tree." So Eve did speak to Adam when offering him the fruit, therefore she stood in the same relationship to Adam as the serpent stood to her.
Pffft. Show the words.
But whether knowledge of good and evil is a sin was not part of your OP.


You made it so by implying that that it was evil to eat of it. You want to restrict dialog because you cannot argue for your point or position.
You said that "God seems to be rewarding Adam for sin", so what was the sin that Adam was guilty of?


According to dogma, for bringing death and sin to the earth, even though dogma says that sin was born in heaven before it was sent to earth in the form of Satan. You will also know that God himself brought death when he killed to dress A & E.

If your OP is arguing that Adam is guilty but Eve innocent, what did Adam do that Eve didn't?
Dogma says he ate as Eve did without temptation.
Both were led by another to break God's commandment; both ate the fruit; both hid their nakedness.
Indeed, just as you would and did when you learned manners and right from wrong.

Again, would you give up your moral sense?
I gave no judgement over the justification of Adam ruling over Eve. But you equated it with God rewarding the guilty and punishing the innocent. I don't believe the Genesis story supports that equation.
I think it does and if you think otherwise, give your argument.

Would you say then that women should rule over men?

Would that be justified and if not, why is men ruling over women justified?
But for the record, I think it doesn't matter what you think God did or didn't do. It's human choices that count.
Indeed, and to choose to remain mentally blind and as bright as a brick would be the wrong choice for mankind.

Right?

Regards
DL

Nasruddin
Posts: 63
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Did God err in making Adam ruler over Eve?

Post by Nasruddin » Sat Nov 04, 2017 3:42 pm

Here endeth the lesson.

User avatar
Gnostic Bishop
Posts: 443
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 2:57 pm

Re: Did God err in making Adam ruler over Eve?

Post by Gnostic Bishop » Sat Nov 04, 2017 4:57 pm

Nasruddin wrote:
Sat Nov 04, 2017 3:42 pm
Here endeth the lesson.
Nice that you are a quick learner. :thumbup:

Answering tough questions is key. You should have shared your answers though so as to help the lurkers.

Regards
DL

Nasruddin
Posts: 63
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Did God err in making Adam ruler over Eve?

Post by Nasruddin » Sun Nov 05, 2017 12:30 pm

As I said. God can do what he likes. Humans have a choice. What more needs to be discussed?

Any further debate into your OP on God's actual motivation or short comings will need accepting the Genesis story as if it involved active characters who behaved with reason, emotion or faith. That will involve examining the story itself and looking at its internal dynamics based on its internal context. Doing that might itself involve questioning the accuracy of what the story reports, and the motive for presenting the story in the way it is presented.

However, if you are wanting to examine the morals of the Genesis story (rather than fallibility of God) in comparison to other moral standards, then the Genesis story was a creation to justify or explain a particular community's social dynamics or philosophy. As situations have changed since then, the debate is whether the story can still be used to justify or explain certain social dynamics/philosophies (which might have changed, or been replaced by new ones), and whether those social dynamics/philosophies (original or not) are worth supporting anyway.

If the story was a creation to explain human behaviours, then humans make a choice in following those behaviours.
If the story bears witness to an actual event, then God can do what he likes because he is God.

If the story is a corruption, then we need more information. But ultimately the story behind the story (if there is one) will still lead to the same two options.

User avatar
Gnostic Bishop
Posts: 443
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 2:57 pm

Re: Did God err in making Adam ruler over Eve?

Post by Gnostic Bishop » Sun Nov 05, 2017 12:57 pm

Nasruddin wrote:
Sun Nov 05, 2017 12:30 pm
As I said. God can do what he likes. Humans have a choice. What more needs to be discussed?

Any further debate into your OP on God's actual motivation or short comings will need accepting the Genesis story as if it involved active characters who behaved with reason, emotion or faith. That will involve examining the story itself and looking at its internal dynamics based on its internal context. Doing that might itself involve questioning the accuracy of what the story reports, and the motive for presenting the story in the way it is presented.

However, if you are wanting to examine the morals of the Genesis story (rather than fallibility of God) in comparison to other moral standards, then the Genesis story was a creation to justify or explain a particular community's social dynamics or philosophy. As situations have changed since then, the debate is whether the story can still be used to justify or explain certain social dynamics/philosophies (which might have changed, or been replaced by new ones), and whether those social dynamics/philosophies (original or not) are worth supporting anyway.

If the story was a creation to explain human behaviours, then humans make a choice in following those behaviours.
If the story bears witness to an actual event, then God can do what he likes because he is God.

If the story is a corruption, then we need more information. But ultimately the story behind the story (if there is one) will still lead to the same two options.
I do not quite agree because I see a third option.

That being that Christianity changed the moral of the story from the elevation in Eden that the Jews wrote into it to the fall that Christianity wanted to sell in order to denigrate both women and the many serpent cults that were prevalent in those days. Misogyny is what they wanted to promote.

http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/10/ ... -theodicy/

‘Instead of the Fall of man (in the sense of humanity as a whole), Judaism preaches the Rise of man: and instead of Original Sin, it stresses Original Virtue, the beneficent hereditary influence of righteous ancestors upon their descendants’.

Regards
DL

Post Reply