38 replies to this topic

[Jed]

I Tim 2:11-14 said:

11A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. 13For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.

This passage is one of the ones Evangelion wants me to explain re Adam being an allegory. I thought it best that I understand it first .

To me, the argument sounds similar to, "Women should only weave modest garments. For Arachnae once out wove Minerva and was turned into a spider for her arrogance." Because of what one woman did, all women are damned to silence?

I don't understand the reasoning of this verse. It sounds rather OTish for an NT letter.

Edited by Jed, 14 December 2009 - 04:02 AM.

[R2D2]

Thisisme, on Dec 14 2009, 02:57 PM, said:

Maybe Paul never quite got the allegory?

I think if Adam was indeed an allegory I would think that Paul would still have thought that Adam was a real, historical person and would have believed in a 7 day creation and probably a flat earth as well, since that was how people scientifically understood their world.

Anyway Jed:

I have a personal theory about that verse, having chewed it over when we had the women speaking debate. My thought is Adam = a type of Christ and Eve = is the ecclesia. Adam wasn't deceived and Eve was deceived and became a sinner. I think this verse restates the divine hierarchy that is stated elsewhere in the Bible i.e. God, Christ and ecclesia. Hence the reason why women wear hats and do not usurp authority in the ecclesia.

Would be interested to hear others' thoughts and whether I'm off base. It doesn't make sense to me otherwise.

[Fortigurn]

Jed, on Dec 14 2009, 11:53 AM, said:

Because of what one woman did, all women are damned to silence?

Because of what one man did all men are doomed to death?

[Jed]

R2D2, on Dec 14 2009, 05:09 PM, said:

Thisisme, on Dec 14 2009, 02:57 PM, said:

Maybe Paul never quite got the allegory?

I think if Adam was indeed an allegory I would think that Paul would still have thought that Adam was a real, historical person and would have believed in a 7 day creation and probably a flat earth as well, since that was how people scientifically understood their world.

This is my thinking too, but it doesn't help me understand it .

Quote

I have a personal theory about that verse, having chewed it over when we had the women speaking debate. My thought is Adam = a type of Christ and Eve = is the ecclesia. Adam wasn't deceived and Eve was deceived and became a sinner. I think this verse restates the divine hierarchy that is stated elsewhere in the Bible i.e. God, Christ and ecclesia. Hence the reason why women wear hats and do not usurp authority in the ecclesia.

This is worth considering. Thank you .

[Jed]

Fortigurn, on Dec 14 2009, 05:09 PM, said:

Jed, on Dec 14 2009, 11:53 AM, said:

Because of what one woman did, all women are damned to silence?

Because of what one man did all men are doomed to death?

That's not the way I read it. "Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned—". We don't inherit Adam's sin. We aren't doomed because of what Adam did, we are doomed because of what we did.

[Jed]

Thisisme,
I posted this thread in the General Theology forum because I don't want to discuss evolution/creation here. If you have an way of understanding the passage I would like to hear it.

[Fortigurn]

Jed, on Dec 14 2009, 12:18 PM, said:

Fortigurn, on Dec 14 2009, 05:09 PM, said:

Jed, on Dec 14 2009, 11:53 AM, said:

Because of what one woman did, all women are damned to silence?

Because of what one man did all men are doomed to death?

That's not the way I read it. "Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man...

Stop right there. Sin entered the world through one man. How? Well keep right on going, 'the many died through the transgression of the one man', and 'by the transgression of the one man, death reigned through the one', and 'condemnation for all people came through one transgression'. Says it three different ways.

Quote

We don't inherit Adam's sin.

Agreed. We inherit his mortality.

Quote

We aren't doomed because of what Adam did, we are doomed because of what we did.

I'm not talking about doomed, I'm talking about dying.

[R2D2]

Thisisme, on Dec 14 2009, 03:23 PM, said:

Jed, on Dec 13 2009, 11:18 PM, said:

Fortigurn, on Dec 14 2009, 05:09 PM, said:

Jed, on Dec 14 2009, 11:53 AM, said:

Because of what one woman did, all women are damned to silence?

Because of what one man did all men are doomed to death?

That's not the way I read it. "Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned—". We don't inherit Adam's sin. We aren't doomed because of what Adam did, we are doomed because of what we did.

You were doomed when you gave your first cry, because of what Adam did. Before you could even think of doing anything.

Thats why many churches baptise babies so as to save them from this idea of original sin.

[Jed]

Fortigurn, on Dec 14 2009, 05:22 PM, said:

Jed, on Dec 14 2009, 12:18 PM, said:

Fortigurn, on Dec 14 2009, 05:09 PM, said:

Jed, on Dec 14 2009, 11:53 AM, said:

Because of what one woman did, all women are damned to silence?

Because of what one man did all men are doomed to death?

That's not the way I read it. "Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man...

Stop right there. Sin entered the world through one man. How? Well keep right on going, 'the many died through the transgression of the one man', and 'by the transgression of the one man, death reigned through the one', and 'condemnation for all people came through one transgression'. Says it three different ways.

I will die because I am mortal. I will deserve it because I sin. Sin entered the world by Adam because he was the first to sin (and thus deserved death). It is still in the world because we continue to sin. Adam just kicked off the process by virtue of being the first man.

It's not a valid comparison anyway. We still do what the one man did. That doesn't hold for women and Eve (or if it holds for women it also holds for men).

[Jed]

Thisisme, on Dec 14 2009, 05:23 PM, said:

You were doomed when you gave your first cry, because of what Adam did. Before you could even think of doing anything.

Because of what Adam did in the ultimate sense (but in that case, because of what God did too). Because I am of the dust and have free will, I will sin; no original sin need apply.

[Jed]

Thisisme, on Dec 14 2009, 06:20 PM, said:

Jed, on Dec 13 2009, 11:57 PM, said:

Thisisme, on Dec 14 2009, 05:23 PM, said:

You were doomed when you gave your first cry, because of what Adam did. Before you could even think of doing anything.

Because of what Adam did in the ultimate sense (but in that case, because of what God did too). Because I am of the dust and have free will, I will sin; no original sin need apply.

Jesus was of the dust and had free will.

Yes. Can you think what the difference was?

[daysha]

 monster11.gif   5.83K   0 downloads

Now, back 2 the silent ladies topic...  when_women_ruled_da_world___cwahats.jpg   77.44K   15 downloads

[Fortigurn]

Jed, on Dec 14 2009, 12:55 PM, said:

I will die because I am mortal. I will deserve it because I sin.

Sure, not under dispute.

Quote

Sin entered the world by Adam because he was the first to sin (and thus deserved death). It is still in the world because we continue to sin. Adam just kicked off the process by virtue of being the first man.

Yep, fine. How does this affect the fact that by one man's transgression, death became a natural consequence for all men?

Quote

It's not a valid comparison anyway. We still do what the one man did. That doesn't hold for women and Eve (or if it holds for women it also holds for men).

It is a valid comparison, because we all die regardless of whether we do what the one man did. Babies still die regardless of the fact that they're sinless. They don't get a choice about it.

[Guido]

R2D2, on Dec 13 2009, 11:37 PM, said:

Thisisme, on Dec 14 2009, 03:23 PM, said:

You were doomed when you gave your first cry, because of what Adam did. Before you could even think of doing anything.

Thats why many churches baptise babies so as to save them from this idea of original sin.

I think Thisisme is talking about Romans 5:18, "therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for [i.e. 'doomed'] all men...", not the Catholic doctrine of original sin.

Edited by Guido, 14 December 2009 - 08:51 PM.

[Jed]

Fortigurn said:

It is a valid comparison, because we all die regardless of whether we do what the one man did. Babies still die regardless of the fact that they're sinless. They don't get a choice about it.

That's because we're made of dirt. We were made mortal from the beginning. Adam got the way barred to the tree of life. Is that what you're getting at?

[SedesGobhani]

R2D2, on Dec 13 2009, 08:09 PM, said:

Thisisme, on Dec 14 2009, 02:57 PM, said:

Maybe Paul never quite got the allegory?

I think if Adam was indeed an allegory I would think that Paul would still have thought that Adam was a real, historical person and would have believed in a 7 day creation and probably a flat earth as well, since that was how people scientifically understood their world.

Anyway Jed:

I have a personal theory about that verse, having chewed it over when we had the women speaking debate. My thought is Adam = a type of Christ and Eve = is the ecclesia. Adam wasn't deceived and Eve was deceived and became a sinner. I think this verse restates the divine hierarchy that is stated elsewhere in the Bible i.e. God, Christ and ecclesia. Hence the reason why women wear hats and do not usurp authority in the ecclesia.

Would be interested to hear others' thoughts and whether I'm off base. It doesn't make sense to me otherwise.

I agree. I just did a study on this so:

http://www.scribd.co...64/Gender-Roles
http://www.scribd.co...64/Gender-Roles
http://www.scribd.co...85/Gender-Roles

[Fortigurn]

Jed, on Dec 15 2009, 07:15 AM, said:

Fortigurn said:

It is a valid comparison, because we all die regardless of whether we do what the one man did. Babies still die regardless of the fact that they're sinless. They don't get a choice about it.

That's because we're made of dirt. We were made mortal from the beginning.

It's because we're made from people who are already mortal, that's what it is. We're not made from dirt the way Adam was. We are mortal because are made from people who were mortal, all the way back to Adam. Regardless of what we do, we die because we are mortal, and we are mortal because of what he did, not because of what we do.

[Jed]

We are mortal because God made Adam mortal. How are we mortal because of what Adam did?

Overworked underpaid mods: could we have a threadsplit please?

[Fortigurn]

Jed, on Dec 16 2009, 02:42 AM, said:

We are mortal because God made Adam mortal. How are we mortal because of what Adam did?

I think Paul explains it well, several times.

[Jed]

And round the circle we go....

Since what Paul explains is what we are discussing, would you mind answering the question directly?

[Fortigurn]

Jed, on Dec 16 2009, 07:13 AM, said:

And round the circle we go....

Since what Paul explains is what we are discussing, would you mind answering the question directly?

I did that before, 'condemnation for all people came through one transgression'.

[Jed]

Adam was made mortal. Transgression aside, he was going to die. We inherit that mortality, but it has nothing to do with his sin and everything to do with the way God made him to start with. How are we mortal because of what Adam did?

[Flappie]

Jed, on Dec 16 2009, 10:30 AM, said:

Adam was made mortal. Transgression aside, he was going to die.

So what was the threat of Gen 2:17?

[Fortigurn]

Jed, on Dec 16 2009, 07:30 AM, said:

Adam was made mortal. Transgression aside, he was going to die. We inherit that mortality, but it has nothing to do with his sin and everything to do with the way God made him to start with.

Could you explain how you square that with what Paul says several times? What I'm getting so far is 'I don't agree with Paul that women should be silent because Eve sinned, and I don't agree with Paul that death entered by one man's sin, and that condemnation for all people came through one transgression'. Given what's at stake (women speaking), I don't think there's going to be any movement forward on either issue, especially given your ecclesial background.

Quote

How are we mortal because of what Adam did?

Because we come from a man who was mortal, not non-mortal, and he was mortal when he had his first child, because he sinned.

[Fortigurn]

Flappie, on Dec 16 2009, 07:44 AM, said:

Jed, on Dec 16 2009, 10:30 AM, said:

Adam was made mortal. Transgression aside, he was going to die.

So what was the threat of Gen 2:17?

Sort of 'In the day that you eat of it, you will die, and in the day that you don't eat of it, you will also die'. Mmmm. A bit tricky.

[Jed]

Flappie, on Dec 16 2009, 12:44 PM, said:

Jed, on Dec 16 2009, 10:30 AM, said:

Adam was made mortal. Transgression aside, he was going to die.

So what was the threat of Gen 2:17?

Removal from the tree of life.

[Fortigurn]

Jed, on Dec 16 2009, 07:46 AM, said:

Flappie, on Dec 16 2009, 12:44 PM, said:

Jed, on Dec 16 2009, 10:30 AM, said:

Adam was made mortal. Transgression aside, he was going to die.

So what was the threat of Gen 2:17?

Removal from the tree of life.

Well then, in that case you still have the problem of people dying through no fault of their own, just like women have to be silent through no fault of their own.

[Jed]

Fortigurn, on Dec 16 2009, 12:44 PM, said:

Jed, on Dec 16 2009, 07:30 AM, said:

Adam was made mortal. Transgression aside, he was going to die. We inherit that mortality, but it has nothing to do with his sin and everything to do with the way God made him to start with.

Could you explain how you square that with what Paul says several times?

Sure. I'm just about to go out so you might have to wait a few hours.

Quote

What I'm getting so far is 'I don't agree with Paul that women should be silent because Eve sinned,

Nope. I'm saying, I don't understand how Paul gets "women silent" from "Eve deceived".

Quote

and I don't agree with Paul that death entered by one man's sin, and that condemnation for all people came through one transgression'.

Nope. I do agree with Paul, but I'll leave the explanation to the next post. Don't go out of town!

Quote

Given what's at stake (women speaking),

Eh? I want to understand why Paul said women are not to speak.

Quote

I don't think there's going to be any movement forward on either issue, especially given your ecclesial background.

Whoosh.

Quote

Quote

How are we mortal because of what Adam did?

Because we come from a man who was mortal, not non-mortal, and he was mortal when he had his first child, because he sinned.

So before he sinned he wasn't mortal?

Catch you later. This discussion has been useful so far .

[Flappie]

Jed, on Dec 16 2009, 10:46 AM, said:

Flappie, on Dec 16 2009, 12:44 PM, said:

Jed, on Dec 16 2009, 10:30 AM, said:

Adam was made mortal. Transgression aside, he was going to die.

So what was the threat of Gen 2:17?

Removal from the tree of life.

That seems to imply that the tree of life would keep them alive regardless of their mortality, correct?
If so that means the transgression resulted in him being removed from the tree which resulted in his death. How do you square that with "Transgression aside, he was going to die."?

If that's not the case, what was the result of being removed from the tree of life? And how is the tree of life relevant to Gen 2:17 if the removal did not result in Adam's death?

[Jed]

Flappie, on Dec 16 2009, 01:00 PM, said:

Jed, on Dec 16 2009, 10:46 AM, said:

Flappie, on Dec 16 2009, 12:44 PM, said:

Jed, on Dec 16 2009, 10:30 AM, said:

Adam was made mortal. Transgression aside, he was going to die.

So what was the threat of Gen 2:17?

Removal from the tree of life.

That seems to imply that the tree of life would keep them alive regardless of their mortality, correct?

I imagine that's what a tree of life does.

Quote

If so that means the transgression resulted in him being removed from the tree which resulted in his death. How do you square that with "Transgression aside, he was going to die."?

Clumsy wording . "Transgression aside, he was mortal."