Tags

, , , , , , ,

This post actually began as a comment I left on another site, but related to Genesis 3:16, related to some discussion and debate going on.

“It never ceases to surprise me how many of the negative (and false) doctrines within Christianity stem from women’s teachings. Susan Foh in the 70’s or 80’s actually redesigned the whole biblical understanding of “her desire shall be for her husband,” and portrayed it more as the curse of Eve, as justification for headship and male authority, male authority no longer stemming from His grace and love, but now as perpetual punishment for the eternally cursed Eve.

Ironically, if we believe in a permanently vile and cursed Eve, we are basically saying the sins of women are so big, so powerful, they carry more weight than the sacrifice Jesus Christ made on the cross. So basically portraying “vile women,” as bigger and badder than God Himself, which is actually a form of feminism and goddess worship.”

The messages lurking behind that distortion are quite negative for men too. I mean call me crazy, but who wants to be perceived as some woman’s eternal punishment? She only desires me because God put a curse on her. I have headship and responsibility towards her, not because I am the much-loved son of a most High God, but because she is a defective, inferior, perpetually cursed helpmeet. The implications are ugly and they ripple out across the pond in ways we can’t always see at first glance.

Sam Powell actually addressed this issue quite well a while back, in a post called Genesis 3:16  The ESV actually changed the wording to say, “Your desire shall be contrary to your husband” which does imply Eve is perpetually against her husband. How we went from “desire FOR your husband” to “desire CONTRARY TO your husband” is beyond me.

My helpmeet is AGAINST me just like God himself probably is, is a perverse and untrue message.

Pastor Wilson has at least shown some interest in examining the issue, so “in him I am well pleased.” J/K. He is a bit of a fence sitter on the matter, but I appreciate his willingness to question it. He has a post called, The Feckless Evangelical Bridge

Here is Wendy with A Somewhat Scholarly Analysis of Genesis 3:16

Here is another, The Desire of The woman, a Response to Susan Foh’s Interpretation.

Myself, I do not believe in the curse of Eve, the fall of mankind, yes, but Eve is not “cursed.”  Neither is Adam. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”John 1-1. God curses the ground and he curses the serpent.  He wraps His kids in skins an He posts a guard in the garden to protect them from farther harm.

Also “And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.”- Genesis 3:15 Regardless, if one is going to believe in “curses,” any Christian worth their salt should come to the realization that Christ Jesus died for us. It is finished. The curse was broken just as sure as that temple curtain was so torn, and He is now seated in victory at the right hand of the Father.

So, wake up and smell the grace.

 

marriage

 

 

Advertisements