Women pastors

[irishcowboy]

The order of creation is the reason that Paul gave: "For Adam was created first."

No it's not as I've been explaining...

The account says that Eve gave the fruit to Adam but does not say that he was there.

The serpent asked in plural, 'you' and Eve responded in plural, 'you'. And the text says he was with her.

We're not getting back into this here, firehill, regardless of how badly you want to. The text does not state or imply that Adam was with her at all.

are we talking about this verse here?????

Gen 3:6 And when the woman saw that the tree [was] good for food, and that it [was] pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make [one] wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her ; and he did eat.

[firehill]

Even if you don't accept my connection there, the very least the verse teaches is that a woman cannot teach a man because the first woman was deceived. Either way, a woman is not permitted to teach a man.

You could only come to this conclusion IF you take Paul to be meaning that Eve is the prototypical female which you havn't even established as being implied nor stated in the context of the passage! Pauls connection of creational order and who was decived shows that Eve is not being refered to here as the prototypical female.

BTW: The two verses are not intertwined as you put it. The "for" in verse 13 is connected with verse 12, as the "and" in verse 14 is also connected with verse 12. It is not that the order of creation has anything to do with who was and who was not deceived.

14And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.

[Marnie]

The order of creation is the reason that Paul gave: "For Adam was created first."

No it's not as I've been explaining...

The account says that Eve gave the fruit to Adam but does not say that he was there.

The serpent asked in plural, 'you' and Eve responded in plural, 'you'. And the text says he was with her.

We're not getting back into this here, firehill, regardless of how badly you want to. The text does not state or imply that Adam was with her at all.

Of course it does. How can you think otherwise?

Exactly..... she gave to the Adam who was with her.

she took of its fruit and ate. She also gave to her husband with her, and he ate.

I know it! People see what they want to see.

[Ovedya]

Even if you don't accept my connection there, the very least the verse teaches is that a woman cannot teach a man because the first woman was deceived. Either way, a woman is not permitted to teach a man..

I don't see the sense in that at all. Neither is it ever stated anywhere else in Scripture.

What kind of spiritual law is this......

The fact that Eve was deceived is directly connected to the fact that she engaged in conversation with the cleverest of all creature. Now if you wanted to suggest that any woman that engaged in a similar conversation with the same clever creature stands a good chance of being deceived you might have more logic behind you. But just because Eve was deceived does not mean she is predisposed to being deceived, nor does it mean that all females would be predisposed to being deceived...... anymore than it means that all men are predisposed to willfully knowingly deliberately choosing to sin.

The perhaps you could briefly explain why the serpent chose to beguile Eve and not Adam. Convenience perhaps? Because she just happened to be "in the neighborhood" of the tree?

Or perhaps: A) Because he wanted to subvert God-s divine order (Which is keeping with his character, considering the fact of his rebellion), B) Because he knew the woman was more open to deception; or even, maybe C) Both.

[Ovedya]

Even if you don't accept my connection there, the very least the verse teaches is that a woman cannot teach a man because the first woman was deceived. Either way, a woman is not permitted to teach a man.

You could only come to this conclusion IF you take Paul to be meaning that Eve is the prototypical female which you havn't even established as being implied nor stated in the context of the passage! Pauls connection of creational order and who was decived shows that Eve is not being refered to here as the prototypical female.

BTW: The two verses are not intertwined as you put it. The "for" in verse 13 is connected with verse 12, as the "and" in verse 14 is also connected with verse 12. It is not that the order of creation has anything to do with who was and who was not deceived.

14And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.

Irrelevant.

[Marnie]

Even if you don't accept my connection there, the very least the verse teaches is that a woman cannot teach a man because the first woman was deceived. Either way, a woman is not permitted to teach a man..

I don't see the sense in that at all. Neither is it ever stated anywhere else in Scripture.

What kind of spiritual law is this......

The fact that Eve was deceived is directly connected to the fact that she engaged in conversation with the cleverest of all creature. Now if you wanted to suggest that any woman that engaged in a similar conversation with the same clever creature stands a good chance of being deceived you might have more logic behind you. But just because Eve was deceived does not mean she is predisposed to being deceived, nor does it mean that all females would be predisposed to being deceived...... anymore than it means that all men are predisposed to willfully knowingly deliberately choosing to sin.

The perhaps you could briefly explain why the serpent chose to beguile Eve and not Adam. Convenience perhaps? Because she just happened to be "in the neighborhood" of the tree?

Or perhaps: A) Because he wanted to subvert God-s divine order (Which is keeping with his character, considering the fact of his rebellion), B) Because he knew the woman was more open to deception; or even, maybe C) Both.

I know the answer! From the greatest theologians in the world:

"Satan knew Eve would fall for it," says Amanda, age 9. Nice pun, Amanda.

"Because Eve was eating when Satan tempted her," says Griffin, 8.

This is the maitre d' theory of the fall. Perhaps Satan worked in the forbidden fruit as the dessert of a nine-course dinner.

"Because Satan knew Eve would make Adam taste the apple," says Jennifer, 8. Oh, I see. It's a two-for-one special. Adam fell for Eve in more ways than one.

"Because Satan is a boy," says Rachel, 9, "and boys don't like girls."

It was Eve's personality, says Clay, 9: "Eve was more sensitive than Adam."

Amnesia was the problem, says Nicole, 8: "Eve forgot they weren't supposed to eat that tree, and then, Adam forgot."

Oops, I forgot! Wrong tree.

It wasn't forgetting; it was ignorance, says Josh, 10: "Eve was new in the Garden of Eden." In other words, Eve was new in the garden and didn't know her way around.

Well, why didn't she know? Because, says Caroline, 10, "God hadn't given her such a lecture." So, says Elyse, 8, "she didn't know the rules." Actually, "the devil knew God didn't tell Eve not to eat it so he tempted her," explains Joseph, 9.

"Eve was just walking around," says Victoria, 8, "and I think Adam was busy." So Eve "was the only one out of the two of them that Satan could find," says Brittany. Megan, 10, agrees: "She was in the wrong place at the wrong time."

"We don't know the devil's thoughts," says Heather, 9, "so we don't know why."

LINK

[Ovedya]

The order of creation is the reason that Paul gave: "For Adam was created first."

No it's not as I've been explaining...

The account says that Eve gave the fruit to Adam but does not say that he was there.

The serpent asked in plural, 'you' and Eve responded in plural, 'you'. And the text says he was with her.

We're not getting back into this here, firehill, regardless of how badly you want to. The text does not state or imply that Adam was with her at all.

Of course it does. How can you think otherwise?

For the reasons I stated. Adam did nothing. Which would make his sin all the more greater. In such a scenario Adam would be guilty of being beguiled by the serpent himself, and of eating of the fruit.

No. the verses neither states or implies that he was with her.

[Marnie]

The order of creation is the reason that Paul gave: "For Adam was created first."

No it's not as I've been explaining...

The account says that Eve gave the fruit to Adam but does not say that he was there.

The serpent asked in plural, 'you' and Eve responded in plural, 'you'. And the text says he was with her.

We're not getting back into this here, firehill, regardless of how badly you want to. The text does not state or imply that Adam was with her at all.

Of course it does. How can you think otherwise?

For the reasons I stated. Adam did nothing. Which would make his sin all the more greater. In such a scenario Adam would be guilty of being beguiled by the serpent himself, and of eating of the fruit.

No. the verses neither states or implies that he was with her.

Aww, man, you're killing me dude! Did you read the text???

[Ovedya]

The order of creation is the reason that Paul gave: "For Adam was created first."

what does being born first have to do with exercising gifts and skills.

Authority.

Adam was not born.

Did he have a belly button?

[Ovedya]

The order of creation is the reason that Paul gave: "For Adam was created first."

No it's not as I've been explaining...

The account says that Eve gave the fruit to Adam but does not say that he was there.

The serpent asked in plural, 'you' and Eve responded in plural, 'you'. And the text says he was with her.

We're not getting back into this here, firehill, regardless of how badly you want to. The text does not state or imply that Adam was with her at all.

Of course it does. How can you think otherwise?

For the reasons I stated. Adam did nothing. Which would make his sin all the more greater. In such a scenario Adam would be guilty of being beguiled by the serpent himself, and of eating of the fruit.

No. the verses neither states or implies that he was with her.

Aww, man, you're killing me dude! Did you read the text???

I did.

"Mother fixed us all dinner. Then she served it to us."

Were we all in the kitchen with mother when she fixed us dinner?

"John bought a ring for Janice. Then he gave it to her."

Was Janice with John when he bought the ring?