teresaq Posted August 31, 2011 Share Posted August 31, 2011 When was that first believed, does anyone know? Has it been around the belief that since women's brains were smaller than men's, women were mentally deficient? Is it a concoction some have come up with to try to prevent women's ordination? If so, did SDAs come up with that, or "we" adopted it from others? Just curious... facebook. /teresa.quintero.790 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parade Orange Posted August 31, 2011 Share Posted August 31, 2011 it seems since man has always had the upper hand regarding strength and therefore providing a hearth and protection to female and family since the dawn of time men always looked to itself as the one who holds the keys we dont even have to look to scriptures to see that! and in scriptures we see men as the head the prominant figure then we got paul contraversial statements seeming to back up our male dominated culture SDA'a are a product of all that as well All progress in the Spiritual Life is knowing and Loving GOD"there is non upon earth that I desire besides YOU" PS 73:25That perspective changes EVERYTHING-suffering and adversity are the means that makes us hungry for GOD. Disapointments will wean us away wordly occupations. Even sin(when repented of) becomes a mechanism to push us closer to HIM as we experience His Love and Forgiveness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators John317 Posted August 31, 2011 Moderators Share Posted August 31, 2011 Eve wasn't created subordinate to Adam but she was definitely created to have a different work or role than Adam was created for. I think it is somewhat like the various members of the Godhead being equal yet having different work to do. I have no idea when it was first believed that women were less intelligent. I doubt it has anything to do with women's ordination since the difference between men and women has been known for thousands of years before the existence of the Christian Church. I wouldn't refer to it as a question of women being less intelligent than men, though. Some of the differences from earliest times-- some of which may help explain how people think of the differences between men and women-- are shown in the following ways: The fact that Eve was created to bear the children shows that that she was intended to do different work than Adam was intended for. It generally means that women were designed take care of the children and the men to labor outside the home. Women's names were not given in the ancient family records.For instance, we don't know the names of Adam and Eve's daughters, and in fact, they are not even mentioned. God chose men as the leaders, priests, and prophets of Israel, as well as the 12 disciples and the leaders of the early church. Again, though, it is not a matter of women being less intelligent; women think differently than men do, and their brains are different, not inferior. It is just like their bodies are different, not inferior, to men's bodies. Women don't compete with men in weight lifting, in football, or in boxing or wrestling, etc., yet everyone seems to realize that these difference don't mean women are inferior. Ellen White tells us that God created Adam taller than Eve. Both the Bible and the Spirit of prophecy say that God gave Eve to Adam, not Adam to Eve. We're also told by Inspiration that woman is from man and that she was created for the man, not man for the woman. Eve was to be protected by Adam. It is not a popular belief today, but we're told by Ellen White that angels of God told Eve to be careful not to separate herself from Adam, because there would be less danger from being tempted when she was with him than when by herself. The Bible tells us that man is the head of woman, but it also says that God is the head of Christ and Christ is the head of man. As long as we keep these relationships in mind, we won't ever believe that the differences between men and women mean that women are inferior or of less value than men. John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rudywoofs (Pam) Posted August 31, 2011 Members Share Posted August 31, 2011 ..odd topic, considering the status of Ellen White in the SDA church... Pam      Meddle Not In the Affairs of Dragons; for You Are Crunchy and Taste Good with Ketchup. If we all sang the same note in the choir, there'd never be any harmony. Funny, isn't it, how we accept Grace for ourselves and demand justice for others? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parade Orange Posted August 31, 2011 Share Posted August 31, 2011 ty RUDYWOOFS good point HEY all! i want to say something about that WE all know that story about how EGW got chosen to be a messinger cause that fella rejected to give what GOD showed him [please ask someone else here for that refrence if not familiar] GOD TOLD HIM 'i will give it to the weakest of the weak' well i got to thinkin about that awhile back and i tiped my cowboy hat and stroked my mustache and said to my dog 'YELLER, GOD could have given it to a weak MAN!' BTW no hat or dog but yes mustache a christian man who loves JESUS who is not hearty or strong or even walking! a simple man WITH A THORN BY HIS SIDE U CAN SEE FROM SPACE! GOD could have raised up a man at this time for this event like JOHN THE BAPTIST or perhaps a Jeremiah with a bad ticker! A man with a head wound and bad breath! WHATEVER! u folks do know GOD had all this planned all along dont u? we know the old story! JACOB not ESAU ISSAC not ISHMAEL THE FIRST ISRAELITES OUT OF EGYPT NOPE THE SECOND GENERATION!! DAVID not SAUL GENTLE not JEW [so to speak] the first one rejecting second one embracing GOD KNOWS HOW IT IS WITH US HIS PEOPLE HUMANS! HE has ALWAYS set up a something or someone getting the message out! after someone fails! GOD could have planted another dude to spread the VISION! HE PLANTED A WOMAN! All progress in the Spiritual Life is knowing and Loving GOD"there is non upon earth that I desire besides YOU" PS 73:25That perspective changes EVERYTHING-suffering and adversity are the means that makes us hungry for GOD. Disapointments will wean us away wordly occupations. Even sin(when repented of) becomes a mechanism to push us closer to HIM as we experience His Love and Forgiveness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parade Orange Posted August 31, 2011 Share Posted August 31, 2011 ISAIAH56! hello nice to meet you and thanku for fawning over my SODOM post! # 471750 and 471752 im glad u liked and ty for encourging me to share more on the matter! that touched me and so did TERESAQ(SDA) ty ty your post addresses it very nicely thanku for explaining so well! All progress in the Spiritual Life is knowing and Loving GOD"there is non upon earth that I desire besides YOU" PS 73:25That perspective changes EVERYTHING-suffering and adversity are the means that makes us hungry for GOD. Disapointments will wean us away wordly occupations. Even sin(when repented of) becomes a mechanism to push us closer to HIM as we experience His Love and Forgiveness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teresaq Posted August 31, 2011 Author Share Posted August 31, 2011 There is a statement in the SoP, the one that says Adam and Eve, both, were warned about separating from each other. One would be weaker alone. It just happened that Eve was the one who found herself wandering... I see most of your response regarding post-sin and seems quite appropriate to post-sin thinking. I mean we can't assume that Eve sat in the "den" while Adam went out to "labor" as it is in the industrialized nations of today. That would have separated them and they were told not to separate themselves from each other. Since their "culture" was completely alien to us, I don't know why we would assume they would be living as we do today, post-sin. I would imagine as the children started arriving they would accompany both parents in their work-and I don't mean the girls would be with mommy and the boys would be with daddy in "different" work. lol As for Eve being "given" to man...God could have created both at the same time but He chose to wait til Adam noticed that he was alone, maybe helping Adam to be more appreciative of the "gift"? The question still has not been answered, WHO INVENTED THE THEORY THAT EVE WAS CREATED SUBORDINATE TO ADAM? Or has it been in the back of some people's minds since way back? facebook. /teresa.quintero.790 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Gail Posted August 31, 2011 Administrators Share Posted August 31, 2011 A related question: If one doesn't consider themselves hard done by being in subordination, is it a bad thing? (Trying to consider what may have been acceptable in times past as well as today) Getting back to the subject at hand: I know something happened at the Fall, and everybody received a result to that, Adam, Eve, and the serpent. Eve's part is stated in Genesis.3:16. Does having your husband rule over you mean that women in general are subordinate to men? Isaiah 32:17 And the work of righteousness shall be peace; and the effect of righteousness quietness and assurance for ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Gail Posted August 31, 2011 Administrators Share Posted August 31, 2011 I'm not sure that I buy that. To me, I see both Adam and Eve as each having attributes that God has, and that the two of them together better represented (or reflected) God's character as a whole than the parts did. Isaiah 32:17 And the work of righteousness shall be peace; and the effect of righteousness quietness and assurance for ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Tom Wetmore Posted August 31, 2011 Administrators Share Posted August 31, 2011 It comes from a misunderstanding of what has become known as headship. In the garden God commissioned both Adam and Eve as rulers, co-rulers, over all else. The idea of man ruling over woman is from the curse of sin pronounced by God after the fall. It was not a proscriptive idea from God, but a descriptive fact of the result of what sin would do to the previously balanced relationship. God described the upset of sin as man seeking to rule over and not with. This striving for dominance was the essences of Lucifer's agenda of seeking to rule over God himself. But God is a God of oneness, just as the head and the body make one person. The interdependency between the head and the body means that one cannot exist without the other. They are a single unit of life. The brain does not work without the heart and the heart does not work without the brain. "Absurdity reigns and confusion makes it look good." "Sinless perfection is such a shallow goal." "I love God only as much as the person I love the least." *Forgiveness is always good news. And that is the gospel truth. (And finally, the ideas expressed above are solely my person views and not that of any organization with which I am associated.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Gail Posted August 31, 2011 Administrators Share Posted August 31, 2011 Isaiah 32:17 And the work of righteousness shall be peace; and the effect of righteousness quietness and assurance for ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teresaq Posted August 31, 2011 Author Share Posted August 31, 2011 I am seeing it pop up and am curious if anyone knows its origen, or has there been this "strain" of understanding all along? It may go hand in hand with the idea of Jesus (and the HS?) being subordinate to God pre-incarnation, which the scriptures do seem to imply, but I haven't seen where Eve was intended to be "submissive" to Adam from creation. I read parts of Adrian Ebens' perspective and while I found it very nice I couldn't agree. From what I have seen of Adrian Ebens he seems to be a real Christian. The few others who espouse this, well from the way I see them treat their wives and women... Yes Gail, that has been my understanding also...but those who believe the topic title believe Eve was just reminded of her "place". That doesn't make sense to me since Adam and the serpent weren't reminded of their "places" but received something other than what they had before. The serpent flew, now it had to slither on the ground, for example. facebook. /teresa.quintero.790 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Outta Here Posted August 31, 2011 Share Posted August 31, 2011 Maybe this is a question for another thread, but what does it even mean to women to "have their husband's rule over them"? Is it different or the same as subordination? Also, can anyone give me an example of a situation in which a husband would demonstrate that he is ruling over his wife? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoAspen Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 And yet the topic continues to be debated! Why, is truly a question that will not be answered until all of human kind gives up the desire to rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators John317 Posted September 1, 2011 Moderators Share Posted September 1, 2011 I believe that if men lovingly ruled their wives as Christ lovingly rules the church, the wives would like being ruled. My point is that God's plan is for wives to be subordinate to their husbands in the same way that Christ is subordiante to the Father and as the church is subordinate to Christ. Christ gave Himself for the church so that He obviously loves the church more than he loves His own life. That's how God wants husbands to love their wives. I see the main problem being that most men have the wrong concept of what it means to "rule." It doesn't mean to rule selfishly or with a desire for power. That's the nature of Satan's rulership. It's just the opposite of the way God rules and of the way He intended the husband to rule in the home. This kind of "rule" does happen, but it is altogether too rare. Ellen White's chapters in Adventist Home related to the responsibilities of the husband and wife describe exactly what I am trying to communicate here. John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil D Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 When a male can't stand it any longer I wonder if this is what some of you are refering to in the concept of 'ruling'... Democracy is a device that ensures we shall be governed no better than we deserve.  George Bernard Shaw  Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators John317 Posted September 1, 2011 Moderators Share Posted September 1, 2011 I think there are some things that we need to get settled in our minds before we can understand God's original plan for men and women. One of them is that God gave the responsibility only to Adam of walking throughout the Garden (alone) and naming the animals. Another is that Adam was made the representative head of the human race. This means that sin did not come onto the human race through Eve's eating of the fruit. If Adam had resisted Eve's temptation, she would have died, and God would have made Adam another companion. But the human race only fell when Adam sinned, not when Eve sinned. I wonder if everyone here is in agreement with this. John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil D Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 looking this way and that way..... ......uh.....nope....... Democracy is a device that ensures we shall be governed no better than we deserve.  George Bernard Shaw  Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoAspen Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Tom Wetmore Posted September 1, 2011 Administrators Share Posted September 1, 2011 So are you saying that if a woman falls in the garden it doesn't make a sin? A women is not worth saving? If Adam alone had eaten the fruit and Eve had resisted, what would God have done with Eve? What would God have done with Adam? (If Adam had been kicked out of the garden alone there would have been no you and me.) Adam and Eve together sinned. When confronted by God, Adam blamed Eve. Not much has changed since then. "Absurdity reigns and confusion makes it look good." "Sinless perfection is such a shallow goal." "I love God only as much as the person I love the least." *Forgiveness is always good news. And that is the gospel truth. (And finally, the ideas expressed above are solely my person views and not that of any organization with which I am associated.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators John317 Posted September 1, 2011 Moderators Share Posted September 1, 2011 I'm saying exactly what the Bible and Ellen White teach. Sin, according to the Bible, was transferred to the human race through Adam, not through Eve. Ellen White wrote that if Eve alone had fallen-- and if he had passed the test-- God would have created a new companion for Adam. The Bible supports this view. I don't believe Ellen White would have said that her words should be understood to mean that women aren't worth saving. Paul, I'm sure, wouldn't have said his words meant that, either. It's important first to acknowledge this before we can discuss what it signifies. John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teresaq Posted September 1, 2011 Author Share Posted September 1, 2011 I56 if you don't mind let's think about what you said a little bit more. First you devalued Eve to the worth of a dead leaf. But far, far, more important than that do you know what you did to God? You made Him look like He couldn't have cared less about Eve. That He felt about Eve the same way you do...nothing more than some leaf that withered and died. Not a human being that God considers as a child. Lets say, for the sake of argument, that neither A nor E had sinned, had children and that one of those children sinned. Do you believe, since only Adam was the rep of the race that the same thing would have happened to him/her as you believe would have happened to Eve? facebook. /teresa.quintero.790 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil D Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 well, that is not EXACTLY what EGW and the Bible teach....because if women are NOT as important as men, then God has a bias against women. And women and men are not prone to salvation on an equal basis... No, there is a distortion in your thinking...me thinks a severe and big distortion... Democracy is a device that ensures we shall be governed no better than we deserve.  George Bernard Shaw  Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators John317 Posted September 1, 2011 Moderators Share Posted September 1, 2011 On page 56 of Patriarchs and Prophets, Ellen White wrote that Adam didn't take into account the fact that God could have given Adam a companion to take Eve's place if he had decided not to eat of the forbidden fruit. Therefore Adam resolved to share Eve's fate. This need not have happened. If Adam had passed the test of not eating the forbidden fruit, but if Eve had failed it, there was no need for all humanity to die. Humanity perished because of Adam's sin, not Eve's. Please read the passage for yourself. Romans 5: 19 plainly tells us the same thing, does it not? Again, I believe it's important to acknowledge what the Bible and the SoP says on these subjects before we can hope to have a true understanding of what God's originally planned for man and woman. Neither Paul nor Ellen White intended their words to mean that women are worthless, so if that is the thought that anyone is getting from the fact that God would have made Adam a new companion in Eve's place, he can get rid of that thought right now. It is completely wrong. John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators John317 Posted September 1, 2011 Moderators Share Posted September 1, 2011 No, I am not devaluing anyone. I am merely stating what Ellen White wrote on page 58 of Patriarchs and Prophets-- that Adam did not take into account the fact that God could have made him another companion in place of Eve if Adam had decided not to partake of the forbidden fruit. It is wrong to jump to the conclusion that this means God valued Eve as much as a dead leaf. I really don't believe that either the Bible or Ellen White mean for anyone to think this. Please check out Patriarchs and Prophets, page 57,58. Romans 5: 19 is very clear that sin is the result of the first man's taking the forbidden fruit. That is why it was so important for Adam to resist Eve's temptation of him. The human race was not fallen because of Eve's choice but because of Adam's. Do you agree with this? I realize these are not popular (politically correct) ideas in our modern society, but we need to be able to acknowledge the truth that God has revealed to us in His word if we want to understand God's original plan for man and woman. John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts