A Curse Is Not An Ideal

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

Why you and the SDA Church .org soooo willing to reflect the the lesser ideal (in the Edict) when God is calling us to reflect a higher ideal?

The church has no direction from Heaven that the "curse" was done away with or is of no more effect.

As long as sin exists in the world, the "curse" will have a purpose. It is part of God's plan. We have no right to do away with God's arrangement.

We have these clear statements in plain English, written by the prophet of God:

Quote:

...sin had brought discord, and now their union could be maintained and harmony preserved only by submission on the part of the one or the other. Eve had been the first in transgression; and she had fallen into temptation by separating from her companion, contrary to the divine direction. It was by her solicitation that Adam sinned, and she was now placed in subjection to her husband. Had the principles joined in the law of God been cherished by the fallen race,this sentence, though growing out of the results of sin, would have proved a blessing to them ; but man's abuse of the supremacy thus given him has too often rendered the lot of woman very bitter and made her life a burden.

Eve had been perfectly happy by her husband's side in her Eden home; but, like restless modern Eves, she was flattered with the hope of entering a higher sphere than that which God had assigned her. In attempting to rise above her original position, she fell far below it. A similar result will be reached by all who are unwilling to take up cheerfully their life duties in accordance with God's plan. In their efforts to reach positions for which He has not fitted them, many are leaving vacant the place where they might be a blessing. In their desire for a higher sphere, many have sacrificed true womanly dignity and nobility of character, and have left undone the very work that Heaven appointed them. {PP 58, 59}

Her statements above have great significance for those who realize that she was a true prophet. What she wrote here is in harmony with the Bible.

You are not answering my question. No one said the curse was done away with. Again, you are fighting against a case that was never made. You have done this before. Doing this does not strengthen your case but rather it shows that you have no answer.

The question is, "Why you and the SDA Church .org are soooo willing to reflect the the lesser ideal (in the Edict) when God is calling us to reflect a higher ideal?"

Please answer the question as asked. Don't continue to answer something that was never ever asked/asserted.

Second, I have used the Bible to make my case and that case holds. You make a case against what the Bible holds and you use Ellen White to say that the Bible is wrong.

You tell me which should we believe, the Bible or Ellen White.

John317 you constantly use Ellen White as your interpreter of Scripture. That is not what the Bible in 1Corinthians chapter two is the way we are to interpret Scripture. Why do you constantly fight against what the Bible says?

Which is better John317, to follow the superior "Ideal in Eden" or the "Edict" which is inferior according to the Bible Truth?

[John317]

Genesis 3:17

And to Adam he said,

"Because you have listened to the voice of your wife

and have eaten of the tree

of which I commanded you,

'You shall not eat of it,'

cursed is the ground because of you;

in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life."

Why did God reprimand Adam for listening to the voice of his wife?

What did God intend for Adam to do?

Notice God does not find fault with Adam, as He did with Eve, for listening to the serpent.

Paul talks about this in 1 Tim. 2: 14. What is Paul's point here? How does it relate to the church?

[M. T. Cross]

Genesis 3:17

And to Adam he said,

"Because you have listened to the voice of your wife

and have eaten of the tree

of which I commanded you,

'You shall not eat of it,'

cursed is the ground because of you;

in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life."

Why did God reprimand Adam for listening to the voice of his wife?

What did God intend for Adam to do?

Notice God does not find fault with Adam, as He did with Eve, for listening to the serpent.

Paul talks about this in 1 Tim. 2: 14. What is Paul's point here? How does it relate to the church?

I am unsure of the answers to those questions. What is your opinion on them John?

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

Second, [it appears that] you base your ways of thinking on other than the Bible as found in Genesis, which says that the "two shall be one". [That] throws that Ideal out the window.

The fact that the husband is head of the wife in no way prevents "the two" from being "one." As a matter of fact, the sentence that God gave after the Fall is for the purpose of helping the husband and the wife to be "one." The "sentence" that God gave to Eve was surely not given in order to defeat His purposes that husband and wife shall be "one."

As Ellen G. White says, "...sin had brought discord, and now their union could be maintained and harmony preserved only by submission on the part of the one or the other. ....she was now placed in subjection to her husband. Had the principles joined in the law of God been cherished by the fallen race,this sentence, though growing out of the results of sin, would have proved a blessing to them..."

Can you see that the sentence is not AGAINST the plan of God that "two shall be one"?

Therefore, far from throwing the ideal out the window, obedience to God's sentence will prove the greatest blessing to us if we cherish "the principles joined in the law of God."

"Submission" as you cite above is the key word that destroys the Oneness Principle as the Ideal in Eden envisions it. I can get "oneness" simply by adding "one and zero". Is that God's ideal? Certainly not according to the Scripture in Genesis when the text says that "the two shall be one".

Again, you are trying to fit a square peg into a smaller round hole. What you are asserting is against the clear Word of God. Why do fight against the clear Biblical Council.

Once again you are using Ellen White to interpret the Scripture as if the Scripture as God gave it cannot interpret itself.

The "Edict" is most definitely against the "Ideal in Eden" that God made in all its perfectness.

Whether God made the curse by punishment or by prescription God did not intend that His People would continue to accept the inferior "edict" as the only solution but God as the Bible says over and over again (Matt. 5:48; Romans chapter eight, to name two out of many) expects God's People to strive for the "Ideal in Eden".

I believe SDA Church .org through its own prophet Ellen White gave a diet that was Eden as the "ideal" and not the "edict" after the flood as to what God's People are to strive. If the Principle is good for one then it is good for the other.

So I ask you John317 why are you inconsistent with your principles of argumentation in regards to diet as opposed to argumentation in regard to the roles of men/women?

I believe the inconsistency speaks so loud that you need ear plugs to keep from going deaf.

Next, an ideal is never achieved by practicing only the "less than ideal practice". Practicing the less than ideal will always keep you on the less than ideal level.

[Overaged]

The fact that men *do* use their strength and position to rule over women doesn't mean they *should*, and doesn't mean that God wants them to.

This is quite true. But how is the text in Genesis being related to this subject? I am not sure I have figured that out yet...

[John317]

The question is, "Why you and the SDA Church .org are soooo willing to reflect the the lesser ideal (in the Edict) when God is calling us to reflect a higher ideal?"

Where does the Bible teach your assumption-- that God is calling us to oppose or ignore the Edict given in Eden?

I reject your idea that there's a higher ideal for mankind than the Edict that God gave to Adam and Eve.

What you call the "lesser ideal" is the command of God.

In fact, Paul refers to it as "the law" and says it is basis of his instructions in 1 Cor. 14.: 34.

Do you agree with what Paul says in 1 Cor. 14: 33b-38?

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

...

Quoting Ellen White and her analysis of the Bible is not a good substitute for actually reading the Bible and doing what the Bible actually says.

We should do both-- that is, we should study the Bible and do what it says, and also study the Spirit of prophecy. They go hand in hand. Ellen White is in complete harmony with Holy Scripture.

If you do not believe she's in harmony in what she has said on this topic, please show the Bible evidence.

What is your evidence that I am not reading the Bible?

1. I never said you did not read the Bible. Sheesh you do not read me very carefully.

2. [The problem] is that [using] Ellen White to interpret what the Bible says. That is much different than reading the Bible for what it actually says.

3. As to the harmony part: Have you not been reading my posts on this thread alone and yet not seen the inconsistency between what the two are saying.

If you do not see it then [that] is your choice.

Only you can make the changes necessary. I cannot and will not attempt to change you because it is not my JOB. I will however continue to point out your inconsistencies. This I have done in the hopes that you will see it and change. But it is up to you, not me.

[John317]

...

I am unsure of the answers to those questions. What is your opinion on them John?

The questions were:

Quote:

Why did God reprimand Adam for listening to the voice of his wife?

What did God intend for Adam to do?

God reprimanded Adam for listening to the voice of his wife because Adam was supposed to be her protector and teacher. Instead, he became a passive observer. He allowed his love for Eve to lead him to disobey God.

God didn't intend for Adam to be a passive observer of what his wife did. He was supposed to be the leader. Adam wasn't given to Eve in order to be her helper, but Eve was created to be Adam's helper.

God didn't create an inferior partner for Adam. Eve was made equal to Adam, but they had different functions and roles. Similarly, Christ is equal to the Father, yet they have different work to do. This is the way it is in the church as well as in the home.

[miz3]

I don't mind standing up and saying that I'm saved while being a sinner. That's what the Bible is all about.

That is what the Bible teaches.

[miz3]

Ellen White was a genuine prophet of God and inspired by the Holy Spirit.

We study the Bible and then study what Ellen White wrote on the topic.

The Bible interprets itself. The Holy Spirit teaches us through the Bible, but He also leads us to study God's prophets; and Ellen White was a true prophet. Therefore it would not be obeying Scripture to ignore Ellen White's comments.

The Bible's testimony is,

"Do not quench the Spirit. [20] Do not despise prophecies, [21] but test everything; hold fast what is good." {1 Thess 5: 19-21}

Hold fast what is good-- and Ellen White's writings are certainly good.

That text does not say that Ellen White is a prophet. No where in the entire Bible does it say that Ellen White is a prophet.

Besides we are drifting away from topic. Whether the Bible, which it doesn't says Ellen White is a prophet is for another thread not this one.

In any case the Bible trumps Ellen White and you continue to use Ellen White to trump what the Bible says.

[miz3]

Genesis 3:17

And to Adam he said,

"Because you have listened to the voice of your wife

and have eaten of the tree

of which I commanded you,

'You shall not eat of it,'

cursed is the ground because of you;

in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life."

Why did God reprimand Adam for listening to the voice of his wife?

What did God intend for Adam to do?

Notice God does not find fault with Adam, as He did with Eve, for listening to the serpent.

Paul talks about this in 1 Tim. 2: 14. What is Paul's point here? How does it relate to the church?

Because she was wrong in this case. God never ever inferred that Eve was always wrong and that Adam should never ever listen to his wife's counsel.

No support here for those who are against Women in the Church being Leaders in that same Church. We have already on the other thread dealt with 1Timothy 2:14. I don't know why you keep barking up the wrong tree with these texts.

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

The question is, "Why you and the SDA Church .org are soooo willing to reflect the the lesser ideal (in the Edict) when God is calling us to reflect a higher ideal?"

Where does the Bible teach your assumption-- that God is calling us to oppose or ignore the Edict given in Eden?

I reject your idea that there's a higher ideal for mankind than the Edict that God gave to Adam and Eve.

What you call the "lesser ideal" is the command of God.

In fact, Paul refers to it as "the law" and says it is basis of his instructions in 1 Cor. 14.: 34.

Do you agree with what Paul says in 1 Cor. 14: 33b-38?

Before Genesis chapter three and the curse that put a woman under her husband was a different order. Eve was not under her husband in the Ideal before sin. Duh!

Eve was Adam's helper as a united single oneness without any differences whatsoever. It mimicked the Godhead where there is always agreement.

It is not my assumption, but I am citing Biblical FACT.

What is it about this simple FACT that escapes you John317?

Why are you in such denial?

[John317]

Because she was wrong in this case. God never ever inferred that Eve was always wrong and that Adam should never ever listen to his wife's counsel.

Where does Ellen White say this? Where did I or anyone else say that Eve was always wrong?

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

Because she was wrong in this case. God never ever inferred that Eve was always wrong and that Adam should never ever listen to his wife's counsel.

Where does Ellen White say this? Where did I or anyone else say that Eve was always wrong?

Go back over your posts John317 and see where you made your mistake. I am sure if you listen carefully to your own words you will understand why I responded as I did.

[olger]

Originally Posted By: John317

Her statement means that if we sincerely and seriously cherish the principle of the law of God, then the sentence [i.e., the curse] will prove a blessing to us.

That's encouraging!

True !

Bible good.

World confused.

[John317]

"Submission" as you cite above is the key word that destroys the Oneness Principle as the Ideal in Eden envisions it. I can get "oneness" simply by adding "one and zero". Is that God's ideal? Certainly not according to the Scripture in Genesis when the text says that "the two shall be one".

That's false reasoning. Jesus Christ is in complete and joyful submission to the Father, yet He is fully equal to the Father, and they are in perfect oneness.

The Scriptures teach that we are to be in submission to one another.

You appear to misunderstand the meaning of "submission."

The Church gladly submits herself to Christ.

The Bible teaches that the wife is to submit herself to her husband as the church submits herself to Christ. Also, the husband is to love the wife and give himself for the wife as Christ loves the church and sacrificed Himself for her.

[John317]

You tell me which should we believe, the Bible or Ellen White.

Seventh-day Adventists do both.

The Bible is the standard, or canon. Ellen White is a continuing authority for teaching and correction.

[John317]

That text does not say that Ellen White is a prophet. No where in the entire Bible does it say that Ellen White is a prophet.

That's true, miz3, but then I never claimed that the text says "Ellen White is a prophet."

[Neil D]

The Fall brought up about a situation where it was necessary that someone in the marriage be the head, and the Bible is clear that God chose the husband to be the head of the wife.

1 Cor. 11:3--

[3] But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God.

Really? You mean that the word "head" is used in an authoritarian sense....If the word was intended to be used in that manor, you would have a point....

There are some scholars who even now argue that it is NOT being used in that sense.

The word "head" also carries a different definition.... as a SOURCE..IE the head[source] of the river.. In the greek mythology, Athena came out of ...Zeus' head, complete, and the source of her existance.... she became the goddess of wisdom..[among other things]....

Christ, when arguing with Sadducee over the marriage issue pointed out that we humans needed to get back to the original plan in Eden...where Adam and Eve were in a partnership before the fall. Apparently, He thought it was possible for us to do that now, post fall [so to speak].

Assuming that Paul insisted on a partnership, with texts that point to all being equal at the cross [there is neather jew nor gentil, male nor female..ect], texts like the above from Corinthians serve to strengthen the concept of partnership...not headship...

And if you present the case of a benevolent dictatorship [because that is what the concept of headship is] to your future spouse, I will suppose that your relationship with your wife will have soured....for her...sometimes after she marries you.....once she sees what the dictatorship/headship entails, she will never ever truely be happy....she will have seen that she has traded her freedom for a mess a pottage...no matter how good it may taste...While you males THINK you have a wife, your wife will feel [way down deep] like a slave...even though she tells you what you want to hear....That will be human nature...

[doug yowell]

So would that mean that Christ is not the "head"(authority) of the Church?(Eph.5:23)Kinda like the church on earth is now the "equal" of Christ and is fully capable of leading without His OK? Hmmmm, where have I heard that before?

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

"Submission" as you cite above is the key word that destroys the Oneness Principle as the Ideal in Eden envisions it. I can get "oneness" simply by adding "one and zero". Is that God's ideal? Certainly not according to the Scripture in Genesis when the text says that "the two shall be one".

That's false reasoning. Jesus Christ is in complete and joyful submission to the Father, yet He is fully equal to the Father, and they are in perfect oneness.

The Scriptures teach that we are to be in submission to one another.

You appear to misunderstand the meaning of "submission."

The Church gladly submits herself to Christ.

The Bible teaches that the wife is to submit herself to her husband as the church submits herself to Christ. Also, the husband is to love the wife and give himself for the wife as Christ loves the church and sacrificed Himself for her.

The part in red is correct. Thus, while women do submit to men, so should men submit to women. Just like we pointed in the cases of Huldah and Deborah. Or don't you understand those cases at all.

[Neil D]

We should do both-- that is, we should study the Bible and do what it says, and also study the Spirit of prophecy. They go hand in hand. Ellen White is in complete harmony with Holy Scripture.

If you do not believe she's in harmony in what she has said on this topic, please show the Bible evidence.

What is your evidence that I am not reading the Bible?

If you rely on EGW and her thinking, you will be disregarding her counsel to seek that "greater light"...Especially since she called herself the "lessor light"....She obviously was aware that her counsel and her words were to be forever subordinate to the biblical counsel and principles....And while you believe that she does not cross the bible, she is definately not on par with the bible....

[doug yowell]

If you rely on EGW and her thinking, you will be disregarding her counsel to seek that "greater light"

I think you should add the word soley after the word thinking in order to make this observation clear and correct.

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

You tell me which should we believe, the Bible or Ellen White.

Seventh-day Adventists do both.

The Bible is the standard, or canon. Ellen White is a continuing authority for teaching and correction.

If what you say above is true then why do you interpret the Scripture through the lens of Ellen White all the time?

Are they both equally "the standard, or canon? Does Ellen White say she is the standard, or cannon? Does Ellen White say we are to interpret Scripture (which you constantly do) through the prism of Ellen White?

[One] needs to come to a correct understanding concerning the relationship between the Bible and Ellen White [otherwise it can lead to] wrong conclusions about what the Bible actually says.

[Neil D]

What's being said is that the Bible clearly teaches that men are to be the elders, pastors, bishops, etc. The NT gives no evidence that women were assigned to those positions in the first century church. In fact, Paul was inspired by the Holy Spirit to write that women are not to teach men but are to be "submissive" and "silent" in the churches. Paul's reason for this instruction is not local or cultural problems but he points his readers back to what occurred in Eden.

Why do you think Paul does this?

That is an assumption that you make, based upon your reading/scholorship[?] of men who also make the same assumption. There are scholars who argue the points that Paul never did make those assumptions and that there were extra-ordinary circumstances for Paul to pen that counsel. There is historical evidence that shows we've come in the middle of a conversation that the partys understood, but that we do not.

It is understanding the historical evidence that shows that Paul was not talking about the subjugation of women. And while you point out that men are to be "bishops", there is biblical evidence that points out men were not exclusive in thier holding of this office...or offices.. The result is that the extra ordinary instructions of Paul point to local problems, indeed....and are not necessarily universal.