Allegory in the Bible

Sometimes a rose isn't just a rose, a woman isn't just a woman and a passage in the Bible is actually illustrating a larger theme or event in the text.

I used to hate when my teacher told me a rose wasn't just a rose. I didn't trust that she knew what the author was thinking and didn't understand the point of guessing outside of what was explicitly written. As I've grown over the years, I've learn to appreciate hidden meanings in texts a lot more. In the Bible, a lot of the individual stories are allegories for larger themes. One of the biggest clues to helping me find these allegories can be found in Jeremiah 6:2. In this verse, we are explicitly told a woman symbolizes God's holy city was really is His holy people. In the New Testament, you see confirmation of this when the Church constantly being refered to as "the Bride of Christ." When I started plugging "the Church" in for women in Biblical narratives, a whole new layer started to unravel for me. Below are just a few examples of allegory in the Bible. Can you come up with more?

Passage	Allegory
The Book of Esther	Represents the transition of the Old Covenant into the New Covenant and redemption of God's people King Ahauserus --> God Queen Vashti --> Israel in rebellion Esther --> The New Testament Church Haman --> Satan Purim --> The Marriage Supper of the Lamb to the Church
The Fall of Man	Represents Christ coming to earth as a man to suffer to save the Church Adam --> Christ (notably Christ doesn't sin as Adam did) Eve --> the Church Eden --> Heaven/Paradise
The Feast Days	Represents the mission of Christ Passover (Salvation from Egypt) --> Crucifixion (Salvation from sin) Feast of Unleavened Bread (Firstfruits) --> The resurrected dead + Christ (Matthew 27:50-53) Pentacost (Giving of the law) --> Receiving the Holy Spirit Feast of Trumpets --> Warnings of Christ's second return (Matthew 24; Revelation 8-11) Day of Atonement (High Priest redeems Israel for their sacrifice) --> The sealing of the saints in Revelation Feast of Tabernacles (commemorates when God dwelt with Israel during their 40 years) --> Living in paradise in union with the Most High/The Millenium

References

1. "Allegory". Merriam Webster Dictionary; visited March 2022

The Fall of Man feat. Michael

¹Now the serpent was more cunning than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said to the woman, “Has God indeed said,
‘You shall not eat of every tree of the garden’?”
²And the woman said to the serpent, “We may eat the fruit of the trees of the garden; ³but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God has said,
‘You shall not eat it, nor shall you touch it, lest you die.’ ”
⁴Then the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die. ⁵For God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”
⁶So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree desirable to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate. She also gave to her husband with her, and he ate. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves coverings. Genesis 3:1-7 NKJV

We didn't talk about the fact that the fruit is not and apple. That idea was popularized by Paradise Lost

Genesis 2:18 says it is not good that man be alone. This is the first time God says something is not good.

Little Light Studios is a ministry that breaks down subliminal (and not so subliminal) messages in modern TV shows. If nothing else, I recommend their video on the science of consuming media.

Ellen White, whom Michael references, is thought to be a prophet by some. I have never read her writings and therefore make no judgements about her.

When I said "that's a whole different topic" with respect to animals talking in the garden, I was thinking of a theory I've heard in which some people believe the serpent spoken of was not a literal serpent. I don't agree with this interpretation, but the reason I didn't bring it up was because I thought it would derailed the conversation.

Bible verses to reference

• Symbolism of Woman as a church
  1. Jeremiah 6:2
  2. Ephesians 5:23-32
  3. 2 Corinthians 11:2
  4. Revelation 19:7-8
• Fruit of the vine
  1. Ezekiel 17:23
  2. Hosea 10:1
  3. Matthew 7:16-20
  4. Luke 8:4-8
  5. John 15
• The serpent is the devil
  1. Revelation 12:9
  2. Revelation 20:2
• 2 Peter 3:8 - A day is like a thousand years

The Woman & the Serpent

What if your parents guaranteed you a reprieve, a loophole, from your punishment before they even told you what your punishment was. That's exactly what God did for us.

Season 1 Episode I

¹⁴So the Lord God said to the serpent:
Because you have done this,
you are cursed more than any livestock
and more than any wild animal.
You will move on your belly
and eat dust all the days of your life.
¹⁵I will put hostility between you and the woman,
and between your offspring and her offspring.
He will strike your head,
and you will strike his heel.Genesis 3:14-15 CSB

00:01:21	Hey guys! Welcome back to the PSALMS to God podcast. So today we're talking about Genesis 3—the infamous Chapter 3 of Genesis. It is the fall of mankind. And I feel like so much was missing, in terms of the details when I was taught the story as a child, and even as I read it as a teenager—and even some probably in college. I feel like I was so much older when I realized how significant this story is. More importantly, how beautiful this story is. Yeah you heard that right: I said this story is beautiful.
00:02:11	So just some context for those who are a little fuzzy on exactly how the fall happened: Adam and Eve were in the garden. Everything is perfect but there is one tree they're not supposed to eat from—they can eat anything else. They have all of the great fruits; everything is delicious, everything is perfect, and it's free, more importantly, but they just can't eat from this one tree. So the serpent convinces Eve that she should eat from it and that it will make her like God. So then Eve further goes on and convinces her husband that they should both eat from it. And they do. And then they become ashamed and they realize that they are naked. They hide from God, but eventually they come out and God confronts them about what has happened. Adam is the first to speak: he blamed Eve. Eve blames the serpent, and then starting in verse 14 God starts divvying out punishments.
00:03:17	And this is where it gets really interesting. We focus so much on the fact that mankind fell. We focus in on the fact that we were punished, that we were banished from Eden, and that that is, you know, why we are in the state that we're in. People focus on the fact that the woman was made submissive to her husband or to have a desire for her husband, and that the man was placed in charge. And we could do a whole 'nother podcast, probably several podcasts, on the ramifications of that and the misinterpretations and misuses of that, but we're not going to get into that.
00:03:59	What I want to get into is the fact that before God ever punished mankind, before God curses us, before He curses the ground, before anything bad really starts taking place... God first punishes the serpent, who is the devil[1]. The first thing that he does is ensure that there is a way out for us! What people don't often teach, at least in my experience growing up in a Baptist church and popping around from Methodist and Baptist and AME churches, no one stopped to talk about Genesis 3:15 is the first Messianic Prophecy in the Bible. It's, I guess, the first prophecy, period—but it's about Jesus. The seed that's spoken of, the offspring of the woman is Jesus[2]
00:05:10	So when you look at symbolism in the Bible, obviously we know the serpent is the devil, the woman is Eve, but the woman could also be a church. Throughout the Bible when they start talking about women, they're often talking about the church,[3] or they were talking about the bride of Christ. And it's interesting, because if you flip all the way to the end of the Bible and you go to Revelation, if you go to chapter 12 and you start reading just from verse 1, it says " A great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head. She was pregnant and cried out in labor and agony as she was about to give birth. Then another sign appeared in heaven: There was a great fiery red dragon having seven heads and ten horns, and on its heads were seven crowns. Its tail swept away a third of the stars in heaven and hurled them to the earth. And the dragon stood in front of the woman who was about to give birth, so that when she did give birth it might devour her child. She gave birth to a Son, a male who is going to rule all nations with an iron rod. Her child was caught up to God and to his throne. The woman fled into the wilderness, where she had a place prepared by God, to be nourished there for 1,260 days." (Revelation 12:1-6 CSB)
00:06:42	Photocredit: Unsplash.com/Advait Berde I probably didn't need to read the entire passage, but I just kind of got carried away, sorry guys. But the point is this is a prophecy given in Revelation and is talking about the woman giving birth to this child that will rule the nations, that child being Jesus and the woman is not Mary, but it's about the church. It's about just the entire concept. This whole thing is tied together. The whole point—once again we have the dragon/serpent/Satan—It's the same narrative all the way through. It's all boiling down to this war in heaven where Satan has lost his mind and is trying to become God, and started stirring up discord. But from the beginning, from the very beginning, God specifies that this seed is going to come. This child, this person, the Messiah, Jesus the King of Kings, He is going to come and He's going to defeat the serpent. The serpent will try to defeat Him but he will fail. So we get in Genesis 3 that the serpent would you bruise the heel the seed of the woman, but the woman's seed will crush the head of the serpent. And that is exactly what happens.[4]
00:08:10	So Satan has Jesus crucified which is bruising the heel. He thinks he's going to have a victory, but really all he did was set up the grand finale. This gives Jesus the ability to pay for our sins and that's exactly how it was supposed to play out. And now Jesus has the victory, and He's going to come back and deal the final blow to crush the serpent's head once and for all. I think it's beautiful, because God is speaking salvation before He ever punishes us, and there's something very, very parental and very, very reassuring about that. It's almost like, it's like I have to give you the good news before I give you the bad news. The good news is you're going to live forever and I love you and I'm going to take care of you and I'm going to get you out of this. The bad news is, you know, you're going to have to struggle a little bit until we can work all this out and I got to punish you, but don't worry. Remember the good news I told you five seconds ago.
00:09:28	I think that's so amazing, because even though throughout all of our trials and tribulations we don't necessarily understand God's plan, a lot of times we get impatient. We want what we want now. We want the benefits now. We feel like He's abandoning us. From the very beginning, from the inception of our creation, before anything was ever wrong in this earth, God gave us hope. He spoke our salvation before He spoke our downfall, and He gave us His word all throughout the Old Testament, all throughout the New Testament. So even today, as we struggle, He has given us hope first. He has told us that He will make a way out of no way, every single time. So anytime we get ourselves into some mess, there is always a way out. And He always provides us a way out, before we even dig ourselves in the hole. Before He wants to lower the hammer on us, He wants to save of us first and foremost.
00:10:38	I think that's a beautiful thing and an important thing to take away from Genesis 3. Instead of focusing on our shortcomings and our failures but to see how God uplifted us and how He provided hope in such a desperate situation. So that's what I wanted to leave you guys with today. I hope that as you continue your day-to-day life, that will meditate on that. Don't be so hard on yourself If you mess up, and remember that God already promised us the victory, and that even if you have to go through something because of a decision you made or because of decisions other people made, God is going to give you hope. He already gave you hope, and He will bring you through it. It will be great and grand and beautiful.
00:11:37	Thanks for tuning in. I will see you guys on Monday. In the meantime, don't forget to subscribe, like, suggest this podcast to your friend, whatever the Spirit moves you to do. You can find a transcript for this particular episode at www.psalmstogod.com/TheWomanAndTheSerpent

Footnotes and References

1. Revelation 12:9; 20:2
2. Galatians 3:16
3. Jeremiah 6:2; Ephesians 5:23-32; 2 Corinthians 11:2; Revelation 19:7-8
4. On playback, this isn't as clear as I thought it was. What I was trying to point out is that in both cases the woman is a stand in for us, the Church. So before God punishes the Church (us), He gives hope. I was also trying to illustrate how this theme of Satan attacking this hope is also connected to this initial event.

Wait...Was it a Punishment or a Prophecy?

This past week, a friend sent me a sermon to listen to. I appreciate sermons that cause me to think from a new angle and this one did exactly this. I'm going to link the sermon at the end of the post so you can enjoy it for yourself.

One of the main points the pastor made is that God always uses male, female, and their relationship to represent Christ and the church. I've talked about that on the blog many times, and despite clearly recognizing that symbolism in Adam (Jesus) choosing to leave paradise (Heaven) to be with Eve (the Church), I never made the connections this pastor made about intimacy. After listening his sermon, I thought back and realized another thing I missed...

Eve's Punishment

In Genesis 3, after Adam and Eve have eaten the forbidden fruit, God gives Eve the peculiar curse of pain in labor. From this, people have come up with some pretty wild beliefs. Those theories don't matter though. What matters is that Eve represents the church.

End Times

There are numerous scriptures that liken the end of times to a woman in labor. Labor isn't a surprise. By the time a woman is in labor, there's been months of preparation and the woman knows her baby is coming. When the time is near, she begins to feel the labor pains. At first they are far apart, but soon the contractions are close together. It is when the contractions are occurring rapidly after one another that she knows it is time to deliver the baby.

The end of the world is similar. We know that the church shouldn't be surprised by the second coming of Jesus because we have the discernment and wisdom of the Holy Spirit and the prophecies. We often assume the labor pains are the warning signs Jesus laid out, such as earthquakes, famines, wars, etc. I agree that these signs will increase in frequency, but after thinking back on the church metaphor, I realized it's also about persecution.

Persecution

Ever since the fall, doing the right thing—the Godly thing—has been persecuted by humankind. How did the first murder occur? Cain was upset that Abel was worshiping God the right way. The curse that God put on Eve to have pain in labor isn't just about women feeling physical pain bringing forth children; it's about the church experiencing pain bring forth the fruits of the spirit and "creating" new life in Christ.

From Biblical times, all the way through today, we can see examples of God's church being targeted because of their faith and unwillingness to yield to the enemy. Whether it be during the days of the prophets or during the dark ages when the Catholic church was killing anyone who spoke out against them, people who have stood for God's true Word have always experienced persecution. As we draw nearer to Christ's second coming, persecution will become more and more frequent against those truly following God's Word.

Nurturing New Believers

Photocredit: ShutterStock.com / Monkey Business Images

Churches are supposed to be going out into the world, bringing people to Christ. When these people accept Christ and choose to be reborn, a new life in Christ is created. Just as a woman nurtures a child in her womb, the church is supposed to nurture new believers. Some women take extreme caution when they're pregnant—getting regular checkups, eating healthy, avoiding high stress situations, etc.—to ensure their baby is growing in a healthy environment that is conducive for optimal growth and development. Other women may not be in the position to take the same precautions; they may suffer from addictions or illnesses that in turn affect the development of the baby. Churches are exactly the same way. Not every church is a healthy environment and not every church nurtures new believers.

What I Really Missed

The punishment God gave Eve isn't just a punishment, it's a symbolic prophecy. Just as the Feast Days pointed to Jesus' coming, the labor women experience to bring forth life points to the history and purpose of the church. When you look at a something that was meant to punish, and realize it's still part of the testimony/prophecy, you just know that God is awesome.

References

1. Michael Polite. "I Don't Have Bad Sex". YouTube. January 1, 2016

Head of the House

This has been on my mind since the very first time I saw a meme about women fixing plates for their husbands but I never took the time to write it down. Now that I've seen this argument several times, I feel like it's time we sat down and discussed the Biblical order of a house and what that really means.

Introduction

Every couple of months or so, someone revives an asinine argument about women fixing a plate for their husband verses their child on social media. Some people argue that the child's plate should be fixed first, others argue that the husband's should be fixed first. Naturally those who argue in support of the husband's plate being fixed first try to cite the Biblical order of a house to validate their answer. Because I see so many spiritual flaws in the arguments floating around, I feel obligated to talk about this subject.

The first thing we need to do is establish what the Bible says about marriage and roles within a marriage, but then we need to talk about what that actually means. After we've set the Biblical precedence, I'll talk about the spiritual flaws presented in this particular scenario.

God's Design of a Marriage

Photocredit: Unsplash.com/Beatriz Perez Moya

A lot of people believe that Eve was supposed to be submissive to Adam from the very beginning, even before the fall. One person argues that this design is obvious because Adam was created before Eve. Most cultures do dictate that the oldest is the person in charge. 1 Peter 5:8, which commands the young to submit to the old, and 1 Timothy 2:12-13 seems to support this interpretation, but I have my doubts.

Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.Genesis 3:16 KJV

When I started re-reading the Bible, something stood out to me when God punished Eve at the fall. If you look at Genesis 3:16, it seems that part of her punishment is that she should be ruled over by her husband. It seemed odd to me that God would punish Eve with something that was already in effect. That would be like your parents punishing you buy making you go to school, even though you already had to go to school... That's not a punishment, it's everyday life.

Even with 1 Peter 5:8 and 1 Timothy 2:12-13, there are questions to be asked. 1 Peter 5:8 is talking to us post-fall; it follows the order God established at the fall, but it doesn't actually confirm that things were this way before the fall. Further, in 1 Timothy 2:12-13, if you continue reading through 1 Timothy 2:14, you see that the husband was called to lead not just because he was created first, but because he was not deceived. In the garden Adam knew with 100% certainty that eating the fruit was wrong and would get them into trouble. Yet, instead of putting his foot down to stop Eve, calling out to God for help, or allowing Eve to fall alone, he went along with it. Then he had the nerve to blame it on Eve when he knew better the whole time!

Recently, I found an interesting interpretation of Genesis 3:16 that would explain my question of how someone could be punished with something that was already set in stone. This interpretations suggests that the second part of this verse is actually talking about the battle of the sexes that has been going on throughout time. They claim the Hebrew word translated to "desire" in the verse is the same as the one in Genesis 4:7. This word is said to mean control, and thus they interpret Genesis 3:16 to say the woman will try to control the man and the man will rule the woman. They relate this to the flawed interactions we have today in which men abuse their wives and try to rule with force instead of love; meanwhile women fight to be in charge and take said power from men.[1]

Naturally, I had to follow up their claim with some research. According to a couple references, תְּשׁ֣וּקָתֵ֔ךְ (teshuqah) is the Hebrew word translated to desire.[2][3] I looked up the word in Strong's lexicon (which defines Hebrew words of the Bible and shows their usage throughout the Bible). Although it is true that this word is used in Genesis 4:7 as well, the meaning of the word is given to be "longing" or "craving."[4] It doesn't appear to have anything to do with control.

Nonetheless, the interpretation does bring up a good point. It really doesn't matter what the roles of husband and wife were before the fall, because it's clear was the roles are after the fall and we live after the fall. The following verses all confirm man to be head of the house:

• Genesis 3:16
• 1 Peter 3:5
• Ephesians 5:22-24
• Colossians 3:18
• 1 Corinthians 11:3

However, because we are fallen, the concept of leading and ruling has been greatly perverted. Genesis 3:16 may not be a reference to the abuse women have suffered at the hands of men or the subsequent fight for power by women, but this issue is deeply related to how we see the roles of husband and wife today.

What Does it Mean to Lead?

People are always referencing God's command that a man is to be the head of the household, usually by citing the verses above about women submitting to their husbands. However, I seldom see people go on to the next verses that describe how a man should lead. People should question what exactly it means to be the head of a home. Too many think being in charge, or being a leader, is about bossing people around and getting their say all the time. If you take the time to read all the verses on marriage and/or leadership in the Bible, the definition of leadership is clearly outlined.

For starters, let's read the what God has his servants to tell the husbands after they tell the wives to submit:

• 1 Peter 3:7
• Ephesians 5:25-33
• Colossians 3:19

1 Peter 3:1-7

We know that 1 Peter 3:5-6 praises women who submit to their husbands as holy women, but let's look at the verses surrounding that verse (1 Peter 3:1-7). 1 Peter 3:1 addresses the issue of a woman whose husband is not obeying God. This man could be a believer that has become disobedient or could be a non-believer. Either way, Peter says that the women should be in "subjection" that the husbands may be won over "by the conversation of the wives." As Peter goes on, he reminds the husbands to give honor to the wives and deal with them in knowledge (1 Peter 3:7). Peter commands them to be protective of their wives as they would over anyone weaker than them. I point these two verses out because it illustrates fundamental points about leadership.

First, the fact that a woman can save her husband through conversation proves that the woman has the right to speak and engage in said conversation. Many quote 1 Timothy 2:12, which condemns women from teaching, but if a woman can never teach, how is that Peter expects a woman's conversation to change the heart of her husband? 1 Peter 3:1 proves that women were allowed to think independently from their husband and speak about their faith within the marriage. What makes this different from usurping power, or what happened in the garden of Eden is both how the man reacts and wether the woman is in tune with God or not. What I'm trying to say is that a good leader is not necessarily the person who comes up with all the ideas, rather a good leader is able to distinguish a good idea from a bad idea. So should it be be in a marriage; the wife may present ideas and suggestions, and the man should consider the possibility, not merely pull rank to enforce his own will. If he determines it is an ungodly idea, he will reject it (as Adam should have), but if it's a good idea he would follow up on it. In submitting, the wife would accept this.

Photocredit: ShutterStock.com/merzzie

Second, is the fact that a leader protects. A Godly man wants his wife and children to feel safe at all times and he wants to provide an environment that they can thrive in despite being physically weaker or shorter or whatever the case may be. A good leader is able to assess the strengths and weaknesses of those around him and leverage these for the benefit of the cause. For instance, during the winter, my dad chops wood for the fireplace; the woodpile is in our backyard not far from the house. Usually my dad would build the fire and keep it going. However, if my dad had to be away from the house for most of the day, he would make preparations so that my mother and I didn't have to worry about the fire. Sometimes this meant choosing a log that would burn until he got back, other times it meant bringing in a stack of wood and sitting it directly beside the fireplace so my mom wouldn't have to struggle across the yard with it. A good leader knows the limitations of his partner and does what he can to uplift them.

Ephesians 5:25-33

Ephesians 5:25-33 is powerful because it relates a husband's love and treatment of his wife to the Christ's love and treatment of the church. No pressure, right? Jesus loved the church so much that He was willing to come down to Earth and suffer for our sins so that we might appear spotless before the Father. Despite trying to put the blame off on Eve, Adam behaved similarly. Remember 1 Timothy 2:14 tells us that Adam wasn't deceived, he could have let Eve eat the fruit on her own and refused to eat of it himself. Adam had everything he could ask for in the garden and clear sight that his action would change that, just like Jesus knew His ministry would culminate in the crucifixion. Yet, Adam chose to follow Eve into spiritual death. Obviously, it would have been better for him to stop her so that there was no spiritual death, but the point is, he was willing to give up everything for his wife just as Christ was willing to give up things for us.

In these verses, Paul is also reminding us that the wife and husband are one flesh. As such, the husband should treat the wife the way he would treat himself because she is an extension of him. A Godly husband does not want his wife to be battered and bruised because he doesn't want himself to be battered and bruised. He doesn't want her in rags or starving because he does not want those things for himself. He wants her to have all that he has because he sees her as a part of himself. A good leader acknowledges that those around him have value and wishes to help them achieve the best they can.

Colossians 3:19

Colossians 3:19 instructs husbands to do two things: love their wives and not be bitter toward them. Neither of these suggest lording over the wife with an iron first. In fact, if you go back to the Old Testament, Deuteronomy 24:5 lays out a public law that a newly married man is supposed to stay home making his wife happy. The Israelites could not send him to war and they couldn't burden him with business. Perhaps this is where the modern honeymoon, albeit shorter, takes it's inspiration. The husband has a duty maintain his wife's happiness and that duty was crucial enough for God to tell Moses to write it in the law. A good leader knows that the morale and happiness of his supporters is important, so he concerns himself with their wellbeing.

Luke 22:24-27

Luke 22:24-27 isn't specifically about a man and a wife, but it is a picture of leadership given in the Bible that I think is particularly important when we discuss men as the leaders of our homes. So many men today talk about being "the king" and being treated like "the king" that I think this passage really should be quoted more often.

²²And there was also a strife among them, which of them should be accounted the greatest. ²⁵And he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors. ²⁶But ye shall not be so: but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger; and he that is chief, as he that doth serve. ²⁷For whether is greater, he that sitteth at meat, or he that serveth? is not he that sitteth at meat? but I am among you as he that serveth.Luke 22:24-27 KJV

In this passage, Jesus tells His disciples not to be like the Gentile kings who rule with fear and force. Instead, He desires for them to lead by serving. Many of the men desiring to be treated like kings are talking about the behavior these Gentile kings were afforded due to the fear and force they exerted on their people. They have an expectation that they will be put upon a pedestal and served, but that isn't what Jesus taught.

Jesus, King of Kings, embodies servitude throughout the New Testament. A specific example is when He washes the feet of disciples before the last supper (Matthew 26:14-39; Luke 22:24-27; and John 13:1-7).

Back in September, the pastor at my church gave a phenomenal sermon about the concept of leading by serving. He talked about this very concept of Jesus coming down from Heaven and humbling himself to a human life to lead us out of sin.[6] Jesus did not sit on the throne commanding us to do this and do that; He came to Earth and walked the walk. He dealt with the Pharisees harassment, he struggled through His family not supporting Him (John 7:5), He was tempted, He was beaten and spat upon, He even died (and rose!)—He doesn't ask us to go through anything He wasn't willing to go through Himself. A true leader is willing to do all that he asks his followers to do.

Who Should the Wife Serve First?

So, back to this question about whom the wife should prepare a plate for first. I'm going to be honest and tell you I think it's a very flawed question. First, it makes the assumption that the husband should not be serving, and second, it lacks context. Are we talking about an infant child or a fifteen year old?! Clearly an older child can fix their own plate, and to be honest, so can a husband...

I never saw my grandmother fix a plate for my grandfather, and I never saw the women at my church fix plates for the husbands at church gatherings. My parents have been married for 35+ years, and in general, they both fix their own plates. When I was too young to fix a plate for myself, whichever parent I was closest to fixed my plate. So, if I was standing by my dad, he made me a plate. When we would sit around the house during non-meal times, whoever got up fixed plates. For example, if I got up to go to the bathroom, my mom may ask me to bring her some water when I came back. My dad, who has a sweet tooth, might get up to get some pie and offer pie for the rest of the family. If we accepted, he would fix pie for each person and serve it. Basically, the rule is, when you get up see if anyone wants anything.

I think it's nice to serve someone you love, but I think it's important to remember all the points I made above. It shouldn't be expected that a woman would always serve the man and the man never serve the woman. Both of my parents worked 8-5, which meant they were both tired when they got home. If the husband had a rough day at work (or just because), by all means I think the wife should cater to him, but I think the same should come from the husband. When my mom had a rough day or didn't feel well, my dad took care of me and cooked dinner. On mother's day, my dad made breakfast for my mom and served it to her. This doesn't make him less of leader, in fact it proves he is a leader.

In the recent conversation about this topic, someone suggested that by serving the child first the mother is teaching the child not to recognize the father as head of the house. However, being head of the house has nothing to do with who eats first. In fact, what kind of man expects to eat before making sure his wife and child are provided for?

When I was small, we would go to McDonalds and I ask for a cheeseburger with no pickles and no bread (yes, I've always been a picky eater), but my dad would order a normal cheeseburger, take the bread and the pickles and eat them while I ate what I wanted and my mom ate what she wanted. As I child, I thought my dad had an affinity for bread and pickles, but now that I'm older, I realize that he couldn't afford a meal for all three of us so he got food for me and my mom and ate what was left. Now that is the head of the house.

References

1. Gregory Brown, PhD. "2. Foundation Two: Gender Roles In Marriage". Bible.org. July 7, 2015
2. "Genesis 3:16". Bible Hub; visited February 2018
3. "Genesis Chapter 3". Mechon Mamre; visited February 2018
4. "Lexicon :: Strong's H8669 - tĕshuwqah". Blue Letter Bible; visited February 2018
5. " 8669. teshuqah". Bible Hub; visited February 2018
6. Pastor Joseph Salajan. Up the Down Staircase, or Down the Up Staircase?". Plantation Seventh Day Adventist Church Media Center. September 2, 2017

1 Chronicles 1-9: Genealogies

Insights from the genealogies are pointed out.

Introduction

The first 9 chapters of 1 Chronicles gives us the lineage of the Israelites. It starts by walking us through from Adam to Noah to Abraham, then traces the lineage of Ishmael and Isaac, before zeroing in on the 12 tribes of Israel. It is a bit hard to follow the names due to multiple wives and chronology bouncing between brothers. Below are a few things that stood out to me.
Top

Ephrath, Caleb's Wife

Caleb, one of the only two spies to trust God to lead the Israelites to victory, married a woman named Ephrath. I find this interesting because throughout the Old Testament we hear about the Ephrathites. When I first read the word "Ephrathites" I thought it was a misspelling of Ephraimites, but I noticed that the people referred to as Ephrathites all grew up the region known as Judah, specifically around Bethlehem. Once I realized this, I assumed they were dubbed the "Ephrathites" because the descended from a man named Ephrath. However, 1 Chronicles 2 makes me wonder if they inherited this name from a woman? Resources state that the name is given after the old name for Bethlehem, Ephratah.^[1] Of course, that only makes me wonder how Bethlehem received that name in the first place...
Top

Canaanite Women

Whites in the South spent a lot of time trying to craft their version of Christianity to paint Black people as inferior and deserving of slavery. People even twisted the Curse of Canaan to extend to Ham in attempt to justify the treatment of slaves. Interestingly when we look at the lineage of Judah laid out in 1 Chronicles 2, we can see that the line of Judah sprang from a Canaanite woman. This means David, Solomon, and Jesus all have ties back to Canaan and to Ham.
Top

Simeon

The end of 1 Chronicles 4 covers information on Simeon's descendants who essentially merged into Judah. However, a remnant of Simeonites survived through the reign of Hezekiah and killed the Amalekites living in the land to establish their own place.
Top

References

1. "Ehrathite". BibleStudyTools.com; visited February 2017

Why Does God Let Bad Things Happen?

Just because things aren't perfect on Earth, doesn't mean God doesn't exist. It doesn't mean He doesn't love us, and it doesn't mean He isn't watching out for us.

Introduction

Tuesday, I was all in my feelings about the mistrial in the Michael Slager case. I tried to make myself remember that only one of the twelve jurors seemed to think it was OK to shoot a fleeing man in the back, not once, but multiple times (side note: in my opinion, the black police officer who saw that the taser was nowhere near Walter Scott's body should be on trial as an accomplice). Of course, that doesn't ease the hurt of knowing that one person can halt the delivery of justice when a black man has been shot by a police officer. Meanwhile, 2 million more people voted for Hillary Clinton than Donald Trump,^[1] but the man who ran a campaign that incited racial violence is our president-elect. Seems like in both cases the system is working against black people. That's why it didn't surprise me when I saw so many comments and responses to the mistrial on Facebook when I logged on.

One of my friends posted the beautiful response of Walter Scott's mother, a proclamation of her faith in God and her strength to continue on. The comments on the video reflected a sentiment I've heard all too much it my life. They all boiled down to rage against God for letting bad things happen. So many people lose faith, or never gain faith, because they don't believe a good God would let these things happen. In the "woke" black community I see an even stronger aversion to God, with people blaming God for the enslavement of our ancestors. Reading those comments, I was moved to speak on the issue.

The issue is basically a cake made up of three layers: false doctrine, confusion of good and evil, and a sense of entitlement. Now bear with me, because we all fall into these traps—this isn't an indictment on people, but an attempt to show how what we are taught and how we feel create this disbelief, and an answer to some of the question broached.
Top

False Doctrine

People seem to think God is a fairy godmother waiting for us to wish on a star so He can grant our wishes. People quote "ask and ye shall receive" (Matthew 21:22) or "I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me" (Philippians 4:13) so much, that our image of God is that He just wants us to have what we want. When someone dies, we are quick say God has failed us, because we asked for them to live and for Christ to help them survive. We totally neglect John 11:25: "Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. The one who believes in me will live, even though they die." It's just another instance of picking and choosing what verses we want to believe and how we interpret them. If you believe the whole of the Bible, death isn't the end. Further, unless we live to see Jesus come back, we're all going to die some point; that's the price of sin.

We also tend to link sin with "bad people." If I say someone has sinned or is in sin, people assume I'm calling them a bad person. When a person like me says we're all going to die a first death because of sin, people are quick to talk about how good of a person the deceased is, but I'm not suggesting otherwise. We all sin. Abraham sinned, Moses sinned. David. Peter. Everyone in the Bible sinned (except Jesus). It doesn't mean we're "bad" people. The notion that because we haven't committed what we consider "major" sins, such as murder, give us a false sense that we aren't sinners so we should live long, healthy lives and reap the benefits of our "goodness."

Lots of preachers today are known as what has been dubbed "prosperity" preachers. They talk about all the great things that will happen if you follow Christ and stay true to God. According to them, life is a cake walk if you trust God: your bills will get paid, you'll find the spouse of your dreams, you'll be successful at whatever you do, and everyone around you will build you up...

Is that what happened in the Bible? Does the Bible not say that in the last days God's faithful won't be able to buy or sell (Revelation 13:17)—if you can't buy or sell, how do you pay bills (that's buying a service), how do you get paid (that's selling a service)? Was Jesus married? Paul? I'm not saying you won't find a spouse, but if the Bible were a Disney movie Christ would be the prince and the Church would be the princess, any other romance would be considered a subplot and likely not get a lot of air time.

Speaking of Disney movies, our society has us believing the good guy always wins in a triumphant victory, and then rides off into the sunset with his girl. We forget that Christ is the victor, not us. Most of the disciples ended up in jail or crucified. They weren't "successful" by the world's standard and they certainly weren't accepted by the world. So, why are people convinced that because Mr. Scott's mother (or anyone else) has strong faith, God will stop every bad thing from happening in their life? 1 Corinthians 10:13 tells us that God won't let us be tempted by more than we can handle; notice that He doesn't say He won't tempt us at all...

Job is my go to guy, for almost every thing in life, and is a perfect parallel for this situation. Job was a righteous man. God loved Job, and Job loved God, but the devil thought Job only loved God back because God gave him favor. As much as I hate to play devil's advocate, the devil's point of view makes sense. I'm sure if I'd lived during Job's era, I would have thought something like "yeah, sure, it's easy to be all righteous when you're being fed with a silver spoon."

Think about it: we are the bride of Christ, so you should always think about faith as a relationship between you and God. Love comes easy when the other person gives you everything you want and need. However, we know that men can get irritated with their wives because they talk through the football game and women can get irritated with their husbands because they don't want to spend 4 hours in the mall picking out the perfect towels. I know both of these are overly stereotypical; I'm exaggerating to making a point. The truth is, you're never going to be 100% satisfied with your spouse; they're going to do something you don't like at some point. That's the price of having free will and independent thought. What keeps people together is the fact that you're choosing to love the person (this applies to any relationship really). God doesn't want us to be gold diggers, claiming to love Him simply because He gives us everything we ask for. He wants us to choose Him. That's the whole point of Him letting Satan screw up Job's life; He proved that Job would trust and choose Him despite his pain and misfortune.

God knew that Job had done nothing to deserve the misfortune that befell him. God knew that Job loved Him, but He wanted to prove to the world what that love meant—that's why we know the story today. In the end, Job ended up with more blessings than he'd had before his trial, but people often forget that he still had to live through the trial. Do you think that just because God gave Job more children he forgot all about the children that died? Satan thinks that by wreaking havoc in lives of God's children, we will leave God, that's why he wanted to torture Job. Satan's goal is to steal as many from God as he can—even if you aren't joining a Satanic temple to worship the devil, the simple fact that you turn away from God is a victory in Satan's eyes. The easiest way to do this is to get you to question God's love.
Top

Confusion of Good and Evil

Let me ask you, how do you define a good person versus a bad person, and how do you assess a good action from a bad action? Right or wrong, some people in the country believe Micahel Slager was the good person, and Walter Scott was the bad person. Clearly, one the jurors believed killing Walter Scott was OK. We don't all have the same definition for these things, so who is right? Will we ever agree?

An Evil Guy

Most of us will agree that Hitler was a bad person; bad is an understatement. We feel this way because of what we know he did. Would we have felt this way in say, 1930? Would it have been a good action for someone to have killed him before he rose to power? Perhaps instead of outright murder, an illness claimed his life, would that have been better? If Hitler had died before he became the infamous murdering maniac he was, it would have been considered a tragedy and there would be absolutely nothing to make us say "he deserved to die." His mother would have felt the same pain that Mr. Scott's mother is feeling now.

I'm not suggesting Mr. Scott could have turned into a murdering machine later in life. I gave this example to remind you that how we view an action is completely relative to what we know. As humans, we have limited information. No matter how many different news sources we keep up with or how close to the victim/murderer we may be, our opinion of good and bad is based on biased information. God on the other hand knows all the information, that's why He's the only one able to judge good and evil in the end. The jury may acquit a murderer, but God will handle the final judgment. For all we know, God has an even worse fate lined up for Mr. Slager.

With the knowledge we have, it's easy to say what we think would have been a better outcome. Yet, we don't actually know how changing an event alters our current realty. Remember, if an event never happens, we loose every thing we learned from it. Now think, what did we learn from Hitler and World War 2?

Hitler didn't invent anti-semitism. He didn't even invent the idea of eugenics (the process of weeding out undesired genes to create a "superior" races of people). Had Hitler not shown the world the damage these ideas could cause, would California still be a hotbed for researching eugenics?^[2][3][4] Would someone else have picked up that torch? If the US hadn't bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki, no one would know the harm radiation from nuclear bombs does after the initial explosion. We may have seen nukes fly back and forth across countries, resulting in even more people dead, before anyone realized the danger if the weapons had been delayed for the next war.

I'm not saying these things are good—they're horrific moments in humanity that should bring shame and saddness—but everything happens for a reason. We can't see what would happen if different events had played out over history. We don't know if it would have been better or worse. God does. I choose to trust He took us down the best path, despite our subconscious determination to do as much harm to one another and the Earth as we possibly can. Outrage over the death of our black men is going to serve a higher purpose, you can believe that.

An Evil Time

Since the issue and the comments were more specific to black people, I want to address the issues brought up about God and slavery while I'm talking about the ambiguity of how life works. One of the commenters said slavery (assumably the enslavement of Africans in the Americas) was proof that God didn't exist. Really? Were the Israelites His chosen people? Were they not enslaved for 400 years? Interestingly, we too were enslaved for around 360 years (roughly 1503 to 1865^[5][6])—history has a way of repeating itself... Of course the same logic goes for slavery that goes for what I said about WWII... What would the world look like today if slavery had never occurred?

Well, for one, I doubt the United States of America would have ever existed. Part of what made America financially stable was the fact that it had a free source of labor. The ideas of freedom of speech and freedom of religion (albeit, only for white men at the time) would have never gained popularity, because America wouldn't have existed. The Catholic Church would probably still be torturing people who dared to disagree with them. Would Europe have relinquished the colonies in Africa, Southeast Asia, Australia, and the Americas? Would they have ever been inspired to lead a revolt, or would Europe still be greedily consuming these countries resources while decimating their people? If the US never grew in to a super power, what would have happened when the world went to war?

Another obvious consequence would be the erasure of most of our own existences. Let's face it, as black as we claim we are, African-Americans are, on average, about 20% white.^[7] Chances are, most of us wouldn't exist because ol' massa wouldn't have been able to rape our great-great-great-great-grandmother. Sure, she might have still had a child, but it would not have been the same the child. Furthermore, all of the inventions by slaves would probably not have been invented; why invent stuff you don't need?

We're so content to focus on one detail, we forget there's a bigger picture. Regardless of whether you look at our lives from a religious point of view or from an atheistic point of view, we are but a speck in the grand scheme of things.
Top

Entitlement

I know, I know, you still want to know why so much bad stuff happens on Earth. It isn't satisfactory to simply say God is providing us with a choice or that these things happen for a reason. It doesn't really make us feel better that the Bible clearly shows bad things happening to good people, either, does it? Why can't we just be happy?

³But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: ⁴In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.2 Corinthians 4:3-4

Well, have you ever stopped to think about who's running the show here on Earth, and why?

We've been taught to think in terms of black and white, not just racially, but for good and evil too. Good always wins, and evil always loses. Yes. In the end. But it isn't the end yet, is it? We're in the middle of the story! Right now Satan is the ruler of this world; that's why bad things happen. The world rejected God when they crucified His Son on the cross; the message was "we want to do it our way."

We want to tell God what we will and won't do, but expect Him to swoop in and save us every time the world plunges into chaos. We don't want prayer in schools. We don't want "In God We Trust" on our money. We don't want "under God" in our pledge. We don't want to take the whole Sabbath for rest and worship. We don't want to give up the things God has said were bad for us. Yet, suddenly, when tragedy strikes, we feel like God has wronged us because He didn't intervene. That's entitlement...

Like I said earlier, we all sin. I may not be a cold-blooded killer (or even a warm-blooded killer—does that exist?), or an adulterer, or a thief, but I'm not perfect. Therefore, I do not deserve a perfect life. Adam and Eve chose to eat the forbidden fruit. Now, we're all born with the knowledge of good and evil and the freedom to choose. If I choose wrong, my actions don't just affect me, they affect everyone around me. Eve's choice affected Adam. Together, their choices affected Cain and Abel. Cain's choice to be jealous killed Abel. Could God have put a bubble around Abel to protect him? Sure. Could God have struck Cain dead the moment the idea crossed his mind? Sure. Of course, then we wouldn't have free will. If we had no choice in the matter, that would make Him an evil dictator. If you could make your spouse stay with you forever and only do what you wanted, but on the inside, they though to do differently, and you exercised your power over them, would you be a good person? Conversely, if you gave your spouse the freedom they deserve and they chose to betray you, are they entitled to your forgiveness? Do you owe them anything?
Top

The Battle Isn't Over

Just because things aren't perfect on Earth, doesn't mean God doesn't exist. It doesn't mean He doesn't love us, and it doesn't mean He isn't watching out for us.
Top

References

1. Wolf, Richard. "Clinton's popular vote lead surpasses 2 million". USA Today. November 21, 2016
2. Black, Edwin. "The Horrifying American Roots of Nazi Eugenics". History News Network. September 2003
3. "Introduction to Eugenics". Genetics Generation. 2015
4. Cherney, Isabelle. "The History of Eugenics in the United States". Crieghton University. 2016
5. Adi, Hakim. "Africa and the Transatlantic Slave Trade". BBC. October 5, 2012
6. Wickham, DeWayne. "Wickham: Do you know when slavery began and ended?". USA Today. February 10, 2014
7. Gates, Henry Louis. "Exactly How ‘Black’ Is Black America?". The Root. February 2013

Untainted Words of God: Adam & Eve

There are lots of weird interpretations concerning Adam and Eve. In this post I'll discuss the relationship between Adam and Eve, the treatment of women based on Eve, their race, and the idea that Eve is transgendered

Introduction

Photocredit: FreeImages.com/Blend Images

Why not start at the beginning? Adam and Eve, along with their relationship, form the basis of how people view men and women today. The modern concept of Adam and Eve creates so much discord, from the treatment of women to race, even to gender. I've seen so many ideas and doctrines derived from said ideas that I can't keep track of them all! Nevertheless, I find them all equally interesting and I want to talk about them.

This post is covers a variety of interpretations stemming from Adam and Eve, which means it's also a bit long. You can use the table of the contents to the right to skip around, or to bookmark your place if you need to come back to the reading.
Top

Eve

In a freestyle battle, a poet posits that the reason Black men treat Black women poorly and as side chicks is because they were taught women came from their sides.

You treat the Black woman like a side b****
Well 'cause you were taught she came from your sideB. Dot

He is clearly referencing Genesis 2:21-22:

²¹And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; ²²And the rib, which the Lord God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.Genesis 2:21-22

I don't disagree that the poor treatment of women throughout history stems from the interpretation of Eve's relationship to Adam (more-so in connection with the idea that Eve is to blame for sin entering the world, but we'll get to that in a minute). However, I find both the interpretation he references and his subsequent evaluation to be off the mark. In order to make this claim, the poet makes many assumptions:

• How does he know that the Black men who treat women poorly are Christians? I've never met a true man of God that was mistreating the women in his life...
• How is it that this treatment is only damaging the relationship between Black men and women? Why hasn't this effected White people? Or the people of countless other cultures and races that are Christians?
• How does someone being created from your very own flesh automatically translate to mistreatment?

The poet's premise that women are seen as less than and unworthy of men's respect because they are created from the rib of man makes no sense. What makes a mother's love so strong? The fact that the baby came out of her, that the child is her own flesh and blood. Adam says similar words upon realizing Eve has been made from his own body:

²³And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. ²⁴Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.Genesis 2:23-24

Adam is ready to leave his family behind to be with the person who has come from his rib. Why? Just as a mother's world shifts to center around her child, his world shifted around Eve. Adam's only family at that point was God, and he did leave God behind for Eve (I'll clarify this point below in the section "Was She to Blame?"). Adam already recognized that they were one flesh, and this is before anyone was told to be submissive to anyone.
Top

Helpmeet

The Bible tells us Eve was created to be a "help meet" for Adam, which sounds submissive for sure and is probably how people came to think that Eve's role was to be submissive from the beginning. However, Genesis 3:16 tells us that part of Eve's punishment is that her husband will rule over her. If that is part of her punishment, it stands to reason that she was on equal footing before. So one has to wonder what was meant by "help meet?"

Merriam Webster sends readers to "helpmate" as the definition of "help meet"^[1] which is defined as "a person who is a companion and helper."^[2] While helper doesn't sound any better in terms of submission, a helper is not necessarily a servant. A companion and a helper could be a partner; after all, partners do help each other.

Nevertheless, this is where I told you knowledge of time periods and original languages is important. We can try to force fit definitions to words like "helpmeet" and "helpmate" to support the idea that woman was created as a maid or argue her to be created as partner, but this is counter productive. We don't want speculation; we want answers. The original Hebrew words translated to "help meet" are ezer and k’enegdo.

Ezer

Ezer, which is translated as "help," is created from root words that mean to save, rescue, and to be strong. According to experts, the word ezer is used 21 times in the Bible and although it is translated as "help", in context 8 of those times (roughly 40%) it means "savior." The other occurrences mean "strength."^[3] When God says He wanted to create a help meet for Adam, He is saying Adam needed someone to be his strength. Ever heard the saying "behind every successful man is a strong woman"?

K’enegdo

K'negedo is only used this one instance in the Bible, however scholars believe it means "exactly corresponding to."^[3] My study Bible lists the English "meet" to mean "complimentary."^[4]
Top

Was She to Blame?

Despite his lyrics, most of the poet's assumption that women are to be treated poorly stems from the blame that is often placed on Eve for the fall of mankind. Like the poet, most feminists have a problem with placing the fall of humanity on Eve. However, in the Bible, the blame isn't placed squarely on her shoulders: all 3 parties (the serpent, Eve, and Adam) are punished for their role in the act.

Let's go back to my point that Adam left God for Eve. When Eve decided to taste the forbidden fruit, she didn't stuff the fruit down Adam's throat. We are told that she offered it to Adam and he willingly ate the fruit. He could have let Eve eat the fruit alone with the expectation that she would die and he'd be fine. He could have ran off to find God in the hopes that God would stop her. However, like most people who are in love, he followed her blindly. Whether he simply didn't want to disappoint her or wether he was afraid to be without her, he knowingly turned his back on God to follow Eve.

¹¹Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. ¹²But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. ¹³For Adam was first formed, then Eve. ¹⁴And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. ¹⁵Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.1 Timothy 2:11-15 KJV

Perhaps the harshest passage in the Bible as it relates to women and our plight due to Eve can be found in 1 Timothy 2:11-15. This is the root of the idea that women are worthless and should have no rights. However, there's a lot more to the first than meets the eye. Bear with me as we step through the implications of this passage.

1 Timothy 2 Does Not Place Blame on Eve

As I said earlier, Adam willingly ate the fruit, which is confirmed in 1 Timothy 2:14. Now, if you study the books of law (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy), you will notice that accidental sins were the only sins that were forgiven. We are reminded of this in the New Testament, as well.

For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sinsHebrews 10:26 KJV

When we go back to Genesis 2 and 3, you'll notice that God directly instructed Adam not to eat the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge. God also created the Garden of Eden before Adam's eyes. We aren't told how Eve receives the news of this rule, whether God tells her after her creation or whether Adam relays the news. What we do know is that Eve seems to be the very last thing created, implying that she never sees the full glory of God creating life. Just as parents expect older siblings to show younger siblings the ropes and senior employees are to show new employees the ropes, God likely expected Adam to be a leader in the Garden of Eden.

When Eve came to Adam with the suggestion that they eat the fruit, she was deceived (1 Timothy 2:14 confirms this). To be deceived is to believe something that is not true.^[4] Therefore, the serpent had convinced Eve that it was OK to eat the fruit and she was not purposefully disobeying God. She was confused and fell prey to false doctrine (there it is, all the way back at the very beginning!). Adam, on the other hand was not deceived. That means he knew they were not supposed to eat the fruit, yet he did it anyway.

Each person had their own fault in the situation. Eve could have waited and asked God directly. This is why she doesn't get off scot-free when the punishments are doled out. However, it was Adam who should have put an end to the action, not because he was a man but because he knew better.

Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:Romans 5:12 KJV

Sin entered the world through Adam ("one man") because it was Adam who deliberately disobeyed God.
Top

Women Teaching Doctrine

Now that we understand the role of deception in the events that occurred, we can talk about teaching. No one wants false doctrine being taught to the masses. In 1 Timothy 2, Paul says that he doesn't suffer (tolerate) a woman to teach doctrine because Eve was deceived (i.e. confused) about doctrine. While Paul does say that she should learn in silence, he does not say that they are to always be silent. Paul is discussing the issue of false doctrine being taught in the church at Ephesus (read 1 Timothy 1 to get the proper context). It appears to me that Paul is talking about a woman's conduct during something similar to a Bible study. He doesn't want the women to take over (or "usurp") the lead ("authority") from the man who is knowledgeable about the topic.

If I had never experienced the wives of deacons or pastors, and women in the congregation hijack a church service and turn it on its head, I would probably have trouble with the idea presented above. After all, how can one be so sure a similar circus might not occur from men at another church?

There's a little detail that goes unnoticed when reading this passage. In 1 Timothy 2:11, Paul says, "let the woman learn in silence." He doesn't say let women be silent, but he refers to "the woman" as though he is speaking of one specific woman. Now "the woman" could be referring to all women, but it could also mean a specific woman. If we continue paying attention 1 Timothy 2:12, says "a woman," which definitely refers to women in general, but then, why didn't Paul say "let a woman learn in silence"? Also, he refers to "the man," not to men in general. Paul doesn't say do not let women usurp authority from men, but rather he says a woman should not take authority from a specific man.^[6][7][8] My study Bible further suggests that this prohibition is from public teaching and cites Acts 18:26, Titus 2:3-5, and 1 Corinthians 11:5 to prove its point.^[5]

Does this mean women can be in charge of a church? I'm not sure, but it's definitely not as cut and dry as people make it out to be. The passage is definitely speaking on conduct in the church, not at home or at work. Paul is definitely not saying a woman has no rights in her marriage because he says quite the opposite in 1 Corinthians 7 (emphasis added):

The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife.1 Corinthians 7:4 KJV

I've read a few studies of this passage, and countless books have been written on the topic. I'm listing some articles you can read online for better clarity below.

• "Adam and Eve in Ancient Gnostic Literature" by Marg Mowczko @ New Life
• "Lost in Translation: A Look at 1 Timothy 2:12-15" by Bob Edwards @ The Junia Project
• "Defusing the 1 Timothy 2:12 Bomb" by Gail Wallace @ The Junia Project

Top

Childbearing

In 1 Timothy 2:14, the woman in question is Eve, and presumably in verse 15, we are still talking about Eve when Paul says "she." Paul tells us that the "curse" of childbirth is also her salvation. This is one of the most beautiful paradoxes in the Bible. Part of Eve's punishment is that she will bring forth life in sorrow. However it is through a woman that life continues. It is through Mary that Jesus is born and thus, through a woman salvation is provided to all mankind. God may have cursed womankind to feel pain as we bring life into the world, but He also blessed us with a form of creation that man did not receive. This is part of God's complimentary design—different, but both necessary and important.

My study Bible interprets verse 15 to mean that women are saved even in the role they have (i.e. we don't need to teach to earn our salvation).^[5] Top

Appearance

In opposition to that, the poet (who is quite talented despite his apparent hatred for his Creator) places women on the pedestal of being gods. He references pictures of Adam and Eve where Adam has a belly button to further his point that Adam came from a woman making woman god. Which is crazy, considering the fact that those pictures weren't created until the 16^th century or so. Those aren't real depictions of Adam and Eve!
Top

Race

Adam and Eve are always depicted as a White man and a White woman, but that isn't Biblical either. Very few descriptions of skin color are given in the Bible (a clue that God doesn't care about skin color so much as your heart, motives, and actions). One such description given is of Esau, Jacob's twin brother. Esau is described as being ruddy or red in color. Like everyone else, Esau is a descendant of Adam and Eve, which means that red color must come from their genes...

Basic genetics tells us that a child receives one gene from each parent. Together these genes determine our physical features. Genes are classified as dominant or recessive. For example, let the gene that causes brown eyes, be known as B, which is a dominant trait. Now, let the gene that cause blue eyes, a recessive trait, be known as b. For a child to have blue eyes both parents must pass it the recessive b, otherwise the B trait will dominate. Skin works in a similar fashion, with dark skin being a dominant trait and pale skin a recessive trait. For us to have the range of skin tones we have now, genes for both dark and light skin traits must have existed in Adam and Eve. Note that people of African descent have been known to give birth to albinos or lighter skinned children, but it is unlikely that "fully" White parents will give birth to a dark skinned child. Thus, there are multiple possibilities as to Adam and Eve's physical appearance.

One of them may have been made up of purely dominant traits, with dark brown skin, brown eyes, curly hair, etc., and the other could have been made up of purely recessive traits, with pale skin, blue eyes, and straight hair. Another possibility is that they both could have had a mixture of dominant and recessive traits. We really don't know. The only thing we can say with absolute certainty is that Adam and Eve were not both White. Likely, the first people had combinations of dominant and recessive genes, thus exhibiting dominant traits. Over time the recessive trait would have become more pronounced. At the point of Noah and his wife, this cycle would have restarted. When God divided the people at the tower of Babel, this may have been the catalyst for weeding certain traits from different nations.
Top

Gender

In the media nowadays, there is a lot of discussion about gender. Although the Bible clearly states that Adam is a man and Eve is a woman, people have begun to stretch the words of the Bible to create new interpretations of Eve's gender. In the article Where Would Jesus Pee, Hemant Mehta tackles the question of where Jesus would be expected to go to the bathroom. The question stems from the fact that Jesus does not have an Earthly father, which convinces a multitude of people that Jesus did not receive a Y chromosome, thus making Him biologically female. The commenters further this question by attributing it to Eve, who was born of Adam's rib with no female DNA.

It sounds like a legitimate question until you actually think about it...
Top

Physical Appearance

In both the case of Eve and Jesus, there was no such thing as gender reassignment surgery. I doubt they took hormones therapy either. In the case of Eve, who gave birth to an unknown number of children (we know of at least 3), she was clearly created with a female reproductive system. While Jesus did not father children, the community assumed Him to be a man from birth. When Mary gave birth to Him, she knew He was a boy because of what she saw. If she'd given birth to a female child and tried to pass her off as a male, once puberty hit, it would have been very obvious that something was amiss (His voice, monthly bleeding, inability to grow facial hair, physique, etc.). Further if Jesus Himself was transgender, don't you think He would have left us a clue that it was OK to be transgender? Both Jesus and Eve's physical appearance matched the gender ascribed to them without the aid of surgery or hormone therapy. Therefore, it's pretty safe to say that they were biologically the gender ascribed to them as well.
Top

One Parent, One Set of DNA?

The crutch of this argument is that both Eve and Jesus have DNA from only one provider. Well, Adam has DNA from no one in that case. Obviously God, who made us in His image, created DNA for Adam and Eve. He also provided Jesus' Y chromosome (He is Jesus' Father after all). Just as He was able to create Eve from Adam's rib, He was able to create Jesus inside Mary's womb. Just because He did not physically impregnate Mary, does not mean He couldn't have contributed to DNA of Jesus. If Jesus and Eve had no genes from God they would have been a clones of Mary and Adam respectively... What's more is that in the case of Eve coming from Adam, men have an XY chromosome pair so even if Eve received all of her DNA from Adam, she still could have gotten 2 X's. One commenter assert that since Eve was created from Adam's rib, she started as male and the "reassignment" was done by God. However, a rib is not a human being, nor is it gendered. Just as Adam started from non-gendered dust, Eve started from a rib, which is non-gendered. While females may have smaller rib cages on average,^[9] a single rib from the cage does not gender a person. From the moment Eve became a living human, she had the biology of a woman. God did not take a clone of Adam and reassign his male reproductive organs to female ones. If you want to claim that then every man on the planet is transgender because he came out of his mother's womb and thus was created from feminine materials. Sure the sperm allowed the "reassignment" of the fetus to male, but the baby developed and grew from the mother's ovum.
Top

Divine Intervention

For argument's sake, let's say we agreed with the theory that Eve and/or Jesus were actually transgendered. In both cases the transformation or reassignment occurred before the person was brought to life and was done at the hand of God. Therefore, at the moment they became human and by the time they breathed their first breath, they were already biologically the gender God intended them to be.
Top

The Bathroom

Because I can't resist thinking in depth about questions posed, I gave a little thought to the bathroom question. Again, remembering the times, there would have been no bathrooms in either of their life times, not in the sense that we have bathrooms today, at least. Nudity was not encouraged; we see that in the story of Ham's cursing that looking upon his father's nakedness was frowned upon. Thus, I'd wager men didn't pee beside each other and women probably didn't either. Likely bathrooms were non-gendered (like those in our homes) and people provided some sort of occupied/unoccupied signage to avoid embarrassment.
Top

Disclaimer

While I believe that God brings us in to the world as the gender we are meant to be (that includes guiding doctors in their decision for babies born with evidence of both genders), I don't actually care which bathroom people choose to use. As long as you aren't bothering me, I don't care. As a woman, the stalls give us most of the privacy we need. Further, concerns for assault are not limited to women (re: Amy Inita Joyner-Francis) and just like a perverted man could inappropriately film women (re: University of Toronto Dumps Transgender Bathrooms After Peeping Incidents), so could a lesbian (or even a straight woman who was simply off her rocker).
Top

References

1. "helpmeet". Merriam Webster. 2016
2. "helpmate". Merriam Webster. 2016
3. Heather Ferrell. "The Real Meaning of the Term Helpmeet". Women in the Scriptures. November 9, 2010
4. "deceive". Merriam Webster. 2016
5. Holman Bible Publishers. Holman KJV Study Bible. pg. 2028-2029. 2014
6. Mowczko, Marg. "Adam and Eve in Ancient Gnostic Literature". New Life. March 2015
7. Edwards, Bob. "Lost in Translation: A Look at 1 Timothy 2:12-15". The Junia Project. September 2013
8. Wallace, Gail. "Defusing the 1 Timothy 2:12 Bomb". The Junia Project. January 2014
9. Bellemare F., Jeanneret A., Couture J. "Sex differences in thoracic dimensions and configuration.". American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. 168(3):305-12. August 2003