Quote:
Originally Posted by Nell
That's because there is no connection.
This thread, titled "New Jane Anderson Website," in places, morphed into the usual prevailing strawman---male gender bias. It's not even about Jane's actual website. Male gender bias was only one point Jane wrote about. Yet this often became the subject of this thread.
IMHO, there either was male gender bias by the translators, or there wasn't. But that's hardly the most important issue. The issue is, are the lemon passages translated correctly or not?
John's testimony and Jane's message (link below) should be the subject, including Jane's new website.
This was posted on December 4, 2016: Jane's Message
Drake has sounded an alarm. Thanks Drake. We will take your concerns under advisement and trust God for His enlightenment.
Nell |
If we look at the passage in Genesis identified as one of these "lemon verses" the translation of "desire" is considered a bad translation that should be "turn to".
However, there is no dispute that the verse talks about the trouble that women will have in childbirth and childrearing. There are biologic reasons why human babies are born completely helpless and requiring much more time and effort in the rearing than babies of all other mammals. Therefore, whether the woman's "desire" is to the man, or she "turns to" the man, the context is the difficulty involved in bearing and rearing children. This is a fact, not a bias.
We know that raising children requires a tremendous amount of labor, perhaps for 20 years. We know that single parent mothers are the largest group of poor in this country.
So then I disagree with the interpretation that the woman is being warned against "turning to" the man, that doesn't make sense.
In addition, according to the interpretation she presents the woman is not held accountable for her actions in the fall. However, that supports the interpretation that the man, as "head", is held accountable. So again, I don't think this is an accurate interpretation since the interpreter agrees that the man is the one held responsible for the woman's actions.
Third, the interpreter argues that the woman is never banished from the garden, only the man. However, they also bring up Genesis 5 where Adam is considered to include both the male and female (i.e. Mr. and Mrs. Adam). If God banished the Adams that includes both Adam and Eve, they are now a unit. This is supported by Jesus interpretation that "what God has joined together let not man separate".
Therefore in looking at this one very critical "lemon" verse I don't think the translation "desire" or "turn to" changes the meaning and the attempt to interpret the way this person has is fatally flawed.