A Woman of Chayil: Far Above Rubies by Jane Carole Anderson

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Nell

It would behoove men and women alike to understand that the woman is not the enemy…she was blessed. She is up to the task of destroying the enemy, that old serpent. In fact, at this point, the woman is actually the church. The Body of Christ comprised of all believers, both women and men who will bring about his final demise.

The woman was deceived. (I Timothy) The man transgressed. (Romans) There is no mention that Eve actually heard God's command directly. Both failed. Their offspring all suffered because of it. What's worse, disobeying God or being deceived by His enemy? Both became sinners, under God's judgment, needing a Savior.

It troubles me when men and women are pitted against each other, especially when this occurs in the church of God. Neither men nor women are the enemy, but Satan and his powers.

One of the things that so troubled me in the Recovery was that often times Witness Lee did not know who his enemy was. He too often made our brothers and sisters in Christianity the enemy. Hate to repeat that mistake.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Ohio

One of the things that so troubled me in the Recovery was that often times Witness Lee did not know who his enemy was. He too often made our brothers and sisters in Christianity the enemy. Hate to repeat that mistake.

Fully agree.

But the problem in dealing with issues like this one is that the goal of the discussion is to end so much of that kind of thinking, while those that are determined to maintain the status quo are busy making that mistake in spades.

And the discussion looks so acrimonious. But the acrimony is (hopefully) only on one side of the discussion.

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Ohio

The woman was deceived. (I Timothy) The man transgressed. (Romans) There is no mention that Eve actually heard God's command directly. Both failed. Their offspring all suffered because of it. What's worse, disobeying God or being deceived by His enemy? Both became sinners, under God's judgment, needing a Savior.

The problem is that woman was and has been blamed and otherwise punished for the failure of both man and woman. Both are equal failures but one repented, and the other did not.

Nell

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Nell

The problem is that woman was and has been blamed and otherwise punished for the failure of both man and woman. Both are equal failures but one repented, and the other did not.

You are correct that both failed. And that there has been a tendency by some to blame the woman. Especially in prior times and in certain sectors of modern Christianity.

But beyond that I cannot agree. The inferences made in post #68 and the one quoted above are a little much when it comes to the characterization of the unstated actions and blessing attributed strictly to the woman (Eve) and that you claim for yourself.

First, you refer to a repentance that woman did but man did not, but I do not see the support for it. She did confess. But confession is not the same as repentance. Ever heard the "I did it and I'd do it again" confession? Confession is not repentance. We actually do not see anything of repentance on the part of either of them. I would suspect that there was repentance by both. But it was not recorded.

Yet that is as far as I can take it — suspect it is so. Just as it is as far as your statement about the repentance of the woman v the man can go.

You can't make doctrine out of suspicions, be they good or bad ones. It could even turn out to be true (when we get through the pearly gates and ask about all those things we couldn't figure out). But it was not given to us to see and know now, therefore not available to comment on. Surely nothing to insist upon or declare as a fact.

Same concerning the seed. "Every promise in the book" is not mine. Yes, God did say that the seed of the woman would crush the head of the serpent. But this was not some blessing to woman. It was a promise to mankind that the serpent would be dealt with. It is part of the blessing to the nations that was promised to come through Abraham. (So is it now a male thing to claim?)

[Nell]

Originally Posted by OBW

You are correct that both failed. And that there has been a tendency by some to blame the woman. Especially in prior times and in certain sectors of modern Christianity.

But beyond that I cannot agree. The inferences made in post #68 and the one quoted above are a little much when it comes to the characterization of the unstated actions and blessing attributed strictly to the woman (Eve) and that you claim for yourself.

First, you refer to a repentance that woman did but man did not, but I do not see the support for it. She did confess. But confession is not the same as repentance. Ever heard the "I did it and I'd do it again" confession? Confession is not repentance. We actually do not see anything of repentance on the part of either of them. I would suspect that there was repentance by both. But it was not recorded.

Yet that is as far as I can take it — suspect it is so. Just as it is as far as your statement about the repentance of the woman v the man can go.

You can't make doctrine out of suspicions, be they good or bad ones. It could even turn out to be true (when we get through the pearly gates and ask about all those things we couldn't figure out). But it was not given to us to see and know now, therefore not available to comment on. Surely nothing to insist upon or declare as a fact.

Same concerning the seed. "Every promise in the book" is not mine. Yes, God did say that the seed of the woman would crush the head of the serpent. But this was not some blessing to woman. It was a promise to mankind that the serpent would be dealt with. It is part of the blessing to the nations that was promised to come through Abraham. (So is it now a male thing to claim?)

OBW,

Her repentance or lack thereof is not a doctrine for me. I believe she did repent because of what followed. I believe he didn't because of what followed. That's it. So we're on the same page. However, eventually I also believe Adam repented.

How do you know that the seed of the woman would crush her head of the serpent was not a blessing to woman? How do we know that the promise to Abraham wasn't a kind of blessing to men? I'm mostly not serious about this last question, just to carry on your point. It is not recorded. So I have no strong opinion either way. In the overall picture of this topic, this is not a major point. it's not an issue to me. It's just what I think.

Nell

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Nell

Her repentance or lack thereof is not a doctrine for me. I believe she did repent because of what followed. I believe he didn't because of what followed. That's it. So we're on the same page. However, eventually I also believe Adam repented.

How do you know that the seed of the woman would crush her head of the serpent was not a blessing to woman? How do we know that the promise to Abraham wasn't a kind of blessing to men? I'm mostly not serious about this last question, just to carry on your point. It is not recorded. So I have no strong opinion either way. In the overall picture of this topic, this is not a major point. it's not an issue to me. It's just what I think.

You can think what you want. And even believe that it is true. But when you put it into a discussion like this, you imply that it is fact that can be relied upon.

Even you admit that it is not. So don't say it without qualifier. It says you do have an opinion and that you think it is as strong as if actually written there. You didn't say it. But you didn't soft-sell it either. You just said as if a fact.

Damaging to the impact of the message. And if I keep seeing a lot of it, you need to understand that no matter how strongly I might want to agree, it is just as sour to me when those kinds of things are done as what you are righting against is to you.

You are trying to persuade. Persuasion is not a matter of passion, but of truth and evidence. What you cannot support may not be truth. May be. But may not be.

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Nell

The problem is that woman was and has been blamed and otherwise punished for the failure of both man and woman. Both are equal failures but one repented, and the other did not.

Nell

Hmmm, Adam didn't repent? Does that mean Adam went to hell?

Let's not carry this thing too far, Nell. Men and women each have their respective strengths, weaknesses and roles. Neither is fundamentally superior.

Here's a funny thing you might not know about men: although we often patronize women, we also tend to put them on pedestals. I'm definitely well into middle age, but apparently not too old to learn something.
Recently my wife divorced me. You know what this taught me? That it is a mistake to put women on pedestals. They are just as capable of treachery as men. Although I used to think they were somehow sweeter, purer and more innocent than men, now I know that was misguided idealism on my part. A woman can stab you in the back just as readily and heartlessly as a man can. They might have different reasons for doing it, but the net result is the same.

Men and women are both primarily the one same thing: human. Their virtue and depravity might come out in different ways, but they have the same potential for each.

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Igzy

Hmmm, Adam didn't repent? Does that mean Adam went to hell?

Let's not carry this thing too far, Nell. Men and women each have their respective strengths, weaknesses and roles. Neither is fundamentally superior.

Igzy,

Eventually Adam repented. Jane has an excellent theory of how it happened in the book.

No argument here...neither is superior over the other. I don't believe I said that. I perhaps wasn't clear that Adam was unrepentant during the time frame of Gen. 3:12-16.

Women have been hindered in their/our walk with the Lord and our role in the Body of Christ due to inaccurate translations of a few verses in the Bible which firmly place Christian women in these subservient roles to Christian men. Let's see a show of hands of all the males who have been hindered in their roles as Christians because of domineering Christian women.

Nell

[Evangelical]

This "theory" about Adam repenting or not repenting sounds a lot like OBW recently said about Witness Lee "... taught a lot of things that were nowhere in the text. The were just his opinions.".

Let's consider the facts of what the bible actually says.

It says that instead of repenting, the first thing they did was hide from God and cover themselves up. They tried to hide their sin and cover it, not repent.

God is gracious towards them but this is likely due to His grace and mercy and not dependent upon their repentance. A person could construct an equally plausible theory about Adam and Eve's repentance:
God showed them grace and mercy despite them not having repented. Perhaps their feeling of guilt and regret as evidenced by them hiding from God and covering themselves, was enough for God to show mercy.

God covering them with sheepskin is to show God covering their sin, His grace and mercy, irrespective of whether they repented or not (they were saved by grace, not works).

We should keep in mind that the bible never mentions anything about Adam or Eve's repentance because the point of the story of Adam and Eve's transgression is to show us that all men have sinned, to point to Christ.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

We should keep in mind that the bible never mentions anything about Adam or Eve's repentance because the point of the story of Adam and Eve's transgression is to show us that all men have sinned, to point to Christ.

Perhaps repentance is not specifically mentioned, but they did bear (bare?) the shame of their sin, and the fear of God's judgment.

Later they did believe God's promise of a Savior yet to come. They saw the shed blood of an animal sacrifice, heard God's word, believed His promise, and were clothed with that sacrificial animal skin.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Perhaps repentance is not specifically mentioned, but they did bear (bare?) the shame of their sin, and the fear of God's judgment.

Later they did believe God's promise of a Savior yet to come. They saw the shed blood of an animal sacrifice, heard God's word, believed His promise, and were clothed with that sacrificial animal skin.

I believe as it was a case of deception and not a willful act of sin, God showed mercy and their blessing was not conditional upon their repentance. That is, Eve and Adam did not decide to rebel against God and eat the fruit. Eve was deceived by Satan, and she never takes the blame for that when she says:

"And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.".

[aron]

Originally Posted by Nell

Let's see a show of hands of all the males who have been hindered in their roles as Christians because of domineering Christian women.

Let's see. . Aimee Semple McPherson, Elizabeth Clare Prophet, Patsy Freeman, Ellen G. White, Jesse Penn-Lewis. The first and the last of those both negatively impinged upon my walk. But really, what of it? Life goes on. Let go.

But what of it? I notice precious little talk here of Jesus Christ, merely Paul's advice in epistolic format. Where are the gospels? Did Jesus get so thoroughly effaced by Paul's word?

Jesus clearly ran the show. If he wanted to allow women into the inner circle of disciples, there they were. And there they were. Jesus was Roberts Rules of Order personified. "Whatever he tells you, do it", his mother told the servants. There were women all around, functioning. Yet not as the twelve. Why? Because of convention.

In this Paul echoed Jesus. The days and years, post-Pentecost, were full of tumult, often with no center. Paul wrote to the Corinthians, who tried to re-create pentecostal ferver with each meeting, shouting each other down. Paul tried to restore order. In this context, his writings on women come forth. Everybody was now free - slaves didn't have to obey the master, children were free from parents, married men could abandon their children and go off to preach the gospel. The last days were at hand. The kingdome of God was poured out, for all to see.

"God has raised this Jesus to life, to which we are all witnesses. Exalted, then, to the right hand of God, He has received from the Father the promised Holy Spirit and has poured out what you now see and hear."

This overturned everything, as it should. Yet Paul desperately cautioned not to forget social convention. Slaves, women, children, fathers, all had to remember where they still were in society and not become dangerously unstable. In this he did echo Jesus, who was of all things an observant Jew.

Anyway, I haven't gotten to my point, which was to support Nell that there has been widespread systematized oppression. We should acknowledge this and repent. And secondly, to yet again raise the point that the movement of Nee started with women in the lead, yet 100 years later when women's rights have advanced, the "recovery" has clearly regressed, and become reactionary. It turns out that women were disposable, in the recovery. They served their purpose and then got abandoned when temporal power was amassed. Funny thing what power does to a man. (Or a woman.)

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Nell

The problem is that woman was and has been blamed and otherwise punished for the failure of both man and woman. Both are equal failures but one repented, and the other did not.

Nell

I was not aware of this, in fact, I have known some who have exonerated Eve completely saying she never heard God's command, and put the blame squarely on Adam for not instructing her adequately, and for not stopping her.

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I was not aware of this, in fact, I have known some who have exonerated Eve completely saying she never heard God's command, and put the blame squarely on Adam for not instructing her adequately, and for not stopping her.

i was summarizing my post #68.

In Gen. 3:2-3 Eve repeated God's command not to eat of the tree, so she heard the command from somewhere. Regardless of how she heard it...she knew the command not to eat of the tree of knowledge (even though a few words were added ... from somewhere ... about touching the tree.) The Sgt. Schultz "I know nothing" argument doesn't float for me. Both sinned. Both eventually repented (sorry I can't seem to clarify this point adequately.)

The main point is that due to inaccurate translations of a few verses in the Bible, women have been hindered in their walk with the Lord and their roles in the church, having been relegated to a subservience which God never intended.

Nell