How do YOU interpret the Bible (obvious CC)

[MamaSheep]

K...back to finish up with those last 3 verses in Timothy 2.

 

13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.

14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

 

 

As I was saying before, I think this is sort of a "conclusion" to a literary "thingy" (because I have no idea what the technical term for this is, it's just a pattern I see in the text) that Paul is doing here. He started out with a little mini-version of the pattern--general, masculine, feminine, general, then did a more expanded version, and this is the "inclusive, generic" conclusion to the thing. Interestingly, it has another mini-pattern sort of encased in it--masculine before feminine, then feminine before masculine, then folding both in together.

 

That "For" at the beginning of 13 indicates moving into the next "section" of the literary form, and connects what is about to come to what he just said, which was that women should focus on their own tasks and not shove into masculine territory. And this is probably where all the truly feminist types will roll their eyes at me, because I do see men and women as having different roles, or tasks, or focuses, or responsibilities. Different "venues" sort of. Neither is inferior to the other, but they are not the "same", they are "equal". If you see what I mean. And I think this is what Paul is describing in this bit. Women should mind their own business, and men should mind theirs.

 

Anyway. So "Adam was first formed," (masculine) "then Eve" (feminine). Obviously this is talking about the creation, when God formed Adam first, then declared that it was not good for Adam to be alone, and formed Eve to make mankind whole and complete, and gave her the "task" of helping Adam. In this, man came first and woman completes and helps him.

 

Moving on. "And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression." I will say up front that my views about the Fall are somewhat different than how much of Christianity traditionally views it. In the garden, Adam and Eve were immortal, but the immortality they enjoyed was not the same thing as "eternal life". Immortality is living forever, but eternal life is living forever with a particular quality of life, if you see what I mean. Satan lives forever, but he does not have eternal life. People who are ****ed go on existing, just like people who are saved. It's the quality of life that is different, the kind of being one is, not just the stuff in their surroundings. And although Adam and Eve had immortality in the garden they did not have eternal life. But God had a plan for them to be able to receive eternal life. This is why Jesus is called the "Lamb slain from the foundation of the world" (see Rev. 13:8, for example). He wasn't actually "slain" at the time of creation, but he was foreordained at that time to offer Himself as a sacrifice on our behalf at the appropriate time in the plan, chosen before Adam and Eve were even created. Jesus's role as Savior was not a last-minute stop-gap "fix" after God's plan for Adam and Eve got all messed up. Jesus's role as Savior WAS the plan, from the very beginning. The only way for Adam and Eve to receive eternal life, rather than mere innocent, ignorant immortality, was for them to learn about good and evil and live by faith in a world where they had to choose between the two. Those who receive eternal life have to be the kinds of people (or beings, really) who will choose good over evil--not just beings who are moral by default because they don't know anything else and have no other options. That's not really being "good", it's just sort of...being. And in order to choose, they had to have something to choose between. So God gave them a choice. He told them they could roam around and find food just there and provided for them hanging on the trees, but don't just casually walk up and eat the fruit from THAT tree, because that's not just food, that is a choice. If you eat that fruit you choose to experience death. So don't eat that, don't just go and make a meal out of it. It has consequences.

 

Adam and Eve did not yet know good from evil, having not eaten from the tree of knowledge. Satan (as always) did not understand the mind and intent of God in setting up this scenario, and Satan figured he'd mess up God's little paradise and get Adam and Eve to do the one thing they'd been told not to do and act in opposition to what God had said about not eating off that tree. And Satan lied and told Eve that God was lying to her when he said she'd die if she ate the fruit because God didn't want Adam and Eve to know good and evil like God did, and they would if they ate the fruit. Now the part about them knowing good and evil like God was the truth that sold the lie, because as we read a few verses farther on, God acknowledges that after eating the fruit Adam and Eve did indeed now know good from evil. But God had told the truth, Satan had lied, and having eaten the fruit they had made a choice and now they would experience death. More to the point, they would experience a world in a state of dying, a state of corruption--a fallen world, a world where there was sickness, pain, conflict, confusion, and death. A world that had been there, outside the garden, all this time. The garden was not the whole earth. They would become mortal and would, themselves, experience the death of their bodies. Which is why there was a Savior established for them from the foundation of the world. They would now have options--some good options, some evil options, and they would have to discern between them and make choices. Some of the choices would be really difficult. And they would face temptations they had never before experienced. They would have to make choices--sometimes very difficult choices. And sometimes they would choose wrongly. All of us will sometimes choose wrongly, no matter how hard we try. That's just a fact of life in a fallen world. But the experiences would mold their characters and through the redemption offered by the Savior, they could receive the gift of eternal life. So their path was one that led through death to an even better life than immortality in the garden. And eternal life was what God planned for them from the beginning by providing a Savior, from the foundation of the world.

 

Now, a lot of people see what Adam and Eve did as a sin. Paul calls it a "transgression". The word "transgression" in English is made up of "trans", which means "across", and "gress", which means "move". The word in Greek has a similar meaning. Literally, it means "a going over". It is used metaphorically to refer to breaking rules because when one breaks a rule one crosses (or goes over) a prescribed moral boundary. Adam and Eve "transgressed". They crossed over the boundary laid down by God, and they received the consequences of their transgression. All of them, from death to the possibility of eternal life. I think this is different from a "sin". A "sin" is doing something that is inherently morally wrong--choosing "evil". A "transgression" is doing something that is not necessarily morally wrong, or evil, but which crosses a boundary, or breaks a rule. That can blossom off into a whole other discussion. But I think there's a distinction, and I think Paul thought so too.

 

Adam was created first, he entered first into physical existence--and his name means "mankind". All mankind are "of" Adam. Even Eve was made from Adam. Eve was made to complete and help him. As verse 13 says, "Adam was first formed, then Eve."

 

And verse 14 continues, "And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression." Adam did not enter first into mortal existence, it was Eve who went first--she was "in the transgression"; she chose first to "go over". She didn't understand exactly what she was doing at the time, because she was deceived. But Adam, who was not deceived, knowingly chose to go with her into the new, fallen existence. Paul is pointing out that the man went first into existence, then the woman; but the woman went first into mortality, then the man. He's folding the male and female together and making them one, here, to complete his literary pattern. The next verse completes the thought, but requires some more explanation, I think.

 

(continued)

[MamaSheep]

(continuing)

The discussion between God and Adam and Eve after they ate the fruit is relevant here. I'm not going to quote it all here, but go and read it, it's in the third chapter of Genesis. Notice that God does not curse Adam and Eve. He curses the serpent, who thought he was messing up God's plans. And he curses the ground, but he says that is done for Adam's sake, meaning for Adam's benefit. Adam and Eve are both told that things are going to be a lot harder and more painful from here on out. The first "sorrow" in the verse about Eve and the "sorrow" with which Adam will eat, are both the same Hebrew word, which means, "pain, labor, hardship, sorrow, toil". It's going to be hard work to bring forth children. It's going to be hard work to provide food for the family. And it's going to involve pain and sorrow. But Adam will "rule over" Eve. Now. I don't think that God's views of proper godly leadership changed between Adam and Jesus. I think God meant Adam to "rule over" Eve in the sense that Jesus explained in those verses we looked at in Matthew. Adam is to provide for Eve, help and support her, comfort and heal her, and all those things that Jesus did for his followers. And I think that's what the first part of the last verse in 1 Timothy 2 means, particularly in conjunction with the verse that comes before it.

 

And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

 

 

"Saved" here is not talking about women "earning" eternal salvation by making babies. Everything else in scripture tells us that we CANNOT "earn" salvation. That interpretation would be completely counter to the entire New Testament witness about Christ and how redemption works. So it's talking about something else. Something that does fit. The Greek word can be used in the technical, saved-from-sin sense, but it can also be used in its original sense that means to preserve someone in danger, rescue, heal, comfort, make well, restore to health, and so forth.

 

So Adam was created first, then Eve. Then, Eve "went over" first, followed by Adam, into a realm where she would bear children--where she would become "life", the mother of all living, as her name says--in labor and pain. Nevertheless, she will be preserved through the perils of bearing children, made well, and restored to health--IF--they, both the man and the woman together, the inclusive generic, continue in faith, charity, and holiness, with sobriety.

 

Now, remember that this section started with a "For", to connect it to the preceding thought? Let's talk about that for a minute. The preceding thought that it's connected to is the idea that women should mind their own business and not try to tell the men how to do their jobs. How does that connect? Well, the Adam and Eve thing is the reason women need to focus on their own thing. Adam had his role in the beginning of things. Man has his own role now. Eve had her role in the beginning of things. Woman has her own role now. If they both focus on their own realm of responsibility, they will be in a kind of unity that will be very beneficial to the woman--moreso than if she lost focus on her role and tried to take over his.

 

And then Paul sums up by taking us, conceptually, back to the beginning, by telling them to continue TOGETHER in faith (lack of doubt/submission to God), charity (abscence of wrath/bullying interference), and holiness (holy hands/good works), with sobriety (taking it seriously and having respect for God).

 

The end. Of this part. :001_smile:

[Aubrey]

I try really hard to ignore these verses. I don't know what I believe about them, but I do know what I believe, & the latter is more important. These verses are not the heart of the Gospel.

 

I subscribe to a hierarchy of Scripture: I take the biggies--love your neighbor as yourself & love the Lord your God w/ all your heart--& I figure once I've got those down cold--those that I *do* understand--then I can begin to grapple w/ the mysterious & confusing ones.

 

In the mean time, though, I'm bandaging banged up knees, taking food to sick people, praying--& I find a lot more peace in that than in figuring out the Confusing Scriptures.

 

It's not that I don't want to know...it's not that I don't care...it's that...I think it is human nature to want laws, to want black & white *rules* to follow, & somehow, I think that that desire for LAW is tied up w/ our sin nature. I think that trying to figure out the RULES of Christianity is...somehow a slippery slope. I try very hard to steer clear of that w/out going too far the other direction (where anything goes). For me, legalism is a greater temptation than debauchery, so it's legalism I try to watch out for. :001_smile:

[MamaSheep]

The last of the verses you asked about is 1 Peter 3:7. As before, I think it's helpful to look at it in context, so I'm going to back up a bit. You might notice that the first verse in chapter 3 starts with the word "Likewise", which is a comparison word. These verses on wives and husbands are actually part of a list Peter is making to show how a particular principle should be applied. I'm going to back up to a little before the beginning of the list, where Peter outlines the principle he's going to apply to all the 'items' on the list--which are different types of relationships.

 

This is from chapter 2

9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:

10Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.

11 Dearly beloved, I beseech you as strangers and pilgrims, abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul;

12 Having your conversation honest among the Gentiles: that, whereas they speak against you as evildoers, they may by your good works, which they shall behold, glorify God in the day of visitation.

 

If you look at verses 9 and 10, Peter tells the recipients of his letter that by joining Christ's church they have become a "people", in the sense of a country, or nation, or tribe. But then in verses 11 and 12 he calls them strangers (foreigners) and pilgrims, which might seem a little contradictory--are they "the people" or are they "foreigners"?. Looking up the Greek for the strangers and pilgrims part in a concordance, he's talking about, "one who comes from a foreign country into a city or land to reside there by the side of the natives". So he's saying that by becoming citizens of God's kingdom they have, in essense, become outsiders, or resident foreigners, in the larger culture in which they live. Christians have different cultural customs, practices, values, etc. than do the people among whom they live, just as if they were people from another country--foreign nationals, so to speak.

 

He asks them to refrain from participating in immoral, un-Christian behavior that is part of the culture around them, and instead to live according to their beliefs, similar to the manner in which a person from a foreign country might maintain cultural practices from their native land, even if living among people of another culture.

 

He points out that people will sometimes say mean things about them because they are Christians--and therefore "different" or "weird" to the people around them. But seeing the good, moral, admirable behavior of the believers will help the people around them realize that Christians are good people, and may even help change their minds such that they will want to join with the Christians and be one of the people praising God (as opposed to 'speaking evil') when Christ returns.

 

["Conversation" here means, in Greek, "conduct", or "manner of life". "Honest", in Greek, is a word that means, excellent, admirable, commendable, praiseworthy, beautiful--that sort of thing.]

 

And that's the main theme he's going to apply to the upcoming list--the idea that if Christians live an upstanding, honest, kindly, friendly life, the people around them will see that and it will influence how people feel about, and treat, Christians. And people who are not willing to listen to the gospel for its own sake might "hear" it through the behavior and attitudes of the Christians in their lives.

 

So now Peter is going to discuss how this principle applies in various situations and relationships. The first item on his list of examples starts in verse 13:

13 Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme;

14 Or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well.

15 For so is the will of God, that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men:

16 As free, and not using your liberty for a cloke of maliciousness, but as the servants of God.

17 Honour all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the king.

The first relationship he talks about is the relationship of a person to the legal, governmental authority under which he lives ("ordinance" here means "institution"--an ordinance of man is an institution founded by man). Whether it's the king, as the supreme legal authority, or governors, or people sent by the governors to enforce the law, Peter says you should "submit" to them. This "submit" is the same word used in some of the verses we looked at earlier that means voluntary cooperation. He says we should be good citizens. We should voluntarily cooperate with those who make and enforce the laws because being cooperative, good citizens, and exhibiting behavior that helps contribute to civil order and peace, we will give a good impression of Christians and help create goodwill toward our people in the community. And that is what God desires us to do.

 

The "free" in "as free" means "freemen", or not bondsmen or slaves. A free man should exercise his freedom (there were different kinds of civil rights for persons of differing statuses in the Roman empire), but in doing so he should not use his "rights" to do things that are immoral, even if they're not illegal, but should keep in mind that even though he is legally "free", he is a servant to God (and therefore obligated to God to follow God's rules). And he says we should show appropriate levels of respect for all men, fellow believers, God, and the king.

 

(more coming)

[MamaSheep]

(continued)

 

Next Peter talks about the servant/master relationship.

18 Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward.

19 For this is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully.

20 For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God.

21 For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:

 

Again, "be subject to" is that same Greek word for voluntary cooperation. He's saying don't be rebellious and difficult. Be respectful ("fear" here is referring to respect) to your master; and not just the good and kind ones either, but the same thing applies even if your master is crooked and unfair (froward). "Thankworthy" is a Greek word that means things like "grace", "good will", "gratitude". If, because of our beliefs (for conscience toward God) we are wrongly mistreated, we show our gratitude toward God for Christ's suffering for our sins by bearing it patiently. It doesn't show gratitude to God to bear punishment patiently when you deserve it, but if you "do well", or behave in a godly manner, and you suffer because of it, your patience in suffering is a kind of offering to God, and it follows the example of Christ, who showed us how to endure undeserved suffering patiently and without complaint.

 

Verses 22-25 expand on the idea that Christ, though innocent, suffered unjust cruelty for our sake, and we should be deeply grateful for what he did. And that ends chapter 2.

 

Chapter 3 continues the list by showing that the same principle applies if the relationship in which you live as a Christian "foreigner" is that between a husband and wife. The wife part comes first.

1 Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives;

2 While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear.

3 Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel;

4 But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price.

5 For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands:

6 Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement.

 

Ok, so up there in verse 1 we have the same "be in subjection" that means voluntary cooperation. In a situation where the wife is Christian and the husband is not, the wife should still treat the husband respectfully and honor his wishes. A non-believer husband, one who "obey not the word" might be won to Christ by seeing his wife's godly attitude and behavior. Here again "conversation" means conduct, manner of living. And the "fear" with which it should be coupled means respect. So by living according to Christian principles and showing love and respect toward her husband, his heart might be softened toward God. But, he says, this "conversation", or conduct, that you should show to your husband cannot be only at the surface level. You can't "put on" good behavior like jewelry, a hair-do, or fancy clothes, that are only outwardly beautiful. Rather, it needs to be the deep, inward condition of her character, the "hidden man of the heart" (man here is the generic anthropos), that part of her that is not corruptible--that can't be "rotted away" by outside things, the beauty of a peaceful, humble heart. He offers them the example of respected women in their religious history, such as Sarah, the wife of Abraham, who voluntarily cooperated with him, and thus shares all the blessings of Abraham. She is honored as the mother of God's chosen people, in the same way that Abraham is honored as the father. (And actually, since Peter is Jewish and has grown up with a deep respect for Abraham, and since Peter is writing primarily to non-Jewish people in this letter, it is quite interesting that he tells these good women that they are Sarah's "daughters", because they are not literally descended from Sarah. Rather they are spiritually similar to her if they behave in a peaceful, cooperative manner with their husbands, and as such are worthy to be honored as Sarah is honored. High praise.)

 

And then Peter moves on to the opposite situation, where the husband is the believer and lives with a wife who is not.

7 Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.

Just as Christian wives with non-Christian husbands should treat their husbands with cooperation, love, and respect, so likewise should Christian husbands treat their non-Christian wives. They should live with them "according to knowledge". The Greek word translated as "knowledge" is "gnosis", and refers to knowledge of the Christian faith. So even though their wife is not a Christian, the leadership style of the husband toward her should still be the Christian model of servant-leadership. He should "give honor" to the wife, or treat her with respect, and care for her and be gentle with her as if she were a precious, fragile container (not because she is weak, but because her feelings about her husband converting to a new religion she doesn't agree with might be a bit fragile and he should honor her feelings about this). And he should treat her as though they were already heirs together of the grace of life--as though they will be together in heaven forever. Because to treat her in any way other than how he would treat her if she were Christian, and then pray that she will join him in belief, is counterproductive.

 

Then Peter goes into a summery and reiteration of the point he made back in chapter 2 about how we should behave in our relationships with non-Christians. Be kind, be respectful, even if people treat you badly, maintain Christian behavior, don't retaliate. That sort of thing. And he reminds them that God is watching over them through it all.

 

So, that's the last of those verses. I hope this helps. :)