Genesis 3:16

[Violet]

I don't believe it does.

How is God supposedly giving a desire to sin not the same as God tempting someone to sin?

So Eve didn't deliberately eat the fruit?

She did deliberately eat. But this is different than the picture we get in Rom 1 where they deliberately, knowingly exchanged the truth of God for a lie.

Nonsense. "And to Adam he said, “Because you have listened to the voice of your wife and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you,"

Are you saying that when a woman speaks to you that she is actually trying to control you?

[robrecht]

Are you saying that when a woman speaks to you that she is actually trying to control you?

Wait, you mean that is not true? I need to show this thread to my wife!

[Violet]

I believe Violet is doing special pleading here:

She cannot deny that God gives us good desires that are resistible, but somehow any (hypothetical) sinful desire given by God must be irresistible.

True. I take it back.

However, the problem remains that God giving a desire to sin is akin to God tempting one to sin which the scriptures say He does not do.

[Violet]

The question of whether the "desire" in Gen 3 is a curse/punishment or a description/prediction of what was to be the inclination of the woman is a good one and I've been trying to think it through. I'm not claiming to be a fantastic thinker, I'm just trying to think these through.

Here is what I've been considering:

The reasons it could be a curse/punishment is the context. The words are given in a like manner of the punishments to the serpent and to the man and to the "pain in childbirth" and "man will ruler over you" punishments also given to the woman.

The reasons it could be a description/prediction of woman's nature after the fall is....? It matters a lot if "desire" means "control" or if it is of a more sexual nature, as in the Canticles (as discussed above).

I try to ask myself these questions, as a woman, and see what corresponds to reality. While I know that a woman's sexual desire for a man is part of her nature, I do not know that a woman's desire to control her husband is part of her nature. While the pain of childbirth corresponds to reality, while men being "rulers" of women throughout history corresponds to reality I cannot discern if a perpetual inclination for women to control husbands actually corresponds to reality, as a description of reality. In fact, with the many oppressed women on the planet I think they'd have a death wish if they did. But they do still intimately desire to have a man, which tends to make me think that this is what the description actually is.

I can speak of reality in my own experience, too. I do not have a naturally controlling personality (even if I was not a Christian--according to the Myers-Briggs type indicator--if you put weight in that sort of thing). So, while I cannot say I have been sinless in this, I can say that desiring to control my husband is not an accurate description of me as a woman as like having pain in childbirth is for me as a woman. If it is to be a description of women, it is not talking of an occasional temptation to control her husband, but of a quality, a characteristic, a property. The lack of an accurate correspondence to reality counts something to me. Maybe it shouldn't? Maybe a bad analogy but if people told you the scriptures mean to say that the sun revolves around the earth, no matter how good their exegesis, it doesn't correspond to reality, you know its not true. Instead of saying the Bible is in error, you go back and re-examine if this is what the scriptures are really saying.

Please know I'm not committed to a view yet; I'd like help thinking these things through.

[Geert van den Bos]

The question of whether the "desire" in Gen 3 is a curse/punishment or a description/prediction of what was to be the inclination of the woman is a good one and I've been trying to think it through. I'm not claiming to be a fantastic thinker, I'm just trying to think these through.

Here is what I've been considering:

The reasons it could be a curse/punishment is the context. The words are given in a like manner of the punishments to the serpent and to the man and to the "pain in childbirth" and "man will ruler over you" punishments also given to the woman.

The reasons it could be a description/prediction of woman's nature after the fall is....? It matters a lot if "desire" means "control" or if it is of a more sexual nature, as in the Canticles (as discussed above).

I try to ask myself these questions, as a woman, and see what corresponds to reality. While I know that a woman's sexual desire for a man is part of her nature, I do not know that a woman's desire to control her husband is part of her nature. While the pain of childbirth corresponds to reality, while men being "rulers" of women throughout history corresponds to reality I cannot discern if a perpetual inclination for women to control husbands actually corresponds to reality, as a description of reality. In fact, with the many oppressed women on the planet I think they'd have a death wish if they did. But they do still intimately desire to have a man, which tends to make me think that this is what the description actually is.

I can speak of reality in my own experience, too. I do not have a naturally controlling personality (even if I was not a Christian--according to the Myers-Briggs type indicator--if you put weight in that sort of thing). So, while I cannot say I have been sinless in this, I can say that desiring to control my husband is not an accurate description of me as a woman as like having pain in childbirth is for me as a woman. If it is to be a description of women, it is not talking of an occasional temptation to control her husband, but of a quality, a characteristic, a property. The lack of an accurate correspondence to reality counts something to me. Maybe it shouldn't? Maybe a bad analogy but if people told you the scriptures mean to say that the sun revolves around the earth, no matter how good their exegesis, it doesn't correspond to reality, you know its not true. Instead of saying the Bible is in error, you go back and re-examine if this is what the scriptures are really saying.

Please know I'm not committed to a view yet; I'd like help thinking these things through.

Mark 12:25 comes to mind, seeming to provide an answer:
For when they rise from the dead, they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.



Death being punishment for sin, or: consequence of sin.

[Paprika]

How is God supposedly giving a desire to sin not the same as God tempting someone to sin?

Because when the desire is active at certain times it is not the God that tempts but the desire - part of the person's own nature - that drags and lures away.

She did deliberately eat. But this is different than the picture we get in Rom 1 where they deliberately, knowingly exchanged the truth of God for a lie.

Good. Did she deliberately tell Adam to eat it? Did she not know that God did tell Adam not to eat it, and that she was asking Adam to disobey?

Are you saying that when a woman speaks to you that she is actually trying to control you?

Are you done with silly strawmen?

[Violet]

Because when the desire is active at certain times it is not the God that tempts but the desire - part of the person's own nature - that drags and lures away.

I see a need to make a distinction between the two options of 1) is it God directly giving the desire to sin or 2) are these words the description of the effects of mankind's sin nature after the fall? I believe you have erroneously combined them. What do you think? Did God put an evil desire in woman or is He describing the effects of the fall upon the woman? Please explain.

Good. Did she deliberately tell Adam to eat it?

I think this is part of the question. We cannot tell from the text if her "voice" was commanding or offering. There is nothing in the text that indicates she was trying dominate her husband.

Did she not know that God did tell Adam not to eat it, and that she was asking Adam to disobey?

She did know. Even so, her sharing the fruit with her husband is not indicative of control.

Are you done with silly strawmen?

No, I have another. Do you believe every time someone offers you something that they are, in fact, trying to control you?

[Paprika]

No, I have another.

Then this discussion is at an end.

[Violet]

Then this discussion is at an end.

Wow, you took that way too seriously. I was being silly, as you suggested.