Reformed Theology

[ohio jones]

Any idea why CMC used it?

Probably because it was an already-written off-the-shelf statement that had support across the evangelical community. Writing, editing, and getting a new statement approved takes time and effort, which in the long term was invested, but in the short term may not have been readily available.

[Judas Maccabeus]

Any idea why CMC used it?

Probably because it was an already-written off-the-shelf statement that had support across the evangelical community. Writing, editing, and getting a new statement approved takes time and effort, which in the long term was invested, but in the short term may not have been readily available.

Yes quite familiar with it. Only part of it I take exception to is the third clause:

"Adam's headship in marriage was established by God before the Fall, and was not a result of sin"

I really don't see the Biblical support for this, in light of Gen 3:16

To the woman he said,

“I will make your pains in childbearing very severe;
with painful labor you will give birth to children.
Your desire will be for your husband,
and he will rule over you.”

People taking that clause to t's logical conclusion have gone to a few odd conclusions. Does anyone know how they support this?

J.M.

[ken_sylvania]

God did say he was going to make a help suitable for Adam. The idea of a helper seems to carry a subordinate role. Also see 1st Corinthians 11.

For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man. For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.

[Neto]

Any idea why CMC used it?

Probably because it was an already-written off-the-shelf statement that had support across the evangelical community. Writing, editing, and getting a new statement approved takes time and effort, which in the long term was invested, but in the short term may not have been readily available.

Yes quite familiar with it. Only part of it I take exception to is the third clause:

"Adam's headship in marriage was established by God before the Fall, and was not a result of sin"

I really don't see the Biblical support for this, in light of Gen 3:16

To the woman he said,

“I will make your pains in childbearing very severe;
with painful labor you will give birth to children.
Your desire will be for your husband,
and he will rule over you.”

People taking that clause to t's logical conclusion have gone to a few odd conclusions. Does anyone know how they support this?

J.M.

It is interesting to note that the word translated "desire toward" in this verse is the same word as in 4:7, where God says (to Cain) Sin desires to control you". Translating it this way in 3:16 has commentary support, makes a lot more sense to me, and incidentally, it was approved by our Wycliffe Bible Translation consultants for us to render it this way.

[Judas Maccabeus]

God did say he was going to make a help suitable for Adam. The idea of a helper seems to carry a subordinate role. Also see 1st Corinthians 11.

For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man. For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.

If she was already in a subordinate role because of her "being" and not her function, why the "curse" of Gen 3:16? I would agree that Eve had a supportive role before, but something changes in the fall. My take on it is without sin, you did not need subordination and authority. With sin in the world, it becomes necessary. In other words, I would say that the need for the current state of things is because of the fall.

One of the CBMW people has written an article that basically says women remain in a subordinate position in eternity. The whole "Eternal subordination of the Son" view of the Trinity is sometimes used to buttress this claim.

I believe without sin, and without distinct gender roles, in eternity we will all be equal.

J.M.

[Neto]

God did say he was going to make a help suitable for Adam. The idea of a helper seems to carry a subordinate role. Also see 1st Corinthians 11.

For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man. For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.

If she was already in a subordinate role because of her "being" and not her function, why the "curse" of Gen 3:16? I would agree that Eve had a supportive role before, but something changes in the fall. My take on it is without sin, you did not need subordination and authority. With sin in the world, it becomes necessary. In other words, I would say that the need for the current state of things is because of the fall.

One of the CBMW people has written an article that basically says women remain in a subordinate position in eternity. The whole "Eternal subordination of the Son" view of the Trinity is sometimes used to buttress this claim.

I believe without sin, and without distinct gender roles, in eternity we will all be equal.

J.M.

Perhaps my comment above seemed totally out of place in this discussion, so I will explain that the way I understand the text is that sin left both husband & wife with desires and typical actions that ran contrary to the created order. With a husband that did not rule over his wife in the wrong way, and a wife that did not attempt to control her husband, there was no conflict between them. The created order of command, if you will, was complementary, and not in any way offensive to the wife, because the husband always behaved with his wife's best interests at heart, and the wife did not rebel against his leadership, or attempt to take his created place.

[Judas Maccabeus]

God did say he was going to make a help suitable for Adam. The idea of a helper seems to carry a subordinate role. Also see 1st Corinthians 11.

If she was already in a subordinate role because of her "being" and not her function, why the "curse" of Gen 3:16? I would agree that Eve had a supportive role before, but something changes in the fall. My take on it is without sin, you did not need subordination and authority. With sin in the world, it becomes necessary. In other words, I would say that the need for the current state of things is because of the fall.

One of the CBMW people has written an article that basically says women remain in a subordinate position in eternity. The whole "Eternal subordination of the Son" view of the Trinity is sometimes used to buttress this claim.

I believe without sin, and without distinct gender roles, in eternity we will all be equal.

J.M.

Perhaps my comment above seemed totally out of place in this discussion, so I will explain that the way I understand the text is that sin left both husband & wife with desires and typical actions that ran contrary to the created order. With a husband that did not rule over his wife in the wrong way, and a wife that did not attempt to control her husband, there was no conflict between them. The created order of command, if you will, was complementary, and not in any way offensive to the wife, because the husband always behaved with his wife's best interests at heart, and the wife did not rebel against his leadership, or attempt to take his created place.

We largely agree on that. The created roles would have worked perfectly, without any real need of "authority" needing to come into the relationship. Sin changed this radically with the fall. Headship became necessary for the relationship to function.

J.M.

[Neto]

If she was already in a subordinate role because of her "being" and not her function, why the "curse" of Gen 3:16? I would agree that Eve had a supportive role before, but something changes in the fall. My take on it is without sin, you did not need subordination and authority. With sin in the world, it becomes necessary. In other words, I would say that the need for the current state of things is because of the fall.

One of the CBMW people has written an article that basically says women remain in a subordinate position in eternity. The whole "Eternal subordination of the Son" view of the Trinity is sometimes used to buttress this claim.

I believe without sin, and without distinct gender roles, in eternity we will all be equal.

J.M.

Perhaps my comment above seemed totally out of place in this discussion, so I will explain that the way I understand the text is that sin left both husband & wife with desires and typical actions that ran contrary to the created order. With a husband that did not rule over his wife in the wrong way, and a wife that did not attempt to control her husband, there was no conflict between them. The created order of command, if you will, was complementary, and not in any way offensive to the wife, because the husband always behaved with his wife's best interests at heart, and the wife did not rebel against his leadership, or attempt to take his created place.

We largely agree on that. The created roles would have worked perfectly, without any real need of "authority" needing to come into the relationship. Sin changed this radically with the fall. Headship became necessary for the relationship to function.

J.M.

I understand why you say we "largely agree". I would say that the "authority" was there, but since it was not challenged, and never misused, it didn't look anything like the authority we have witnessed, experienced, and sometimes exercised. So in the practical sense, the way it works out in real life in our sin ridden world, I think I'm "on the same page".

[JimFoxvog]

God did say he was going to make a help suitable for Adam. The idea of a helper seems to carry a subordinate role.

I've heard this idea countered by pointing out that God is also described as our helper.

[Sudsy]

God did say he was going to make a help suitable for Adam. The idea of a helper seems to carry a subordinate role.

I've heard this idea countered by pointing out that God is also described as our helper.

"But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you." - John 14:26