Do creation and the fall make men leaders?
Moore starts with the creation account in Genesis 2, and highlight the part where Eve is formed from Adam. He then says:
Further, Scripture tells us that the woman is to be ruled by her husband, because Eve was deceived.
Genesis 3:16 To the woman He said, “I will greatly multiply Your pain in childbirth, In pain you will bring forth children ; Yet your desire will be for your husband, And he will rule over you.”
But that is simply eisegesis – seeing things in scripture that is just not there. The words are “he will rule“, not “he is supposed to rule” or “he will do right if he rules.” Jesus also said snares will take little ones from him (Matt. 18:7), but He never told anyone to place such snares. (Moore’s 1 Timothy verse will be handled later.)
I pointed out the absurdity of reading a man’s right to rule into it, by comparing it to other things God said will happen, and making similar arguments about them:
1 Scripture is clear that the earth will produce thorns. (Gen 3:18) Therefore, sowing weeds on someone’s field is the will of God
2 Scripture is clear that a woman will be ruled by her husband (Gen. 3:16) Therefore, husbands ruling wifes are the will of God
3 Scripture is clear that men will eat in sorrow. (Gen. 3:17) Therefore, creating an unpleasant atmosphere at the dinner table is the will of God, when a man is present.
To that, Moore answers in his second response:
God did not say to sow weeds, nor did God say to create an unpleasant atmosphere. But God DID say that man would rule his wife (Gen 3:16).
Yes, Wbmoore, would, not should…
How then, should we view the creation story? Well, Genesis 1:27-28 say:
Gen 1:27 And God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
Gen 1:28 And God blessed them: and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the heavens, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
For the sake of those readers who read the Bible in pink and blue, “man” in that verse is a word that means humanity, not males. And him – as in “created he him”- does not refer to males either – it is the English word chosen to complete the sentence, as grammar rules in Hebrew differ from English. God made humans in his image, to have dominion over it. No mention there that male humans should have dominion over female humans.
Two other recent posts of mine make it clear that Eve was not created inferior at all, that the word translated into English as helper usually refers to God and not an inferior. She was made as strong rescuing help equal to Adam. (In his second response Moore tells me that ezer means “helper”, not “rescuer”. He is superficially right. “Rescuer” is shorthand for the sort of helper, mostly God as “helper”, ezer refers to.)
Genesis 3, point out what Eve’s daughters will do, not what they should do.
Does submission verses mean that men are to rule?
Have any Bible teacher ever taught you that people have the right to slap your face? Well, there is a Bible message telling us to turn the other cheek. But to conclude, from that, that God gave the slapper the responsibility or even the right to slap you, will be ridiculous. It is similarly ridiculous reasoning to read the male right/ responsibility to rule into “wives submit” verses.
Wbmoore gives several verses that tell us wives are to submit to their husbands.
He starts with taking Eph 5:22 out of context. Here is some context:
Eph 5:21-22 subjecting yourselves one to another in the fear of Christ, wives, unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
Most translations do it this way:
…subjecting yourselves one to another in the fear of Christ.
(New paragraph) 22 Wives, be in subjection unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
But the statement to wives is not a new sentence as it does not have its own verb in the Greek we translate it from. It is a run-on of verse 21. The submission verse is connected “subjecting yourself to one another.” Similarly, 1 Pe 3:7, after an earlier verse told wives are subject, told husbands to do/be “likewise.”
My previous post also contains other truths about submission, for example, that almost all submission verses seem to be in the passive voice in the original Greek. The passive statement “wives are subject to husbands” is a simple truth in marriage. Male rule or no male rule, wives are subject to husbands. If you pull in one yoke with someone else, his decisions affect you. I have no problem with Moore stating wives are subject to husbands, except that he somehow links it to some never-mentioned-in-the-Bible male right to be the boss.
On the other hand, biblical orders to husbands on how to treat wives are in the active voice.
(In his second response to me, he gets into a long tangential discussion to prove that the Bible does give some people authority. He does that because he misunderstood “So the first thing about the context is that everyone in the church should submit to one another. (Nobody is given authority).” In the Eph 5:21-22 context, there is no authority given and authority is not the reason to submit there. He reacts as if I said there is no authority in Christianity, while I said there is no authority in this passage.)