Because Christianity is bigger than Biblical manhood or Biblical womanhood (Blog of Retha Faurie)

Erratum

 In a previous post, I made this allegation about complementarians:

[They] read God’s statement to Eve- “thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee” as ” thy desire should be to thy husband, and he ought to rule over thee.

Since then, I learned of this complementarian argument: Eve’s desire, according to them, was a desire to rule over Adam, which is bad. God allegedly tell that this will be rectified by Adam’s rule, which will be a good thing.

So the real allegation should be:

[They] read God’s statement to Eve- “thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee” as ” thy desire ought not be to thy husband, and he ought to rule over thee.

These words are not, in comp minds, meant as two what-ought-to-be’s. It is meant as one what-ought-not-to-be and one what-ought-to-be.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: