Male headship before the fall: God’s message, or human perversion of Scripture? Part 2

<<Continued from Part 1

4. …God named the human race “Man,” not “Woman.”… (Gen. 5:1-2):

 

In the Hebrew text, the word … ’ådåm… is by no means a gender-neutral term… (Genesis 2:5,7, 8, 15, 16, 18, 19 (twice), 20 (twice, 22, 23, 25; 3:8, 9, 12, 17, 20, 21; 4:1, 25; 5:1)…

It does give a hint of male leadership, which God suggested in choosing this name….

Reading the same text with pink glasses

(To understand this argument, we have to know that people give meanings to words, things they understand when they hear it. An aggressive atheist, when hearing the word ‘God’, may hear: “That fictional character who is blamed for a lot of Old Testament deaths and the Crusades.” Another person, from a religious home, may think: “The One who is angry with all my sin and wants to punish me.” The problem is not the word “God”, but how people understand it.)

God named the human race “Man.” Then, the male sinfully appropriated the name for himself, calling the woman by other names. By the time Genesis was written, this sinful way of thinking about the term ’ådåm was established to such a degree that, writing in Hebrew, God used the word ’ådåm in two ways: The way God intended (for the whole race) and the meaning that sinful men gave the word: As a word for males.

On the other hand, the female was named “life causer”. (The meaning of Eve.) This gives a hint of female leadership: We die in Adam, but get life in Eve.

Stripping away the biases

Did Paul find “women keep silent” preposterous? (Part 2)

Different views on how to understand 1 Cor 14:34-35

Possibility1) The complementarian view: Women should indeed keep silent.

It is the simplest interpretation of those 2 verses, in isolation. But it runs into lots of trouble when compared to the rest of the passage. It seems to contradict “all have a psalm/ doctrine/ tongue/ revelation/ interpretation, all (psalms/ doctrines/ tongues/ revelations) should be used to edify (the gathered believers)… All could prophesy… Desire to prophesy… Forbid not to speak…” All these texts are part of the context, as verse 26-40 is the passage this is a part of. It also contradicts some other evidence of women as teachers, apostles and gospel workers in the New Testament.

I have never seen any complementarian effort to reconcile these apparent contradictions. Their view doesn’t explain the “What! Did the word of God go out from only you? Or did it reach only you?” following right after :34-35 either.

It also has the glaring problem that nothing in the Old Testament law says it. Paul knew OT law, so why is the words “as the law also say” in the passage?

Possibility 2) “Silence” is meant only in a certain regard

Paul tells tongue speakers to be silent – unless an interpreter is present. (1 Cor 14:28) They could speak again later – when there is an interpreter.