How I Became a Feminist - well, I get it anyhow

New Testament Review and comparison. The conclusion to a contextual study of Genesis Chapter 3, 1-7

NKJV - 1Ti 2:14 -And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.

NLT - 1Ti 2:14 -And it was the woman, not Adam, who was deceived by Satan, and sin was the result.

NIV - 1Ti 2:14 -And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.


Note that in all three popular versions that

1) they do not state that Eve deceived Adam. This is consistant with Genesis 3.

2) The NLT is incorrect - Adam was deceived by Satan. The NLT is inconsistent with Genesis 3.

The popular implication of the text of Gen.3 combined with 1 Tim. 2:14 is that Eve deceived Adam. By his silence and submitting to her offer to eat of the fruit he took a submissive role. The idea that she gave him the fruit implies that she deceived him.

But the reality is clear. They both were deceived. First Adam who was responsible for the whole garden. In this deception of his heart he was teamed with Satan to allow Eve to test the fruit from the framework of her own state of deception.

Adam sinned first. And it was for his sin that the New Testament said Christ had come.

So both Adam and Eve were deceived by Satan. The context of the Genesis narrative informs the silence of Adam who was present and therefore engaged.

Both Adam and Eve were enticed at the notion of autonomy from God - to be His peer. The result of their acting on this (as individual children of God) was that they received limited autonomy from God (they received a degree of what they wanted). Adam would be called to provide fro his family and Eve would conceive without divine protection from the pain of it.

Together they would discover community without God. That was the moment when power and politics was formed. And this has been our lot since.

See Text:


Gen 3:15
And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

Gen 3:16
Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire [shall be] to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

Gen 3:17
And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed [is] the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat [of] it all the days of thy life;


Adam listened to the CONVERSATION of his wife (present and engaged...though silent) no where does the text say Eve said "here Adam, eat this."

So folks of the faith, this is important to know as far as reflecting on how our theology has informed our understanding and attitudes. The church for two millennium has mixed the post-fall reality with the pre-fall condition. The church has indoctrinated in one form or another that 'Adam was deceived by Eve.' and 'Adam gave up his headship over Eve, becoming a passive male.'

This understanding has led to much misery for women for literally thousands of years. No one having time to be clear on the fact of equality before God as laid out in the Genesis narrative. The narrative being warped and proclaimed from the male dominated church. This, as explained later in Genesis, only brought natural rebellion from the other now dominated (rather than loved and respected according to plan) group...women.

So in conclusion and for illustration I present a small tidbit from my own life:

Child 1: "She did it first."

Child 2: "That's not true, he did."

Father: "That's not the point...in fact...it doesn't even matter. You are treating each other badly, and that hurts me too."

Additional Thinking

Some additional thinking on these two areas of scripture - that interested me.

1) They actually can be used by serious feminist oriented theologians. These are quite proper reviews of the narratives and should be promoted. I hope one of those theologians swing by and pick up on these. The improper interpretation of these texts were foundational to negative ecclesiastical communities, to women, for centuries.

The basis of their argument would be based in the reality of the text rather than the often promoted political intentions that are wrongly applied to the text. Or in some cases - work to try and make the text irrelevant.

2) Technically speaking - Adam murdered his wife and then committed suicide. It just didn't happen in the moment.

FINAL: GEN. - Contextual Study of Chapter 3, 1-7

Gen 3:1 NOW the serpent was more cunning than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said to the woman, "Has God indeed said, 'You shall not eat of every tree of the garden'?"


Satan draws on God's words in the form of a question.


Gen 3:2 And the woman said to the serpent, "We may eat the fruit of the trees of the garden;
Gen 3:3 "but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God has said, 'You shall not eat it, nor shall you touch it, lest you die.'"


Eve answers imperfectly as God did not add they could not touch it. That seems to have been something of her own planning.


Gen 3:4 Then the serpent said to the woman, "You will not surely die.


Satan brings God's word into question conversationally. He lies. Adam (silent throughout) and Eve find themselves in a discussion of the validity of God's word.


Gen 3:5 "For God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."


Satan now has projected the very thing that he was about - the thing that got him kicked out of heaven...pride. Adam is silent in this text but present. He is already entertaining the idea that Gods word can be revisited for interpetation and clarification. Now he is presented with the possibility of being God. He is silent but present. Satans propsal is a gamble. Adam knows that God said he would die. But Satan suggests that he will not die AND he will be like God.

Adam allows for this new interpretation to be tested. If Eve eats the fruit and dies - he will surely not eat of the fruit. If Eve does not die then he can be like God and will eat of the fruit.


Gen 3:6 So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree desirable to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate. She also gave to her husband with her, and he ate.

Gen 3:7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves coverings.


Because Adam is silent in the text no one generally wants to speculate what he might have been thinking. However, If you stay within the context of the narrative you can see that all these things are factual.

- Satan brings God's word into question conversationally. He lies.

- Adam is silent in this text but present

- he is presented with the possibility of being God

- Adam knows that God said he would die.

- Satan suggests that he will not die AND he will be like God

- If Eve eats and does not die - then Satan is correct in his statement "You will not surely die."

- If Eve does not die, in the context of the narrative, then it is logically good for Adam to eat the fruit as well

- Adam did eat

FINAL: JOB - a contextual study of Chapter 2, 9-11

Some things to note in general:
Job is not the hero, God is.

Some things to note in paticular:
the one thing Job desired most was to die. And that is the one thing God would not allow. In the end of the narrative we see that God was focused all along on the heart of Job. He was not interested, at this point in Job's life, with his deeds or words.

All his kids are dead

All his servants are dead

All his camels, donleys, and oxen are stolen

Now it is down to him.

Job 2:5
"But stretch out Your hand now, and touch his bone and his flesh, and he will surely curse You to Your face!"

Job 2:6
And the LORD said to Satan, "Behold, he is in your hand, but spare his life."

Here we see that Job will not die. This will become the greatest evil that Job will experience.

Satan suggested the following to God "But now, stretch out Your hand and touch all that he has, and he will surely curse You to Your face!" (1:11)

Job 2:7
So Satan went out from the presence of the LORD, and struck Job with painful boils from the sole of his foot to the crown of his head.

Job 2:8
And he took for himself a potsherd with which to scrape himself while he sat in the midst of the ashes.


Job 2:9
Then his wife said to him, "Do you still hold fast to your integrity? Curse God and die!"

At this point Job's wife was externalizing her feelings. This evident in the text. Feelings she knew were also her husbands. He was known as a great man...but she knew him as a man, one who lost everything and filled with pain inside and out. She could not hold back her honest thoughts. She was truthful and asked her husband to be true as well.

Job 2:10
But he said to her, "You speak as one of the foolish women speaks. Shall we indeed accept good from God, and shall we not accept adversity?" In all this Job did not sin with his lips.

Here we see the text is specific that Job did not sin with his lips. We know that a person sins in his heart. This detailed editorial given in the text is redundant and is meant to make a point. The point is that Job was using what some might call today 'Godly words'. Thes are used to mask truthful emotions that that might give evidence of a fear, doubt, even hate.

Job 2:11
Now when Job's three friends heard of all this adversity that had come upon him, each one came from his own place--Eliphaz the Temanite, Bildad the Shuhite, and Zophar the Naamathite. For they had made an appointment together to come and mourn with him, and to comfort him.


We see the whole narrative that Job could not see. Because he did not heed his wife's advice God could not enter into the discussion he desired to have with Job. He would have to suffer the 'help' of his friends for the next 35 chapters. (ever experience that?)

But finally, his sinless 'lips' mentioned in 2:10 can no longer hold in the truth of his self-rightous heart. And God can enter into conversation with him. And have a real heart to heart. This was the intent of God all along. To reveal Jobs heart and reason with him concerning its condition.

Remember that He held two meetings for this specific pupose.

Job 1:6. 2:1 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came among them.

Job 38:1
THEN the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said:
Job 38:2
"Who is this who darkens counsel
By words without knowledge?
Job 38:3
Now prepare yourself like a man;
I will question you, and you shall answer Me.


Now, will you read this in a popular commentary (or any)? Will you consider that Job's wife was not evil? I don't know, maybe not. Will this understanding help you consider the trappings of your own heart? Will it help you to trust that God is not a bully and can take, wants to hear, anything you feel that is true? I hope so. He really is love.

Contextual Theology

Okay. I am, I think, creating a new discipline of theology. Much theology includes contextual consideration. But not enough to my mind. The scope (or periscope to be technical) of text that is studied today sometimes takes current accepted theology as the context. However, it is known that the Bible is its own best commentary. This fact will drive the study of two important areas of scripture (to start).

1) Gen. 2 - what really happened in the garden. What 'they' don't want you to know because...no, I don't have a clue why it has not been interpreted this way.

2) Job - why the book would have been greatly shortened if Job had only listened to his wife.

The goals of the upcoming study are as follows - A) edify the body for increased understanding and faith. B) continuous personal activity to help me avoid writing fiction...