DOCSLIB.ORG

Chapter 1, Eve

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Chapter 1, Eve 12 Extraordinary Women – Chapter 1, Eve Responding in Prayer Heavenly Father, protect us against the lies and deceitful tricks of the enemy. Help us to discern clearly lie from truth. Help us to reject and overturn the lies that we have accepted as truth in the past. You alone know all the ways in which we have struggled with sin in our lives. We confess to You today that we are sinners in need of Your forgiveness. With a deep awareness that we cannot be our own savior and that Jesus alone is Savior, we ask You today to forgive us of our sins and to set us free from them. We ask this in our Lord Jesus’ name. Amen. Review 1. If you met Eve on the first day of her creation and then were asked to describe her to a friend, what descriptive words would you use? DISCUSSION: Are these the attributes we have today for female perfection in our culture? In the church? 2. What do we know about Eve from Scripture? List a couple of facts. DISCUSSION: To what extent do we tend to focus on physical and outer attributes and facts rather than the spiritual or inner attributes of a person? Where does “relationship” identity fit into a woman’s description, e.g., the identity that might be drawn from the words “sister,” “wife,” “mother,” “grandmother,” “friend”? 3. Identify four main truths we can draw from the way in which Eve was created. DISCUSSION: Which of these four lessons is most intriguing to challenging to you and why? 4. What is Satan’s modus operandi in temptation? DISCUSSION: The serpent promised Eve she would not die, her eyes would be opened, she would be like God, and that she would know good and evil. In what ways does Satan promise us these things today? How enticing are the human desires to live forever, understand all mysteries, have the power and the glory of God and have a full knowledge of both good and evil? Why are these things impossible for a human being? Why do they appear to be good things? 5. In what ways do people today try to cover the shame and guilt brought on by their sins? DISCUSSION: Why are each of these attempts to sidestep built and shame inadequate? Why is the only adequate response to our own sin? 6. In what ways did the curses of the serpent and Adam also impact Eve? DISCUSSION: What unique responsibilities are placed upon husbands and fathers? How might a wife help her husband fulfill his responsibilities before God? To what degree must a woman guard against blaming a husband for her own sin or the unrighteousness that might exist in her family? 7. In which four areas could Eve still take comfort and hope after she had sinned? DISCUSSION: Why are each of these attempts to sidestep built and shame inadequate? Why is the only adequate response to our own sin? 1 | P a g e Highlighting the Lesson 1. How do you explain the biblical principle that Adam and Eve were two persons who were truly equal, and yet had a relationship in which Adam was the head and Eve submitted to him? 2. The curse placed on Eve directly impacted her relationship with her husband and children. How can a woman today live free of that curse? 3. In what ways did the curse against the serpent hold a promise for Eve? Lasting Implications 1. Why are the issues of headship and submission in the story of Eve so crucial to our understanding of the gospel today, and especially the issue of Christ’s headship over the redeemed race? 2. In what ways are we each like Eve – guilty of the same sins and responses to our own sin: a. Disobeying God’s commands b. Enticing others to join us in our sin c. Trying to hide from God d. Shifting blame to others 3. In what ways can we live free of the curse? Reflect and Respond Reflect We can easily misunderstand God’s instructions if we rely only on what other people tell us. Ideally, every instruction attributed to God should be supported in Scripture. Identify a specific example when you or someone you know failed to verify the authenticity of a second-hand instruction. Respond How can we best protect ourselves from the vulnerabilities we see in Eve? Reflect How easy is it to give in to a tendency to try to “be God” in another person’s life, especially the lives of our family members and typically in the “name of love”? Respond Is there a situation or relationship in which you need to turn over the full reigns of control to God? In what ways can you do that? 2 | P a g e Bible Connections If you want to search a little deeper, here are some suggested reading/questions. 1. Genesis 20:20-25. In what ways was Eve’s creation totally initiated and accomplished by God? 2. I Corinthians 11:3-9, 14; 14:34-35; I Timothy 2:11-15; Colossians 2:9 and Philippians 2:6. In what ways was women crated to be “subordinate, yet equal”? 3. Genesis 3:1-7 compared to Genesis 2:16-17. In what ways might we be prone to misunderstanding God’s commandments just as Eve apparently did? 4. Genesis 3:4-5. What four things did Satan promise to Eve if she would eat the fruit God had forbidden? 5. Romans 5:12, I Timothy 2:14; and Romans 5:18-19. Why was it Adam’s failure that was so decisive for humanity, rather than Even’s eating of the forbidden fruit. 6. Genesis 3:8-13. What were the three main responses Adam and Eve both had toward their sin? 7. James 1:13-14 and I Timothy 2:14. Why must we take full responsibility for our own sins? 8. Romans 16:20; Hebrews 2:13; 2 John 3:8; and Galatians 4:4. What is the biblical understanding regarding the “crushing” of Satan by Jesus Christ? 3 | P a g e .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • God Gave Adam and Eve a New Son, Seth. Genesis 4:25
    God gave Adam and Eve a new son, Seth. Genesis 4:25 © GCP www.gcp.org Genesis 4 35 OK to photocopy for church and home use God gave Adam and Eve a new son, Seth. Genesis 4:25 Let’s Talk ASK Adam and Eve sinned against God. But God made a promise to take care of their sin. What did God promise? SAY He promised to send a Savior. God had a wonderful plan to send someone many years later from Eve’s family line who would pay for Adam and Eve’s sin and the sin of all God’s people. SAY First, God gave Adam and Eve two sons, Cain and Abel. Abel trusted God, but Cain did not. Cain killed Abel. ASK Some time later, God gave Adam and Eve a new son. What was his name? SAY God gave Adam and Eve a new son named Seth. Many years later, Jesus, God’s promised Savior, was born into Seth’s family line. God always keeps his promises! Let’s Sing and Do ac Bring several baby blankets or towels to class. Give each child a blanket. Do tr k Preschool these motions as you sing to the tune Here We Go Round the Mulberry Bush. 46 Vol. 2 CD 1 God made a promise to Adam and Eve, 2 Adam and Eve had baby Seth, Adam and Eve, Adam and Eve. Baby Seth, baby Seth. God made a promise to Adam and Eve— Adam and Eve had baby Seth— He promised to send a Savior! God would keep his promise! (wave blanket overhead, like a praise banner) (spread blanket, lay picture on it) 3 Through Seth’s family, Jesus came, 4 We believe God’s promises, Jesus came, Jesus came.
    [Show full text]
  • Eve's Answer to the Serpent: an Alternative Paradigm for Sin and Some Implications in Theology
    Calvin Theological Journal 33 (1998) : 399-420 Copyright © 1980 by Calvin Theological Seminary. Cited with permission. Scholia et Homiletica Eve's Answer to the Serpent: An Alternative Paradigm for Sin and Some Implications in Theology P. Wayne Townsend The woman said to the serpent, "We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, but God did say, `You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die. "' (Gen. 3:2-3) Can we take these italicized words seriously, or must we dismiss them as the hasty additions of Eve's overactive imagination? Did God say or mean this when he instructed Adam in Genesis 2:16-17? I suggest that, not only did Eve speak accu- rately and insightfully in responding to the serpent but that her words hold a key to reevaluating the doctrine of original sin and especially the puzzles of alien guilt and the imputation of sin. In this article, I seek to reignite discussion on these top- ics by suggesting an alternative paradigm for discussing the doctrine of original sin and by applying that paradigm in a preliminary manner to various themes in the- ology, biblical interpretation, and Christian living. I seek not so much to answer questions as to evoke new ones that will jar us into a more productive path of the- ological explanation. I suggest that Eve's words indicate that the Bible structures the ideas that we recognize as original sin around the concept of uncleanness.
    [Show full text]
  • Chimpanzees Share Forbidden Fruit Kimberley J
    Chimpanzees Share Forbidden Fruit Kimberley J. Hockings1*, Tatyana Humle2, James R. Anderson1, Dora Biro3, Claudia Sousa4, Gaku Ohashi5, Tetsuro Matsuzawa5 1 Department of Psychology, University of Stirling, Stirling, Scotland, 2 Department of Psychology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, United States of America, 3 Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom, 4 Department of Anthropology, New University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal, 5 Primate Research Institute, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan The sharing of wild plant foods is infrequent in chimpanzees, but in chimpanzee communities that engage in hunting, meat is frequently used as a ‘social tool’ for nurturing alliances and social bonds. Here we report the only recorded example of regular sharing of plant foods by unrelated, non-provisioned wild chimpanzees, and the contexts in which these sharing behaviours occur. From direct observations, adult chimpanzees at Bossou (Republic of Guinea, West Africa) very rarely transferred wild plant foods. In contrast, they shared cultivated plant foods much more frequently (58 out of 59 food sharing events). Sharing primarily consists of adult males allowing reproductively cycling females to take food that they possess. We propose that hypotheses focussing on ‘food-for-sex and -grooming’ and ‘showing-off’ strategies plausibly account for observed sharing behaviours. A changing human-dominated landscape presents chimpanzees with fresh challenges, and our observations suggest that crop-raiding provides adult male chimpanzees at Bossou with highly desirable food commodities that may be traded for other currencies. Citation: Hockings KJ, Humle T, Anderson JR, Biro D, Sousa C, et al (2007) Chimpanzees Share Forbidden Fruit. PLoS ONE 2(9): e886.
    [Show full text]
  • Hawthorne Analysis
    I was left puzzled from our discussion on Wednesday about the metaphor surrounding Rappaccini's Daughter and the Adam and Eve Garden of Eden story. Olga and Lindsay both asserted that Hawthorne's style is to construct blatant and solid-to-a-fault metaphors, and I agree with that conclusion. So if that is true, then how come we had such a difficult time in class coming to a consensus on the roles from Rappaccini's Daughter within the analogy? I had my own opinions on the content of the metaphor and will clarify them here. Adam is a reasonable place to begin: Adam is the original figure of good and of humanity. God brings him into the world and sets him in a good situation for him to be happy. Later, Adam is given a companion whom he loves and cherishes, but who ultimately gives him a gift (as she sees it) that is actually detrimental to him. Giovanni seems to be the Adam within Hawthorne's story - he comes into Padua innocent and bright, young and beautiful, and is situated in a comfortable condition: the apartment and university. However, he is lonely and seeks companionship in Beatrice. Beatrice is the Eve because she is the companion of Giovanni, the one who is his first friend in the world of Padua. She also is the one who gives him a gift which she feels is agreeable. Just as Eve innocently gives Adam the apple, Beatrice gives Giovanni the poisonous cloud and lets it permeate his being. The other clear analogy is the garden.
    [Show full text]
  • How Can Original Sin Be Inherited?
    DEAR FATHER KERPER Michelangelo, The Fall and Expulsion from Garden of Eden. Web Gallery of Art sinned against obedience. But this act How can original represents much more: they actually rejected friendship with God and, even worse, attempted to supplant God as God. sin be inherited? To see this more clearly, we must rewind the Genesis tape back to chapter ear Father Kerper: I’ve always had a huge 1. Here we find that God had created problem with original sin. It seems so unfair. I can the first human beings “in the image of God.” (Genesis 1:27) As such, they understand punishing someone who has broken a immediately enjoyed friendship and law. That’s perfectly just. But why should someone even kinship with God, who had Dwho’s done nothing wrong get punished for what someone else lovingly created them so that they could share everything with Him. did millions of years ago? Though Adam and Eve had everything that human beings could Many people share your understandable In the case of speeding, the possibly enjoy, the serpent tempted reaction against the doctrine of original punishment – say a $200 ticket – is them to seek even more. Recall the sin. As you’ve expressed so well, it does always imposed directly on the specific serpent’s words to Eve: “God knows in indeed seem to violate the basic norms of person who committed an isolated fact that the day you eat it [the forbidden fairness. But it really doesn’t. How so? illegal act. Moreover, the punishment is fruit] your eyes will be opened and you To overcome this charge of unfairness, designed to prevent dangerous and illegal will be like gods.” (Genesis 3:5) we must do two things: first, reconsider behavior by creating terribly unpleasant By eating the forbidden fruit, Adam the meaning of punishment; and second, consequences, namely costly fines and and Eve attempted to seize equality rediscover the social nature – and social eventually the loss of one’s license.
    [Show full text]
  • God Made Eve and Ordained Marriage
    GGOODD MMAADDEE EEVVEE aanndd oorrddaaiinneedd mmaarrrriiaaggee Several thousand years have passed since Adam and Eve became man and wife, but God hasn’t changed what he first instructed mankind regarding marriage in the Bible. Did you know that God was the One who decided that man and woman should marry? In Genesis 2 we find part of the wedding service spoken in many wedding ceremonies today. Men and women and marriage and children are very important to God. Marriage is not just a good idea… it’s a “God Idea”! But some people don’t know or don’t believe what God says about marriage. They say that marriage is something to be tried out to see if it will work—depending upon how you feel about it. Many folks are even suggesting that the idea of marriage is outdated. But what does the Bible say about marriage? Let’s take a look and find out! God decided that Adam needed a wife to help him and to be his companion. Genesis 2:18 The LORD God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.” God decided that Adam should not live alone. - God was his Creator and knew what was best for him. - God didn’t ask Adam what he wanted or thought best. - God made the decision to make a wife for Adam. God loved Adam and wanted him to be complete. - God knew that Adam wouldn’t continue to be happy if he remained alone. - Because God loved Adam and wanted what was best for him, he decided to make a wife for him.
    [Show full text]
  • Chaos and Order, Order and Chaos: the Creation Story As the Story of Human Community
    Chaos and Order, Order and Chaos: The Creation Story as the Story of Human Community James E. Faulconer Extended prolegomenon Along with a number of other contemporary scholars, Walter Brueggemann has asked us to remember that God speaks to us in scripture most often through narrative and storytelling rather than systematic theological exposition. Speaking of the rst chapters of Genesis, he makes the following observation: The story is not explained. It is simply left there with the listening community free to take what can be heard. There is, of course, talk here of sin and evil and death. But it is understated talk. The stakes are too high for reduction to propositions. The story does not want to aid our theologizing. It wants, rather, to catch us in our living. It will permit no escape into theology.1 As Brueggemann says, the story is both concrete and imaginatively open-ended, allowing us the freedom to consider the variety of ways in which present events and those of the story may overlap.2 Scripture calls for a different kind of reading than what we use for a modern history, philosophy, or theology text. I will try to take the substance of Brueggemann’s warning to heart and read scripture differently than I would read a theology text. And I certainly hope not to read it merely as an aid to theologizing. Nevertheless, I will be doing scriptural theology. But I do so precisely because I think that is a kind of theology that can “catch us in our living” by helping us to read differently than we previously have.
    [Show full text]
  • Another Look at Cain: from a Narrative Perspective
    신학논단 제102집 (2020. 12. 31): 241-263 https://doi.org/10.17301/tf.2020.12.102.241 Another Look at Cain: From a Narrative Perspective Wm. J McKinstry IV, MATS Adjunct Faculty, Department of General Education Presbyterian University and Theological Seminary In the Hebrew primeval histories names often carry significant weight. Much etymological rigour has been exercised in determining many of the names within the Bible. Some of the meaning of these names appear to have a consensus among scholars; among others there is less consensus and more contention. Numerous proposals have come forward with varying degrees of convincing (or unconvincing as the case may be) philological arguments, analysis of wordplays, possi- ble textual emendations, undiscovered etymologies from cognates in other languages, or onomastic studies detailing newly discovered names of similarity found in other ancient Semitic languages. Through these robust studies, when applicable, we can ascertain the meanings of names that may help to unveil certain themes or actions of a character within a narrative. For most of the names within the primeval histories of Genesis, the 242 신학논단 제102집(2020) meaning of a name is only one feature. For some names there is an en- compassing feature set: wordplay, character trait and/or character role, and foreshadowing. Three of the four members in the first family in Genesis, Adam, Eve, and Abel, have names that readily feature all the elements listed above. Cain, however, has rather been an exception in this area, further adding to Genesis 4’s enigmaticness in the Hebrew Bible’s primeval history. While three characters (Adam, Eve, and Abel) have names that (1) sound like other Hebrew words, that are (2) sug- gestive of their character or actions and (3) foreshadow or suggest fu- ture events about those characters, the meaning of Cain’s name does not render itself so explicitly to his character or his role in the narrative, at least not to the same degree of immediate conspicuousness.
    [Show full text]
  • PROGRAM NOTES the Classical Master Josef Haydn and The
    Program Notes The Classical master Josef Haydn and the idiosyncratic minimalist Arvo Pärt may seem like a musical odd couple, but this afternoon’s pairing brings to- gether two composers who share some fundamental characteristics. Both are men of a deep personal faith which is often reflected in their music. And both were unafraid to reference contemporary events in their music. Haydn’s title Missa in Tempore Belli (Mass in a Time of War) was his own, and refers to the Napoleonic wars, which were played out in large measure on Austrian soil. Pärt dedicated his 2008 Symphony No. 4 “Los Angeles” to Mikhail Khodoro- vsky, the Russian oil magnate, philanthropist, and vocal critic of the Putin government, whose imprisonment was widely thought to be politically mo- tivated, and his selection of the text for Adam’s Lament is his response to the ongoing tensions between Islamic and Christian worlds. Estonian-born Arvo Pärt (b. 1935) reinvented his compositional style after making an early name for himself as an avant garde composer. His early com- positions were fiercely atonal and serial, but he also experimented with aleatoric music, where he might indicate the range of pitches for a given voice but not specify discrete pitches, rhythms or durations, and collage music, in which he layered phrases of music from composers like Bach onto his own 12- tone music. The premiere of Pärt’s 1968 Credo, a choral collage piece, caused something of an uproar. The use of the liturgical text had not been approved by the Soviet composers’ union and the work was subsequently banned in the Soviet Union.
    [Show full text]
  • EVE E-50Z User Manual Rev
    User Manual EVE E-50Z 1. Before You Begin ....................................................................... 1 What Is Included ........................................................................................... 1 Unpacking Instructions.................................................................................. 1 Claims ............................................................................................................................ 1 Text Conventions .......................................................................................... 1 Symbols ........................................................................................................ 1 Disclaimer ..................................................................................................... 1 Product at a Glance ...................................................................................... 2 Safety Notes.................................................................................................. 2 2. Introduction ................................................................................ 3 Product Overview.......................................................................................... 3 Product Dimensions...................................................................................... 4 3. Setup ........................................................................................... 5 AC Power...................................................................................................... 5
    [Show full text]
  • January 2014 Ensign
    OLD TESTAMENT PROPHETS ADAM “Few persons in all eternity have been more directly involved in the plan of salvation . than the man Adam.” 1 ost people know me as the first Because we chose to eat the fruit, God knew that the Fall would Mman to live on the earth, but we had to leave the garden and God’s happen—He sent Jesus Christ to many don’t know that I had a special presence. This is known as the Fall. atone for our sins and overcome responsibility before I came to the We became mortal, experienced both death so that we and our children earth. In the premortal existence, I led the good and the bad of life, and could return to Him.11 God’s armies against Satan’s armies brought children to in the War in Heaven,2 and I helped earth.10 Jesus Christ create the earth.3 I was known as Michael then, which means one “who is like God.” 4 God chose me to be the first man on the earth and placed me in the Garden of Eden, a paradise with many types of plants and ani- mals. He breathed into me “the breath of life” 5 and gave me a new name: Adam.6 God told my wife, Eve, and me not to eat the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.7 If we didn’t eat the fruit, we could stay in the garden and live forever, but we wouldn’t be able to “progress by experiencing opposition in mortality” 8 or have children.9 The choice was ours to make.
    [Show full text]
  • The Forbidden Fruit and the Tree of Knowledge: an Inquiry Into the Legal History of American Marijuana Prohibition
    VIRGINIA LAW REVIEW VOLUME 56 OCTOBER 1970 NUMBER 6 THE FORBIDDEN FRUIT AND THE TREE OF KNOWLEDGE: AN INQUIRY INTO THE LEGAL HISTORY OF AMERICAN MARIJUANA PROHIBITION Richard ]. Bonnie* & Cbarles H. Whitebread, Il** Mr. Snell. What is the bill? Mr. Rayburn. It has something to do with something that is called marihuana. I believe it is a narcotic of some kind. Colloquy on the House floor prior to passage of the Marihuana Tax Act. • Assistant Professor of Law, University of Virginia. B.A., 1966, Johns Hopkins University; LL.B., 1969, University of Virginia . •• Assistant Professor of Law, University of Virginia. A.B., 1965, Princeton Uni­ versity; LL.B., 1968, Yale University. We wish to express our sincere appreciation to the students who assisted us in the preparation of the tables at Appendix A. Because the drug statutes of the several states are particularly confusing and difficult to find, and because so many jurisdictions have recently changed their drug laws, the preparation of the chart required long, tedious work which so many were kind enough to perform. To them, our most sincere thanks. We should like to thank especially Michael A. Cohen, John F. Kuether, W. Tracey Shaw, Alan K. Smith, and Allan J. Tanenbaum, all students at the University of Vir­ ginia School of Law, whose research assistance and tireless effort were invaluable. \Ve are particularly indebted to Professor Jerry Mandel who supplied us with much of the raw data used in the historical case studies in this Article. In his excel­ lent article on drug statistics in the Stanford Law Review, Problems 'With Official Drug Statistics, 2] STAN.
    [Show full text]