-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Are Women More Easily Deceived Than Men?
- Thread starter Ulsterman
- Start date
Paul of Eugene
New Member
I think that being easily decieved is a human thing and perhaps men are more easily decieved in one arena and women more easily decieved in another arena.Originally posted by MaryKay:
I believe that usually women are more easily decieved than men ...Oh my, it hurts BAD to say that.Can I take it back? Please Please. Mk :
I think this is the kernal of the matter. Men are, I believe, more susceptible to sexual temptations than women. That is not to say women cannot be tempted in that area. Women are perhaps more readily deceived in SPIRITUAL matters. That is not to say that men cannot be deceived, nor is it a suggestion that ALL women are easily deceived. It is a generalisation, resulting in a general prohibition of females from any teaching ministry which overrules men.
Whatever 'part of you' that is, it must not be your brain, since the question is herein posed. </font>[/QUOTE]Of course it's my brain! My comment was alluding to the fact that I find the question, if taken seriously rather than in jest, deeply offensive and insulting to women, and I cannot believe that some posters are answering this question in the affirmative
Yours in Christ
Matt
As the questioner I can assure you that I had and have no intention of offending or insulting women. It is interesting that none of the women who have responded have expressed offence or insult, and a number of them have answered in the affirmative!
Matt, do you think it is insulting and offensive to men to suggest they are more susceptible to sexual temptations than women?
I'm sure you did not intendyour question to be insulting, but I found it to be so with regard for example to my wife - in expressing my anger, I am in some senses defending her honour, which I consider to have been in some degree attacked. The same could be said for my other female Christian relatives, none of whom, I can assure you, show any signs of 'spiritual deception', least of all my wife.
As to your sexual question, yes, those with a higher sex drive are more likely to be sexually tempted and, yes, such individuals tend to be young men, although not exclusively so (and whether that equates to 'deception' of some kind is very much a moot point). But that is a product of biology and applies equally to Christian and heathen alike. Your question, OTOH, is directed towards the spiritual condition of people, and thereby goes to the issue of character; that's what got me riled
Yours in Christ
Matt
As to your sexual question, yes, those with a higher sex drive are more likely to be sexually tempted and, yes, such individuals tend to be young men, although not exclusively so (and whether that equates to 'deception' of some kind is very much a moot point). But that is a product of biology and applies equally to Christian and heathen alike. Your question, OTOH, is directed towards the spiritual condition of people, and thereby goes to the issue of character; that's what got me riled
Yours in Christ
Matt
Brontefiend
New Member
I believe that if women are more easily decieved than men, it is because we haven't done our job to teach girls critical thinking skills. They are just as capable. There do seem to be gaps, but I think they have far more to do with societal expectations and ideas.
Matt, I too am married and I have three daughters. I think you are taking this too personally. This is a question about women in general, and not your wife or mine in particular. It is a question raised on the strength of 1 Tim 2:11-14. It is a theological question, not a psychological question. It does not infer ALL women are deceived, or even that all are more easily deceived, but that in the spiritual realm they are more open to deception as Eve was in the garden.
Given that Jesus first revealed Himself as Messiah to a woman, that He healed women. That He taught women (Luk 10:38ff). That women ministered to Him. That His first resurrection appearance was to a woman, I think it is safe to say women are valued by God.
In Christ male and female are equals, they share all the same blessings of knowing the Lord. “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Galatians 3:28). But having said that, a Jew is still distinct from a Gentile, a slave from his master, and a man is still distinct from a woman, and that in God's order of things a woman is not to have authority over men, nor to teach men, because, it would appear, women (as a whole) are more susceptible to spiritual deception.
Your statement, although general, nevertheless does have personal implications - for my wife, for yours and for your daughters; I'm accordingly not sure how else to take it. I think you are missing the context of this passage; some posters have already correctly pointed out that the verse refers to one woman only, 'Eve', and that therefore to construe from this that all women are more prone to spiritual deception than men is erroneous. The Scripture also merely says that Eve was deceived 'first' (a refutation of the gnostic claim that she gained 'knowledge' 'first'); this means that Adam also was (equally) deceived, he just wasn't deceived 'first'.
Yours in Christ
Matt
Yours in Christ
Matt
Forgive me, Matt, but it seems to be that the reference to Eve in the context is an explanation as to why all women are not to teach nor usurp authority over men. If Eve was by a quirk of history only the first to be decieved, without implications to the female gender, then Paul's argument in the context is invalid. Whether we like it or not the text is plain "But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression." (1 Timothy 2:11-14).
Paul's command to all women would prove to be a nonsense if Eve was no more deceived than Adam.
Again, I reiterate this in no way impinges upon the dignity of women. Is it insulting to tell a woman she ought to be in submission to her husband as the spiritual head of the home? Why then is it insulting or offensive to tell her she must be under the authority of male oversight in the church? It is simply a matter of order, based upon the distinctions between male and female.
But the whole passage is about the Scriptural refutation of the gnostic heresy Timothy was faced with, not about the prohibition on women teaching: the gnostics were saying "Hey,Eve ate from the Tree of Knowledge first, so women as daughters of Eve are possessed of greater spiritual knowledge than men and therefore we women are superiorly qualified and entitled to teach men"; Paul says in response, "No, you're wrong; Eve wasn't endowed with knowledge first, she was deceived first, therefore those who assert this cannot teach or have authority but should learn first instead". That's what it is about
Yours in Christ
Matt
Yours in Christ
Matt
<<I believe that if women are more easily decieved than men, it is because we haven't done our job to teach girls critical thinking skills. They are just as capable. There do seem to be gaps, but I think they have far more to do with societal expectations and ideas.>>
You are right on. Actually, Eve did more logical thinking than Adam. Why would God want his children to be ignorant of good and evil? When she TOUCHED the fruit (which Adam had LIED to her BY THE TOUCHING would cause immediate death) she didn't die, she thought the serpent was right.Had she been told the truth she would have been stronger and would not have eaten the fruit.
Good logic says God would want you to know good and evil. She ate the fruit and sure enough. She gained the knowledge of good and evil. Therefore, she offered it to Adam.
Adam is a foreshadow of Jesus. Adam's bride came out of his side. The Bride of Christ, the church, was created from the water and blood from Jesus' side. Adam died for his bride knowing she was disobedient just as Jesus died for His while she was in sin.
The death was immediate. Just as God said it would be. Thinking themselves righteous, they suddenly saw themselves as they really were - naked. Sinful and naked. When Adam heard God walking in the garden he hid himself. Not because he had gained the knowledge of good and evil. But because he was naked. He had tried to clothe themself but just as man's efforts to cover their sins are like fifthy rags, he saw himself as he really was.
Once God curses something it is forever cursed. God never cursed Adam and Eve. He cursed the ground. He punished them for disobedience. But he never cursed them. Adam was created sin. Flesh is sin. Sin is not handed down through the blood. No where does it say that. Sin is in the flesh. It says that over and over.
Adam was created sin. Adam and Eve were sin before they gained the knowledge of good and evil. Sin was in the beginning with Lucifer. In the first verse you see confusion in God's creation. Satan is the author of confusion. That is when sin entered.
By one man (spiritual man - Lucifer) sin entered. If it entered when Adam ate the fruit --- could Eve have continued eating all day long and sin would have never entered? Because Eve, a woman, ate first. It say by one man -- not by two.
Nudity is a sin. Just because they were ignorant of sin does not mean they were innocent of sin. God is fighting sin with sin (Adam and Eve). They were both naked (sin) in their creation.
Because the devil thought God did not want them eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil; that is the tree he focused on.Once they gained the knowledge of good and evil God went back into heaven. What He really did not want was for sinful Adam and Eve to eat from the tree of eternal physical life.
You are right on. Actually, Eve did more logical thinking than Adam. Why would God want his children to be ignorant of good and evil? When she TOUCHED the fruit (which Adam had LIED to her BY THE TOUCHING would cause immediate death) she didn't die, she thought the serpent was right.Had she been told the truth she would have been stronger and would not have eaten the fruit.
Good logic says God would want you to know good and evil. She ate the fruit and sure enough. She gained the knowledge of good and evil. Therefore, she offered it to Adam.
Adam is a foreshadow of Jesus. Adam's bride came out of his side. The Bride of Christ, the church, was created from the water and blood from Jesus' side. Adam died for his bride knowing she was disobedient just as Jesus died for His while she was in sin.
The death was immediate. Just as God said it would be. Thinking themselves righteous, they suddenly saw themselves as they really were - naked. Sinful and naked. When Adam heard God walking in the garden he hid himself. Not because he had gained the knowledge of good and evil. But because he was naked. He had tried to clothe themself but just as man's efforts to cover their sins are like fifthy rags, he saw himself as he really was.
Once God curses something it is forever cursed. God never cursed Adam and Eve. He cursed the ground. He punished them for disobedience. But he never cursed them. Adam was created sin. Flesh is sin. Sin is not handed down through the blood. No where does it say that. Sin is in the flesh. It says that over and over.
Adam was created sin. Adam and Eve were sin before they gained the knowledge of good and evil. Sin was in the beginning with Lucifer. In the first verse you see confusion in God's creation. Satan is the author of confusion. That is when sin entered.
By one man (spiritual man - Lucifer) sin entered. If it entered when Adam ate the fruit --- could Eve have continued eating all day long and sin would have never entered? Because Eve, a woman, ate first. It say by one man -- not by two.
Nudity is a sin. Just because they were ignorant of sin does not mean they were innocent of sin. God is fighting sin with sin (Adam and Eve). They were both naked (sin) in their creation.
Because the devil thought God did not want them eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil; that is the tree he focused on.Once they gained the knowledge of good and evil God went back into heaven. What He really did not want was for sinful Adam and Eve to eat from the tree of eternal physical life.
???
Yours in Christ
Matt
Yours in Christ
Matt
D
dianetavegia
Guest
Copen, your statment of faith says: The truth in scripture has no contradictions and no ignored scripture.
YET.. you are adding to scripture and claiming that Adam lied to Eve to deceive Eve.
If you think you have scripture to support your assertion that Adam lied to Eve, please post it.
Copen, you also say you don't attend church because there is 'none close enough to attend'. FIND ANY Baptist church and get some study under a good Bible preaching pastor!
Diane
YET.. you are adding to scripture and claiming that Adam lied to Eve to deceive Eve.
Nowhere does the Bible say Adam told Eve if she touched the fruit she'd die. What we do see from scripture is that Eve said that's what would happen. Was she exaggerating? Was she assuming? We don't know but to outright insist that Adam LIED before sin entered them... is adding to the Bible and is dangerous.
If you think you have scripture to support your assertion that Adam lied to Eve, please post it.
Nudity is NOT a sin! Lustful thoughts are a sin!
God created perfect creatures! God said it was 'very good'. To imply God created Adam and Eve as sinful creatures is to imply God is impotent!
Copen, you also say you don't attend church because there is 'none close enough to attend'. FIND ANY Baptist church and get some study under a good Bible preaching pastor!
Diane
Brontefiend
New Member
Y'know, sometimes I like to walk around my house in the buff (when I'm home alone) after a shower. I really don't feel like this is a sin issue.
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
UM,
Sadly this happens on 99% of the threads
Sadly this happens on 99% of the threads
But do you accept that I accept the gnostic interpretation and that is accordingly going to colour my take on this passage ref women teaching and in authority etc
Yours in Christ
Matt
Yours in Christ
Matt