Kruse Kronicle

Adam as head of the family

—

by

mwkruse
in ,

From Women in Ministry (Cheryl Schatz):  Adam as head of the family

It is common for hierarchists to say that Adam was Eve’s head not because he was her source, but because he had an authority over her. While the teaching that Adam was Eve’s ruler before the fall of man is unsubstantiated, the fact that Adam was the source of Eve is foundational to the doctrine of the kinsman redeemer.

Let’s see if we can draw out the important connection regarding Adam’s headship and the new head of the church, the Lord Jesus Christ. Adam was the first human creation and from his body Eve was created. ….

From here, Cheryl makes her case using a series of cool diagrams. (I love charts and diagrams.)  Good stuff!

As I was reading this, I was thinking about 1 Cor 11:3, which some believe was a creedal statement:

But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the husband is the head of his wife, and God is the head of Christ.

Said more theologically:

Christ in creation originated man. The husband (Adam) originated the wife (Eve) . God originated the new man, Christ Jesus.

 

Comments

6 responses to “Adam as head of the family”

  1. John Radcliffe Avatar
    John Radcliffe

    Michael,
    I have found your contributions in comments on a recent topic on “Better Bibles Blog” very helpful, but I am less impressed by your apparent unquestioning agreement with Cheryl’s theory.
    It is very ingenious; but for it to “work” (i.e. be a possible explanation of the biblical data) we would have to assume that either (a) Eve was sinless; or (b) a human being’s moral nature is inherited exclusively from his or her father.
    As (a) plainly contradicts Scripture (e.g. Romans 3:23), I would be interested to know what biblical evidence there is to support (b).
    Kind regards, John

    Reply
  2. Michael Kruse Avatar
    Michael Kruse

    Hi John,
    I have not investigated this matter and I am not fully endorsing it or dismissing it.
    She wrote in her third paragraph:
    “Although Eve was deceived and she sinned, Adam sinned willfully without being deceived and he, by his rebellion, was charged with bringing sin into the world.”
    So I am not clear how you came to the conclusion that she was saying Eve is sinless.

    Reply
  3. John Radcliffe Avatar
    John Radcliffe

    I meant that unless my option (b) was true, Eve would have to have been sinless to avoid transmitting her sinful nature to her descendants. I think more was involved in Christ’s conception than just the avoidance of a human father’s genes.

    Reply
  4. Michael Kruse Avatar
    Michael Kruse

    John, like I say, I have not investigated in detail what is being said here. I think what we are dealing with is symbolism, not biology and physical inheritance of the sin nature. If I sent an American flag up my pole that had green and white stripes with and a blue field containng 50 circles instead of stars, you might see some similarities but you would not recognize it as an American flag. Thus, getting the symbols right about what is symoblized by Jesus being the new Adam is critical. In a preliterate culture these metaphors and symbols were aboslutely critical for communication of theological truths.
    I know from other studies of M.E. cutlure that most folks do not have “identity crises” like we do in the West. You are from a family and a clan. That IS your identity. Whatever you do or don’t do reflects direcetly on your family or clan. Consequently, clarity about origins (your head) is critical for identity. So while I have not fully investigated what Cheryl writes about here, it does on the surface seem to fit with other things I have learned about the culture.
    If this doesn’t get at your concern you could post a comment to her. I’d be interested to see her response.

    Reply
  5. John Radcliffe Avatar
    John Radcliffe

    Michael, as I said in my initial comment, I came here via a link from the B B Blog: I then just followed the link in this post. When I returned to read the rest of your post I kept expecting a “but …” to appear – but it never did, which surprised me (hence my comment). I have no desire to go looking for an argument, so I’ll just thank you for the courtesy of your responses (and again for your helpful comments elsewhere) and leave it there.

    Reply
  6. Michael Kruse Avatar
    Michael Kruse

    Thank you John.
    I do a couple of things with this blog. One is to reflect on issues that are of interest to me. The other major thing is news aggregation. I don’t fully endorse what I link here unless I explicitly say so. Sometimes I link stuff I completely disagree with (I though I usually say so.)
    In this I case I thought Cheryl articulately described some things I have not seen laid out quite the way she did. On the surface I don’t seem much that gives me pause but I also have not studied this topic in any depth so I can’t endorse it. Part of the reason for linking was to see what take others might have who and that is what you have offered. My intention was not to champion or defend her position but rather use it as good launch point for discussion.
    I am glad you stopped by and thanks again for your kind words of affirmation!

    Reply

Leave a Reply to Michael KruseCancel reply

Discover more from Kruse Kronicle

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading