Critical Reasoning Of Sin And The Serpent

The serpent eventually persuades Eve to eat from the “Tree of Knowledge”. After she eats from it, she has Adam eat from it. Shortly after, they finally notice they are naked and become self conscious and cover up. God then asks about what they have done and Eve blames Adam, while Adam blames the Serpent. God curses them, and makes Eve suffer through labor and banishes both of them from the Garden of Eden.

Towards the end of ‘On the Equality of the Sexes’, Murray specifically invokes the story of Adam and Eve, a story used for centuries to depict women as the sinners, to turn the argument against itself and argue that Adam, or the men, are the real sinners in the Bible, as Adam knowingly breaks the rules while Eve was innocently deceived by the serpent. “Adam could not plead the same deception,” says Murray, “nor ought we to admire his superiour strength, or wonder at his sagacity”, implying that people overestimate the skills of men while dismissing the intellect of women as commonplace. The bigger takeaway from Murray’s invocation of Adam and Eve is that it shows the audience that she is trying to make her argument more relatable by putting gender equality in the framework of the Bible, a piece of work that was not only a religious text, but a way of life for most people in Murray’s time. By analyzing the Bible through a feminist lens and swapping the roles of Adam and Eve, Murray saved women’s reputation as the repenting sinners, but in mentioning the Bible to justify her point, Murray ultimately retreats back to the practice of relying on others’ words to make her ideas worthy of public consumption.

to scatter your enemy, to drive him before you,to see his cities reduced to ashes, to see those who love him shrouded in tears,and to gather into your bosom his wives and daughters." Genghis Khan, much like the Hebrew Bible during certain points, regards women as objects. However, to write the Hebrew Bible off as fully misogynistic would not do the ancient texts justice. From Genesis to Judges 2, the Hebrew Bible objectifies women, uses them as scapegoats, but during certain points rises them to the level of highly admired Prophets and warriors. This essay attempts to explore the various undertones of femininity depicted throughout the Hebrew Bible.

The Hebrew or Israelite’s (HoI) book of Genesis (2.5-3) and the Pandora Myth in the Greek poet Hesiod’s Work and Days both include the creation of Men and Women. In each of these works, this creation plays a significant role in showing the relationship between human beings and gods (or God) in that culture. The order of creation (Man Vs Women) indicates the importance one sex has over the other. In the book of Genesis (2.5-3) and Work and Days, Men are created before women towards the beginning of creation. However, the basis on why women are created indicates the importance of women in HoI and Greek cultures. In the book of Genesis (2.5-3) woman is created to be a companion for the lonely man, but plays an important role helping humans become more human like. In contrast, the story of Work and Days tells us women are created to punish man and are the root of all evil. The process in how women are created also indicates their importance within these cultures. In Genesis, the woman is created from a man’s rib, while in Work and Days the woman is created out of clay and the “gifts” of many gods. Lastly, how the gods (or God) treats man, preceding creation, may also indicate some insight to their relationships. In Genesis, we see God worry for man’s well being, while in Works and Days man is being punished for something they didn’t do.

With few exceptions, our male dominated society has traditionally feared, repressed, and stymied the growth of women. As exemplified in history, man has always enjoyed a superior position. According to Genesis in the Old Testament, the fact that man was created first has led to the perception that man should rule. However, since woman was created from man’s rib, there is a strong argument that woman was meant to work along side with man as an equal partner. As James Weldon Johnson’s poem, “Behold de Rib,” clearly illustrates, if God had intended for woman to be dominated, then she would have been created from a bone in the foot, but “he

In the Hebrew Bible, the Book of Genesis and the Greek play Medea, by Euripides, contain female characters that can be seen as complex and have significance and meaning in the text. There are many interpretations involving the female characters, some characters may be portrayed as weak and irrational or strong-willed and wise. I will argue that, women are portrayed in the Hebrew Bible and Medea as irrational and senseless, in order for the men to be portrayed as superior and for women to be seen as inferior. This idea of the female characters being irrational and senseless can be seen in Genesis 4, Genesis 18, Genesis 29, and throughout the Medea play.

The Hebrew prophets are filled with varied imagery and language, from the colorful language of the visions Ezekiel’s Temple (Ez. 40-48), to the literary techniques of judgement oracles (Isa. 13), to the laments of Jeremiah (Jer. 12). However, no other rhetorical device should cause its audiences, both original and modern, to squirm with discomfort more than the prophetic metaphors that speak negatively of feminine sexuality and propagate misogynistic abuse towards women. These metaphors, graphic and violent, often portray the people of Israel as dishonored, sexually promiscuous women who have shamed their husbands. As an African-American woman and Old Testament scholar, Renita J. Weems deals with these difficult metaphors to understand

For the past two-thousand years, the Book of Genesis has served as work of literature to the western civilization. Whether people believed in the Bible or not, the Book of Genesis tell stories they talk about having good morals, teaching live-learned lessons and overall it gives a glimpse of how the first human being acted when the world was developing and how they handle problems and situations. However, even though the book of Genesis shows a tone of life long morals, Genesis also shows the different sides of humans. Genesis shows how human can be deceitful, evil, and disobedient to authority figures. But these traits with humans were rarely displayed by man, but mostly by woman. In

Feminist theory and Christian worldview can be integrated but to what extent? Too much emphasis on the abstract, detached mind leads us astray. To be fully human does not require sex or gender but it does require God’s image. That, it seems, does not disappear with gender or sex, for both God and the angels are personal yet without sex or gender. As such, the thin essential properties of humanity, being rooted in God’s creative work, remain forever whereas the human cultural creations of gender and sex do not. In the beginning we are sexed and gendered (Genesis). In the end, we are neither (Galatians), hence the solution to the apparent contradiction of the Christian scriptures on gender.

Genesis 3 exposes the serpent, also known as the devil. The serpent asks Eve to

This presentation is about the book of Genesis in the Old Testament. Its main purpose will be to educate you, the audience on hermeneutics, the literal and contextual interpretations of the creation story, as well as the history, author, date and importance of the book of Genesis.

Genesis 1-3 offered the very first outline of societal norms and therein introduced interpretations of norms related to family, gender, and sex. In our now-progressive society, the constraints of indubitable religion are removed and the differing interpretations of gender, sex, and family within religion are freely debated. Since the text of creation is divine and human logic cannot fully interpret or understand God’s word, there are copious, varying interpretations of the text. An essential starting point for interpreting the Bible is the understanding that misinterpretations are bound to happen. The difference in time and context alone is causation, let alone the factors of translation and transcription. Susan T. Foh and Carol Meyers, both graduates of Wellesley College, have very differing strategies regarding how to interpret divine texts. Meyers, a professor at Duke, directed attention towards the context in which the text was written. Since our societies are constantly in flux, the context from when the text was written is often different from the context in which predominant and accepted interpretations were fabricated. Foh’s strategy of interpreting and understanding the text is to utilize latter parts of the text, which were written with more recent contexts, in order to understand the text. Both of these methodologies set up the text to be re-interpreted, however, Foh’s methodology is more complete because it allows the text to speak for itself rather than bring in

It is tough to get a clear look into the ways Meyers interprets textual evidence since her focus on women’s religion is often marginalized. Nonetheless, she does with what she has to make a full and convincing argument. Meyers identifies that feminist biblical study is masculinized, so she decides to uncover the role of women in the sanctuary through the Deuteronomic use of unisexual terms such as “you” and “person”. In doing so, she concludes that both women and men were to engage in communal events and offerings (Meyers 2002, 279-280).

The Bible is controversial on the matter of gender equality. There are numerous contradictions about the status of women in Christian society. Historically, the most prominent interpretation has been rather negative toward women. The Christian Church, with principally male authority, emphasizes the idea that women are inferior to man. They focus on Eve’s sin leading to a punishment that “her husband will have authority over her.” (Drury, 34)

To study Genesis in terms of its literary and historical content is not to say that we are in any way being irreverent in our reading of this part of the Old Testament. In other words, it is possible to read Genesis in both a spirit of appreciation for its position as the opening exegetical narrative of the Bible and as a document that reflects literary and historical realities and influences during the time when it was being written down. This paper examines some of the contemporary sources that influenced the two sets of writers who recorded the events of Genesis.