Quote:
Originally Posted by Nell
"Our perspective?" I don't think so. This is all YOU. It may sound like an afterthought from YOUR misogynistic perspective. YOUR perspective includes your epic male gender bias and your misogynist bent, which cannot be ignored. Nothing you say regarding women has credibility.
There is no context where these two statements can be attributed to a sober minded man. There is no context where woman was not part of God's plan either in time or eternity. I know. Here's where you break out your "experts".
|
You are not quoting my full statement. I said it sounds like an afterthought but God had a plan all along. By saying it "sounds like an afterthought" I am obviously denying that it was. I never introduced the term afterthought into this discussion. It would be to deny God's plan in creation and also what male and female represent in the new testament. But from Adams perspective he might have felt that God didnt plan a companion for him while he saw the animals had one.
The first company God made for Adam was animals, not women. That's the fact. Hence in the original creation order, or the original plan, it was Adam, then animals, and then wait a minute, Adam is lonely, let's use one of his ribs (not the dust) to create the woman.
You have some biases of your own, namely, the extra-biblical opinions of Bushnell regarding what actually happened in the Garden.