government theory

Chapter 8 On Adam's Sovereignty Due to Eve's Subordination to Him

44．We see that our author found another text in the "Bible" as the basis for his Adamic kingship, which is "Genesis" Chapter 3No. 16: "You will love your husband, your Your husband shall rule over you." Our author says: "This is the original conferment of government." On this basis, later on the same page, he concludes: "The highest authority is based on the fatherhood, and is limited to one This is the monarchy." Regardless of the premises, he always came to this conclusion; as soon as "government" was mentioned in any text, his "absolute monarchy" was immediately established on the basis of theocracy.Anyone who has only to look carefully at our author's reasoning from this statement, and examine, among other things, the statement "Adam's line and descendants" which he has inserted there, will find that it is It is rather difficult to understand what our author means.

But, leaving his peculiar method of writing aside for the moment, let's examine the text at hand.These words are God's curse upon woman, for she is the first and most radical transgressor.If we consider the occasion on which God first spoke these words to our first parents, considering that he was delivering judgment and expressing his wrath over their actions against his will, we cannot conceive of God giving Adam privileges and dispensations at this time, and Grant him dignity and authority, elevate him to the position of dominion and monarchy.Eve, as the tempter and co-offender, was placed below Adam, who accidentally achieved superiority over her because she was punished more severely, but in the "fall" of original sin he was equally responsible. Responsible, as can be seen from the following verses that he too was degraded.It is difficult, therefore, to conceive of a situation in which God would at the same time make him a universal sovereign over all mankind, and at the same time make him a lifelong laborer; He lives on the throne and with all the privileges and comforts of absolute authority.

45．Adam, therefore, could not at this time expect any favor and any conferment of privilege from his Creator, whom he had offended.Even if this were, as our author says, "the first grant of government," and Adam became such a monarch as Sir Robert wished, it is evident that God made him but a very poor So pitiful as a monarch, even our author himself does not think that such a monarchy can have such a great privilege.God ordered him to work to support himself, and it seems that he was only given a hoe to subdue the land, rather than a king's wat to rule the inhabitants of the land.God said to him, "In the sweat of your brow you shall eat your bread." It may be objected that this was inevitable, since he had no subjects then, no one to work for him.But later, after he lived for more than 900 years, there should be many people in the world who can be ordered by him to work for him.But God said: "Otherwise, no one will help you except your wife, and as long as you live on this earth, you will live by your own labor." , for you were born from the ground, and you are dust, and you will return to dust.” Maybe someone will defend our author: these words are made of Adam as the representative of all mankind, not to the human race. Personally, he said it was God's curse on mankind due to the fall from original sin.

46．I believe that God's speech is different from that of human beings, that what he speaks is richer in truth and more certain.However, when he is happy to speak to humans, I think he will not break the language rules that humans are used to, and speak in a way that is different from humans.When God stoops to speak to men, He does not reduce Himself to the same low capacity for understanding as men, simply because if He did not speak in a human way, then men could not understand and would not achieve His purpose .But if our authors' interpretations of the Bible are to be accepted as correct for the needs of their doctrines, we are forced to think that God did not speak in the same way as humans.Because according to the usual rules of language, if God speaks to Adam in the singular here, it must be understood as speaking to all mankind; what he said in the plural ("Genesis" Chapter 1No. must be understood as speaking to Adam alone and to no one else; and what God said to Noah and his sons together must be understood as speaking to Noah alone (Genesis Remember" Chapter 20), if you really want to do this, it will be very difficult to understand God's word.

47．It is also to be noted that the passages quoted here in Genesis Chapter 3 No. 16, which our author calls "the original grant of government," were not addressed to Adam , and those words did not grant Adam anything, but only a punishment for Eve.If we take these words as they were meant to be addressed specifically to Eve, or to all the women she represented, then at best they relate to women and imply nothing more than women usually Be obedient to your husband.But if her own condition, or a contractual relationship with her husband, exempts her from this obedience, it cannot be said that there is any law to compel a woman to submit to this oppression, as if there were a way of avoiding it. The pain of childbearing, which no law obliges her to suffer, is a part of the same curse upon her as above said.The original text reads like this: "Again, God said to the woman, 'I will multiply your pains in childbirth, and you will suffer much when you give birth to your children; you will love your husband, and your husband will rule over you.'" I I think it will be difficult for anyone but our author to find in these words the conferring of a "monarchy" on Adam, for the words were neither addressed to Adam nor concerned with him. .I don't think anyone will think that women are bound by these words as if bound by a law, and must submit to the curse contained in these words, and feel that they are obliged not to try to avoid suffering.Would anyone say it was a sin if Eve, or any woman, had not felt as much pain in childbirth as God threatened Eve here?If our queen, Mary or Elizabeth, were to marry any of their subjects, would it be said that, according to this passage, they should be politically subject to him, or that he should therefore have a "sovereignty" over her? Dominion"?As far as I can see, God did not give Adam authority over Eve in this passage, nor did he give man authority over his wife, but only foretelled the possible fate of women, that is, according to God's will, He wanted to make regulations, To make her subject to her husband, as the laws of men and the customs of nations prescribe.At the same time, I believe that this kind of regulation in the world has its natural basis.

48．For example, when God talked about Jacob and Esau, he said, "The older will serve the younger" ("Genesis" Chapter 25No.20 Section [-]).No one would think that God meant Jacob to be the ruler of Esau by saying this, He was merely prophesying what would happen in the future!But if what God here says to Eve must be understood as the law of bondage and subordination to her and to all other women, then this subordination is only due to every wife to her husband. Subordinate, rather than referring to anything else.If this is regarded as "the initial grant of the government" and "the foundation of the monarchy", then there should be as many monarchs as there are husbands in the world.Therefore, if saying this does give Adam any power, it can only be a marital power, not a political power.This power is the husband's power to conduct private affairs as the owner of the goods and land in the family, and that the husband's will is superior to his wife's in all common affairs related to them, but it does not mean that He has life-and-death political power over his wife, not to mention other people.

49．The above views are what I believe.If our author is to understand this sentence in the original text as a kind of "grant" and "prime grant of government", and a government of a political nature, then he should put forward stronger arguments to prove it, not just Simply interpret the words "Thou shalt desire thy husband" as a law, and by this law Eve and all that begat her were to be subordinated to the absolute sovereignty of Adam and his heirs. The meaning of the phrase "You shall desire your husband" is so vague and interpreted by the commentators of the Bible inconsistently that it cannot be taken as a credible The same cannot be said about the issue.But, according to our author's method of writing, whenever the original text is mentioned, he automatically concludes that the meaning of the original text is as he explained it.As soon as the words "government" or "subject" appear, whether in the text or in the notes, it is immediately expressed as a word for the duty of the subject to the sovereign, and the relationship changes accordingly; God says "husband ’, Sir Robert insisted on referring to it as a ‘sovereign’.

Not only does the Bible not say a word about this, nor does our author produce any evidence to prove it, but in him, Adam immediately had "absolute sovereign power" over Eve, and this power was not only over Eve. One has this power even over "all who are begotten by her."In any case, Adam must have been an absolute sovereign, and our author has said so from Chapter 1 until the end of this chapter.Since neither "Prince" nor "People" are mentioned in the original text, and nothing is said about "absolute" or "princely" power, except to show the subordination of Eve as wife to her husband, therefore, in my Without presenting any reason for these simple observations of mine (that the passage does not give Adam the "absolute sovereignty" that our author assumes), I wish my readers to consider for themselves that my Whether simple statements are enough to debunk the kind of power he asserts affirmed by simple assertions.Though one may wish to give a short and sufficient answer to most of the grounds advanced by our author, a mere denial will suffice to refute him; and an assertion for which there is no evidence, without giving reasons to deny it, is a sufficient answer. up.

Therefore, if I say nothing but deny the author's assertion that "According to the original text of the Holy Scriptures, God Himself has conferred and founded upon the Father the supreme power, ordained this power to be sovereign, and to Adam himself and his successors," and that would have been answered, for these are obviously conclusions drawn by our author from the words of the same page.If I asked any sane reader to read the original text and consider carefully to whom the sentence was spoken, he would be amazed, if it were not for the author's superhuman ability to point out the inability to others. How can he find absolute monarchy from there?In this way, we have examined both original texts of the Bible.I can recall that from these verses our author proves the "sovereignty of Adam," that is, that "supremacy."He said that this kind of power "should be exercised by Adam without limit, and the range should be determined by his will, which is the will of God" (see "Genesis" Chapter 1No.20, Chapter 3No.16 Festival).In fact, one of these two passages refers only to the obedience of lower animals to humans, and the other refers to the obedience due to wives to their husbands.Both of these are very different from the obedience of subjects to the ruler in political society.

(End of this chapter)