Ten Reasons: The restoration

The author has decided to prove headship existed before the fall by looking at what happened at and after the fall. It’s a lot like trying to save the free market system by abandoning the free market principles. He has to step outside of Genesis’ time-frame entirely – removing it from it’s time and place and filling in the gaps with information belonging to other times and places. He points to his eighth reason:

The restoration – When we come to the New Testament, salvation in Christ reaffirms the creation order. If the previous understanding of Genesis 3:16 in correct, as I believe it is, then what we would expect to find in the New Testament is a reversal of the curse. We would expect to find an undoing of the wife’s hostile or aggressive impulses against her husband and the husband’s response of harsh rule over his wife. In fact, that is exactly what we find. We read in the New Testament, ‘Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord. Husbands, love your wives, and do not be harsh with them. (Colossians 3:18-19) This command is an undoing of the impulse to oppose (Hebrew teshuqah + ‘el) and the harsh rule (Hebrew mashal) that God imposed at the curse. God reestablishes in the New Testament the beauty of the relationship between Adam and Eve that existed from the moment they were created. Eve was subject to Adam as the head of the family. Adam loved his wife and was not harsh with her in his leadership. This is the pattern that Paul commands husbands and wives to follow.

This might be the shortest reason of them all; which makes me feel a little cheated after having so much said of the other reasons. You’ll note that the curses are only half-reversed; for one, women still experience pain in childbirth and men still have to deal with thorns in the ground. Thing is – a partial reversal doesn’t equate a full restoration. But let’s take a closer look to see if a restoration has really taken place and that the pre-fall and post-Resurrection the verses should match up – the author’s footnote points to Ephesians 5, Colossians 3, and 1 Peter 3:

To be more specific, Ephesians 5:21-6:9; Colossians 3:18-4:1; and 1 Peter 2:11-3:7 form what’s commonly understood as the household codes. Paul’s writing to Jewish and Gentile communities of Christians living under Roman control and Roman family conventions. Before Jesus and Paul arrived on the scene, Aristotle wrote that: “the first and least parts of a family are master and slave, husband and wife, father and children.” He believed that a husband’s rule over his house could be compared with types of governments – “the government of a household is a monarchy, since every house is governed by a single ruler“; he continues by saying that husbands exercise a republican government over their wives and monarchical government over their children, and that they exhibit political office over slaves and royal office over the family in general. All of these relationships are one of power, one where a greater power or force ‘rules‘ over the others who are all not equals. Sounds a lot like ‘mashal‘ from yesterday, doesn’t it?

Out of curiosity, how can Paul’s response to Aristotle’s popular teaching about the nature of family as a unit of the state double as a restoration of the original gender roles? We seem to sell God short, as if this is the sum of His achievement in this area – after cursing Adam and Eve, after having Jesus die to reverse the curses, the final result is … “wives submit to your husbands and husbands love your wives … oh, and don’t be harsh with them either.” I guess God’s power has it’s limits that He couldn’t imagine a world where society has moved beyond the need for power to be organized in hierarchies or lives to be lived in hierarchies – at least, not on this side of heaven.

But there’s something more to the house-hold codes, they were written to undermine the existing status quo under Roman tradition. Romans lived in something of a patriarchal society, husbands were the kings of the citizens subject to them – their wives, their children, and their slaves. Husbands were the legal representation who had status while everyone elses’ status was lesser and subordinate to his. He was also the priest in his own cult and would lead his family in spiritual exercises. He was also a functionary of the state who had life or death power over his family. Romans patriarchs were powerful men with almost no limit to their power and no checks on their behavior. Paul’s advice ‘looked‘ like what the world expected on the outside – men in charge, women not so much. But it ‘acted‘ as if it were it’s opposite – undermining the Roman tradition from the inside-out, destroying gender roles based on power and instead using Christ as a foundation.

Jesus Christ died so that everyone would live. He died so that his church would flourish. Paul’s suggesting that these ‘heads‘ have to remember what their own ‘head‘ did for them and follow his example – to die to selfishness, to die to the thirst for power, to die to privileged. He’s asking women to die to the need to manipulate others in a world where they don’t have power – because if husbands ‘die‘ to their own power, then they will equally be powerless and that’s where they find they are both at their most powerful – in Christ alone.

I don’t think that Paul’s pointing to a restoration of what Adam and Eve might have known, but a far greater reality that they couldn’t have imagined – one that points to one of my favorite sayings: “You can’t un-ring a bell.” or perhaps, “You can’t un-sin a sin.” There is no going back, there is no undo on everything that has been undone – but Jesus’ sacrifice ‘finished‘ the old order of things and gave us something new. Something that couldn’t have existed in Adam and Eve’s time; what we have is better than a restoration … it’s a replacement and an upgrade.


3 thoughts on “Ten Reasons: The restoration


    Do children of Christian parents inherit their parents righteousness? Are they deemed righteous when they reach the age of accountability? Are they born again Christians at birth? Do they inherit the righteousness of their parents and are they automatically added to the body of Christ? Do they inherit the forgiveness of all the sins the may commit? The answers are: no, no, no, no, and no. Those are absurd questions.

    Babies are born righteous, however, they do not inherit righteousness.

    Do children of Christian parents inherit Adam’s sin? Do they inherit a sinful nature? Of course not, that would be absurd, illogical, and Scripturally incorrect. How can babies inherit sin from parents who have had their sins washed away by the shed blood of Jesus Christ? How can babies inherit a sinful nature from Christian parents who have been forgiven by God and have the indwelling of the Holy Spirit?

    Not only do babies from Christians not inherit Adam’s sin, neither do babies from unbelievers inherit Adam’s sin.

    Ezekiel 18:20 “The soul that sins shall die. The son shall not bear the guilt of the father, nor the father bear the guilt of the son. The righteous of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.(NKJV)

    Romans 5:12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned—(NKJV)

    Death spread to all men because all have sinned.

    Genesis 3:1-24…….22 The the Lord God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil. And now, lest he put out his hand and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever” 23 therefore the Lord God sent him out of the garden of Eden to till the ground from which he was taken 24 So He drove out the man; and He placed cherubim at the east gate of the garden of Eden, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to guard the way to the tree of life.(NKJV)

    All men inherit the consequences of Adam’s sin, that is all men are denied access to the tree of life. All men will die physically as the result of Adam’s sin.

    All men suffer the consequences of Adam’s sin, but not his guilt.

    No person has nor will they inherits the guilt of Adam’s sin.

    Men do not inherit sin from Adam. No man has inherited guilt from parents, nor from anyone else.

    Men fall short of God’s glory because all men have sinned, not because Adam sinned. (Romans 3:23)



    Was Jesus born with a sinful nature? Was Jesus born as a sinner because He inherited Adam’s sin? Of course not, because men are not born with sin inherited from Adam nor are they born with a sinful nature.

    2 Corinthians 5:19-21….21 For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteous of God in Him.(NKJV)

    Hebrews 4:15 For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weakness, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin.(NKJV)

    If those who preach that all men are born with a sinful nature and that all men inherit the guilt of Adam’s making them sinners at birth, are correct, then Jesus would have been a sinner at birth and born with a sinful nature. Nothing could more void of the truth than John Calvin’s doctrine.

    Was John the baptist a sinner at birth because he inherited the sin of Adam? Was John born with a sinful nature?

    Luke 1:13-15 ……15 “For he will be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink. He will also be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother’s womb.(NKJV)

    God filled John the baptist with the Holy Spirit in his mother’s womb. If John was a sinner at birth because he inherited Adam’s sin how could John be filled with the Holy Spirit? If John the baptist was born with a sinful nature at birth how did he become great in the eyes of the Lord?

    God did not create David with a sinful nature. David did not inherited Adam’s sin nor the sins of his parents.

    Psalm 139:13-14 For You formed my inward parts; You have covered me in my mother’s womb. 14 I will praise You, for I am wonderfully made, Marvelous are Your works, And that my soul knows very well. (NKJV)


    Job 1:1 There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was blameless and upright, and one who feared God and shunned evil.(NKJV)


    Acts 10:1-2 There was a certain man in Caesarea called Cornelius, a centurion of what was called the Italian Regiment, 2 a devout man and one who feared God with all his household, who gave alms generously to the people, and prayed to God.(NKJV)


    Genesis 6:9 This is the genealogy of Noah. Noah was a just man, perfect in his generations. Noah walked with God. (NKJV)


    Genesis 6:22-24 22…Enoch walked with God three hundred years…….24 And Enoch walked with God; and he was not, for God took him.(NKJV)

    YOU ARE INVITED TO FOLLOW MY BLOG. http://steve-finnell.blogspot.com


    1. Your post was eaten by my spam-filter being a little long, so I only just saw it. The question isn’t whether or not we all inherit sin natures, but if Jesus’ death and Resurrection restores the pre-fall gender roles; of whether or not Adam has authority (a.k.a. headship) over Eve and therefore all men have authority (a.k.a. male headship) over women in the specific contexts of family life (husbands lead, wives are forbidden from leading) and church life (men lead, women are forbidden from leading). I’m unsure of how your comment answers the question.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s