Martinus: Livets Bog, vol. 4, sect. 1182

1182. With regard to "Eve" is it not conceivable that God was also revealing the "truth" with these well-known words: "I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee"? Now, do these age-old words handed down to us in the pages of the "Bible" not tell us here that "Eve" or the "woman" had been an entirely different being from the being we have become acquainted with down through history and up to the present day? Does the divine voice not tell us that the "woman" in the light was a being that did not know any sorrow in connection with conception and did not know any pain in connection with childbirth or the reproduction of the species, at the same time as we are also told, between the lines, that she knew nothing of any "desire" for a "man" either, just as little as she knew anything of recognising such a being as a "ruler" over her. But a being that knows no "sorrow" in connection with "conception" and knows nothing of "painful childbirth" and knows nothing of having a "desire" for a "man" cannot possibly be a being that is subject to the organic structure of the animal principle of mating or "one-poled sexuality". For an unshakeable characteristic of this sexuality is of course that it makes it vitally necessary for the woman to "desire" a "man", that is, a being of the "opposite sex". That this is the case is further established as fact in that "Eve" should subsequently be under the rule of a "man". She should in fact be a being that could not fend for herself, that could not hold her own. She should thus be dependent on another being whom she could lean on, and find happiness only in doing this.
But at the same time as the divine voice thus reveals to the world "Eve's" existence before the darkness, the same words of course also reveal the specific nature of "Adam" in "Paradise". If "Eve" was a being that had no "desire" for a "man", "Adam" could not be a being that was dependent on this "desire" either. And since Eve knew nothing of being ruled by a "man" and did not have the organic structure of "one-poled sexuality", "Adam" could not of course possess the structure of this sexuality either or feel within himself the "male" urge to protect and caress an inferior "feminine" being. How then could this structure have been satisfied?