PDA

View Full Version : Question about Genesis 3



Gulah Papyrus
Dec 11th 2008, 06:54 PM
2And the woman said to the serpent, "We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden, 3but God said, 'You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.'"

It appears that Eve 'added to God's word' in this passage, which is definitely a no-no, but this was before she ate of the fruit, and therefore before the fall. So why did Eve make this error?

Esperanza32
Dec 11th 2008, 07:05 PM
God told Adam not to eat from the tree (Gen 2:17) before Eve was even created. There's no record of how Eve found out it was forbidden; apparently either God told her and it's not recorded, or Adam told her (and that's not recorded either). It seems perfectly reasonable to me that the Bible is not an exhaustive account of absolutely everything God said to them. I think this is a non-issue.

BrckBrln
Dec 11th 2008, 07:06 PM
2And the woman said to the serpent, "We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden, 3but God said, 'You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.'"

It appears that Eve 'added to God's word' in this passage, which is definitely a no-no, but this was before she ate of the fruit, and therefore before the fall. So why did Eve make this error?

I don't think she was adding as much as she was giving us more detail. :dunno:

RJ Mac
Dec 11th 2008, 07:23 PM
God told Adam, Adam told Eve. So either Adam added the part of you cannot
touch or die, or Eve added which doesn't make sense for her to add it.
Therefore if Adam added it to instill fear into Eve, he is guilty of adding to
the word of God - Rev.22:19;

Is this why Eve stumbled? Are we as guilty as Adam if we add something to
the word in hopes of making others obey it by adding a fear factor that is
not there and once that fear factor is proven false, will not everything else
we have said be viewed as questionable and we have lost our goal because
we thought the word wasn't adequate to do what was needed so we added.

Is this why Adam is held responsible for the sin and not Eve?

RJ

Diolectic
Dec 11th 2008, 07:24 PM
2And the woman said to the serpent, "We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden, 3but God said, 'You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.'"

It appears that Eve 'added to God's word' in this passage, which is definitely a no-no, but this was before she ate of the fruit, and therefore before the fall. So why did Eve make this error?
LORD God commanded the man about the Tree (Gen 2:16), Adam told his wife, Eve.
Second hand info is easy to misquote.
My guess is that she might have added to what Adam told her for safty matters, "if we shouldn't eat from the tree, we'd better not touch it then."

Gulah Papyrus
Dec 11th 2008, 07:27 PM
God told Adam not to eat from the tree (Gen 2:17) before Eve was even created. There's no record of how Eve found out it was forbidden; apparently either God told her and it's not recorded, or Adam told her (and that's not recorded either). It seems perfectly reasonable to me that the Bible is not an exhaustive account of absolutely everything God said to them. I think this is a non-issue.
Not really trying to make an 'issue' out of it, I was listening to a sermon and the Pastor used this verse to illustrate the dangers of 'adding to the word' and I thought to myself ...'self, why would she make that error if sin was not in the world yet?', so I started a thread.:dunno:

Anyway, I like your response. Thanks.

Gulah Papyrus
Dec 11th 2008, 07:31 PM
God told Adam, Adam told Eve. So either Adam added the part of you cannot
touch or die, or Eve added which doesn't make sense for her to add it.
Therefore if Adam added it to instill fear into Eve, he is guilty of adding to
the word of God - Rev.22:19;

Is this why Eve stumbled? Are we as guilty as Adam if we add something to
the word in hopes of making others obey it by adding a fear factor that is
not there and once that fear factor is proven false, will not everything else
we have said be viewed as questionable and we have lost our goal because
we thought the word wasn't adequate to do what was needed so we added.

Is this why Adam is held responsible for the sin and not Eve?

RJEven if Adam added to the word, it is still a sefish act comitted before the fall....a case of Adam thinking that God's word wasn't quite enough and that Adam could improve on it, so how does this happen before the fall?

RJ Mac
Dec 11th 2008, 07:42 PM
The time frame from Adam to the fall could be anything but we do know
he had to tell Eve for her to know it. He passed on what God had given to Him.
Not trusting her to be obedient, did he add to the command? For if it had
been given by God it would have been recorded when he received the
original command but touching the fruit wasn't mentioned to Adam.

RJ

Esperanza32
Dec 11th 2008, 07:43 PM
Not really trying to make an 'issue' out of it

I know, I'm sorry I came off sounding like I thought you were making an issue. :) I did not mean to sound huffy! :) I was just in a rush because I wanted to be the first response. ;)

Good for you for thinking through the finer points of Scripture and preaching you're hearing! I think sometimes I let sermons roll off of me without trying to really challenge what I'm hearing against Scripture, and then letting myself be challenged by the teaching.

BrckBrln
Dec 11th 2008, 07:47 PM
Why couldn't it just be an extra detail not given to us 2:17?

Diolectic
Dec 11th 2008, 07:49 PM
Even if Adam added to the word, it is still a sefish act comitted before the fall....a case of Adam thinking that God's word wasn't quite enough and that Adam could improve on it, so how does this happen before the fall?Because of the flesh.
Adam was no diferent before he sinned than he was after.
Only his spiritual state was effected.

1John 2:16 For all that is in the world,

1:the lust of the flesh
2:the lust of the eyes
3:the pride of life,
is not of the Father, but is of the world.
Gen 3:6And when the woman saw that the tree was
1:good for food,
and that it was
2:pleasant to the eyes.
and a tree to be
3:desired to make one wise she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.

Gulah Papyrus
Dec 11th 2008, 07:51 PM
I know, I'm sorry I came off sounding like I thought you were making an issue. :) I did not mean to sound huffy! :) I was just in a rush because I wanted to be the first response. ;)

Good for you for thinking through the finer points of Scripture and preaching you're hearing! I think sometimes I let sermons roll off of me without trying to really challenge what I'm hearing against Scripture, and then letting myself be challenged by the teaching.No need to apologize, I understand this place can get pretty combative.:hug:

divaD
Dec 11th 2008, 09:12 PM
God told Adam not to eat from the tree (Gen 2:17) before Eve was even created. There's no record of how Eve found out it was forbidden; apparently either God told her and it's not recorded, or Adam told her (and that's not recorded either). It seems perfectly reasonable to me that the Bible is not an exhaustive account of absolutely everything God said to them. I think this is a non-issue.



Sometimes I wonder about myself. Perhaps I have a reasoning problem or something. Anyway, I come to the same conclusions that you do. So if I have a reasoning problem, then that means so do you, since I agree with your reasoning, lol. I have no idea why some believe that Eve added to the Word of God. There's not a hint of that anywhere in Scripture. Nowhere.

Gulah Papyrus
Dec 11th 2008, 09:21 PM
Why couldn't it just be an extra detail not given to us 2:17?It could be, it just seems like an odd detail to leave out...and the sermon I heard used it as an example of the dangers of adding to the word.

Gulah Papyrus
Dec 11th 2008, 09:26 PM
I have no idea why some believe that Eve added to the Word of God. There's not a hint of that anywhere in Scripture. Nowhere.No idea huh? Maybe it's because God didn't say anything about 'not touching' but Eve did?:dunno:

I can totally see how somebody could conclude that...it's right there in black and white...wouldn't that constitute a 'hint'?

BrckBrln
Dec 11th 2008, 09:29 PM
It could be, it just seems like an odd detail to leave out...and the sermon I heard used it as an example of the dangers of adding to the word.

I don't see anything odd about it. They really go together, not eating and not touching. I view Eve just giving us more detail like Genesis 2 gives us more detail about Genesis 1.

Mysteryman
Dec 11th 2008, 09:33 PM
No idea huh? Maybe it's because God didn't say anything about 'not touching' but Eve did?:dunno:

I can totally see how somebody could conclude that...it's right there in black and white...wouldn't that constitute a 'hint'?
Well, your pastor is correct. But remember that she was being deceived. This record shows us that when you know something, not to change it , nor add to it, or take away from it.

The woman (she had no name at this time) was considering what the serpent was saying, and she was trying to act as if she knew more than she actually knew.

How many people have you come accross that want to explain something to you and they actually want to say more than what they actually know ?

How about just reading the last few posts on this thread !

Just_Another_Guy
Dec 11th 2008, 09:37 PM
God told Adam, Adam told Eve. So either Adam added the part of you cannot
touch or die, or Eve added which doesn't make sense for her to add it.
Therefore if Adam added it to instill fear into Eve, he is guilty of adding to
the word of God - Rev.22:19;

Is this why Eve stumbled? Are we as guilty as Adam if we add something to
the word in hopes of making others obey it by adding a fear factor that is
not there and once that fear factor is proven false, will not everything else
we have said be viewed as questionable and we have lost our goal because
we thought the word wasn't adequate to do what was needed so we added.

Is this why Adam is held responsible for the sin and not Eve?

RJ

Adam was found guilty of disobedience, not transgression of the law...or sin. He was punished for this disobedience. We see in Paul's Epistle that Adam was not found guilty of the transgression due to him not being deceived by the Serpent. (1 Timothy 2:14). In the end Adam is held accountable for Eve being lead astray..probably because she was primarily under his care and guidance.

divaD
Dec 11th 2008, 09:56 PM
No idea huh? Maybe it's because God didn't say anything about 'not touching' but Eve did?:dunno:

I can totally see how somebody could conclude that...it's right there in black and white...wouldn't that constitute a 'hint'?



So, is one to assume everything that God said unto Adam, everything that Adam said unto Eve, that it's recorded in the Bible? And besides, have you ever tried eating anything without touching it first? Even if you were to eat something with your mouth only, your mouth would still touch it before you actually ate it. I see nothing unusal about Eve stating that they weren't even to touch the tree. The thought of Eve adding to the Word of God never once crossed my mind in all those countless times that I read this verse, well not until I heard others come to this conclusion.

Gulah Papyrus
Dec 11th 2008, 10:17 PM
So, is one to assume everything that God said unto Adam, everything that Adam said unto Eve, that it's recorded in the Bible? And besides, have you ever tried eating anything without touching it first? Even if you were to eat something with your mouth only, your mouth would still touch it before you actually ate it. I see nothing unusal about Eve stating that they weren't even to touch the tree. The thought of Eve adding to the Word of God never once crossed my mind in all those countless times that I read this verse, well not until I heard others come to this conclusion.
This might be what Eve was thinking as well...Hmmmmmmm:hmm:

Your reasoning doesn't jive with your stance on The Gap Theory(So, is one to assume everything that God said unto Adam, everything that Adam said unto Eve, that it's recorded in the Bible? ). So is one to assume that everything that God did between Gen 1:1 and 1:2 is recorded in the Bible?:hmm:

Partaker of Christ
Dec 11th 2008, 11:52 PM
So, is one to assume everything that God said unto Adam, everything that Adam said unto Eve, that it's recorded in the Bible? And besides, have you ever tried eating anything without touching it first? Even if you were to eat something with your mouth only, your mouth would still touch it before you actually ate it. I see nothing unusal about Eve stating that they weren't even to touch the tree. The thought of Eve adding to the Word of God never once crossed my mind in all those countless times that I read this verse, well not until I heard others come to this conclusion.

Hi DivaD!

Sure, you cannot eat without touching, but you can touch without eating.

It clearly states that God said (and this is what the serpent tested) do not eat.

Gen 3:1 Now the serpent was more crafty than any other beast of the field that the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God actually say, 'You shall not eat of any tree in the garden'?"
Gen 3:2 And the woman said to the serpent, "We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden,
Gen 3:3 but God said, 'You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.'"

Matt 4:4 But he answered, "It is written, "'Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.'"

There is no power or authority in our words, but there is power and authority in God's words.

James 3:17a But the wisdom from above is first pure;
If we add our own unpurified word's to God's pure word's, it then becomes impure.

IamBill
Dec 12th 2008, 12:15 AM
This might be what Eve was thinking as well...Hmmmmmmm:hmm:



My exact thoughts when reading that :rofl:

Biastai
Dec 12th 2008, 12:38 AM
2And the woman said to the serpent, "We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden, 3but God said, 'You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.'"

It appears that Eve 'added to God's word' in this passage, which is definitely a no-no, but this was before she ate of the fruit, and therefore before the fall. So why did Eve make this error?

Great point! It may have been memory. We have no idea how much time had elapsed between the command and the temptation. The tempter may be capitalizing upon this when he tries to either infuse doubt or perhaps to test Eve's knowledge to detect weakpoints.

"He said to the woman, 'Did God really say, 'You must not eat from any tree in the garden'?"
Genesis 3:1

keck553
Dec 12th 2008, 12:41 AM
It's not a memory issue, it's an obedience issue, the same one that plagues mankind today. God made Eve in His image - before the fall, she wouldn't have forgotton. It's exactly what Moses indicated it was - disobedience to God's command. God's not going to equip someone with a faulty memory, then pitch them out of the garden for it.


God had said in verse 16 and 17, "Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat." So the Serpent's query was logically correct.But was it truth? No, it wasn't. God's instruction to the Man and the Woman was to eat of any tree except the 'Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.' The difference seems subtle, but it is not. The instruction is mostly a positive instruction to eat of any tree, with one exception. The negative instruction against the eating of the Tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil was an instruction with a reason: "for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die." God does not often offer such a motivating reason for His instructions.


In the next few verses, the Serpent takes the Woman for a ride on the philosophy train, and railroads her right into the most logical answer to his first question: "Has God indeed said?." The logical answer of course (to Eve), "Why no, He didn't really mean what He said when He said don't eat" – after all, misread 1Cor 6:13; 8:8; Rom 14:17, and this error filled logic seems to make sense. You see, the Serpent's first question, "Had God indeed said?" was really meant to cause the Woman to ask the question, "What did God really mean?" The very simply instructions of G-d had been turned into a logical exercise – and we all know the outcome, which continues to this day.

Gulah Papyrus
Dec 12th 2008, 01:12 AM
It's not a memory issue, it's an obedience issue, the same one that plagues mankind today. God made Eve in His image - before the fall, she wouldn't have forgotton. It's exactly what Moses indicated it was - disobedience to God's command. God's not going to equip someone with a faulty memory, then pitch them out of the garden for it.


God had said in verse 16 and 17, "Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat." So the Serpent's query was logically correct.But was it truth? No, it wasn't. God's instruction to the Man and the Woman was to eat of any tree except the 'Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.' The difference seems subtle, but it is not. The instruction is mostly a positive instruction to eat of any tree, with one exception. The negative instruction against the eating of the Tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil was an instruction with a reason: "for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die." God does not often offer such a motivating reason for His instructions.



In the next few verses, the Serpent takes the Woman for a ride on the philosophy train, and railroads her right into the most logical answer to his first question: "Has God indeed said?." The logical answer of course (to Eve), "Why no, He didn't really mean what He said when He said don't eat" after all, misread 1Cor 6:13; 8:8; Rom 14:17, and this error filled logic seems to make sense. You see, the Serpent's first question, "Had God indeed said?" was really meant to cause the Woman to ask the question, "What did God really mean?" The very simply instructions of G-d had been turned into a logical exercise and we all know the outcome, which continues to this day.

Okay, so back to the OP, if Eve hadn't yet eaten of the fruit, why did she 'add to Gods word'? If sin hadn't yet entered the world, why did Eve think that she needed to improve on what God has said? Isn't adding to the word of God a sin in itself since it is the result of selfish pride and man thinking that he knows better than God?

BrckBrln
Dec 12th 2008, 01:27 AM
Okay, so back to the OP, if Eve hadn't yet eaten of the fruit, why did she 'add to Gods word'? If sin hadn't yet entered the world, why did Eve think that she needed to improve on what God has said? Isn't adding to the word of God a sin in itself since it is the result of selfish pride and man thinking that he knows better than God?

She didn't add to what God said.

divaD
Dec 12th 2008, 01:28 AM
Okay, so back to the OP, if Eve hadn't yet eaten of the fruit, why did she 'add to Gods word'? If sin hadn't yet entered the world, why did Eve think that she needed to improve on what God has said? Isn't adding to the word of God a sin in itself since it is the result of selfish pride and man thinking that he knows better than God?


That's the problem as far as I'm concerned. Purposesly adding to the Word of God would be a sin imo. What would be Eve's motive for doing this? The Bible says that she was deceived. Nowhere does it say nor imply that she added to the Word of God. If Eve was going to make stuff up as she went, why didn't she just go for broke? What did she have to lose if she was already adding to the Word of God? Why would she even need the serpent tempting her if she was capable of going against God's commandment on her own? And when one takes the time to think about it, it would have been pretty difficult for Eve to dream up evil stuff herself, such as adding to the Word of God, since she had no knowledge of evil until her and Adam partook of the fruit.

Friend of I AM
Dec 12th 2008, 01:34 AM
Okay, so back to the OP, if Eve hadn't yet eaten of the fruit, why did she 'add to Gods word'? If sin hadn't yet entered the world, why did Eve think that she needed to improve on what God has said? Isn't adding to the word of God a sin in itself since it is the result of selfish pride and man thinking that he knows better than God?

You seemed to have left out verse 3...

Genesis 3:1-2
Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God really say, 'You must not eat from any tree in the garden'?"
The woman said to the serpent, "We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, but God did say, 'You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.' "

Thus Eve had the same knowledge Adam had regarding what trees to eat from. She didn't add to the Word of God...thus no sin was commited before Eve disobeyed what God had requested of her. She was clearly deceived by the serpent, with a bunch of mind games..leaving out verses..and twisting of the scriptures. This is why God had compassion on her...and didn't hold her entirely accountable for the sin she had commited.

God bless in Christian Love,

Stephen

IamBill
Dec 12th 2008, 01:49 AM
2And the woman said to the serpent, "We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden, 3but God said, 'You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.'"

It appears that Eve 'added to God's word' in this passage, which is definitely a no-no, but this was before she ate of the fruit, and therefore before the fall. So why did Eve make this error?

I have been in this convo a few times :)

Since we know that sin entered through - One Man. (not even one man w/help of one woman ..or one woman).
We can conclude that Eve was not directly told by God as was Adam, just as written. Adam is guilty because HE WAS told - so why, if God told Eve (and added that part) would she not be the guilty one or equally guilty ? she ate first, she gave it to Adam ! ...because she was never commanded in the first place. Now if Adam had indeed relayed the flaw to Eve, she makes no note of it, in fact - "God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die"

Notice how God addresses the issue to each later on-
to Adam
11 And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat?
and to Eve -
13 And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.

IamBill
Dec 12th 2008, 01:59 AM
Okay, so back to the OP, if Eve hadn't yet eaten of the fruit, why did she 'add to Gods word'? If sin hadn't yet entered the world, why did Eve think that she needed to improve on what God has said? Isn't adding to the word of God a sin in itself since it is the result of selfish pride and man thinking that he knows better than God?

I think there was only one Law at the time and it had nothing to do with adding to Gods word.

Biastai
Dec 12th 2008, 03:06 AM
It's not a memory issue, it's an obedience issue, the same one that plagues mankind today. God made Eve in His image - before the fall, she wouldn't have forgotton. It's exactly what Moses indicated it was - disobedience to God's command. God's not going to equip someone with a faulty memory, then pitch them out of the garden for it.


God had said in verse 16 and 17, "Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat." So the Serpent's query was logically correct.But was it truth? No, it wasn't. God's instruction to the Man and the Woman was to eat of any tree except the 'Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.' The difference seems subtle, but it is not. The instruction is mostly a positive instruction to eat of any tree, with one exception. The negative instruction against the eating of the Tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil was an instruction with a reason: "for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die." God does not often offer such a motivating reason for His instructions.



In the next few verses, the Serpent takes the Woman for a ride on the philosophy train, and railroads her right into the most logical answer to his first question: "Has God indeed said?." The logical answer of course (to Eve), "Why no, He didn't really mean what He said when He said don't eat" after all, misread 1Cor 6:13; 8:8; Rom 14:17, and this error filled logic seems to make sense. You see, the Serpent's first question, "Had God indeed said?" was really meant to cause the Woman to ask the question, "What did God really mean?" The very simply instructions of G-d had been turned into a logical exercise and we all know the outcome, which continues to this day.


Sure, I didn't contest disobedience. I was answering the OP's question concerning the different wording. Hazy memory, lack of understanding, ignorance of context, personal interest, etc. are all things that the tempter can use. As far as we know, she obeyed up to that point. The tempter's work can clearly be seen in his probing.

Friend of I AM
Dec 12th 2008, 03:08 PM
I have been in this convo a few times :)

Since we know that sin entered through - One Man. (not even one man w/help of one woman ..or one woman).
We can conclude that Eve was not directly told by God as was Adam, just as written. Adam is guilty because HE WAS told - so why, if God told Eve (and added that part) would she not be the guilty one or equally guilty ? she ate first, she gave it to Adam ! ...because she was never commanded in the first place. Now if Adam had indeed relayed the flaw to Eve, she makes no note of it, in fact - "God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die"

Notice how God addresses the issue to each later on-
to Adam
11 And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat?
and to Eve -
13 And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.

Eve was told by God as per the verses I posted. Both Adam and Eve failed at their assigned duties within their marital relationship as well as with their having trust in God.

keck553
Dec 12th 2008, 04:05 PM
Sure, I didn't contest disobedience. I was answering the OP's question concerning the different wording. Hazy memory, lack of understanding, ignorance of context, personal interest, etc. are all things that the tempter can use. As far as we know, she obeyed up to that point. The tempter's work can clearly be seen in his probing.

Crud. That description sounds just like me.

Equipped_4_Love
Dec 14th 2008, 07:16 AM
I think there was only one Law at the time and it had nothing to do with adding to Gods word.

That is an excellent point.

Even if Eve had added to the word of God, there was no command against it at the time. The only command that they were given was not to eat of the fruit.

Likewise, if Eve added to the word of God, at this point in time, it would not be considered sin, because there was no commandment against it:

Rom. 3:20 tells us that the law is the knowledge of sin, and Rom. 7:7 tells us that we do not know sin except through the law.

Since there was no law established in the Garden, the only guideline of conduct that they had was God's single commandment. Since God did not tell Adam or Eve not to add to the word of God, it would not have been considered transgression at that time.

IamBill
Dec 15th 2008, 12:23 AM
That is an excellent point.

Even if Eve had added to the word of God, there was no command against it at the time. The only command that they were given was not to eat of the fruit.

Likewise, if Eve added to the word of God, at this point in time, it would not be considered sin, because there was no commandment against it:

Rom. 3:20 tells us that the law is the knowledge of sin, and Rom. 7:7 tells us that we do not know sin except through the law.

Since there was no law established in the Garden, the only guideline of conduct that they had was God's single commandment. Since God did not tell Adam or Eve not to add to the word of God, it would not have been considered transgression at that time.

and you explained it better :)
yes ,to my knowledge- adding/removing to Gods words is not mentioned in any way until the end of the book of Rev.

...pretty neat when you consider- what was mentioned in the end, applies to a mistake that took place in the beginning. ;)

Friend of I AM
Dec 16th 2008, 09:40 PM
I was having a discussion with a Friend of mine today regarding this subject. I think many get offended by Paul telling the Corinthians this...

1 Timothy 2:13
And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

This doesn't mean that Adam was some supernatural deity above Eve. It is just simply stating that Adam was not initially deceived to take and eat from the "tree of knowledge" and Eve was. This is why the woman was guitly of the transgression. It has nothing to do with Adam being of superior knowledge or men being better than women. People need to stop striving over one or two verses..and words, and accept the word of God for what it says.

God bless in Christian Love,

Stephen

Just_Another_Guy
Dec 16th 2008, 10:18 PM
wrong thread...