Genesis 3: Did Eve Eat the Fruit First

[Katie Rose Müller]

NKJV Genesis 3:6-7 So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree desirable to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate. She also gave to her husband with her, and he ate. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves coverings.

So my question is this: did Eve eat of the fruit first and then give to her husband who then ate, or did she take the fruit, give to her husband and they ate together?

The reason I find this an important detail to uncover is that if Eve ate first and then gave to her husband who ate afterwards, Eve's eyes were not opened until Adam ate. As it's written by one man sin entered into the world Romans 5:12.

I've been study Genesis 1-3 and have come to the conclusion that Adam was acting High Priest, and the test of the trees was on Adam not on Eve. If Eve's eyes weren't open until he ate, this would strengthen my theory. Adam could have, as husband and priest, made atonement for his wife and disavowed her transgression (Numbers 30:8)

Exodus 32:21 And Moses said to Aaron, “What did this people do to you that you have brought so great a sin upon them?”

Even in Exodus, though the people asked for the Golden Calf (forbidden fruit, so to speak) the sin was put on Aaron first and foremost: what did these people do that you brought so great a sin upon them

Likewise, Adam brought sin upon Eve and the whole world. Eve, though having eaten, was under his headship. Was she blameless of sin because of the deception; blameless while she had her husband as High Priest and Mediator?

So, did they eat together or did Eve eat first,

[tatwo]

35 minutes ago, Katie Rose Müller said:

Likewise, Adam brought sin upon Eve and the whole world. Eve, though having eaten, was under his headship. Was she blameless of sin because of the deception; blameless while she had her husband as High Priest and Mediator?

Greetings @Katie Rose Müller

I don't think she was "blameless of sin because of deception"  she knew the words that God had given Adam...she spoke some of them to the serpent. 

Paul wasn't exactly shy about his feelings on the matter...

"But I am afraid that, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, your minds will be led astray from the simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ." 2nd Corinthians 11:3 NASB

"For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve.  (14)  And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression." 1st Timothy 2:13-14 NASB

I tend to believe that things would have turned out differently if Adam had "not ate"...as you might be suggesting. This is an interesting and sometimes touchy subject. The "sentence or discipline" shall I call it...is somewhat telling in terms of how God saw it...don't you think...have a look? "Emphasis" mine...

"To the woman He said, "I will greatly multiply Your pain in childbirth, In pain you will bring forth children; Yet your desire will be for your husband, And he will rule over you." Then to Adam He said, "Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree about which I commanded you, saying, 'You shall not eat from it'; Cursed is the ground because of you; In toil you will eat of it All the days of your life. "Both thorns and thistles it shall grow for you; And you will eat the plants of the field; By the sweat of your face You will eat bread, Till you return to the ground, Because from it you were taken; For you are dust, And to dust you shall return." Genesis 3:16-19 NASB

47 minutes ago, Katie Rose Müller said:

So, did they eat together or did Eve eat first,

As you quoted Sister..."she took of its fruit and ate. She also gave to her husband with her, and he ate."

Tatwo...:)

[Ray12614]

Interesting OP.  I have pondered this more than once. Since their eyes were not opened until Adam ate the fruit, I would say that they did not fall until Adam ate what Eve gave her.

Of course, Adam was with her . . . so it is likely that Adam heard what the whole conversation with the serpent too. Was it because he didn't want to lose his woman that he decided to transgress God's command? Clearly Adam's decision changed everything forever.

I have wondered what would have happened IF Adam slapped the fruit out of Eves hands and told her that 'they' will not disobey the command of God. Would we then still be an fallen mankind?

Of course all my above observations are only opinions. It will be interesting to see what replies you get . . . . 

 

[Katie Rose Müller]

@tatwo Paul is discussing the issue of deception when regarding Eve, not rebellion which would have been Adam's sin. So I think there is a stark difference between the two.

Also I'm not saying that she was without transgression: to be blameless doesn't mean to be sinless. Merely that while she was being ruled by her husband, he had the opportunity to acquit her before the Lord, so judgment on her was pending so to speak. But once Adam took and ate, it was finalized.

Also when it comes to the punishment of Eve, I think a lot of those were reminder statements. The woman was always to be ruled by the husband, but now that she had been deceived, God is clearly marking out that women are not to subvert or usurp their husbands. Even if Eve had pressured, or acted as a naggy wife, to get Adam to eat the fruit, God was also reminding Adam, that he was suppose to be the man and take authority.

So Paul's perspective is fair, in that, where Adam listened to his wife, Paul is being the man God intended all men to be: true leaders, not swayed, nor bribed, nor tempted, or persuaded whether by a single word or by continuous pressure. And not to be deceived by other doctrines that come from outside the realm of God's word.

But touching on Eve's punishment this was another thing which I had considered: did Eve die in childbirth?

We see the serpent is to be crushed by the Messiah, i.e., he receives the death penalty for sin 3:15; Adam is said to labor and toil til he returns to the ground 3:19 emphasizing his own physical death that will await him. But to Eve we have in pain she'll bring forth children. Not remark on a death penalty, or her impending physical demise. If we take a literary or poetic approach, one would assume, all three of them would be sharing the same fate: their deaths being foretold. So was Eve's pain, hard labor unto death? She sort of just disappears in scripture after Chapter 5 (I think)

If she didn't die in childbirth, then I think it is worth noting that God doesn't touch on her impending physical death, which might be because she was deceived.

Edited November 28, 2024 by Katie Rose Müller

[Sower]

1 hour ago, Katie Rose Müller said:

So, did they eat together or did Eve eat first,

My wife is now preparing our Thanksgiving dinner for our kids and grand kids coming over to share later.
As I think on your question about the woman eating first, I noticed my wife in the kitchen tasting the food being made ready.
This is how she has always done it, and my mom, and grandmother, to eat first, taste, then give to another to eat.

I have no scripture to confirm, but assume this is always how it has been.
The woman making sure what she prepares for others tastes good. (It's in their DNA)........

Sorry Katie, just lightening things up,  have a blessed and Happy Thanks  giving.

 

[Katie Rose Müller]

1 minute ago, Sower said:

My wife is now preparing our Thanksgiving dinner for our kids and grand kids coming over to share later.
As I think on your question about the woman eating first, I noticed my wife in the kitchen tasting the food being made ready.
This is how she has always done it, and my mom, and grandmother, to eat first, taste, then give to another to eat.

I have no scripture to confirm, but assume this is always how it has been.
The woman making sure what she prepares for others tastes good. (It's in their DNA)........

Sorry Katie, just lightening things up,  have a blessed and Happy Thanks  giving.

 

I appreciate this input because as a girl, I do the same thing. Ha ha. And have a Happy Thanksgiving as well!

Edited November 28, 2024 by Katie Rose Müller

[BornAgain490]

1 hour ago, Katie Rose Müller said:

NKJV Genesis 3:6-7 So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree desirable to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate. She also gave to her husband with her, and he ate. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves coverings.

So my question is this: did Eve eat of the fruit first and then give to her husband who then ate, or did she take the fruit, give to her husband and they ate together?

The reason I find this an important detail to uncover is that if Eve ate first and then gave to her husband who ate afterwards, Eve's eyes were not opened until Adam ate. As it's written by one man sin entered into the world Romans 5:12.

I've been study Genesis 1-3 and have come to the conclusion that Adam was acting High Priest, and the test of the trees was on Adam not on Eve. If Eve's eyes weren't open until he ate, this would strengthen my theory. Adam could have, as husband and priest, made atonement for his wife and disavowed her transgression (Numbers 30:8)

Exodus 32:21 And Moses said to Aaron, “What did this people do to you that you have brought so great a sin upon them?”

Even in Exodus, though the people asked for the Golden Calf (forbidden fruit, so to speak) the sin was put on Aaron first and foremost: what did these people do that you brought so great a sin upon them

Likewise, Adam brought sin upon Eve and the whole world. Eve, though having eaten, was under his headship. Was she blameless of sin because of the deception; blameless while she had her husband as High Priest and Mediator?

So, did they eat together or did Eve eat first,

I think you're correct in a sense.

In God's created order, man was created first, then woman from man to be a helper meet for man, which also means compatible.

Man was given the command by God not to eat of that tree.  The command was known by Eve, though we don't know from the text whether Eve was commanded directly by God, or whether Adam told her. 

Via God's created order, man had headship over woman, and thus a responsibility to ensure that God's command was not broken.  Perhaps this is why Adam is the one who is charged with sin, and Eve is simply charged as the one who was deceived. 

In any case, the text seems clear that Eve at first, "and gave also unto her husband..."  The words "also gave" indicate she ate first. 

 

[AdHoc]

4 hours ago, Katie Rose Müller said:

NKJV Genesis 3:6-7 So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree desirable to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate. She also gave to her husband with her, and he ate. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves coverings.

So my question is this: did Eve eat of the fruit first and then give to her husband who then ate, or did she take the fruit, give to her husband and they ate together?

The reason I find this an important detail to uncover is that if Eve ate first and then gave to her husband who ate afterwards, Eve's eyes were not opened until Adam ate. As it's written by one man sin entered into the world Romans 5:12.

I've been study Genesis 1-3 and have come to the conclusion that Adam was acting High Priest, and the test of the trees was on Adam not on Eve. If Eve's eyes weren't open until he ate, this would strengthen my theory. Adam could have, as husband and priest, made atonement for his wife and disavowed her transgression (Numbers 30:8)

Exodus 32:21 And Moses said to Aaron, “What did this people do to you that you have brought so great a sin upon them?”

Even in Exodus, though the people asked for the Golden Calf (forbidden fruit, so to speak) the sin was put on Aaron first and foremost: what did these people do that you brought so great a sin upon them

Likewise, Adam brought sin upon Eve and the whole world. Eve, though having eaten, was under his headship. Was she blameless of sin because of the deception; blameless while she had her husband as High Priest and Mediator?

So, did they eat together or did Eve eat first,

The grammar should answer your main question;

6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be 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. Ge 3:6.

"And" - a conjunction is cumulative, copulative and sequential. This is the sequence
Eve took the fruit
Eve ate the fruit
Eve handed Adam the fruit
Adam took it and ate
 

It says that Adam was "with her". He oversaw the operation. God's accusation was not that he ate from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, but that he "hearkened to the voice of his wife". There was a total breakdown of God's government. Eve should have referred the serpent to her head. Adam, in turn, should have addressed his Head. The answer would have been clear.

If Eve had eaten and Adam refused, Adam could have waited till Eve died and then God could have built another Eve. Coming from a sinless man could have continued Gods original plan.

But a case can be made that sin was already present. Man was give the task of "dressing and keeping" the Garden. Why was the serpent there? Adam had already failed to obey.

Another question that bears study is why did Eve disobey before they were fallen. They had no propensity to sin. I think the answer is found in the fact that until Law came in with Moses, the only Offering was the Burnt Offering. The Burnt Offering is the first in sequence and it shows that Christ was fully for the Father. Eve had not sinned yet, but she was for herself, not for God. You will note that Eve was tempted in exactly the same three points that Jesus was. (i) The matter of eating, (ii) the matter of something attractive to the eyes, and (iii) something to make you famous. Christ answered the Devil with God's unadulterated Word. Eve slightly changed the word. Eve showed slackness concerning accuracy.

Romans 5:12-17 deals with responsibility. Adam is responsible. As head over Eve. He had the say. Notice in Romans 5 it the MALE who causes the sin-nature to be multiplied. This is important because Jesus could be sinless as "Seed of the Woman". But if a human male was involved, Jesus would have been like every other man. Jesus takes into account that Mary is from the old creation and allows Himself, nay insists, to be Baptized - not for the remission of sins but for the burying in the death waters the origin of His flesh.

Intricate but beautiful.

[tatwo]

13 minutes ago, Katie Rose Müller said:

Paul is discussing the issue of deception when regarding Eve, not rebellion which would have been Adam's sin. So I think there is a stark difference between the two.

Interesting perspective Katie...

Adam sinned no doubt...

For the discussions sake...I have always read the account...

"Now the serpent was more crafty than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said to the woman, "Indeed, has God said, 'You shall not eat from any tree of the garden'?"  (2)  The woman said to the serpent, "From the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat;  (3)  but from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, 'You shall not eat from it or touch it, or you will die.'"  (4)  The serpent said to the woman, "You surely will not die!  (5)  "For God knows that in the day you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."  

...as the record of how the deception actually played out...and in the process Eve initially sets him straight on the matter...revealing that she knows what God desired. Then the serpent reloads by twisting the words God spoke once again...this time with the result of Eve being deceived.

It seems to me that the result of "deception" in a situation like this...is likely to be rebellion and disobedience...among other things? So I can agree that there is a difference between "deception and rebellion" for sure...here it would seem that the deception fomented the rebellion against God exactly as the serpent intended.

(6)  When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate." Genesis 3:1-6 NASB

"Good for food...Lust of the flesh...a delight to the eyes...Lust of the eyes...desirable to make one wise...Boastful pride of life." That's likely why Paul said "And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression."  Transgression there can be interpreted as rebellion...

Allow me to add this...she began to..."reason by the soul"...as a result of the deception...something they had not done prior as I see it. The next verse tells us that...I think..."Then the eyes of both of them were opened"...We know the eyes of the spirit were open...they walked with God who is a Spirit...we know the eyes of the flesh were open...the fruit was a delight to the eyes...leaving the "eyes of the soul" the only eyes that were not yet open...right?

As a note...on my interpretation of Genesis 3:6 from above...which doesn't really have to do with our discussion Katie...but is an interesting take none the less.

"Good for food...Lust of the flesh...a delight to the eyes...Lust of the eyes...desirable to make one wise...Boastful pride of life."

In 1st John 2:16 brother John wrote this..."For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the boastful pride of life, is not from the Father, but is from the world." 

In the Genesis 3:6 account...we have our first look at the "world" as I see it. The world in this context defines Satan's "kosmos" or "world"...hence...I suggest this is the earliest vestiges of the dragon's beast? It's a little different...I know.

Tatwo...:) 

 

[Katie Rose Müller]

47 minutes ago, tatwo said:

It seems to me that the result of "deception" in a situation like this...is likely to be rebellion and disobedience...among other things? So I can agree that there is a difference between "deception and rebellion" for sure...here it would seem that the deception fomented the rebellion against God exactly as the serpent intended.

 

Agreed that deception and rebellion are linked, but there's conscious rebellion, knowing  exactly what you're doing and going against it with intent. But Eve seems to have a naivety similar to a child being told no cookies before dinner or you'll get in trouble and then another child comes along and says, did Dad really say no cookies before dinner? You're not going to get in trouble, he just knows if you eat the cookies beforehand you'll figure out how to bake your own. Meanwhile there's crumbs on the other kids shirt, obvious he ate cookies and well, he didn't get in trouble and wouldn't it be great to know how to make cookies oneself?!

It's shortsighted thinking. Yes rebellious and disobedient, but not in a malevolent way. When one is posed with two contradicting statements then one can second guess and even wonder if rules changed. To uneducated people, they can even be swayed by a persuasive argument and agree with the last thing they heard; ignoring the first thing they learned--look at academia for example. Eve's behavior seems more childlike, why would anyone lie to me? Eve speaking with the serpent reminds me more of a curious child that's inspecting and exploring the world around them.

Matthew Poole makes an interesting point:

Quote

Genesis 3:6, when the woman saw, i.e. understood that it was a tree to be desired to make one wise, may seem to imply, both that the serpent told her, and that she believed, that the speech and understanding of the serpent was the effect of the eating of that fruit; and therefore that if it raised him from a brute beast to the degree of a reasonable creature, it would elevate her from the human to a kind of Divine nature or condition.

The idea that Eve saw a serpent suddenly gain verbal abilities would definitely provoke curiosity and awe. Without the Holy Spirit, she wouldn't have had the conviction and control to say no, or to cast down high thoughts and wicked imaginations. All she saw was a pretty fruit and she could become wise. Wisdom is good.

@AdHoc You make a good point about the serpent already being present in the garden and that Adam had failed to keep it out. He may not have known the serpent was a danger, but once it started speaking against the law of God, Adam should have driven the snake out but he didn't. To keep and dress the garden was to hedge about (as with thorns) and to cultivate. He was instated as guardian. Ironic that he was to hedge the garden with thorns just for thorns and briers to grow up and push him. out.