Were there 2 liars at the fall or just 1?

[firehill]

This thread as far as I'm concerned, has run it's course and has nowhere else to go.

Well then let's have a look to see if indeed it has run it's course.

Under question is, did Eve tell the truth or add to God's word?

1) There is evidence that God spoke to them both about the prohibition because it is encompassed in what they could eat, every tree that has fruit with seed in it.

2) The scriptural context of Eve's quote supports WHEN Eve was deceived according to her heart and thoughts and actions which was after the serpent lied.

3) There is evidence that God gave his prohibition more than once to Adam in different form therefore God could have given it to Eve in different form also since we know that he spoke to them both about what they could eat which encompassed what they could not eat.

4) There is no evidence that she added to God's word. She wasn't reprimanded, God didn't correct here, Adam didn't, Paul didn't, the whole bible is silent on such a matter. To add to God's word is a very serious matter yet the bible is silent about Eve having done so.

5) The difference between what Eve said, God said, and what God told Adam in chp 2 is not in itself evidence that proves that she added to God's word.

With ALL this scriptural evidence in mind, it would only be fair TO the bible to say that she told the truth because that's all the evidence IT GIVES! This is what the bible says because this is only what it gives to us regarding the matter.

Did I miss anything?

I forgot to post earlier this:

We have the evidence. We have God's actual quote, then we have Eve's statement that adds to that quote.

What God told Adam does not prove that she added to God's prohibition since she quoted God using the plural 'you.' Eve didn't add to what God told Adam because she quoted what God told THEM. That's the point. Not what God told Adam.

I have one more observation.

In Gen 2:16 God says to Adam:

"Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat,"

In Gen 3:2 Eve says to the serpent: "we may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:"

Seems to me Eve is misquoting God again - what has happened to "freely eat"? But on this occasion she is taking away from God's words.

If there is evidence that Eve misquoted God by taking from His words - and the PLAIN meaning of Scripture, sans assumptions of private and unrecorded conversations, provides such evidence - then there is no good reason to disbelieve that Eve also added to God's words. In fact there is a neat correlation with this opening deception of adding to and taking from God's words, with the warning in Revelation 18:19 about not adding to or taking from the words of the prophecy.

Ruth

It is important for us to observe what Eve said, God said. She said that they could eat fruit from the trees in the garden BUT if you look closer (I've provided what she said below) you can see that when she was telling the serpent what they could eat she WASN'T QUOTING God. No. She quoted God's prohibition. She did not quote God about what they were told they could eat (Gen 1:29). Besisdes, you're still comparing what God told Adam to what God told them (Eve's words and her quote, and we know that God spoke to them about what they could eat...). And since the difference between what God said to Adam, and what he said to them is not evidence that says she added to his prohibiton because it's about what he said to them anyway, not Adam therefore it is not logical to try and make what God told Adam the standard to be measured against. Also, God didn't take away from his word when he quoted himself, in Ge 3, saying to Adam, 'You must not eat it' (very similar to the construction she said, God said, 'you must not touch it' in other words, God spoke that way.) Yet in Genesis 2 that is not what he said to Adam.

Here's also what God said to them:

29 Then God said, "I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food.

2 The woman said to the serpent, "We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3 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.' "

5) The difference between what Eve said, God said, and what God told Adam in chp 2 is not in itself evidence that proves that she added to God's word.

[firehill]

I have one more observation.

In Gen 2:16 God says to Adam:

"Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat,"

In Gen 3:2 Eve says to the serpent: "we may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:"

Seems to me Eve is misquoting God again - what has happened to "freely eat"? But on this occasion she is taking away from God's words.

If there is evidence that Eve misquoted God by taking from His words - and the PLAIN meaning of Scripture, sans assumptions of private and unrecorded conversations, provides such evidence - then there is no good reason to disbelieve that Eve also added to God's words. In fact there is a neat correlation with this opening deception of adding to and taking from God's words, with the warning in Revelation 18:19 about not adding to or taking from the words of the prophecy.

Ruth

Ok...ok. I would like to say this. I do agree with firehill on this point.

4) There is no evidence that she added to God's word. She wasn't reprimanded, God didn't correct here, Adam didn't, Paul didn't, the whole bible is silent on such a matter. To add to God's word is a very serious matter yet the bible is silent about Eve having done so.

I would think that there would be some type of "Rember Lot's wife" type of dealing. Meaning there would have been a dont go after the way of Eve who added and took away from what God said. Fact is...there is not.

Also Ruth. I think it is nit-picking to find words that she did not say. Let me ask have you ever para-phrased the Bible. Well according to this logic when ever you para-phrase you take away or add to God's Word.

Did Paul take away anthing or add to the Word of God....No. But there was a progression. Revelation was added, and Paul's view increased. Could we not say so with the Eve's words. They sound more progressive, then anything.

I thought that was the object of this kind of "contextual analysis" - to find words that weren't recorded and build a doctrine on such omissions.

Ruth

The objective of contextual analysis is yes, to look at the evidence that is provided. I'll nit pick as I leap from verse to verse.

Did Paul take away anthing or add to the Word of God....No. But there was a progression. Revelation was added, and Paul's view increased. Could we not say so with the Eve's words. They sound more progressive, then anything.

Excellent point, ruck1b!

[methinkshe]

I have one more observation.

In Gen 2:16 God says to Adam:

"Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat,"

In Gen 3:2 Eve says to the serpent: "we may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:"

Seems to me Eve is misquoting God again - what has happened to "freely eat"? But on this occasion she is taking away from God's words.

If there is evidence that Eve misquoted God by taking from His words - and the PLAIN meaning of Scripture, sans assumptions of private and unrecorded conversations, provides such evidence - then there is no good reason to disbelieve that Eve also added to God's words. In fact there is a neat correlation with this opening deception of adding to and taking from God's words, with the warning in Revelation 18:19 about not adding to or taking from the words of the prophecy.

Ruth

Ok...ok. I would like to say this. I do agree with firehill on this point.

4) There is no evidence that she added to God's word. She wasn't reprimanded, God didn't correct here, Adam didn't, Paul didn't, the whole bible is silent on such a matter. To add to God's word is a very serious matter yet the bible is silent about Eve having done so.

I would think that there would be some type of "Rember Lot's wife" type of dealing. Meaning there would have been a dont go after the way of Eve who added and took away from what God said. Fact is...there is not.

Also Ruth. I think it is nit-picking to find words that she did not say. Let me ask have you ever para-phrased the Bible. Well according to this logic when ever you para-phrase you take away or add to God's Word.

Did Paul take away anthing or add to the Word of God....No. But there was a progression. Revelation was added, and Paul's view increased. Could we not say so with the Eve's words. They sound more progressive, then anything.

I thought that was the object of this kind of "contextual analysis" - to find words that weren't recorded and build a doctrine on such omissions.

Ruth

The objective of contextual analysis is yes, to look at the evidence that is provided. I'll nit pick as I leap from verse to verse.

Did Paul take away anthing or add to the Word of God....No. But there was a progression. Revelation was added, and Paul's view increased. Could we not say so with the Eve's words. They sound more progressive, then anything.

Excellent point, ruck1b!

Oh dear, oh dear! Now I am being asked to believe that when Eve added "nor touch" it was because she was having a continuing revelation of God's commandment. Was her omission of "FREELY eat" a part of her continuing revelation, too?

Ruth

[firehill]

Oh dear, oh dear! Now I am being asked to believe that when Eve added "nor touch" it was because she was having a continuing revelation of God's commandment. Was her omission of "FREELY eat" a part of her continuing revelation, too?

Ruth

Answer these question because I think you missed what I was saying above. When she told the serpent what they could eat was she quoting God? Or did she only quote God about the prohibiton he gave to them both? When God said to Adam, in Ge 3 quoting himself that he said, 'you must not eat it' was he misquoting himself? Also is this contruction not similar to 'you must not touch it'?

[methinkshe]

Oh dear, oh dear! Now I am being asked to believe that when Eve added "nor touch" it was because she was having a continuing revelation of God's commandment. Was her omission of "FREELY eat" a part of her continuing revelation, too?

Ruth

Answer this question becasuse I think you missed what I was saying above. When she told the serpent what they could eat was she quoting God? Or did she only quote God about the prohibiton he gave to them both?

She MISquoted God where her words are not in agreement with what God said to Adam IN Genesis 2 and she quoted God where her words are in agreement with what God said to Adam in Genesis 2.

Now you answer this question.

If I allow for the sake of argument that God told Eve in an unrecorded conversation that that she must neither eat NOR TOUCH, then did He not neglect to inform Adam that he must not touch? Because it is not recorded that God told Adam not to touch. Therefore there are different rules for Adam and Eve. Poor old Adam could've copped for the penalty even before Eve existed if he had decided to have a game of football with a fallen fruit from the tree of knowledge. EEEK! Don't even TOUCH the fru..........shoot, where's a fig-leaf!

Ruth

[Guest Biblicist]

I think the mistake people make is that the ACT of eating the fruit was their sin.

I believe it started earlier than that. The act of eating the fruit was just the outward sign of an inward condition.

Adam and Eve had the free will to choose between good and evil, unlike us who are evil from birth and have no choice in that matter. When faced with evil, the purest evil, they crumbled. They chose evil. They chose to speak to evil, they chose to reason with evil, they chose to listen to evil, they chose to believe evil.

She did add to God's words but not in a deceptive sort of way, but in a decieved sort of way. Confused, she tried to expound on God's command to counter Satan's overstatement.

I think the question you should be asking yourself is; How do I mimic Eve's sin and how can I draw closer to God so I do not do that?

[firehill]

She MISquoted God where her words are not in agreement with what God said to Adam IN Genesis 2 and she quoted God where her words are in agreement with what God said to Adam in Genesis 2.

She only quoted God regarding his prohibition not regarding what they could eat. Therefore what she said they could eat has nothing to do with leaving out from God's word, in the sense of law, his prohibition.

Now you answer this question.

If I allow for the sake of argument that God told Eve in an unrecorded conversation

God told Adam in an unrecorded conversation, 'you must not eat it'.

that that she must neither eat NOR TOUCH, then did He not neglect to inform Adam that he must not touch? Because it is not recorded that God told Adam not to touch.

It's not about neglecting Adam. God wouldn't do that. Does the bible say he negelcted Adam? See, your working from ideas outside of scripture. Where you have to start from is with what scripture DOES SAY and go from there. Here your starting with an idea of neglect.

Therefore there are different rules for Adam and Eve.

No. Remember Eve said that God said that BOTH were not to eat nor touch.

Poor old Adam could've copped for the penalty even before Eve existed if he had decided to have a game of football with a fallen fruit from the tree of knowledge.

The eating is what would bring death. The touching with the desire to eat is what would bring death. When they touched they touched with the desire to eat. This is different from a game of fruit ball with oneself.

Please answer my questions again. Besides I edited my post so there are more questions I asked.

[firehill]

She did add to God's words but not in a deceptive sort of way, but in a decieved sort of way. Confused, she tried to expound on God's command to counter Satan's overstatement.

I think you need to back up, read what has been posted recently in this thread and respond to those points. How would you explain then scripture showing that she was deceived after the serpent lied and not before he asked her a question?

[methinkshe]

I think the mistake people make is that the ACT of eating the fruit was their sin.

I believe it started earlier than that. The act of eating the fruit was just the outward sign of an inward condition.

Adam and Eve had the free will to choose between good and evil, unlike us who are evil from birth and have no choice in that matter. When faced with evil, the purest evil, they crumbled. They chose evil. They chose to speak to evil, they chose to reason with evil, they chose to listen to evil, they chose to believe evil.

She did add to God's words but not in a deceptive sort of way, but in a decieved sort of way. Confused, she tried to expound on God's command to counter Satan's overstatement.

I think the question you should be asking yourself is; How do I mimic Eve's sin and how can I draw closer to God so I do not do that?

I agree with Biblicist's last post. Also, I am going to concur with EricH's observation that this thread has run its course., and should probably have done so before I raised my last observation. We are now in the realm of vain and contentious arguments (probably have been for a long time) that are edifying to no-one. All I can offer is that there are two ways of reading the Bible: one is to justify one's preconceptions through the Bible and the other is to allow the Bible to form one's conceptions. It is my impression that you are doing the former and not the latter.

Ruth

Ruth

[Ovedya]

I agree that this has run its course.