3 Statements...Just True or False

So nobody did it? Sounds about like at my house.

Read what it says. Both came clean and told the truth. No blame game going on at all. They both admit to eating the fruit.

God asked Adam, and Adam answers, the woman gave me and I did eat.
God asked Eve, and Eve answers, the serpent beguiled me (deceived) and I did eat.

If he was taking the blame he would have said I ate the fruit. No need to bring anyone else into it.
Two of my kids get into a fight. I ask who started it. One says he punched me. The other says he pushed me first.
Both told the truth. Both were trying to mitigate blame.
The same with Adam and Eve.

Reading in human reasoning is not good study. Read it and believe it for what it says.…and I did eat. No blame game…makes for good preaching, but it’s not there.

Only pastors and commentaries mess it up when they try to read in more than what is plainly stated.

Genesis 3
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?
12 And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat. True statement, no blame
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. True statement, no blame

If he was taking the blame he would have said I ate the fruit. No need to bring anyone else into it.
Two of my kids get into a fight. I ask who started it. One says he punched me. The other says he pushed me first.
Both told the truth. Both were trying to mitigate blame.
The same with Adam and Eve.

TRUE|
TRUE
TRUE

Reading in human reasoning is not good study. Read it and believe it for what it says.…and I did eat. No blame game…makes for good preaching, but it’s not there.

Reading in human reasoning is not good study. Read it and believe it for what it says.…and I did eat. No blame game…makes for good preaching, but it’s not there.

I agree with Cameron on this one.


It isn't that Adam or Eve told an untruth, but rather, they chose not to tell the WHOLE truth.

A.) They omitted the fact that both of them knew perfectly well they were sinning, and they knew perfectly well they were going against God's clear directive, on purpose, with the clear intent to disobey. They really glossed over the depth of their understanding, and the clarity of their willfulness.
(These statements of Adam and Eve don't sound like statements of repentance... they're more like the statements of children being caught.)

B. While omitting their own deep knowledge and sinful intent (which shows one's culpability) they somehow DID remember to include another person's involvement and culpability.

C.) These aren't lies, but they seem to be sort of pitiful "deflections", exactly as children do when they're caught in some mischief. They try to downplay their own culpability and distract you with someone else's involvement. It seems to be EXACTLY what Cameron described with his own children.

D.) We should also, in fairness, consider that by this time, when they were explaining it to God, they were no longer in innocence... they were fallen sinners at this point. So it's no great surprise if they were trying to explain things in a way to downplay their culpability.


You guys have a lovely day... and don't take any apples from snakes.
: )

.

So her death would not leave him alone, or so she would not die alone, or some mix of
those two is how I have heard it explained--posth explains this sort of thing well-

He likens it to Christ sacrificing himself for His bride... Did you mention this already?-

I can't think of any place in scripture that suggests Adam had any ability to save Eve from anything, in any capacity.

Adam was just a man; he didn't have divinity like Christ; and therefore he had no ability to effect a divine act like saving someone from their sin.

Adam was just a man.

.

This is true. And I supposed Adam had to know that, at the least after he ate the fruit, that his eating only sealed the destiny of all mankind to suffer death, which scripture does tell us. I posed the question to determine whether it was or was not the intent of speculation that he ate to be with her, given the assertion that scripture that says "He (Adam) is the pattern of the One to come (Romans 5:14b)." supports this reasoning that Adam ate. My current position is that Eve had nothing to do with Adam's desire to eat, and might even argue her influence if I thought about it long enough. Rather she was merely a 'tool' by which Adam's access to the fruit was made more convenient. Indeed, the eating thereof resulted in Eve's acquiescence? of a persistent unrequited love.
Might I be too very far off to consider that possibility?

It just occurred to me what Adam might've been missing that would've qualified him as imperfect, and that which Jesus had an abundance of...
LOVE?!

You are talking to yourself again. I'm not judging, but if you start disagreeing with yourself, might be considered a bit of a red flag.

I read somewhere on the internet that people that talk to themselves are geniuses.

Was it a self help group?

I read somewhere on the internet that people that talk to themselves are geniuses.

Posth did explain that perspective very well, but maybe I'm a bit too jaded
to be convince of it. Either that, or Posth might just be a hopeless romantic.