| Author | Message | ||
| Wolfgang Registered user Username: Wolfgang Post Number: 144 Registered: 10-2005 |
you know SDA's arent the only ones to think that eve was alone in the garden,I work with a catholic and a pentacostal who say they were taught the same thing,I brought this up to my husband who is nnot a EGW fan,but he believes Eve was alone too,he said to build bible text on it not to take just one verse and make a claim and that satan wouldnt have had a chance to led them astray if they were together because there is strenght in numbers,I kinda agree with that,but Im trying to look at other bible text to build,because I as a ex sda I know you shouldnt just tAKE one verse and think I've arrived at something. any thoughts? | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 1908 Registered: 10-2004  |
I think that according to the passage in Genesis, Eve may very well have been alone when the serpent deceived her, but it is very clear that when she took and ate the fruit Adam was "with her" (Genesis 3:6).
There doesn't seem to necessarily be any indication that Eve and the serpent were even anywhere near the tree when they had their conversation. In fact, the passage seems to me to perhaps be implying the opposite. For example, when it says after their conversation, "When the woman saw that the tree was good for food"--it sounds like perhaps she had never seen the tree before, even, until after she talked to the serpent? Also, verse 3 makes it sound to me like Eve and the serpent may not have been at the tree, since Eve says "but from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden..." The way Eve and the serpent speak of the tree, it sounds to me like they might not have been at the tree. So, what I'm saying is that verses 1-5 may have occurred somewhere else, NOT at the tree, and that Eve may have been alone when talking to the serpent, since he does only address Eve. But in verse 6, when Eve saw that the tree was good for food and ate of it, she WAS with Adam, as the text clearly says. Perhaps this is what your Catholic and Pentecostal friends meant? Jeremy (Message edited by Jeremy on July 06, 2007) | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 6231 Registered: 12-2003  |
Hi--you're right, other people think they were apart as well. My hunch is that people read into this story the idea that Adam had left Eve because of the deep-seated belief that the husband wouldn't have let his wife sin if he had been there. Further, he wouldn't have eaten the fruit himself if he had really realized what it was and that it came from that tree. However, the Bible holds Adam, not Eve, responsible for the sin of humanity: 1 Corinthians 15:22: "For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive." And Romans 5:14: "Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who was a pattern of the one to come." In Genesis 2 we learn why God held Adam responsible for humanity's sin. He gave Adam authority over the earth, and Adam named the animals prior to Eve's creation. God also gave Adam the instruction regarding not eating the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Genesis 2:16-17, "And the Lord God commanded the man, 'You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from thetree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die'." In verses 20-21 it tells of God creating Eve from Adam's rib because no suitable helper for him was found. Adam was created as the head of the human race. He was given authority over the earth, and he also was given the authority to name Eve. God gave Adam the instruction regarding sin. The implication here is that it was Adam's responsibility to be sure Eve understood God's instructions. Adam was given responsibility for Eve to understand God's test and command. In Genesis 3, when Eve is deceived by the serpent, Adam did not disabuse her of the deception. The Bible is clear that he was with her. Gary Inrig talked about this in the theology/leadership class Richard attended, and Gary said that Adam allowed Eve to listen to the serpent and be deceived. In a manner still common among men, Adam stood by and watched in some fascination as Eve flirted with danger and sin. Paul is clear in 1 Timothy 1 that Eve was deceived, not Adam. But the Bible holds Adam responsible for sin coming into the human race. Adam did not protect Eve from the sin of deception—and God held him accountable. Eve was deceived, but Adam sinned with his eyes wide open. 1 Corinthians 15 explains that Jesus is the second "Adam". Jesus is the new head of the human race, and He took full responsibility for humanity's sin on himself. He sacrificed himself to rescue us from the darkness of deception. He did what the first Adam did not do. Where the first Adam stood by and allowed his wife to fall into sin, the second Adam took our sin and cleanses us and washes us and presents us to himself as a spotless church without stain, wrinkle, or blemish (Ephe 5:27). So yes, Dawn—there are other texts to show the real issue. Adam did not stray—and God held Adam responsible for the sin of the entire human race because he was entrusted with the spiritual education and protection of his wife and offspring. Colleen | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 1909 Registered: 10-2004 |
In case anyone misunderstands what I was saying above, EGW definitely does contradict the Bible, since she says that Adam was NOT with Eve when she plucked the fruit and ate it--that instead, Eve had to go run off to find Adam and give him some fruit. This contradicts God's Word, which clearly says: "she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate." (Genesis 3:6 NASB). Jeremy (Message edited by Jeremy on July 06, 2007) | ||
| Reb Registered user Username: Reb Post Number: 293 Registered: 5-2007 |
Hmmmmm, I wonder. By not "disturbing" my wife's beliefs in Adventism, am I continuing to allow her to be decieved? There's only so much I can do and the rest is up to God and to her. All I can do is continue to love her and show her Christian behaviour from myself. | ||
| Wolfgang Registered user Username: Wolfgang Post Number: 145 Registered: 10-2005 |
I came across this interpetation It is possible to be with someone and not actually in their presence. For instance, when I am at home "with" my wife, she might be in another part of the house and not visible to me. Adam could have been with Eve in the same way. With her in the garden but not in her presence. Given the serious implications of Adam's presence during the temptation of Eve, it is unlikely that any reliable translation would leave out the phase "with her", yet many do. Assuming Adam was an actual observer of the events but said and did nothing to interfere would necessitate certain negative character traits that may be commonplace for many modern men but highly unlikely in a perfect, unfallen Adam who, as yet, had no sin nature. God addressed Adam first when He found them in the Garden. If Adam was present and had been deceived by the serpent, it is likely that he would have blamed the serpent, as did Eve. Instead he places all the blame on Eve who had offered him the forbidden fruit. There is no mention of the serpent. There is no record in the text of Genesis that God ever directly communicated His warning regarding the forbidden fruit to Eve. He did tell Adam. Eve's response to the serpent when pressed on the issue includes an embellishment (don't even touch it) that would be consistent with a warning from Adam who added this condition in an attempt to protect his mate. (an indication of his love for her) Would this same Adam stand by and watch as his mate engaged in an activity for which God had promised death? If he were deceived, possibly but it would be unlikely that he would have stood by passively otherwise. Satan (the serpent) throughout the scriptures seems to prefer personal, private attacks on individuals that are gauged to strike at our weak points or when we are at our weakest. For example, the temptations of Christ only occurred when Jesus was alone and weak at the end of His 40-day fast in the desert. Adam and Eve, when together, wouldn't make good targets, as they would have been at their strongest. Alone, either could have been vulnerable. Satan loves our private sins. Adam and Eve before the fall had equal standing before God. There was no concept of headship or defined roles for their conduct. God's response to the sin of Eve was to change her relationship in respect to Adam and Himself. She was told that her desire would be to her husband and that he would rule over her. From this point forward in scripture we see man portrayed in a role of spiritual leadership and as the head of the wife. If Adam had been present during the temptation, and indifferent or deceived alongside Eve, it begs the question, why would God have given Adam headship? Adam's punishment came about "because you have (he had) listened to the voice of your (his) wife, and have eaten from the tree about which I commanded you, saying, ‘You shall not eat from it’;" In other words, Adam's sin was because he chose to listen to his wife rather than to God. The text doesn't include her words, but based on the context, if deception played any role at all in Adam's sin, its source would have to from Eve, not the serpent. the author appears to be baptist the whole article can be found at http://www.tlogical.net/adameve.htm I guess what got me thinking about it is that I was watching the central study hour on 3ABN and the pastor was teaching that Eve was alone and she had wandered off and was deceived lots of EGW qoutes. Actually I think he said my favorite author,why is it when they say "my favorite author they never say who it is???? | ||
| Grace_alone Registered user Username: Grace_alone Post Number: 653 Registered: 6-2006  |
Reb, you don't have to bombard her, but you could say that you were doing some Bible study and found that in the Bible. She could see that for herself! One night my kids told me some EGW things about Adam and Eve and the Serpent. Funny, because they have only been to an SDA church twice. I just picked up my Bible and said let's read and see. Sure enough, we couldn't find those EGW things in there! Back on topic... | ||
| Jorgfe Registered user Username: Jorgfe Post Number: 358 Registered: 11-2005 |
Reb, It is especially interesting if you happen to have volume 1 of the Children's Bible Stories series. It has a full page picture of Eve by herself, along with much embellished story about Even being by herself and the running to find her husband. If she had known where her husband was she would not have needed to try to find him. The Baptist church that I attend had a donated set of the books in the church library. When I showed that picture and story to the pastor's wife, she was astute enough to immediately realize that the story line was different from the way she had learned it in the Bible. The next week the entire series were removed from the library. We need to do the same with doctor's offices, and point out the subtle twisting and distorting of truth they contain. They are no more innocent than the fruit on the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Gilbert Jorgensen | ||
| Marysroses Registered user Username: Marysroses Post Number: 65 Registered: 4-2007 |
I also have had the Bible Stories AND the bedtime stories removed from our parish library. Someone had dontated them and they were put on the shelf. When I saw them I went straight to our pastor and they were promptly gone. I hope they were tossed and not just passed on to someone else. People think they are 'safe' becuase they are used to seeing the sample copy in doctor's offices. Interestingly, I have an old sample copy that used to be in my father in law's waiting room (He was a doctor). We kept it for sentimental reasons (my husband's a packrat). I flipped through it, and it wasn't just vol. 1 as I had always assumed, it was a selection of excerpts, NONE Of which had really controversial material. I'm guessing thats why donated copies are accepted without much question. MarysRoses | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 6241 Registered: 12-2003 |
Dawn, I don't agree with the conclusion in the quote above that there was no "headship" of Adam over Eve. He clearly was given the responsibility to name her and to teach her about the tree. God gave Adam that responsibility. Further, the discussion of husbands being heads of wives occurs in the NT, not in the context of the OT. Only in the context of the church, where men and women are equally alive in Christ, is this concept introduced and spelled out. It is part of the New Covenant teachings Paul gave. Headship does not suggest domination. Quite the opposite. Headship is a role that protects, nurtures, equips, honors, and exalts. The model is how the Father exercises headship over Jesus. He exalts Him, gives Him His own glory and authority and honor. He puts all things under His feet. The head makes the body much more than it could be without the head. It does not suppress, control, withhold, or demand from the body. It cares and nurtures it as itself. The body is honored and glorified by the head. (See Ephesians 5.) Colleen | ||
| Philharris Registered user Username: Philharris Post Number: 98 Registered: 5-2007  |
He is my take on this topic: 1. Satan deceived Eve. 2. Eve added to what God had commanded them not to do. 3. It was not a sin to touch the fruit. Or even to pick it. 4. Eve handed the fruit to Adam and together, they both ate it. 5. Some kinds of "wisdom" is not good. 6. Adam put the "voice" of Eve ahead of God's command. 7. The Bible clearly states that sin entered into the world, and all the created universe, because of Adam's sin. 8. Any "what ifs" or "might of beens" is shear conjecture and should be avoided. Lets stay with what the Bible says. Don't take away and don't add to it. 9. What EGW has to say adds to the Bible and exposes her as a false prophet. Having determine that, what is there left to say on this topic? Phil | ||
| Honestwitness Registered user Username: Honestwitness Post Number: 260 Registered: 7-2005  |
In the SDA Sabbath School class I visited today, the lesson was about Adam and Eve. At one point the teacher said, "Now this isn't in the Bible, but some people believe that Adam and Eve were not together when the serpent deceived Eve." Then another participant said, "Isn't there some controversy about whether Adam was there with Eve?" Another participant answered, "I personally believe Adam wasn't there with Eve, because the serpent addressed only Eve. When my wife and I are together and someone comes up to talk to us, they don't just speak to my wife. They speak to both of us." At the time, that sounded convincing. However, now that I think of it, I know that sometimes when my husband and I are standing beside each other in the same room, people often come up and talk to only one of us. This happens especially if the other one is obviously absorbed in something else, like bending over to get a drink from the drinking fountain or is involved in a conversation with another person. Phil, you make a good point that we must be careful to stay focused on what is actually written. But sometimes the written Word is puzzling. As long as we acknowledge that our conversation is merely conjecture, we're ok. It's when we start telling others that our interpretation is the only right one and all others are wrong that we get into dangerous territory. Honestwitness (Message edited by honestwitness on July 07, 2007) |
