Sermon Tone Analysis

3 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made.

And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? 2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: 3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. 4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: 5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

3 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’?” 2 And the woman said to the serpent, “We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden, 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.’ ” 4 But the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die.

5 For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”

Looking at the Reply

2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: 3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die

weakness

wisdom

weakness to enter into discourse with the serpent

Instead of turning away, the woman replied

She might have perceived by his question that he had no good design

But her curiosity, and perhaps her surprise, to hear a serpent speak, led her into further talk with him

It is a dangerous thing to treat with a temptation, which ought at first to be rejected with disdain and abhorrence

should therefore have started back with a Get thee behind me, Satan, thou art an offence to me

Those that would be kept from harm must keep out of harm’s way

7  Leave the presence of a fool,

for there you do not meet words of knowledge.

27  Cease to hear instruction, my son,

and you will stray from the words of knowledge.

It was her wisdom to take notice of the liberty God had granted them

that was her weakness, but she had wisdom

It was her wisdom to take notice of the liberty God had granted them

We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden

thanks to our Maker, we have plenty and variety enough allowed us

To prevent our being uneasy at the restraints of religion, it is good often to take a view of the liberties and comforts of it.

however she changes the precept and the threat,

notice these five elements that happen

First, she omits those elements in the command, “any” and “freely,” which placed the prohibition in a context of liberality

At this point she still is thinking collectively with her husband, from whom, as the narrator implies, she received the command: “we may eat”

this will become important in the serpent’s rebuttal, but let’s stay to these two verses for today

Second, Eve identifies the tree according to its location rather than its significance

third, she refers to “God” as the serpent had done, rather than “the LORD”

Fourth, she also adds the phrase “you must not touch it”

which may make the prohibition more stringent

this is where the dangers of legalism comes in

Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die

she adhered to the command, and faithfully repeated it, as of unquestionable certainty

she adds

Neither shall you touch it

not (as some think) tacitly to reflect upon the command as too strict

seems to have been with a good intention

to make a fence about it

Neither shall you touch it

to her credit the fear of touching the fruit may have been out of deference for God’s command

Adam?

We must not eat, therefore we will not touch.

It is forbidden in the highest degree, and the authority of the prohibition is sacred to us.

The woman’s first mistake was her willingness to talk with the serpent and to respond to the creature’s cynicism by rehearsing God’s prohibition

However, she compounded her mistake by misrepresenting God’s command as the serpent had done

although definitely without the malicious intent of the snake

The serpent had succeeded in drawing the woman’s attention to another possible interpretation of God’s command

proved by this very exaggeration that it appeared too stringent even to her

fifth element in these two verses

First, she omits those elements in the command, “any” and “freely,” which placed the prohibition in a context of liberality

Finally, she failed to capture the urgency of certain death, “You will [surely] die”

is not so particular and faithful in the repetition of that as of the precept

At this point she still is thinking collectively with her husband, from whom, as the narrator implies, she received the command: “we may eat”

Second, Eve identifies the tree according to its location rather than its significance

third, she refers to “God” as the serpent had done, rather than “the LORD”

Fourth, she also adds the phrase “you must not touch it”

which may make the prohibition more stringent

God has said, In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die

all she makes of that is, Lest you die

so we see...

In her answer, Eve extolled the large extent of liberty they enjoyed in ranging at will amongst all the trees

one only excepted, with respect to which, she declared there was no doubt, either of the prohibition or the penalty

But there is reason to think that she had already received an injurious impression

for in using the words “lest ye die,” instead of “ye shall surely die” [Ge 2:17], she spoke as if the tree had been forbidden because of some poisonous quality of its fruit

in conclusion

her love and confidence towards God were already beginning to waver

The tempter, perceiving this, became bolder in his assertions.

Wavering faith and wavering resolutions give great advantage to the tempter.

Here was the beginning of her fall

From doubt, the tempter advances to a direct denial of the truth of the divine threat, and to a malicious suspicion of the divine love

this is where we are for tomorrow

Ye shall not surely die

The original threat of 2:17 points to the certainty of death upon disobedience, but it says nothing of an immediate death

The serpent will introduce the idea of an immediate death into the meaning of 2:17 to deceive the woman

how dangerous to add or take away from the Word of God

18 I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, 19 and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.

back to that tree....

more about that tomorrow!