Why did the serpent tempt Eve instead of Adam?

[Guest]

the union of a man in wife in scripture tells us many things. the man represents the spirit, (our spirit is supposed to govern us) and the woman represents the flesh. this is why man is the head of woman, the Spirit is supposed to be over the flesh. Satan came at Adam thru his flesh which was eve and this is how satan always comes, thru our flesh.

Here I go taking the thread off course again:

Benaiah, I've never heard this interpretation of marriage before. Where does it come from?

How far do you press the analogy? Personally, it doesn't sound too flattering to be considered the "flesh" part of the marriage. Here are some things said about the flesh in scripture:

1. It profits nothing (John 6:63)
   It's weak (Romans 6:19)
   It serves the law of sin (Romans 7)
   Those in the flesh cannot please God (Romans 8:8 )
   Its works are pretty disgusting (Galatians 5:19)
   Those who are Christ's have crucified it (Galatians 5:24)
   Those who sow to it reap corruption (Galatians 6:8 )

Is this what you would want to be married to for a lifetime?

I much prefer the analogy of Christ and the Church (Ephesians 5:22 - 33)

First let me say I am NOT saying that men are spiritual and women are carnal. What I am pointing out a spiritual truth that can be gleaned from these accounts.

What did adam say of Eve? she is "Bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh." the genesis account presents the man as the head ( spirit) and the woman as the body, (Flesh) and reflect that spiritual truth of how satan comes at us. Thru our flesh. satan tempts our flesh and when we give in we sin. just as Adam did after his flesh (eve) was tempted by the serpent.

I think this analogy is clearly in Paul's mind when he says, 1Ti 2:11 Let a woman learn in silence with all submission.

I think that Paul is using that analogy here not making a general slap at all women. what he has in mind is that in the church it is the spirit that is to speak and to teach not the flesh.

[Guest]

Maybe the answer is as simple as this - Eve was the person who went and gathered the food for the both of them. Satan capitalized on the moment of weakness. Its kind of like don't go grocery shopping on an empty stomach.

That's why you should never let yer wimmin folks go shoppin alone, no tellin what trouble they'll git into!

[Guest]

The bottom line is that satan obviously knew that he could deceive eve. scripture tells us that eve was deceived but adam was not deceived.

My mother used to say, "No, Adam was not deceived. He ate from the tree deliberately with open eyes."

If that were, in fact, the case, then why didn't Satan approach Adam instead of Eve? Adam would have accepted, and Satan would not have had to go to the bother of having to deceive him.

[Guest]

Maybe the answer is as simple as this - Eve was the person who went and gathered the food for the both of them. Satan capitalized on the moment of weakness. Its kind of like don't go grocery shopping on an empty stomach.

bingo. i really dont think there is any theological significance to the fact that it was eve that got tricked first.

TK

[Guest]

The bottom line is that satan obviously knew that he could deceive eve. scripture tells us that eve was deceived but adam was not deceived.

My mother used to say, "No, Adam was not deceived. He ate from the tree deliberately with open eyes."

If that were, in fact, the case, then why didn't Satan approach Adam instead of Eve? Adam would have accepted, and Satan would not have had to go to the bother of having to deceive him.

Your mother was right, and scripture says just that. Adam was NOT deceived. Adam sinned when he was tempted by his own flesh, which was eve.

[Guest]

Cant paul's language in 1 Tim 2 about Eve being deceived, but not Adam, simply be interpreted to mean that eve was deceived first?

the reason i say this is that it seems there is always some element of deception when we sin. Adam was deceived into thinking that the benefits of eating the fruit (i.e. disobeying God) outweighed the benefit of obeying God.

dont most sins, if not all, fall into this category? its why the devil is called a liar.

TK

[Guest]

Cant paul's language in 1 Tim 2 about Eve being deceived, but not Adam, simply be interpreted to mean that eve was deceived first?

the reason i say this is that it seems there is always some element of deception when we sin. Adam was deceived into thinking that the benefits of eating the fruit (i.e. disobeying God) outweighed the benefit of obeying God.

dont most sins, if not all, fall into this category? its why the devil is called a liar.

TK

I think that scripture pretty clearly shows that Adam sinned with full knowledge of what he was doing. and remember it was not Eve that brought sin and death into the world by her transgression it was Adam and his transgression.

[Guest]

Man, this seems to be a minor point so i dont mean to be nit-picky. i generally dont like nit-pickiness.

but how can you say adam wasnt deceived? eve already ate, and he saw she was ok (she hadnt dropped dead). she said it tasted awesome. he was deceived into thinking that God was wrong and Eve (and the serpent) were right. if adam saw the full ramification of what he was about to do (i.e. if he wasnt deceived) perhaps he would have made a different choice. satan works by keeping our mind off of the potential consequences and on the present "benefits" of succumbing to sin. that is deception.

and yes, the bible does say that sin etc came through Adam-- which is ok because adam in fact sinned. since adam is the man (which carries more weight in the biblical economy) Paul references Adam's sin as the primary culprit. but what if Adam HADNT sinned? didnt eve's sin count for anything? i think that is what is bugging me about this.

TK

[Guest]

but how can you say adam wasnt deceived? eve already ate, and he saw she was ok (she hadnt dropped dead). she said it tasted awesome. he was deceived into thinking that God was wrong and Eve (and the serpent) were right.

TK, how can you say that Adam was deceived, when the apostle Paul says he wasn't?

1 Timothy 2:14 ...and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor.

If Paul had only meant that the woman was deceived first, why wouldn't he just say so?

[Guest]

Gen 3 says Adam disobeyed because he hearkened unto his wife's voice.
He simply listened to his wife rather then God because he decided that whatever happened, they would be together.