Was Adam Deceived?
bwme...@toast.net
****************
Ver. 14. And Adam was not deceived, &c.] There is no need to say with
interpreters, that he was not deceived first; and that he was not
deceived immediately by the serpent, but by Eve; and that he is
never said in Scripture to be deceived, as Melchizedek is never said
to have a father or mother. The apostle’s positive assertion is to
be taken without any such limitations or qualifications; Adam never
was deceived at all; neither by the serpent, with whom he never
conversed; nor by his wife, he knew what he did, when he took the
fruit of her, and ate; he ate it not under any deception, or vain
imagination, that they should not die, but should be as gods,
knowing good and evil. He took and ate out of love to his wife, from
a fond affection to her, to bear her company, and that she might not
die alone; he knew what he did, and he knew what would be the
consequence of it, the death of them both; and inasmuch as he sinned
wilfully, and against light and knowledge, without any deception,
his sin was the greater: and hereby death came in, and passed on all
men, who sinned in him:
but the woman being deceived was in the transgression: and the
serpent really beguiled her; she owned it herself, #Ge 3:13. And
this is elsewhere said of her, #2Co 11:3 which never is of Adam. She
really thought the serpent spoke truth, that she and her husband
should not die, if they ate of the fruit; but that it was good to
make them wise; and that, upon eating it, they should be as gods,
knowing good and evil; and under this deception she fell into the
transgression, and was the cause and means, by her persuasions and
example, of bringing her husband into the same sin; which involved
him and all his posterity in ruin and destruction. And therefore she
is called by the Jews {p} Nweh Ma, "the mother of iniquity and sin";
to which they refer, #Ps 51:5. And they say, {q} she was the cause
of death to Adam, and to all the world: see Gill on "Ro 5:12". And
they observe {r} the order of the punishment of the serpent, Eve,
and Adam, as of their sin; the serpent was first accursed, then Eve,
and last of all Adam. They say
“{s} Samael (the devil) could not subvert Adam, till the serpent came
and turned the heart of Eve, and Eve turned his heart, and they both
sinned; wherefore it is said, "the woman which thou gavest me";
Samael had no power to turn him, till Eve came, and she was the
cause of his eating.”
Now inasmuch as the serpent did not attack Adam, he being the
stronger and more knowing person, and less capable of being managed
and seduced; but made his attempt on Eve, in which he succeeded; and
since not Adam, but Eve, was deceived, it appears that the man is
the more proper person to bear rule and authority, as in civil and
domestic, so in ecclesiastic affairs; and it is right for the woman
to learn, and the man to teach: and seeing that Eve was the cause of
transgression to Adam, and of punishment to him and his posterity,
the subjection of the woman to the man was confirmed afresh: and she
was brought into a more depressed state of dependence on him, and
subjection to him; see #Ge 3:16. The Ethiopic version renders the
text, "Adam hath not deceived, the woman hath deceived and
prevaricated".
{p} Tzeror Hammor, fol. 141. 3. {q} T. Hieros. Sabbat, fol. 5. 2.
Zohar in Gcn. fol. 27. 3. Caphtor, fol. 37. 2. {r} T. Bab. Erubin,
fol. 18. 1. & Taanith, fol. 15. 2. Bereshit Rabba, sect. 20. fol. 17.
1. {s} Midrash Ruth in Zohar in Gen. fol. 27. 3.
********************
And here is some more:
Dr. Henry Morris (Endnote 2)
********************
1 Timothy 2:14
not deceived. In addition to the nature and purpose of her creation,
there is a secondary reason why woman should not be taking the
leadership role in the home or church. When the first woman took
such a role, yielding to the temptation to reject God’s Word without
first consulting her husband, she then induced Adam also to sin,
thereby bringing sin into God’s perfect world (Genesis 3:6; Romans 5:
12). Adam was not deceived by Satan’s lie, but deliberately
associated himself also with Eve in her sin because of her wanting
him to join her in eating the forbidden fruit (Genesis 3:12) and
presumably also because of his love for her and his willingness to
share her punishment. The many daughters of Eve share the trusting
nature of their first mother and so (in general, at least) are more
easily deceived by those evil spirits who can masquerade as angels
of light (2 Corinthians 11:13-15). Although there may be exceptions
when—for want of masculine leadership—a Christian woman may be
forced to assume the spiritual leadership in the home (for example,
Timothy’s own mother and grandmother) or even in the family of God
(e.g., Deborah—Judges 4:4, 8), this is not the divinely ordained way.
There is no New Testament example of a woman serving as an elder or
bishop or pastor of a local church, with the possible exception of
the false prophetess Jezebel in the church at Thyatira (Revelation 2:
20), who was evidently herself also deceived by Satan.
******************
Endnote 1: Concerning John Gill:
I believe that any Christian interested in REALLY LEARNING TRUTH will
not dispense with John Gill. In the extremely valuable and reasonably
priced (much of it free) Online Bible, you will have around 50 mb of
his Commentary, which is packed with reverent knowledge, and of which
Larry Pierce said, and I certainly agree, something to the effect that
he has forgotten more than any others ever learned. And he doesn't
appear to forget very much. His commentary's very size is one
indication, dwarfing almost any other commentary.
Especially strong in knowledge of Judaism, the targums, their
literature, etc. As well as "church history." Of course, he will be
weaker on some areas of knowledge that have been discovered more
recently, such as the fabulous confirmations of the Prophecy of the 70
Weeks (eg ascension dates of the Persian monarchs).
He is difficult to follow, sometimes, being an author of the 18th
century. But it will be well worth the effort every time you look for
answers in his works.
Endnote 2: Concerning Dr. Henry Morris
A great loss in recent years. The scientist, listed in "who's who,"
employed in government studies, founder of modern Bible/Science
Apologetics, with the landmark "The Genesis Flood," and many other
scientific works, which are consistently and hatefully blasphemed by
the atheists, winner of almost all university debates against them,
turns out to be, like another famous scientist, Isaac Newton, far more
a Bible Student even than a scientist.
The only thing against Dr. Morris' "Defender's Study Bible" is that it
is disappointingly brief. Well, also a few other minor disagreements
I have, such as his view of Revelation (I am a futurist), and his view
of the sons of God in Genesis 6 (I believe the Nephilim and the
Rephaim were produced directly by those angels, rather than by men
possessed by them --- possession theory ignores and doesn't explain
the physical characteristics; it also ignores the motivation of the
angels, which is stated to be a kind of lust). But no two persons who
have ever lived are going to agree on everything.
Any seeker after Truth (2 Thessalonians 2:10-12, Acts 17:11-12, etc)
will also do well to seek for what Dr. Morris might have to offer. You
can get many of his very short articles on the ICR website.
For both Dr. Morris and Dr. Gill, they are indwelt by the Spirit of
Christ (Romans 8:9), in Whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and
knowledge.
And this will induce us to pay close heed to any person who
acknowledges that Jesus Christ is Lord an God of all (Romans 9:5,
10:9-10), because all such persons are also indwelt by the Spirit of
Christ and have access to the only means of understanding Truth
(2 Cor. 2:14).
Bob
Christ Died to Save You