Summations Only

I will be responding to you in time.Edited by Blue, : Err

I don't need to respond since your post is self defeating. Anyone interested in understanding the fall, read scripture.Edited by Blue, : Edit

They are.. The only issue with my post anyone will understand by reading Gen 3. What the Serpent said to Eve is clearly deceptive. The point that he told the truth doesn't change that he was deceptive. It also doesn't change that the Serpent was judged.Edited by Blue, : EditEdited by Blue, : EditEdited by Blue, : EditEdited by Blue, : Edit

Yes

The focus is not what he said.

The focus of the story is clearly on the Serpent "convincing" Eve, to eat from the tree. The Serpent knew they would die. How else would Adam and Eve know they would learn the knowledge of good and evil? God didn't tell the humans it was the tree of good and evil. If the Serpent was an internal adversary it wouldn't of known it was the tree of good and evil. You also need to read verse 1 where it reads "now the Serpent was more SUBTIL than any beast of the field". Then in verse 2 it leads up to the Serpent asking the question. This is a deceptive plot. It's not even a difficult thing to conclude.. Do you really want to argue the meaning of Subtil and How it applies? Crafty, SLY, Shrewd, Prudent... This definition of Subtil is based on the Hebrew lexicon.Edited by Blue, : EditEdited by Blue, : EditEdited by Blue, : Edit

BumpEdited by Blue, : Edit

Ok so Adam knew. What about eve? What about the other questions?Edited by Blue, : Edit

I'm not making anything up. If you are referring to my conversation with ringo it is a simple mistake. It doesn't support the serpent being an internal adversary. The arguments I have I have had for 20 years.The fact that he is a rabbi means nothing. Plenty of them disagree with each other. Including those converted jews that are rabbi and pastor like johnathan cahn.Edited by Blue, : EditEdited by Blue, : EditEdited by Blue, : Edit

You are hating on the Bible. It is clear. You can't even address my post. Yes if we re going to talk about the text we need to address every verse of the story. Read verse 1-2. Address my questions earlier. Stop distracting with claims as you just posted. Stop being silly.Edited by Blue, : Edit

You are hating on the Bible if you pick a few verses to make claims which are false in accepted biblical theology. You need to quote the verses in the proper context of the WHOLE story. Address my questions. Explain v 1-2. Explain the usage of the serpent being SUBTIL.Edited by Blue, : Edit

Here are my questions:If the Serpent in the story was not deceiving Eve in vs 4, why does vs 4 follow from the context of a SUBTIL character in vs 1?Why does the question in vs 1 follow from a SUBTIL character? Here is the definition of SUBTIL according to the Hebrew Lexicon: SUBTIL or `aruwm meaning sly, crafty, prudent, shrew, etc.How does Eve know in chapter 3 the tree was the tree of good and evil? She wasn't even created until a few verses after God instructed "the man" not to eat from the tree of good and evil in chapter 2. Why does the author describe the serpent choosing to deceive Eve vs Adam? Does this have anything to do with the fact that Adam knew it was the tree of good and evil?I really don't see how Eve knew it was the tree of good and evil, if the serpent is an internal adversary how did she know it was the tree of good and evil?Why are we presenting that the serpent is a metaphor of an internal adversary when it is being painted as an external adversary? It is considered a beast of the field that GOD made. If I'm going to accept this NEW interpretation you or somebody claiming it will need to answer these questions, and possibly more..Edited by Blue, : EditEdited by Blue, : ErEdited by Blue, : EditEdited by Blue, : EditEdited by Blue, : EditEdited by Blue, : EditEdited by Blue, : EditEdited by Blue, : EditEdited by Blue, : FormattingEdited by Blue, : vs 16Edited by Blue, : errEdited by Blue, : edit

Oh so now we are accepting inferences, which is what you are implying.My answer is, Adam knew it was the tree of good and evil.Edited by Blue, : err

Eve fed him the fruit. Which is an interesting point. So I suppose we can reasonably conclude she knew because of Adam... However we are concluding it, it is not written. Remember we don't want to rely on unwritten material.Please don't pretend like I am not willing to accept new points but the below 3 questions are a bit more hard to solve.1 If the Serpent in the story was not deceiving Eve in vs 4, why does vs 4 follow from the context of a SUBTIL character in vs 1? This is the context of the entire chapter. It is how it begins.2 Why does the question in vs 1 follow from a SUBTIL character? SUBTIL -Hebrew Lexicon3.) Why are we presenting that the serpent is a metaphor of an internal adversary when it is being painted as an external adversary? It is considered a beast of the field that GOD made. Edited by Blue, : editEdited by Blue, : AddEdited by Blue, : errEdited by Blue, : errEdited by Blue, : err

This is precisely the point I was making. The story does have inferences. In this particular story (and many others in the Bible), you can interpret it and conclude based on the information that is available. In this particular story it is CLEAR case of deception. Especially if you review vs 1. The serpent is SUBTIL. Then all 3 of them being judged. The serpent was judged because he deceived (inferences that they wont die in vs 4). Adam and Eve ate from the tree that Adam was instructed not to eat from, and of course we can conclude Adam told Eve about the tree.I also think it is a good point that the story was designed for those that are faithful. If we think of the biblical God, those that have faith will read this story without all the typical atheist nit picking. Which is another reason why it is a story of deception and judgement. A straight forward reading of it, does present a clear case of deception and judgement.Edited by Blue, : errEdited by Blue, : errEdited by Blue, : edit