Author Topic: The Means of Temptation (Genesis 3:1-5 )  (Read 1374 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Hal

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 460
The Means of Temptation (Genesis 3:1-5 )
« on: July 10, 2013, 05:05:36 PM »


The Means of Temptation (Genesis 3:1-5 ) by N. E. Constance

The third chapter of Genesis deals with the question of the roots of evil in the world. The revelation that comes to us in this portion of the Word of God is factual, bringing to us the real facts of life, the real story of what it is all about. These facts are brought to us in this story of a serpent in a garden of paradise, who talks with a real man and a real woman. One misses the whole point of the story if preoccupied with what the serpent is rather than with what the serpent says.
In the first part of the dialogue between the serpent (Satan coming to her in a disguised and subtle form) and to Eve, he says, “Has God indeed said, ’You shall not eat of every tree of the garden’?” Notice that the serpent does not come questioning the existence of God. Satan never does this for he knows better. Also note that the serpent made no startling proposal of disobedience at this point. Rather, with an apparent full reverence for God, he attempts to inject doubt into Eve’s mind by distorting God’s original command. God had originally said, “Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat” (Genesis 2:16 ). Satan misquotes this command so God seems to be saying, “You can not eat of any of these good trees I have provided for you.” Satan is trying to introduce doubt in Eve’s mind as to the good intentions of God.
So it is today, Satan’s means of temptation are still the same; he is saying, “Let’s have a discussion about God. God is different from what you think. God is not a narrow-minded, moralistic God; He is a God of life, a God of abundance; take everything you can get.”
The game Satan played was to draw our first parents to sin and thus separate them and their God. This first encounter brought a very strong defense from the woman, too strong in fact. She said, “We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden; but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God has said, ‘You shall not eat it, nor shall you touch it, lest you die,’” (Genesis 3:2-3 ). Notice that Eve improves on God’s statement by adding that they were not even to touch the fruit of the tree. Furthermore, in her response, Eve represented the penalty in a somewhat softer tone. God had said, “You shall surely die.” Eve translated the words into “lest you die.” The implication of her reply was that God’s penalty was a risk and not a certainty. In both of these ways she showed a willingness to meddle with God’s command and in doing so she succumbed to taking the first step down the road to disobedience—doubt as to the clearly revealed command of God.
“You shall not surely die.” Satan immediately picked up the point of doubt and pushed Eve on to active disbelief. He went on to make his first accusation against God: “For God knows… ” In essence he was saying, “God is really withholding something very important from you, Eve.” Thus Eve was led to disbelieve God’s wisdom. So still today Satan draws people into his interests by suggesting to them wrong concepts and thoughts about God. He gives, to those who will give ear to him, false hopes of benefits and advantages to be gained by sin. He insinuates that true Christianity and God’s Word have no relevance for our time.
Satan succeeded in his purposes. Eve had first doubted, then disbelieved, and finally she took the fatal step of direct disobedience. First she looked at the tree, then she took of the fruit, and finally, she ate of what God had forbidden. To compound the situation, she gave some of the fruit to Adam and he ate as well. We see from the first that sin is not something one does in solitude. It always involves others.

macuser

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 467
Re: The Means of Temptation (Genesis 3:1-5 )
« Reply #1 on: July 11, 2013, 12:25:03 AM »
Quote
So it is today, Satan’s means of temptation are still the same; he is saying, “Let’s have a discussion about God. God is different from what you think. God is not a narrow-minded, moralistic God; He is a God of life, a God of abundance; take everything you can get.”

This really hits at today's society. You see this kind argument here on the board I guess times never really do change.

Zant Law

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
  • ZLaw
Re: The Means of Temptation (Genesis 3:1-5 )
« Reply #2 on: July 11, 2013, 08:54:12 AM »
An atheist would say something like this,'If your god is so loving and powerful why is there so much sickness in the world?'

The answer is easy but it is unacceptable to them.

Hal

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 460
Re: The Means of Temptation (Genesis 3:1-5 )
« Reply #3 on: July 11, 2013, 10:00:06 AM »
An atheist would say something like this,'If your god is so loving and powerful why is there so much sickness in the world?'

The answer is easy but it is unacceptable to them.
For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. (1 Corinthians 1:18 KJV)

Zant Law

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
  • ZLaw
Re: The Means of Temptation (Genesis 3:1-5 )
« Reply #4 on: July 11, 2013, 05:42:07 PM »
So is acting on your own desires always a sin?
Can you come to that point in life when your desires are also God's desires?
Is there a point when you will see the LIE for what it is?

macuser

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 467
Re: The Means of Temptation (Genesis 3:1-5 )
« Reply #5 on: July 11, 2013, 10:40:38 PM »
So is acting on your own desires always a sin?
Can you come to that point in life when your desires are also God's desires?
Is there a point when you will see the LIE for what it is?

So is acting on your own desires always a sin? NO
The desire to eat is not a sin.

Can you come to that point in life when your desires are also God's desires? Is there a point when you will see the LIE for what it is? Yes by dedication to Him.

Romans 12:2 And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect.

Fat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1233
Re: The Means of Temptation (Genesis 3:1-5 )
« Reply #6 on: July 13, 2013, 08:06:22 AM »
Eve took her eyes off of God's word and that's when temptation always starts.

clark thompson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 296
Re: The Means of Temptation (Genesis 3:1-5 )
« Reply #7 on: July 16, 2013, 05:52:57 PM »
The temptation was being equal with God, people choose to do this when they refuse Jesus, they make themselves or something else their god.

Francis Drake

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 26
Re: The Means of Temptation (Genesis 3:1-5 )
« Reply #8 on: July 21, 2013, 03:22:22 PM »
The temptation was being equal with God, people choose to do this when they refuse Jesus, they make themselves or something else their god.

Thank you Clark, an excellent precision response. One that is usually missed in the dialogue between Satan and Eve.

Although it is not stated as such in Genesis, Adam could, and should have chosen to eat of the Tree of Life. That would have resulted in Adam being filled with the Spirit of wisdom, God himself. Although it would have been Adam who walked the planet, he would have walked it empowered by the Spirit of Christ within. There would have been no death etc. The first Adam would have had characteristics somewhat like the second Adam that we know. Paradise, the Garden of Eden would not have been separated from the Earth we know.

Instead Adam chose to rule the planet using his own knowledge, independent of God, for that is what being like God comes down to.
Adam decided that he could be the source of all decisions, for that is what the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil means, decisions based on our human intellect alone.
The moment Adam did that, his spiritual light switched off. He died spiritually.

Sadly most churches and most Christians make all the choices in their lives based on the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. By that I mean they have little clue of where the Tree of Life would lead them.
If that sounds like criticism or condemnation of the church, then yes, you are right.
However you should realise that I am guilty of that also. Most of my own choices have been made from my wealth of my own intellectual knowledge. I all too often prefer my own thoughts and choices to those of Christ. However I have realised that this is my frequent failing and have confidence in the mercy, forgiveness and love of Christ. He regularly points this tendency out to me, and under God's gentle love, I am learning to take more and more note of what God's, tree of life wisdom would have me do.

Therefore my life is a mixture of God leading me, and me leading me. I have been on this journey for nigh on 40 years, and I can tell you which parts have been the most profitable to me.
Eating of the Tree of Knowledge only leads to destruction.
It is not something that stopped at the Garden of Eden!

Hal

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 460
Re: The Means of Temptation (Genesis 3:1-5 )
« Reply #9 on: July 21, 2013, 05:12:09 PM »


Quote
If that sounds like criticism or condemnation of the If that sounds like criticism or condemnation of the church, then yes, you are right., then yes, you are right.

Condemnation of which church?
The church of Matthew 16:18 and Colossians 1:18, 24. Or could be one of the churches in Revelation 2? The reason I ask is you use the church (singular), earlier you used churches. Arn't all Christians members of the Matthew 16:18 Church?

Did you ever wonder what would happen if Adam and Eve, instead of trying to redirect the blame, asked for forgiveness and repented?

Zant Law

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
  • ZLaw
Re: The Means of Temptation (Genesis 3:1-5 )
« Reply #10 on: October 26, 2017, 10:38:58 AM »
Did you ever wonder what would happen if Adam and Eve, instead of trying to redirect the blame, asked for forgiveness and repented?

That brings the question to my mind, would there have been forgiveness for them without the shedding of blood?

Didn’t He kill animals to make their clothing? First recorded deaths.

ZLaw