Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | Genesis 3:1 Now the serpent was more crafty than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said to the woman, "Indeed, has God said, 'You shall not eat from any tree of the garden'?" |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | Genesis 3:1 Now the serpent was more crafty (subtle, skilled in deceit) than any living creature of the field which the LORD God had made. And the serpent (Satan) said to the woman, "Can it really be that God has said, 'You shall not eat from any tree of the garden'?" [Rev 12:9-11] |
Bible Question:
My mother-in-law (Roman Catholic) believes that in the story of the fall, the forbidden fruit represents intercourse between Adam and Eve. She says that original sin and the fall of man wouldn't have occurred just by "eating some fruit". I told her man's fall occurred because they disobeyed God, by eating the fruit. I couldn't convince her, I told her that there was nothing in the text that would indicate that the fruit represented anything other than the fruit. She apparently learned this in Catholic grade school 50 years ago. Does anyone else hold to this view? Am I right to read this story literally? Emmaus - I tried to check the Catechism, but couldn't find anything in there (but I'm not that good at finding my way through that beast), do you know if this is Catholic doctrine? Thanks, reilly |
Bible Answer: The KJV: “And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD. You don't get a demon child from God or with His help, nor do you praise him for this. Notice also that she said she got “a man” not “men” as in plural or “twins.” Who knows better Eve and the Scripture or Murray? This becomes a matter of where one wants to get there teaching from, the Bible clearly says, in Gen.4:1 “And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain ” So all the arguments for twins, fraternal or any other are mute. Then she bore again, this time his brother Abel. Notice the words bore again. The NIV makes it clear in verse 2: Later she gave birth to his brother Abel. Abel was born “later”, not as a twin. They would have been mentioned as twins, as in the example of Esau and Jacob if this had been the case (again as previously mentioned the Hebrew does not allow for this). This is not making a doctrine from silence, but going against the clear teaching in Scripture. It was from ADAM the Scripture clearly attributes Cain to, not Satan. Then there is another argument they use. Cain is not found being in the genealogy, therefore the reason is because he is from the Devil. This is truly ridiculous as Abel is not in it either, so using this way of interpreting one would have to belive he from the devil also! Murray has made this teaching up from the silence of the Scripture, not from what it teaches. Gen.5 excludes Cain and starts with Seth because it is the genealogy of Noah, this is why Cain is not included (Gen.4:25 he is the appointed seed in place of Abel). This is where Murray's error begins and then he launches into what he calls the line of Cain (Kenites). But Scripture teaches there were many lines of humanity not just two. In our modern time this false doctrine was promoted by William Branham. He taught that Eve's sin in the Garden of Eden (Genesis 3) was sexual sin. Branham said that Eve was seduced into a sexual relationship with the serpent and became impregnated with her son Cain. “Here is what actually happened in the Garden of Eden. The Word says that Eve was beguiled by the serpent. She was actually seduced by the serpent. He was as close to being a human that his seed could, and did mingle with that of the woman and cause her to conceive”(The Original Sin, pp. 2-3). He also taught what was conceived were twins “Since THREE sons were born from TWO acts of Adam, You know POSITIVELY that ONE of those three WAS NOT the son of Adam -- The truth of the matter is that Eve had two sons in her womb TWO sons (twins) from separate impregnation's. She was carrying twins, with Cain's conception sometime previous to that of Abel’s” (Branham, An Exposition of The Seven Church Ages). So we see the very same thing repeated by Murray. If one looks into the teachings of Branham there are other similarities as well. Part 2 More at http://www.letusreason.org/Poptea4.htm |