Previous Verse Next Verse


When the woman saw that the tree was good for food,

Go to footnote number

and that it was pleasant to the eyes,

Go to footnote number

and a tree desirable to make one wise,

Go to footnote number

she took of its fruit and ate,

Go to footnote number

and she also gave it to her husband

Go to footnote number

with her

Go to footnote number

and he ate.  (See comments below.)

Go to footnote number


When the woman considered and understood that this tree was a source of food just like every other tree, and it had a very appealing appearance so it would probably taste really good, and besides that it was able to make her wise, she took some of its fruit and ate it; she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he also ate it.  (See comments below.)


1: “good for food”

The emphasis of this statement is that the tree seemed to be like any other tree in the orchard making the prohibition against eating it seem all the more ridiculous.

2: “pleasant to the eyes”

By now she wanted to eat some of that fruit and was looking for any reason that would convince her. Even if the fruit was equally attractive as other fruits are, and its appearance was not truly special, she had convinced herself that it was special and therefore, it had to taste special. Sinful desire has a tendency of making something bigger and better than it is. A wise man once told me, “Sin is always more attractive when we imagine it than when we do it. Good is more attractive when we do it than when we imagine it.”

Was it an apple? See my comments related to Genesis 2:17.

3: “make one wise”

Notice how, in the first statement she is saying that the tree is just like the others around it, while in the second and third statements she is admitting that she thinks it is special. The first statement addresses how unwarranted God’s prohibition was, while the second and third ones point to how badly she wants to do this.

There was no indication as to why they needed more wisdom, or why they needed to know the difference between good and evil. At this point evil was just a hypothetical possibility, not a real-world reality. But the idea that she could become like God Himself had caught fire within her. Also there was no thought about consequences, because the consequence that God had mentioned had already been set aside by the serpent. She wanted this so badly that she convinced herself that the serpent was right and there would be no negative consequences, only good ones. She believed the serpent over God, based not on their authority, nor on their accomplishments, but based solely on her desire.

4: “and ate”

Notice that she did not fall down dead. There was no immediate consequence of physical death, and there may have been no other immediate consequence either. If she did begin to feel shame right away she may have hidden that fact from Adam until after he joined her in the act. She did not want to be suffering the consequence alone so she acted normal in order to convince him to join her.

5: "her man"

In this instance Adam is referred to as her man, i.e. her husband, almost as if he belonged to her, or as if she was now the leader. Perhaps this statement is designed to indicate the complete perversion by Eve of the purpose for which God had made her – to be a helper and rescuer for Adam, not his ruler or leader. By taking the lead she had now become his destroyer.

6: “with her”

The reason for including such a statement appears to indicate that He did not fulfill his role of leader, protector, and spiritual guide. I think the insertion of this statement is intended to tell us that he was with her through the whole process and yet was not able to convince her to refrain from doing it, or did not try to convince her.

Some commentators have trouble believing he was there the whole time, but that is indeed what the text seems to imply. Also, if Adam was not with her the whole time, where was he? It’s not like he had to run errands. Managing the orchard was something they could do together. God had provided him with a beautiful companion created specifically to meet his needs; the logical assumption is that they went everywhere together.

Possibly, he wanted to eat the forbidden fruit as well. I envision this thing being a process that took a few days in which the pull of this temptation grew on both of them. The fact that the serpent spoke to Eve tells me that Adam was a bit more hesitant than she was. Satan knew that if he could get the woman, she would likely bring the man along too. In the end she took the reins and made something happen for both of them.

7: “he ate”

This event redirected the rest of human history. It set in motion everything we call bad, and it started the process of our ruination. In a word this was our self-destruction.


Throughout the entire Bible death is the curse of sin. The curse in Scripture is usually singular in form, and that singular curse is death. Yes, the fall of man into sin did bring on some consequences besides death, such as disease, violence, pain and suffering, but the primary consequence was death. As we have seen, this meant a separation, separation from God, from others, and from life in this body. We cannot ignore or forget for one moment the importance of death in the framework of biblical theology. Sin and its consequence have shaped our existence and have shaped how God has responded to our situation.

Why does God allow us to go through suffering and why do loved ones die even if we pray for them? God has chosen to leave the effects of sin in place in order to force us to think about sin and its consequences. If life were easy and always happy, we would not sense our need for God and we would never turn to Him. It is indeed a risk that God takes because a certain percentage of the population will become angry at Him and not turn to Him at all. But the risk would be greater, and the responses to Him much fewer, if He removed the consequence of sin and allowed life to be easy.


It is logically and theologically impossible to mix the Bible and evolution. The greatest single proof for that statement is found here in Genesis chapter 3. God said that, if they disobeyed His one and only restriction, they would suffer death. They did disobey and at that moment they were separated from God (spiritual death) and they began to die physically. They passed on to their children the spiritual state of separation and the inevitable reality of physical death.

Evolution posits that death, suffering, violence, disease and other such things were present on this planet for hundreds of millions of years before the arrival of two individuals we know as Adam and Eve. But the Bible makes very clear when death entered the story and why. These two perspectives are 100% opposed to each other. They cannot both be true at the same time. For this reason alone it is impossible to say that God used evolution to do what He did.

Why do so many Bible believing Christians, even many pastors, try to mix evolution and the Bible?

If there is a God and if He is powerful, then we may have to answer to Him some day.  Human nature resists being ruled by anyone else, even God. Also, the more power one has, be it political, or economic or military, etc. the stronger the resistance to being ruled by others will be. We should not be surprised that people in government favor a Godless view of our world. If there is no God then they can do what they want with money and power as long as they trick the people they are supposedly “serving” into thinking they are doing their best for the nation. It all comes down to responsibility. Whom are we accountable to? “If we must give account to an almighty God, that will be uncomfortable. So let’s theorize him right out of existence, shall we?” (They have tried, but it has turned out to be harder than they thought it would be.)


In the end, the debate over creation/evolution comes down to this issue of sin and its key consequence – death. If pressed hard enough, or if you just listen long enough, you will hear an evolutionist finally get to the bottom line, the root of the problem. You will then see that the primary motivation behind evolution is not a scientific question at all, it is a theological question. That question is usually stated something like this: “If there is a God, and if God is so good, then why is my life so hard? Why is there so much suffering and death?” We know that the answer to that question is the presence of sin. But many people don’t want to talk about sin because that turns the responsibility back on us. They would rather point the finger at God and accuse Him of wrong-doing, than change the way they live. Notice that the question is inherently self-centered – “Why is my life so hard?” We want life to be easy and we assume something is wrong if it is not easy. Who is to blame? Well, it must be God. When we find out that the ones to blame are Adam, Eve and ourselves, that changes the picture.

Granted, suffering is not fun, and some of the stuff we go through seems overwhelming. But it is not all God’s fault. Our suffering does not make Him an evil God, or eliminate His existence. Rather it shows how desperate He is to reconcile us back to Himself. Remember this, although we suffer, God is not afraid to suffer with us, in fact He caused His Son to suffer more than we can ever imagine. He did this for our good. The price is high, but He pays more of it than we do.