Mark

So why should we believe that Eve was banished from the garden with Adam.

Cheryl does not believe this to be the case. She believes that the definite article in verses 22-24 of Gen 3 exclude the possibility of Eve being included in the banishment.

Cheryl has said that Eve was ‘deceived’ and Adam sinned ‘wilfully’ (I agree), but Cheryl’s conclusion therefore is that she was no longer a threat to the tree of life.

Cheryl has also told me that although Eve did leave the reason is because her ‘desire is for her husband’ (3:16). Essentially she is fulfilling this prophecy by leaving the garden. Correct me if I am wrong on any of this Cheryl.

What about the bible- what does it say? I will look at some exegetical issues as well.

Lets begin in chapter 3 focusing first on the conversation between Eve and the serpent.
Cheryl believes that although Eve’s quotation of God’s words was a direct command given to her only, since Adam had already been told what not to eat (Gen 2:17), it is therefore her opinion that Eve did not ‘misquote’ what was already given to Adam.

Problem-
1.we only have I recorded instance of God’s command not to touch the tree of knowledge. This was given to Adam only (Eve was not created). Therefore the question is raised, how did Eve know. Either Adam told her or God told her. Since we have no recording of God speaking directly and only to Eve, it is far safer to go with the text we have. It is better to assume that Adam told Eve the prohibition not God. Therefore we conclude that Eve did not quote the prohibition correctly. She dropped ‘any’ from “we may eat from the fruit of (any) tree in the garden… This is an important omission since it already shows that God seemingly isn’t as generous as he first was. Next Eve adds ‘neither shall you touch it’ which is not in the recorded account we have of God’s actual words. This too is important for it now shows that God is crueller than before. So the serpent’s crafty question has begun to make Eve believe that God first of all is ‘stingy’ and second of all he is a harsh God, not even being allowed to touch the fruit. Now we know that it wasn’t the ‘touching’ of the fruit that caused the fall but the ‘eating’, (Gen 3:6-7) which is precisely what is predicted in Gen 2. So Eve was not correct by telling the serpent they couldn’t even touch it.
Also there is another problem with Cheryl’s view namely that during God’s judgement on Adam God directly refers to the dialogue between himself and Adam in chapter 2. God said “of which I commanded YOU, ‘you shall not eat’. This is not said to Eve because God didn’t give her the direct command. The blame here is given to Adam as the one given the prohibition but who worse than Eve, still rejected it. Therefore we must conclude that God did not give a new command to Eve, or even if he did give one to both (see below for reason) Adam is still held as the major responsible partner. It is not good enough to assume something into the text which can not be supported.
An important note- egalitarians are not even agreed on this point. For example in ‘Discovery Biblical Equality’, Richard Hess said this “the reader never learns how the woman received the information that she cites to the snake”.(pg 89) If Cheryl truly believes that Eve was given a specific revelation she should be willing to stand up against other egalitarians to say that they are wrong. It is not only comps who believe that Adam must have reported the prohibition to Eve.

2. The narrative also shows Eve’s ‘desire’ to become wise (Gen 3:6). The word here desire is the same that is used in the Ten commandments- translated do not ‘covet’(Ex 20:17). This is not a ‘good’ thing. Her desire for the fruit is negative showing her rejection of God’s truth. No doubt though, that it was the serpents trickery that led her to that point. We just must be careful to exclude Eve from any involvement in the account, and therefore come to the conclusion that Eve is innocent. She was deceived but she is guilty of desiring wisdom which was not for her. She acted against God’s command and took the fruit.