gengwall

Okay, you want to have evidence that God is not a false prophet? You do realize that if the “rule” is by definition one that is taking dominion over another person and that is “sin” and if that doesn’t actually happen then God is a false prophet, right?

OK, so if the action is by definition sinful, then we don’t need a second witness, especially if God is the speaker. But we don’t have a clear definition of “desire”, do we. It is positive, to be sure, in Song of Solomon. But it is clearly negative and sinful in Genesis 4:7, where, as in Gen 3:16, God is the speaker and He is being predictive of future behavior. If the correct translation of Gen 3:16 is “your turning will be against your husband”, we can certainly claim this particular instance is sinful, can we not? So I would suggest that we need not find a further witness for Eve, but only determine if the nature of her “desire” is by definition sinful. Then your false prophet argument holds for Eve as well as Adam.