Cheryl Schatz

gengwall,
A longgggg time ago you said:

I disagree on all points that this is a second witness that Adam did in fact commit the specific sin of “rule” outside the garden. Now, don’t get me wrong. I do think Adam did it. But I find no scriptural “witness” that he did other than God’s audible prophecy in Gen 3:16. I find God’s verbal utterance sufficient witness all on its own.

The second witness is really appropriate regarding whether Adam had a continued action of sin. This proves the sin nature. The issue of Adam ruling his wife was just one of the sins that Adam would commit and one that would directly affect Eve and God pointed it out to Eve to prepare her for life outside the garden. There is no second witness needed for Adam choosing to “rule” Eve since God specifically prophesied it would happen just like Jesus prophesied that Peter would betray him.

The point that I was making was that Eve did not have a sin nature and so a claim that Eve’s actions are sinful would need a second witness to establish her sin nature. We already have three witnesses to Adam’s sin nature, but where are the witnesses to Eve’s sin nature? I think that we can agree that there is no second witness.

There is just so much to talk about with the sin nature, that I think I am going to set aside commenting on this post until I create the next one. Then I will go back and see if any questions still need answering here.