bgk

“Since you have made the claim that this that God can make an exception to a permission without mentioning the exception, then I would like to ask that you prove your point from scripture.  Give one example where such a thing happened.”
 In the gospels, Jesus gives adultery as a grounds for divorce.  He doesn’t seem  to give any other grounds, but from Paul’s writing it appears that if an unbelieving spouse desires to leave, divorce is acceptable in that case also.  The Holy Spirit is not contradicting Himself, but we confuse ourself if we look at one scripture without the other.
What I’m saying is that God could have made the restriction on eating from the tree of knowledge without his saying so being recorded in chapter one.
I am not saying God did not mention the exception.  He clearly mentioned the exception.  The recording of his mentioning the exception is in chapter two.
The Bible does not say, “The tree of knowledge has no seeds.”  Whether it does or not I don’t know.  Whether it’s relevant I don’t know.  But you are assuming that if God had put the restriction on eating from the tree of knowledge, he would have mentioned it, AND it would have been recorded in chapter one.  That’s faulty logic.  (Circular reasoning or something.)  I could just as easily say that “upon the face of the earth” indicates that the tree of knowledge was in existence, just not on the face of the earth until “God planted a garden in Eden.”  But I’m not saying that lest I be guilty of straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel.

If you’re saying that the serpent said to the woman, “what you (plural) may eat, and the woman replies with “what we (plural) may eat” proves that the man was present, that’s weak.   I can say “we” to refer to my husband without him being here.  Certainly someone could ask me about something my husband and I were told whether or not my husband is around.  I am not saying that the man was or wasn’t around during the time the serpent talked to the woman.  I don’t know.  But I will agree to disagree that we can prove at what point in time the man was with her.  I agree that it can not be proved that he was absent.  I do not agree that it can be proved he was present.  See the difference?  Obviously he was either there or not there, but I do not agree that we can prove he was there when the serpent spoke to the woman.

I think the reference in Hosea is referring to Ephraim and Judah (the tribes collectively) as the ones who have dealt treacherously with God.  The comparison is that they have transgressed God’s covenant like men.  The word men is the from the same word that Adam comes from.  It’s the same word used in Genesis 5:2 to refer to both the male and female human beings.  I never said the woman “coerced” the man.   I believe all mankind, and womankind if you want to word it that way, are sinful.  “There is none righteous, no not one.”   I don’t understand why you are saying that Hosea said that Adam [the first male] dealt treacherously.  And by no means am I saying that if Adam was influenced by his wife to take the fruit, he was not transgressing God’s law.
Sorry about sending 2 posts at once. (bg and bgk)  I didn’t realize the first one had gone through.