“The serpent was the shrewdest of all the wild animals the Lord God had made. One day he asked woman, “Did God really say you must not eat the fruit from any of the trees in the garden?”
Genesis 3:1
The word “shrewd” is key. It means the serpent was clever, cunning, and astute to the situation. It doesn’t quite seem like it at first glance, because the first thing we find him asking is a question that isn’t even remotely true. We know that, and Eve knew that, and even he knew that. But he was being clever, because he wasn’t really looking for the answer to this question but really using it to disguise a deeper question in Eve’s mind. One that would go unnoticed yet affect the decision she would make.
Behind the question, “did God really say you can’t eat from any tree?” are two different components meant to cause doubts for the woman without her even noticing. The first part is the word, “really.” As if there is a distinct possibility God may not have said it or that God may not have really meant it. The second part (the all-out lie) is that there’s an underlying idea he’s planting in her head that it wouldn’t be too crazy or too off-character for God to ask something that was too much of them. It’s a comradery over commiseration. This is the first step in his cunning plot.
The doubt in God’s goodness—as if he is capable of withholding things that are ultimately for our good ‘just because,’ has been planted. The age-old question that if he would do this, could he himself be considered good? Eve corrects the lie, except she too contains misinformation. Perhaps the serpent even knew this—had heard her say it on another occasion—who knows. She responds, “Of course we may eat fruit from the trees in the garden. It’s only the fruit from the tree in the middle of the garden that we are not allowed to eat. God said, ‘You must not eat it or even touch it; if you do, you will die.’”
Now according to chapter 2 of Genesis, this command was given to Adam before Eve was created, so we cannot be sure if this is her misinterpretation or Adam’s, but what we do know is that it’s wrong. God’s warning in chapter two is, “You may freely eat the fruit of every tree in the garden—except the tree of knowledge of good and evil. If you eat its fruit, you are sure to die.” Did you catch the added detail? Well why’s that a big deal? Why does touching the fruit or eating it make a big difference if she was going to do it anyway?
Firstly, anytime we add or take away from God’s good and perfect words, it is a big deal. Because of what she believed here—and I have to think Adam as well, because he was present and does not correct her—she is adding to what’s expected of her. And that’s what makes me think the serpent knew she thought this, because being the shrewd creature that he was, he could very well have known her nature which would have been much like a woman’s today. Unable to resist setting higher or false expectations for ourselves.
The second reason this was a dangerous belief is that we think of sin occurring the minute she took a bite, but from her words, she half expects death to occur when she touches it. But after she dares to touch it, then takes it fully into her hands and waits… nothing happens. So, why not take a bite? And so the slippery slope of sin begins. How close can we get without actually stepping over the line?
This still doesn’t answer why she does it. Why does she partake in it at all? Well, the serpent tells her she won’t die, and that I’m sure that proved reassuring. In one sense, that was true, but in another sense—the most important—it was not. He knows this. And he knew it wouldn’t be enough to bait her. The real hook for me was what he said after.
“God knows that your eyes will be opened as soon as you eat it, and you will be like God, knowing both good and evil.”
Genesis 3:5
And the scripture says, “The woman was convinced.” You know what I think? I don’t even know if she heard the part about good and evil—I think her ears heard the words, “you will be like God,” and she disappeared into a daydream of pros and cons. One that still appeals to woman this very day.
At this point in time, there was no definition of femininity nor feminism (nor masculinity for that matter). Truly. There was man and there was woman, but there was no set directions nor scale from which they could model which way they’d live those callings. There was no other choice but to simply be. They knew they were different, yet they had no qualms about such. Didn’t need to be told how to be feminine nor masculine as there was no world, culture, society, nor comparison to tell them they were not. I think there’s something to this.
For instance, we think of femininity and masculinity as something that culture has painted. As if the things we like, do, or the way we live should dictate such things instead of the other way around. Let me explain. I put up a question on social media last week after Part 2 to gauge how women felt about femininity and themselves. The question was a simple poll asking, “Women, do you generally consider yourself to be feminine?” The answers were: ‘yes’ and ‘not necessarily.’
Let me preface this with saying: I don’t fault anyone who answered either one. Honestly, had it not been my question and my thoughts that prompted it, I’m not entirely sure how I would have answered. And yet, it did surprise me how split the vote was. Putting Instagram and Facebook results together, it was half and half. HALF AND HALF!! That means, half of the women who responded do not necessarily nor fully consider themselves to be feminine. And again, I think I may have put the same answer a month ago, except one problem… this is the definition of femininity:
“qualities or attributes regarded as characteristic of women”
That means that by definition, we should not be basing whether or not we are feminine by our qualities or attributes, but rather that our qualities and attributes should be considered feminine simply because they are ours. That by nature simply being a woman, we are feminine and therefore our attributes are also.
That’s not what the world wants us to think though. They’ve created a mold that we over time accept as femininity, and then worry why we don’t fit said mold. Everyone’s picture of the mold may be slightly different, but I bet we could all come up with a reason why we may not particularly measure up. And while culture tries to dictate what is feminine, it also has an agenda to suppress this femininity as society often treats it as inconsequential or flat out silly.
This was not so for Adam and Eve. They were masculine and feminine with no how-to nor insecurities on such matters. They just needed to be their gender and then be themselves because that was enough. It should be much the same for us today.
Now, there was no definition on how to be feminine at this time, but there was, as discussed last week, definitely a specific role of helpmate given to her. And once we realize that this does not mean helper in the sense we fear it, but rather a help much akin to how the Holy Spirit aids us and a help in opposition to Adam as a counterpart he very much needed (see Part 2). With that context, we don’t so much mind being a helpmate! What we are absolutely not cool with to this day: receiving help.
Sure, we see this come up a lot between man and woman. And even amongst women. Especially these days with more woman in the workforce than ever before and with the feminism movement. But there’s a reason the feminism movement will never be satisfied. And it’s the same reason Eve ate the forbidden fruit. She didn’t crave equality with Adam. She already had it. Her role was different, but her value was the same. No, she wanted the unattainable. She wanted equality with God.
Feminism- the advocacy of women's rights on the basis of the equality of the sexes.
Did you know this was the definition of feminism? I think from this definition, we’d be hard pressed to find someone who wouldn’t agree with such notions. I believe men and woman are equal and that women should absolutely have rights and have the same shot at any job or dream. I realize this has not always been the case, and that there has been some need for change. However, there’s a difference in this definition and the feminist movement we see today.
The feminist movement takes a good thing and asks for more. Instead of shooting for equality, their desire is to be over men. Instead of arguing that women should be equal with men, they argue that women should be the same as men. This can never be so. The very movement is actually against women because there’s an expectation for us to suppress our femininity or discard many roles if we ever want to gain importance or value. Likewise, it is against masculinity that has been portrayed as bad or even obsolete. But God wants us to see that our femininity is already important and of equal value with masculinity. I’m for men and woman being viewed as equally important, but I do not support a movement that tells both they are wrong and must take on gender neutrality to be right. And I do not support the notion that either can replace the other.
What pushes the feminist movement is the same thing that pushes tired moms to never seek rest— self-sufficiency. We can truly be something if we don’t need help, right? Whether it’s help from men, from other women, and even from God. We want to do it ourselves so we can fully claim the results. To become truly praiseworthy. And that, I believe, is why Eve did what she did. At the heart of it, she wasn’t desiring to be more like God; she wanted to be more god-like.
How do I know this? Because if she truly desired Godly wisdom, or to be more like God, she would have asked him on their evening stroll. Not to mention, she already was an image-bearer. No she wouldn’t have been searching for such outside of his presence, and she certainly wouldn’t have sought it out in the very place she knew not to be.
When God finds her in the garden that evening, he asks her why she did it. She answers him, “The serpent deceived me. That’s why I ate it.” Well, the serpent undeniably deceived her, but she ate it because she wanted more attributes of God than he had deemed good and right for her to have. The very attributes of him that should move us to be in awe and reverence of him instead of seeking to attain them for ourselves.
Fast forward in time to when her first son Cain—the very first baby in history—was born, and she has a renewed perspective. After childbirth, (a now painful and utterly terrifying experience due to her choice) she says, “with the Lord’s help, I have produced a man!” What a change. In the garden all was well, and yet she reached past permissible trees to the very one she couldn’t have. Here, she’s just experienced the full weight of her consequences, and yet she gives credit to God for the delivery. But that is what humility does—in all of us. And you know what the feminist movement lacks in spades? Humility.
I’m definitely for women receiving the same pay or holding the same position as a man, but I am not for women seeking to constantly assert their wills or make demands over everyone else. Mostly because… I’m not for anyone doing this. Eve was already an image bearer by nature, but she learned to bear his image more fully as she unknowingly reflected the nature of his son the day she became a mom.
We may have different make-up and different roles as men. Some may even have had more mistreatment than men in the past. But we have the same Jesus, and we have the same bible. And this is what our bible says:
Don’t be selfish; don’t try to impress others. Be humble, thinking of others as better than yourselves. Don’t look out for your own interests, but take an interest in others too.
You must have the same attitude that Christ Jesus had.
Though he was God, he did not think of equality with God as something to cling to.
Instead, he gave up his divine privileges;
he took the humble position of a slave
and was born as a human being.
When he appeared in human form,
he humbled himself in obedience to God
and died a criminal’s death on a cross.
Philippians 2:3-8
Here’s Jesus. The only man who could actually claim equality with God—who was God, and yet gave it up willingly—for me, no less. How can I support a movement to fight and muscle for my own interests regardless of what they may be when such would be so contrary to the nature of Christ? No matter what we are as women, we should be Christian first, seeking his will and glory above our own.
The fall of woman in the garden is still the fall of women today. We have two choices. We can chase after our own interests and seek to become god-like which will lead us further from God. Or we can humble ourselves for his purposes in the endeavor to become more like God which will ultimately draw us closer. If we want to truly be image-bearers, this is the only answer. Not to see what we could become, but to be willing to give up self in order to glorify him.
Thanks again for following along! I'm really enjoying digging into this series and subject, and I hope you are too! If you feel led, please share, subscribe, message me with thoughts-- it is all helpful! As always, we'll keep building so if you've missed Part 1 and/or 2, go back and check those out too for future reference! I'll see you back here next week for Part 4 on Wednesday at 9am!
Comments