1The snake was sneakier than any of the other wild animals that the Lord God had made (Bible Gateway, 1995). One day it came to the woman and asked, “Did God tell you not to eat fruit from any tree in the garden?” 2 The woman answered, “God said we could eat fruit from any tree in the garden, 3 except the one in the middle. He told us not to eat fruit from that tree or even to touch it. If we do, we will die.” 4 “No, you won’t!” the snake replied (Bible Gateway, 1995).
From the above, it is evident that sin was brought unto man, and thus one could form a theorem around the same scripture to provide a scapegoat for their action. However, the first couple was at liberty to carry out the endeavors although they had to heed to the first law (Bible …show more content…
Their interpretation of this figurative language is that their contemplating move to approve the snake’s cunning words, and demeanor was the origin of sins (Bible Gateway, 1995). They have solidified the notion in this primeval event, in point of fact, it has been labeled the origin of sin. As religion has evolved with time and Protestants, have for generations passed on the biblical teachings that the two as the source of all sins. To compound this belief system, Genesis 3 verse 6 “Her husband was there with her, so she gave some to him, and he ate it too” illustrates that the action taken was in full awareness of the two. If one is to argue for the Bible Gateway scripture version, the two would have withheld from carrying out the action, and they would have had a chance for redemption (BibleGateway, 1995). If they had withheld back taken the time to ponder the cunning serpent words, they would have had delayed impulses that would have given room for another course of action to take place. In the same chapter verse 8, “they realized they were naked” illustrates harmonization for actions (Robinson, 2016). It shows that if one had at least withheld back, humanity would have had a chance for redemption. If one had carried and the other had withheld their acting, there is a possibility that they would have beseeched the Almighty God to consider forgiveness as an option. For the believers, there is a possibility that He would have reversed the action for he had created the two so that either would never live in
From the above, it is evident that sin was brought unto man, and thus one could form a theorem around the same scripture to provide a scapegoat for their action. However, the first couple was at liberty to carry out the endeavors although they had to heed to the first law (Bible …show more content…
Their interpretation of this figurative language is that their contemplating move to approve the snake’s cunning words, and demeanor was the origin of sins (Bible Gateway, 1995). They have solidified the notion in this primeval event, in point of fact, it has been labeled the origin of sin. As religion has evolved with time and Protestants, have for generations passed on the biblical teachings that the two as the source of all sins. To compound this belief system, Genesis 3 verse 6 “Her husband was there with her, so she gave some to him, and he ate it too” illustrates that the action taken was in full awareness of the two. If one is to argue for the Bible Gateway scripture version, the two would have withheld from carrying out the action, and they would have had a chance for redemption (BibleGateway, 1995). If they had withheld back taken the time to ponder the cunning serpent words, they would have had delayed impulses that would have given room for another course of action to take place. In the same chapter verse 8, “they realized they were naked” illustrates harmonization for actions (Robinson, 2016). It shows that if one had at least withheld back, humanity would have had a chance for redemption. If one had carried and the other had withheld their acting, there is a possibility that they would have beseeched the Almighty God to consider forgiveness as an option. For the believers, there is a possibility that He would have reversed the action for he had created the two so that either would never live in