Some think that Adam was not
deceived, and did not believe what the serpent had persuaded the woman to, but
rather fell, out of love to his wife, whom he was unwilling to grieve; and
therefore, though he was conscious of a divine command, and not exposed to the
wiles of Satan, yet that he might not abandon her in this condition, be tasted
the fruit she offered; probably believing, that this instance of his affection
for the spouse whom God had given him, if in any measure faulty, might be
easily excused. To this they refer the apostle’s words, 1 Tim. ii. 14.
"For Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, was in the
transgression." But this carries us off from the simplicity of the divine
oracles; the design of the apostle is plainly to shew, that the woman ought not
to exercise any dominion over her husband, for two reasons which he urges:
1st.
Because Adam was first created as the head, and then Eve, as a help meet for
him.
2dly. Because the woman shewed she was more easily deceived, for being
deceived first, she was the cause of deceiving her husband, who was likewise
deceived (though not first) but by her means: for we commonly find in
scripture, that some things seem to be absolutely denied, which we are to
understand only as denied in a restrictive sense: John vi. 27. and Phil. ii. 4.
are instances of this. Nor can we conceive how Adam, when he believed that what
he did was forbidden by God, and that if he did it he should forfeit the
promised happiness, nay, incur most certain death, (for all this he must know
and believe, if he still remained uncorrupted by the wiles of Satan,) would
have taken part in the crime only to please his wife. Certainly if he believed
that the transgression of the divine command, the contempt of the promised
felicity, and his rash exposing himself to the danger of eternal death, could
be excused only by his affection for his wife, he no less shamefully erred, nor
was less deceived, if not more, than his consort herself. Nor can it be
concluded from his answer to God, in which he throws the blame, not on the
serpent’s deceit, but on the woman whom God had given him, that the man fell
into this sin, not so much by an error in the understanding, as giving way to
his affection; for this subverts the whole order of the faculties of their
soul, since every error in the affection, supposes some error in the
understanding. This was doubtless an error, and indeed one of the greatest, to
believe that a higher regard was to be paid to his affection for his wife, than
to the divine command. It was a considerable error to think that it was an
instance of love to become an accomplice in sin; because it is the duty of love
to convince the sinner, and as far as may be restore him to the favour of God,
which certainly Adam would have done, had he been entirely without error. In
whatever light therefore we view this point, we are obliged to own that he was
deceived: the only apology Adam would make, seems to be, that his beloved
consort had, by her insinuations which she had learned from the serpent,
persuaded him also, and that he was not the first in that sin, nor readily
suspected any error or deception by her, who was given him as an help by God.
Herman Witsius, Economy of the Covenants Between God and Man I.VIII.IX
No comments:
Post a Comment