And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:
2. the woman, &c.] The woman is quick to correct the error into which she fancies the serpent has fallen, and to defend the generosity of the Lord.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
2. the woman said, We may eat of thefruit of the trees of the gardenIn her answer, Eve extolledthe large extent of liberty they enjoyed in ranging at will amongstall the treesone only excepted, with respect to which, shedeclared there was no doubt, either of the prohibition or thepenalty. But there is reason to think that she had already receivedan injurious impression; for in using the words “lest ye die,”instead of “ye shall surely die” [Ge2:17], she spoke as if the tree had been forbidden because ofsome poisonous quality of its fruit. The tempter, perceiving this,became bolder in his assertions.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And the woman said unto the serpent,…. Or to him that spoke in the serpent, which she might take to be a messenger from heaven, a holy angel: had she known who it was, she might be chargeable with imprudence in giving an answer, and carrying on a conversation with him; and yet even supposing this, she might have a good design in her answer; partly to set the matter in a true light, and assert what was truth; and partly to set forth the goodness and liberality of God, in the large provision he had made, and the generous grant he had given them: from this discourse of Eve and the serpent, no doubt Plato g had his notion of the first men discoursing with beasts:
we may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden; of all and every one of them, which is to be understood, excepting the one after mentioned; so far are we from being debarred from eating of any, which the speech of the Serpent might imply, that they were allowed to eat of what they pleased, but one.
g In Politico, ut supra, (apud Euseb. Praepar. Evangel. l. 12.) c. 14.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
2. The woman said Her pausing to parley with so serious a temptation was a fearful mistake . To entertain the thoughts of an evil spirit is the sure way to become partaker of some measure of his nature .
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘And the woman said to the snake, “We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden. But God has said ‘you shall not eat of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, nor shall you touch it, lest you die’.”.’
The woman’s conscience is struggling to be fair to God. But she cannot help but think of THAT tree, and she slightly ameliorates God’s warning and slightly exaggerates His demands. God had not said ‘lest you die’, He had said ‘you shall surely die’. Dangerously she has in mind the possibility that it might not be true. It is always unwise to ‘improve’ the word of God. Nor had He said, ‘you shall not touch it’. But in the latter she was interpreting God perfectly correctly. To touch it was to be half way to eating it. (Here we have an indication that the man and the woman saw the tree as ‘sacred’. It was ‘untouchable’). Possibly she is also trying to build up her protection against the temptation she is now experiencing.
Some have tried to see in the reference to this tree as ‘the tree which is in the midst of the garden’ (which was how the tree of life was previously described by the writer) an indication that the story originally only contained one tree, the tree of life. Others have suggested that the woman only knew of one tree, because the tree of life had not yet been revealed to man. But neither is necessary. To the woman in her condition there was only ONE tree, that which was forbidden to her. Her concentration on that tree is intended by the writer to demonstrate the seeds of doubt in her mind. Whereas the most important tree to the writer and to God was the tree of life, which offered continuing life and was therefore central, to the woman the most important tree was the one which was she was unable to partake of, and in her thinking that was central.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
Observe, the woman had not lost sight of the commandment. She could not plead ignorance. Gen 2:16
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Gen 3:2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:
Ver. 2. And the woman said unto the serpent. ] Our first parents were not, in the state of innocency, silly and witless, like young children, as Socinians make them; but very knowing, though but of small experience. But if they fell the same day a wherein they were created, as most hold, how sudden was the serpent’s seducing, the woman’s consenting, Adam’s yielding, and God’s executing!
a
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
may eat. Misquoted from Gen 2:16 by not repeating the emphatic Figure Polyptoton, and thus omitting the emph. “freely”.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
serpent: Psa 58:4
Reciprocal: Gen 2:16 – thou mayest freely eat
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Gen 3:2-3. The woman said With a view to defend the conduct of her Maker toward them, against the insinuations of the tempter. We may eat of the trees of the garden Of all the trees except one. It is only concerning one that God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it. But when she adds, Lest ye die, it is evident her faith begins to waver, and she inclines to doubt whether God would fulfil his threatening, which was not, Lest ye die,
but, In dying ye shall die; that is, Ye shall surely die. She seems also to have intended to intimate, that if they died, it would not be so much through any particular interference and severity of God in executing his threatening, as through the natural, pernicious effects of the fruit, against which God had only kindly warned them.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Eve was vulnerable to this suggestion because she distorted the word of God. She added to it "or touch it" (Gen 3:3).
"In her reply to [the serpent’s] question, she perverted and misquoted three times the divine law to which she and Adam were subject: (1) She disparaged her privileges by misquoting the terms of the Divine permission as to the other trees. (2) She overstated the restrictions by misquoting the Divine prohibition. (3) She underrated her obligations by misquoting the Divine penalty." [Note: W.H. Griffith Thomas, Genesis: A Devotional Commentary, p. 48.]
God reveals His character through His word. When we do not retain His word precisely, a distorted concept of God is often the result. This led Eve to doubt God’s goodness.
The serpent’s claim directly contradicted the main point of chapters 1 and 2, namely, that God would provide what is good for mankind.
"It is because ’Yahweh Elohim’ expresses so strongly the basic OT convictions about God’s being both creator and Israel’s covenant partner that the serpent and the woman avoid the term in their discussion. The god they are talking about is malevolent, secretive, and concerned to restrict man: his character is so different from that of Yahweh Elohim that the narrative pointedly avoids the name in the dialogue of Gen 3:1-5." [Note: Wenham, p. 57.]
One natural tendency that we have when we do not understand or recall God’s word precisely is to make it more restrictive than He does. This is what Eve did. This is a form of legalism.