•      Genesis 2 and 3 form a carefully constructed drama.  Scene I is the placement of Adam in the Garden (2:4b-17); Scene II: the addition of a “helper” (2:18-25); Scene III: the great divorce (3:1-7); and Scene IV: logical consequences (3:8-24).[1]

•      Scene III the prohibition (2:17) is directly challenged and the sorry result turns the innocence and shamelessness of 2:25 into shamefulness (3:7).   

•      The new actor on stage (the serpent) “theologizes” the prohibition; it’s not really a “no” but an option; theology used by the serpent does not serve, but avoids the claims of God.  And notice where God ends up in this theological discussion:  God is relegated to a third party; the speech is about God, not to God.

•      As Brueggemann points out,

This subtle theological talk is a distortion of the realities.  The serpent says back God’s speech in just enough of a twist to miss the point.  The serpent grossly misrepresents God in 3:1 and is corrected by the woman in verses 2-3.  But by then the misquotation has opened up to consciousness the possibility of an alternative to the way of God.  From that point on, things become distorted.  The rhetoric of fidelity has given way to analysis and calculation.  The givenness of God’s rule is no longer the boundary of a safe place.  God is now a barrier to be circumvented.[2]
__________________________________

•      How might scene III might look in our post-modern world; moments when God becomes objectified and theologized rather than obeyed?

•      What is so challenging about this scenario?  The identification of impulses and desires?  The tendency to rationalize? 

•      Can you recall a current movie or best-selling book that reflects the basic plot of this biblical story?  A recent news clip?

•      This story is so artfully and beautifully written, you might consider just simply retelling this story in its entirety.  Tell it in a way that will involve us and which will trigger our own Genesis 3 narratives. 

•      Distinguish the difference between our little temptations with candy and diets, etc. and the temptation that moves to a deeper, more ethical and theological level.[3]