"Now the serpent was more subtil." More subtil. Hence the devil is called, "the serpent with heads," [with great cunning;] "the crooked serpent," [with knotty objections;] "the piercing serpent," [for he often wounds;] and his ways are called "devices," "temptations," "delusions," "wiles," "power," and "the gates of hell"; because of their mighty prevalency. This is he that undertook our first parents.
But how did he undertake them?
He labours to make them question the simplicity of the word of God, bearing Adam's wife in hand, that there must needs be some meaning that palliates the text; Hath God said ye shall not eat of the tree? Which interrogatory suggested them with a strong doubt that this word would not appear a truth, if you compare it with the 4th verse.
Hence learn, that so long as we retain the simplicity of the word, we have Satan at the end of the staff; for unless we give way to a doubt about that, about the truth and simplicity of it, he gets no ground upon us. And hence the apostle says, He feared lest by some means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so our minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ (2 Cor 11:3); that is, lest our minds should be drawn off from the simplicity of the word of the gospel by some devilish and delusive arguments; For mark, Satan doth not first of all deny, but makes a doubt upon the word, whether it is to be taken in this or another sense; and so first corrupting the mind with a doubt about the simplicity of the true sense, he after brings them to a denial thereof; "Hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?"
Ver. 2. "And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden."
"And the woman said." Indeed, the question was put to her, but the command was not so immediately delivered to her: "The Lord God commanded the man" (2:16). This therefore I reckon a great fault in the woman, an usurpation, to undertake so mighty an adversary, when she was not the principal that was concerned therein; nay, when her husband who was more able than she, was at hand, to whom also the law was given as chief. But for this act, I think it is, that they are now commanded silence, and also commanded to learn of their husbands (1 Cor 14:34,35): A command that is necessary enough for that simple and weak sex:[8] Though they see it was by them that sin came into the world, yet how hardly are some of them to this day dissuaded from attempting unwarrantably to meddle with potent enemies, about the great and weighty matters that concern eternity (1 Tim 2:11-15).
Hence note, That often they who are least able, will first adventure to put in their head to defend that, from whence they return with shame.
"And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden."
This was her prologue to her defence, but that also for which she had no warrant. In time of temptation, it is our wisdom and duty to keep close to the word, that prohibits and forbids the sin; and not to reason with Satan, of how far our outward and worldly privileges go, especially of those privileges that border upon the temptation, as she here did: We may eat of all but one. By this she goeth to the outside of her liberty, and sets herself upon the brink of the danger. Christ might have told the tempter, when he assaulted him, That he could have made stones bread; and that he could have descended from the pinnacle of the temple, as afterwards he did (Matt 4:3-7; Luke 4); but that would have admitted of other questions. Wherefore he chooseth to lay aside such needless and unwarrantable reasonings, and resisteth him with a direct word of God, most pertinent to quash the tempter, and also to preserve himself in the way. To go to the outside of privileges, especially when tempted of the devil, is often, if not always very dangerous and hazardous.
By these words therefore, in mine opinion, she spoke at this time too much in favour of the flesh; and made way for what after came upon her, We may eat of all but one.