Satan represented to the holy pair that they would be gainers by breaking the law of God. Do we not today hear similar reasoning? Many talk of the narrowness of those who obey God's commandments, while they themselves claim to have broader ideas and to enjoy greater liberty. What is this but an echo of the voice from Eden, "In the day ye eat thereof"--transgress the divine requirement--"ye shall be as gods"? Satan claimed to have received great good by eating of the forbidden fruit, but he did not let it appear that by transgression he had become an outcast from heaven. Though he had found sin to result in infinite loss, he concealed his own misery in order to draw others into the same position. So now the transgressor seeks to disguise his true character; he may claim to be holy; but his exalted profession only makes him the more dangerous as a deceiver. He is on the side of Satan, trampling upon the law of God, and leading others to do the same, to their eternal ruin.

Satan fortalte det hellige par, at der var fordel ved at overtræde Guds lov. Er det ikke det samme ræsonnement, vi hører i dag? Mange omtaler dem, der adlyder Guds bud, som snæversynede, mens de påstår, at de selv har vidtspændende tanker og nyder større frihed. Hvad er dette andet end et ekko af stemmen fra Edens have: "Når I spiser deraf," - overtræder det guddommelige krav - "åbnes Eders øjne, så I bliver som Gud"? Satan påstod, at han havde fået meget godt ud af at spise af den forbudne frugt; men han lod ikke skinne igennem, at han ved sin overtrædelse var blevet udstødt af Himmelen. Skønt han havde opdaget, at synd resulterer i uendelig store tab, skjulte han sin egen ulykke for at bringe andre i samme situation. På lignende måde søger overtræderen nu at skjule sin sande karakter. Han kan endog påstå at være hellig; men hans ophøjede bekendelse gør ham kun til en endnu farligere bedrager. Han står på Satans side, nedtræder Guds lov og leder andre til at gøre det samme til deres evige ødelæggelse.