And the woman answered him, saying: Of the fruit of the trees that are in paradise we do eat:

“(32) Did the serpent speak with a human voice? [Gen 3:2] In the first place, it may be the fact that at the beginning of the world even the other animals besides man were not entirely destitute of the power of articulate speech, but only that man excelled them in a greater fluency and perspicuity of speech and language. In the second place, when anything very marvellous requires to be done, God changes the subject natures by which he means to operate. Thirdly, because our soul is entirely filled with many errors, and rendered deaf to all words except in one or two languages to which it is accustomed; but the souls of those who were first created were rendered acute to thoroughly understand every voice of every kind, in order that they might be pure from evil and wholly unpolluted. Since we indeed are not endowed with senses in such perfection, for those which we have received are in some degree depraved, just as the construction of our bodies too is small; but the first created men, as they received bodies of vast size reaching to a gigantic height, must also of necessity have received more accurate senses, and, what is more excellent still, a power of examining into and hearing things in a philosophical manner. For some people think, and perhaps with some reason, that they were endowed with such eyes as enabled them to behold even those natures, and essences, and operations, which exist in heaven, as also ears by which they could comprehend every kind of voice and language. (33) Why did the serpent accost the woman, and not the man? [Gen 3:2] The serpent, having formed his estimate of virtue, devised a treacherous stratagem against them, for the sake of bringing mortality on them. But the woman was more accustomed to be deceived than the man. For his counsels as well as his body are of a masculine sort, and competent to disentangle the notions of seduction; but the mind of the woman is more effeminate, so that through her softness she easily yields and is easily caught by the persuasions of falsehood, which imitate the resemblance of truth. Since therefore, in his old age, the Serpent{5}{the ancients believed that the serpent became young again by casting his skin. Ovid says--Anguibus exuitur tenui cum pelle vetustas.} strips himself of his scales from the top of his head to his tail, he, by his nakedness, reproaches man because he has exchanged death for immortality. His nature is renewed by the beast, and made to resemble every time. The woman, when she sees this, is deceived; when she ought rather to have looked upon him as an example, who, while showing his ingenuity towards her, was full of devices, but she was led to desire to acquire a life which should be free from old age, and from all decay.”

“Let us, however, listen to what she says to him in reply. That is, when he said, "'Why is it that God said, Do not eat of any tree of the garden?'" the woman replied to the serpent, "'We do eat of every tree of the garden; but of the fruit of the tree in the middle of the garden God said, Do not eat or even touch it in case you die.'" [ Gen 3:2, Gen 3:3 ] Do you see his malice? He said what was not the case so as to entice her into conversation with him and thus learn what was the case. The woman, you see, is evidently encouraged as though he were kindly disposed to her, and she reveals the whole of the instruction, tells him all in detail, and by her reply deprives herself of any excuse. I mean, what could you say in your defense, woman? "God said, Do not eat of any tree in the garden." You ought to have turned away from the speaker and said to him, Be off, you are a cheat, you do not know the force of the direction given us, nor the extent of the enjoyment we have, nor the abundance of good things given us. For your part you said God has told us to taste nothing of any tree, whereas out of his great goodness the Lord and Creator has permitted us enjoyment and control of them all, bidding us keep away only from one, and this likewise out of great care for us lest we taste it and die. You should, had you been in your right mind, have ad dressed these words to him, turned away from him utterly, and have had nothing to do with him nor listened to anything said by him”

“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.”

“the woman said, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden--In her answer, Eve extolled the large extent of liberty they enjoyed in ranging at will amongst all the trees--one only excepted, with respect to which, she declared there was no doubt, either of the prohibition or the penalty. But there is reason to think that she had already received an injurious impression; for in using the words "lest ye die," instead of "ye shall surely die" [Gen 2:17], she spoke as if the tree had been forbidden because of some poisonous quality of its fruit. The tempter, perceiving this, became bolder in his assertions.”