[HarleyD]

Yes she was deceived, and yes she was following her own judgement.

OK.....Eve chose wrongly because she was deceived and Mary chose correctly because she was not deceived. Is that your position?

[annalex]

Eve chose wrongly because she was deceived and Mary chose correctly because she was not deceived. Is that your position?

No it is not. The "because" part needs elaboration. Eve was told by the Serpent that she will not die eating the fruit and in fact be like God. That was a lie. What is the next thing Eve does? She tests the lie by examining the fruit. At this point, and based on her own senses, she forms her own free-will decision. Eve was not made eat the fruit by the Serpent, as is demonstrated by verses 3 6 in Genesis 3.

Symmetrically, when Mary is told that she will have the Messiah born of her, she tests the news by questioning the angel for consistency of his prediction. After the angel explains, apparently based on her own knowledge and intellect, she agrees to do as God wills under her own free will. The angel did not make her consort with the Holy Ghost as is demonstrated by verses 34 and 38 in Luke 1.

I believe I commented on Mary and Eve earlier in this thread, sorry if it sounds repetitive.

Indeed St. Paul saw Christ as second Adam. The insight that Mary was second Eve belongs to Justin Martyr (Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, chapter 100), written early in the 2 century. This is a natural extension of Adam-Christ symmetry.

He became man by the Virgin, in order that the disobedience which proceeded from the serpent might receive its destruction in the same manner in which it derived its origin. For Eve, who was a virgin and undefiled, having conceived the word of the serpent, brought forth disobedience and death. But the Virgin Mary received faith and joy, when the angel Gabriel announced the good tidings to her that the Spirit of the Lord would come upon her, and the power of the Highest would overshadow her: wherefore also the Holy Thing begotten of her is the Son of God; and she replied, 'Be it unto me according to thy word.' And by her has He been born, to whom we have proved so many Scriptures refer, and by whom God destroys both the serpent and those angels and men who are like him

(DIALOGUE WITH TRYPHO)

*** I agree with Kosta that there is certain heararchy between the books of the Old Testament. Some, like the Pentateuch and the Great Prophets, are at the core of the Divine Revelation of the relationship between God and Man. Others, like the Judges, the Kings, and the Maccabees, while related to the economy of salvation, do so through the prism of historical narrative of the Jewish nation. Yet others, like the Psalms and the Proverbs, are poetry engineered to inspire the soul rather than inform the intellect for theological discourse. It is proper to look for the historical books for the understanding of the Old Covenant as it reflects in the works of men. It is also proper to look in Proverbs in order to meditate on each subject it brings up. But if one wants to understand the Fall, read Genesis 3, and if one wants to understand Mary, read Luke 1 or John 2. The verses from elsewhere, not revealed in connection to these subjects, cannot be ignored, of course, but they should be given secondary weight. Likewise a verse from the historical narrative of the scripture that refers to God leading a military leader to victory should not be given the same weight as a verse from Genesis or the Gospels, that is there for the express purpose to describe God. And surely, no verse form the Old Testament can be used to controvert the New Testament, because Christ taught us to look at the Old Covenant through the prism of His revelation in the New.