Return to "The Shepherd's Chapel and Dr. Arnold Murray" Main Page

In His Own Words:  Examining the Teachings of Arnold Murray

Does "Expattio!" really mean Sexually Seduced?  Or Is Arnold Murray Deceiving Us?

Arnold Murray's Absolutely False Statements and Poor Scholarship Regarding The Greek in 2 Corinthians 11 Exposed

Part 1: "Exapatao" Has Nothing to Do with Sexual Seduction.

Foreword :

One of the scriptures Arnold Murray uses to confirm his teaching that Adam and Eve had sex with the Devil is 2 Corinthians11.

2 Corinthians11:3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtlety, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

Here, in his own words, is what Murray has to say about the word "beguiled" in this scripture:

Clip 1 - from Shepherd's Chapel Tape #438 Mark of the Beast   47:55-48:31  (my version is the one which was distributed in 1993 - If you would like a digitized copy of that complete teaching, for research purposes, contact me.) Download or Listen to Clip #1 Exaptao

Arnold Murray:  You will remember also that, uh...  Paul, in second Corinthians chapter eleven verses two and three stated, "I wanna present you all as chaste virgins to Christ," that is to say our husband, when he returns, "not as Eve who was beguiled by that serpent."  The word beguiled in the Greek being, "Expattio"  which has only one meaning, and that is to be wholly seduced, uh.   Documentation?  Prove me out.  A Strong's concordance, the Greek word 1818, beguiled as it is used in second Corinthians chapter 11.  Now continuing in verse six (of Genesis 3)

Murray relies on our ignorance.  Because when it says "wholly seduce"  we assume that "seduce" means "sexually seduced."  Because that is the what is commonly implied by the English word "seduce."  But does this Greek word explicitly mean "sexually seduce" as Murray teaches?   If this word explicitly refers to sexual seduction, then every time this word is used in the new testament it can have one "and only one meaning."  I hope that did not pass lightly.  IF this word has only one meaning then every time this word is used it would have to mean the exact same thing.  I do not dispute that this word has, really, only one meaning. But it does not indicate sexual seduction, by any means.  I will demonstrate.

We are going to look at every occasion in the bible in which this word "exapatao" (beguiled) is use in the "Greek Manuscripts."   You can do this with a Strong's Concordance, (but the process can be cumbersome) Or with a Greek concordance.   But really, these days, all you need is Google.

Let's see what the meaning of this "expattio" (as Murray mispronounces it) is according to the dictionary at the back of Strong's Exhaustive Concordance.

Strong's #1818: exapatao (pronounced ex-ap-at-ah'-o)
from 1537 and 538; to seduce wholly:--beguile, deceive. (the words that appear after the :-- are the ways in which the King James translators rendered the word)

At first glance it seems Murray is right.  Strong's Dictionary says it means "to seduce wholly."  Murray claims Eve was seduced sexually and he takes advantage of the fact that the English word "seduce" can have a sexual implication.  Murray implies that "exapatao" means "sexual seduction" and nothing else. But does this Greek word really have any sexual implication? 

I want to repeat this. On more than one occasion Murray mentions that "exapatao" has "only one meaning," so if the meaning is sexual, it would have to mean that every time.  So let's look at every other time the Greek word "exapatao" is used in the new testament and see if the only meaning of "exapatao" is "sexually seduce." 

Usage:  This word is used 5 times:
Romans 7:11: "by the commandment, deceived me, and by it"
Romans 16:18: "good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple."
1 Corinthians 3:18: "Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be"
2 Corinthians 11:3: "as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtlety,"
2 Thessalonians 2:3: "Let no man deceive you by any means: for"

So, if the word Exapatao, has one, and only one meaning, and that meaning is "sexually seduce," then in every one of these passages we should be able to insert "sexually seduced" in place of the word the King James translators chose.  Let's get a little more context on these passages and see how that works out.

Romans 7:11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, sexually seduced me, and by it slew me.

Romans 16:17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
18 For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches sexually seduce the hearts of the simple.

1 Corinthians 3:18 Let no man sexually seduce himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise.

2 Corinthians 11:3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent sexually seduced Eve through his subtlety, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

2 Thessalonians 2:3 Let no man sexually seduce you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

As you can see, if we translate the word "exapatao" with the explicit meaning  "sexually seduce" we get some unacceptable results, that cannot be the only meaning of that word.  Often when teaching, Arnold Murray breaks words back to their root meaning.  Mostly he does this when it is convenient in making a point he is trying to make.  For example, He does this in Genesis with the word "tree" in order to turn a tree that grew from the ground into a being with arms and legs. You will notice that he never breaks "exapatao" back to its roots.  He has said "always take it back to the prime."  So let's take his advice. (By the way, there is no such thing as a "prime root" in Dr. Strong's work.   Murray is misreading Dr. Strong's abbreviation "prim. root," which means, "primitive root.")  

"Exapatao"  is a combination of the Greek prefix "ex" and the root word "apatao."  Let's look at those now.

Strong's #1537: ek or ex
a primary preposition denoting origin (the point whence action or motion proceeds), from, out (of place, time, or cause; literal or figurative; direct or remote):--after, among, etc. (I did not copy all the usages because they are not pertinent to this discussion and they are many)

This word is a basic preposition.  For our purposes,  in the context of "exapatao," we will understand it to have the meaning "out" and I will explain why in a moment.  The word is used 924 time (that is not counting its usage as a prefix).

Strong's #538: apatao (pronounced ap-at-ah'-o)
of uncertain derivation; to cheat, i.e. delude:--deceive.

When Dr. Strong defined exapatao as "wholly seduced"  he was obviously getting the "seduced" part from "apatao" and the "wholly" part from "ex."  That is because "exapatao" is a strengthened form of "apatao."  We all would have been better served if he had defined it "wholly deceived." We make similar words in English by combining root words with prefixes like "out," such as: outfox, outgun outmaneuver, outlast, outwit, outsell, etc.  "Exapatao," to keep it simple, means something like to "out-deceive,"  but we do not use that term in English, and in English  it would imply competing deceivers. 

But if there is any chance that "Exapatao" has anything to do with sexual seduction it should come out in the way the root word  "apatao" is used in the New Testament.  "Apatao" was translated "deceive" every single time by the King James translators, let's look at those occurrences and see if the context leaves any room for doubt as to what "apatao" means.

Usage: This word is used 4 times:
Ephesians 5:6: "Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things"
1 Timothy 2:14: "And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived"
1 Timothy 2:14: "but the woman being deceived was in the transgression."
James 1:26: "his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this man's religion"

There is no cause for reading the idea of sexual seduction into any usage of the word "apatao," or the strengthened form, "exapatao."

Interestingly, among the uses of this word we find 1 Timothy 2:14 where the word is used twice.  1 Timothy 2:14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.  The serpent seduced (deceived) Eve into eating the fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and she gave that fruit to her husband.  Arnold Murray implies that the action of eating the fruit is actually a sexual innuendo which is saying that she had sex with the serpent.  If that is true, then the action of Adam also sharing the fruit would have to fall under the same sexual innuendo.  That is why Murray hints that Adam had homosexual sex with the serpent and then begs off from discussing it because it's "touchy."  But 1 Timothy 2:14 totally contradicts any notion that Adam was seduced sexually. 

 And, of course, the whole idea that "beguiled" in 2 Corinthians 11 means "wholly" (sexually) "seduced" is completely deceptive.  The word "exapatao" and it's root  "apatao" has nothing to do, at all, with sexual seduction.  The fact that the word is defined in Strong's concordance as "wholly seduced," is purely an accident of language.  What do I mean?  The word seduce does not automatically imply sexual seduction in English, remember Strong's concordance is over 100 years old.  Dr Strong died in 1894.  In his world, "seduce" did not automatically imply sexual seduction as it does in our modern English. "Seduce" has come to have a strong sexual implication which it did not have 100 years ago.  Murray takes advantage of people's ignorance and uses the change of the usage of "seduce" in our English language to suggest that the Greek word.  The Greek word "exapatao" has nothing to do with sexual seduction.  Murray's definition of "exapatao" as "sexual seduction" is a clear example of poor scholarship, abuse of study tools, and of taking advantage of the ignorance of his students.

Part 2: Is there a word in Greek that better expresses the idea of Seduction?

You bet there is!  To drive this point home I want to look now at the word that is actually translated "seduce,"  in the New Testament.  Because there is a word in Greek that better approximates the varied shades of meaning in our word "seduce." 

Like our word "seduce" this Greek word does not automatically imply sexual seduction, but as you will see from the context, it certainly CAN.

Revelation 2:20 Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols.

To seduce to fornication is contextually the kind of seduction Murray is groping for in Genesis 3 and 2 Corinthians 11.  What is this word?

Strong's #4105: planao (pronounced plan-ah'-o)
from 4106 (plane); to (properly, cause to) roam (from safety, truth, or virtue):--go astray, deceive, err, seduce, wander, be out of the way.

This word, "planao" more correctly captures the idea of seduction than "apatao."  A sexual seduction can certainly be characterized as a roaming from virtue.  Nevertheless, there is really no word used in the Greek New Testament which explicitly indicates sexual seduction.  This word is translated "seduce" several times but only once is it used in a way that imples sexual seduction, and that is only because of the context in that passage.

This word is used 39 times in the New Testament:

Conclusion:

The Greek word "exapatao" has no sexual implication.  Dr. Arnold Murray reads a sexual implication into 2 Corinthians 11 based on his own preconceived ideas about what happened in the Garden of Eden.  The manner in which Dr. Murray uses the dictionary at the back of Strong's Concordance, in this context, is. at worst, deceptive, and, at best, it exposes the fact that Dr. Arnold Murray's scholarship in Greek is extremely poor. 

(1/18/2013) - Paul Stringini - OraclesofGod.org

Return to "The Shepherd's Chapel and Dr. Arnold Murray" Main Page