Who Sinned First?

[William]

Adam or Eve?

[PinSeeker]

This supports the understanding that Eve was deceived by the Serpent AND her husband who was with her at the time. According to the story.

Adam was not deceived. I can understand how one might get that idea, but there is nothing in Scripture that even suggests that, explicitly or otherwise. Scripture is very clear that Eve was deceived... and that Adam was not. If Adam was also deceived, Paul (ultimately God, because it is His Word through Paul in the citations above) would have been very explicit -- or even implicit -- concerning that, and neither is the case.

Therefore it could be said that Adam was the first to sin.

Right. And/or, as I clarified to JohnBauer above, not to minimize Eve's sin, but Adam's sin was the one that really mattered as to the subsequent state of mankind, for the reasons specified (and backed up Scripturally) above (in my response to JohnBauer).

Back in the garden, there was no law about coveting. Indeed there was no law mentioned about betraying Eve. Does that equate to Adam not sinning because there was no law which said he shouldn't use his wife in the way that he did?

No. Ignorance of the law is no excuse. Adam knew not to do what he did, but did it anyway.

Grace and peace to all.

[John Bauer]

Adam was not deceived. I can understand how one might get that idea, but there is nothing in Scripture that even suggests that [he was], explicitly or otherwise. ... If Adam was also deceived, [Scripture] would have been very explicit -- or even implicit -- concerning that ...

Scripture is indeed very explicit—that Adam was not deceived. "Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor" ( 1Tim. 2:14).

[William]

This supports the understanding that Eve was deceived by the Serpent AND her husband who was with her at the time. According to the story.

Adam was not deceived. I can understand how one might get that idea, but there is nothing in Scripture that even suggests that, explicitly or otherwise. Scripture is very clear that Eve was deceived. If Adam was also deceived, Paul (ultimately God, because it is His Word through Paul in the citations above) would have been very explicit -- or even implicit -- concerning that, and neither is the case.

I clearly wrote "Eve was deceived by the Serpent AND her husband who was with her at the time" Adam acted the way he did for other reasons. In that, he may have been deceived...if not through interaction with the Serpent on other occasions leading up to the fateful event, then through his own self deception...lack of knowledge

Therefore it could be said that Adam was the first to sin.

Right. And/or, as I clarified to JohnBauer above, not to minimize Eve's sin, but Adam's sin was the one that really mattered as to the subsequent state of mankind, for the reasons specified (and backed up Scripturally) above (in my response to JohnBauer).

The idea I get from this is that it is not that knowledge of good and evil are inherently a bad thing to have. Rather it is the way in which individuals choose to use said knowledge which determines whether ones actions are borne of 'sin' or not.
Clearly the story presents Adam as the one who sinned first. Some have it that it does not matter.

My thoughts on that is that, for centuries where Eve has had the collective finger of Christendom pointing at her, it seemed to matter that she was primarily the reason for human suffering. The script is not plain enough because it has ben written in a way which implies that, but within said writ of the mythology, there is hidden in plain sight Adams sin in the fact that he betrayed his wife because he wanted to 'be like the god' [of the bible] and may well have had interaction with the Serpent numerous times leading up to the fateful event hatching a plan on how to use Eve to 'test the waters'.

One might say I am reading too much into it...but how else can we explain Adams behavior - his unwillingness to defend Eve in the face of temptation? Something was behind his inaction...

Back in the garden, there was no law about coveting. Indeed there was no law mentioned about betraying Eve. Does that equate to Adam not sinning because there was no law which said he shouldn't use his wife in the way that he did?

No. Ignorance of the law is no excuse. Adam knew not to do what he did, but did it anyway.

But was it wrong? Today - long into the future from Adam, we have deemed such as wrong. What promises did Adam make to Eve that we are informed of? What command of the god was given to Adam, that we can clearly see that as far as the god was concerned, Adam had sinned first?

And also - can we see that the forbidden fruit itself was just a symbolic prop, rather than anything which actually granted something of the knowledge of good and evil. A trigger of sorts, where realization of the extent of selfish actions beings to dawn on those whos actions are selfish? The actions may well have been happening way before the forbidden fruit was ingested...like trouble brewing and then coming to a head.

[PinSeeker]

I clearly wrote "Eve was deceived by the Serpent AND her husband who was with her at the time"

Right, and that's not correct. Adam did not deceive Eve. Scripture would have been explicit about that, too. I would agree, though, if you would say this is what you're also implying, that Adam did sin against Eve in addition to sinning against God... by not acting as the protector, sanctifier, and redeemer of his wife that he was supposed to be -- by not, as Paul puts it, loving his wife and giving himself up for her so that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word.. for not loving his wife as himself.

In that, he may have been deceived...if not through interaction with the Serpent on other occasions leading up to the fateful event, then through his own self deception...lack of knowledge

But this is opposite of what Scripture indicates, even explicitly so. Now, you may agree with this, that what you really seem to be talking about here is not deception, but being wise in one's own eyes, which Scripture is very clear is sinful. If you would change your statement to say that, then I would agree.

The idea I get from this is that it is not that knowledge of good and evil are inherently a bad thing to have. Rather it is the way in which individuals choose to use said knowledge which determines whether ones actions are borne of 'sin' or not.

Right. This is being wise in one's own eyes. And one can deceive himself or herself by being "wise" in this manner. If that's what you're saying, then I'm good with that.

My thoughts on that is that, for centuries where Eve has had the collective finger of Christendom pointing at her...

Don't think that's true at all. But no matter, really.

One might say I am reading too much into it...

Yeah, I would say that. Actually, too much and too little at the same time.

Grace and peace to you.

[William]

I clearly wrote "Eve was deceived by the Serpent AND her husband who was with her at the time"

Right, and that's not correct. Adam did not deceive Eve. Scripture would have been explicit about that, too. I would agree, though, if you would say this is what you're also implying, that Adam did sin against Eve in addition to sinning against God... by not acting as the protector, sanctifier, and redeemer of his wife that he was supposed to be -- by not, as Paul puts it, loving his wife and giving himself up for her so that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word.. for not loving his wife as himself.

Lets run with that then...why did Eve think that touching the fruit was against the gods command?

In that, he may have been deceived...if not through interaction with the Serpent on other occasions leading up to the fateful event, then through his own self deception...lack of knowledge

But this is opposite of what Scripture indicates, even explicitly so. Now, you may agree with this, that what you really seem to be talking about here is not deception, but being wise in one's own eyes, which Scripture is very clear is sinful. If you would change your statement to say that, then I would agree.

Are you saying that the mythology does not accept that "being wise in one's own eyes" is the same as being deceived?

The idea I get from this is that it is not that knowledge of good and evil are inherently a bad thing to have. Rather it is the way in which individuals choose to use said knowledge which determines whether ones actions are borne of 'sin' or not.

Right. This is being wise in one's own eyes. And one can deceive himself or herself by being "wise" in this manner. If that's what you're saying, then I'm good with that.

We agree then that the mythology is saying that Adam sinned first but also that he was deceived by his self?

My thoughts on that is that, for centuries where Eve has had the collective finger of Christendom pointing at her...

Don't think that's true at all. But no matter, really.

It is true and it does matter. It may matter so much that it could be the reason why women have been/are so mistreated my men who's minds are under the influence of the idea that Eve sinned first.

One might say I am reading too much into it...

Yeah, I would say that. Actually, too much and too little at the same time.

How else can we explain such behavior - an unwillingness to defend his wife Eve in the face of temptation? Something was behind his inaction...and we can see that it had to do with Adams self deception that he could be like god if he had this wonderful knowledge...but he was a coward and used Eve to make sure it was then safe for him to eat of...

[bluegreenearth]

[Replying to William in post #11]

According to the myth, it was neither Eve nor Adam but the serpent that sinned first. Is there a logically justifiable reason to believe the serpent's intentions and actions in the story were not sinful?

[John Bauer]

I clearly wrote "Eve was deceived by the Serpent AND her husband who was with her at the time."

Clearly, you wrote that. However, you did not write it as clearly as you might think. It could be taken in one of at least two ways: (1) Eve was deceived by both the serpent and her husband, or (2) Eve and her husband were both deceived by the serpent. It appears to me that you mean the latter, but it hardly matters because neither option is expressed by the text. We can either create an elaborate mythology about that which the text is silent, or we can simply admit that we don't know what happened (because we don't).

The idea I get from this is that it is not that knowledge of good and evil are inherently a bad thing to have. Rather it is the way in which individuals choose to use said knowledge which determines whether ones actions are borne of 'sin' or not.

In my experience, that seems to be the more popular idea. Myself, I have a somewhat different take. It's not so much bare knowledge of good and evil that is bad, but rather autonomous moral reasoning (i.e., deciding for yourself what is good or evil, which denies that God and his prescriptive will is the standard). If God says "X is bad," that counts as knowledge per se. But I don't think that's what was meant. Adam and Eve knew what God had commanded, but made moral choices apart from that standard. The serpent deceived Eve, saying, "Yeah, sure, God said that. But he's wrong, you see. He knows that your eyes will be opened as soon as you eat it, and you will be like God, knowing both good and evil." When she ate of the fruit of the tree, it was a concrete act of autonomous moral reasoning. With Adam and Eve, we have the first case of covenant humans reasoning morally apart from what God had said. They trusted themselves above God. They now "knew" good and evil—it was autonomous and thus godless intimate personal knowledge (יָדַע, yada), or lawlessness.

My thoughts on that is that, for centuries where Eve has had the collective finger of Christendom pointing at her, it seemed to matter that she was primarily the reason for human suffering.

There are centuries of Christian tradition with which I am not familiar, but I do know that from the Protestant Reformation onward there has been a strong tendency to hold Adam accountable for human sin and suffering, as the apostle Paul does, because Adam was the federal head of humanity in covenant with God (the old humanity of the flesh, anyway).

[Within the historical narrative of Genesis] there is hidden in plain sight Adams sin in the fact that he betrayed his wife because he wanted to 'be like the god' [of the bible] and may well have had interaction with the Serpent numerous times leading up to the fateful event hatching a plan on how to use Eve to 'test the waters'.

Nothing in the text so much as even hints that Adam had any interaction with the serpent, much less numerous times, and certainly much less in a conspiracy with the serpent to exploit Eve. That is pure speculation, obviously, without a shred of theological justification (i.e., nothing demands such a conspiracy between Adam and the serpent).

"How else can we explain Adam's behavior," you asked, "his unwillingness to defend Eve in the face of temptation? Something was behind his inaction." As an intelligent moral agent, it is safe to assume that there was something behind Adam's inaction, but an elaborate and fully speculative conspiracy between Adam and the serpent is not needed to explain his behavior. Ockham's razor, my friend: There are much simpler explanations to eliminate first before invoking an elaborate conspiracy. Surely his behavior could be explained by a simple lack of leadership (yet another implied sin), like the young man who stands by, saying and doing nothing, as his friend steals a candy bar. No conspiracy is required to explain what can be accounted for by a lack of leadership.

What command of the god was given to Adam, that we can clearly see that as far as the god was concerned, Adam had sinned first?

"The LORD God placed the man in the garden of Eden to tend and watch over it" (Gen. 2:15, NLT). He was supposed to keep, or guard, or defend the garden (שָׁמַר, shamar) and the presence of the serpent indicated his failure to do so—even as the serpent was deceiving his wife right in front of him (assuming Adam was standing there when that took place, which almost no Bible commentary seems prepared to allow but I am). He also had responsibilities as Eve's husband, but these are implied more by theology than the text itself.

[William]

[Replying to William in post #11]

According to the myth, it was neither Eve nor Adam but the serpent that sinned first. Is there a logically justifiable reason to believe the serpent's intentions and actions in the story were not sinful?

The thread subject isn't about [or asking] who in the story sinned first. It is about which human sinned first.

[PinSeeker]

Lets run with that then...why did Eve think that touching the fruit was against the gods command?

Yeah, let's don't. We don't know from the text what Eve thought or did not... thought. Except to say that she was deceived. I'm sure something was going on in her thoughts (as she almost certainly had a brain... ), but it's not germane to the Scriptural narrative, and it's not germane to this discussion.

Are you saying that the mythology does not accept that "being wise in one's own eyes" is the same as being deceived?

I'm saying that any reasonable human being with any ability to comprehend things and communicate at least somewhat effectively would quickly say that being wise in ones own eyes does not in and of itself imply deception of any kind but simply thinking he or she knows better than what he or she has heard or been told is true. Self-deception is a possibility, but still only secondary. Whether almost instantaneous or gradual/eventual, one can convince himself or herself that something antithetical to a given truth is true, thereby fooling himself or herself. Frankly, I'm incredulous that this part of the discussion is even necessary, although, also frankly, I think we both know that it is not necessary and that you're just throwing stuff up against the wall and hoping it sticks.

We agree then that the mythology is saying that Adam sinned first but also that he was deceived by his self?

We agree, William -- as has been very evident by my previous posts and you're trying to put words in my mouth -- that the Biblical narrative (it matters not whether you think it's a myth or not, and I might remind you that the purpose statement of TD&D states that Scripture is assumed here to be authoritative, which means, according to any dictionary, able to be trusted as being accurate or true; reliable) is very clear that Adam's sin was first and was effectual regarding the ensuing state of all mankind, the human condition. This is not to say that Eve did not sin -- she did -- but that her sin was effected by her having been deceived, which is not the case with Adam.

It is true and it does matter. It may matter so much that it could be the reason why women have been/are so mistreated my men who's minds are under the influence of the idea that Eve sinned first.

It's your opinion. I agree that it's true and it does matter that women have been mistreated over the centuries by men (and other women, too, although maybe in different ways) Christian and otherwise who have manipulated the truth of, and what can be clearly understood from, Scripture (people are not really smarter than they ever have been) to suit their own selfish ends. Others, also Christian and otherwise, have done so in total ignorance of Scripture, but they are not excused either because they innately knew it to be wrong (God made us that way, this is part of what it means to be created in His image). In either case, it has been wise-ness in their own eyes, and that comes from and is the result of pride and self-centeredness -- which was really what Adam's sin was -- as opposed to humility and selflessness, which is what man is exhorted to over and over again throughout the Bible... and by his/her conscience, whether theye "identify" as Christians or not or really know anything about Scripture or not.

How else can we explain such behavior - an unwillingness to defend his wife Eve in the face of temptation? Something was behind his inaction...and we can see that it had to do with Adams self deception that he could be like god if he had this wonderful knowledge...but he was a coward and used Eve to make sure it was then safe for him to eat of.

Yeah I agree with... a little bit... of this... the cowardice part, at least. But even that is a product of pride and/or self-centeredness. Again, Adam was not deceived. He absolutely knew what he was supposed to do -- for God, for Eve, and secondarily for himself. But he failed. Miserably. And, like I said -- therefore, the need for a Savior, for God Himself to rectify things, and the great thing is that He will, despite what seems to be going on around us. Redemption has been accomplished; Christ Jesus did that on the cross. We are waiting for it to be fully applied, but know it eventually will be. God promised that from the get-go -- for the first time in Genesis 3:15, but certainly not the last -- and all God's promises find their 'yes' and 'amen' in Christ:

• "For all the promises of God find their Yes in Him. That is why it is through Him that we utter our Amen to God for His glory." (2 Corinthians 1:20)

Grace and peace to you.

[John Bauer]

[1 Timothy 2:14] supports the understanding that Eve was deceived by the Serpent AND her husband who was with her at the time.

There is nothing in this letter to Timothy which indicates that Adam deceived his wife, or was involved in her deception, or conspired with the serpent to deceive her. It says "the woman was deceived" but it does not say by whom. The answer to that question is found elsewhere, by which we know that it was the serpent. You will search the scriptures in vain, trying to find a text that states or implies that Adam deceived his wife or conspired with the serpent.

Back in the garden, there was no law about coveting.

There is more to "law" than the ten commandments with which we are so familiar—in fact, there were 613 (not just 10). If God commands that we do X, then that is a law. If God commands that we don't do Y, then that is a law. In the garden, one of God's commands—indeed, the most plain and explicit one—was that Adam and Eve not eat of that particular tree. They broke that law or command, and were therefore transgressors. Whatever God commands, that is law, and to break God's law is sin. "I would not have known sin except through the law," that is, falling short of obedience to God. Jesus said, "I give you a new commandment—to love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another" (John 13:34). When we fail to love one another as Jesus loves us—and we fail it miserably every hour—that is sin, despite the fact that it is not one of the ten commandments in Exodus 20.