The Fall of Adam and Eve

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Bobby Hamilton, Nov 10, 2010.

  1. Bobby Hamilton

    Bobby Hamilton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2010
    Messages:
    569
    Likes Received:
    0
    I apologize if this particular topic has been brought up. If so, if someone could link me to it and then close this thread that would be great.


    I was talking to my sister yesterday and she was talking about a Bible study they are doing at her church on Genesis. In particular we were talking about Chapter 3. I made a joking comment to her saying "well, Eve screwed it up for all of us" She took that lightly but said that wasn't accurate at all and that Adam was there with her during the temptation and they sinned at the same time.

    Well that threw up a red flag to me. I recall doing a study a few years ago about Genesis 3, and that was a topic that came up. The defense was verse 6 were it says "she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her"...implying that Adam was with her during the temptation.

    I have a hard time believing this. I don't understand why verses 1-5 would be written the way they were, excluding any mention of Adam, if he had been with Eve. Then, if you look further in Chapter 3 when God calls them out, Adam blames Eve for his sin, not Satan. It doesn't make sense to me that he would blame Eve, had he been there during the temptation. Then when Got punishes Adam, God's direct quote in verse 17 is "because you have listened to the woman"...and not "because you have listened to the serpent"

    So what am I missing here? God's punishement to both of them was different, for different types of sin. If they had both been deceived would this not be the case?
     
  2. Tom Butler

    Tom Butler
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2005
    Messages:
    9,031
    Likes Received:
    0
    The best explanation I have heard is that Eve was deceived, but Adam was not. He willfully disobeyed. That's why we inherited the result of Adam's sin, not Eve's.

    Some have explained Adam's sin as his desire to be with Eve, wherever she was, rather than to live in the garden without her.

    And there is the view that Adam actually tried to blame God for his fall, when he said "the woman that YOU gave me."
     
  3. webdog

    webdog
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    24,691
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't think we know one way or the other based on Adam being "with her". Besides being right next to her, he could have been in the general vicinity or a certain part of the garden.

    Adam blaming Eve was a result of his new sin nature. Eve would have had to told him the events leading to her having the fruit if he was not present.
     
  4. Bobby Hamilton

    Bobby Hamilton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2010
    Messages:
    569
    Likes Received:
    0
    I guess my question would be this: Was Adam present with Eve and was complacent and did nothing as she took of the tree, then he decided to take of the tree?

    Or was he somewhere else in the Garden and Eve approached him and he willingly took because she did?

    Either way Adam seemed not to blame the serpent which would lead me to believe he wasn't there.
     
  5. Bobby Hamilton

    Bobby Hamilton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2010
    Messages:
    569
    Likes Received:
    0

    Thats kind of what I'm thinking. "with her" simply means "in the garden with her"

    like If I'm visiting your house and I'm in the bathroom and you are in the kitchen...I'm with you, I'm just not in your immediate presence.

    As far as blaming Eve...because of his love for Eve, I think the only reason he would've blamed Eve and not the Serpent...would've been his lack of knowledge of the Serpent (at the time)...leading me to think he wasn't there.
     
  6. Scarlett O.

    Scarlett O.
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2002
    Messages:
    9,835
    Likes Received:
    115
    If you believe that someone is making a "stretch" by saying that Adam was with Eve when she and when they both sinned, then I do, humbly, and with all my heart believe that it is a "WILD" stretch to claim that he sinned out of his love for her.

    The Bible says that he was "with her". It also says that he was "not deceived". It doesn't say that he was or was not listening to the conversation, but it does say that he was with her - a few yards away, a few feet away, an acre away, a few inches away - it doesn't say.

    Adam and Eve are BOTH culpable for their own sins.

    Eve did NOT screw it up for all of us.

    Adam AND Eve BOTH sinned and the rest of us are paying the price for it.
     
    #6 Scarlett O., Nov 10, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 10, 2010
  7. webdog

    webdog
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    24,691
    Likes Received:
    0
    It is told to us Eve was deceived, and Adam was not. He had to have know at least the conversation that took place between Eve and the serpent. If she tricked him, he would have been deceived.
     
  8. Bobby Hamilton

    Bobby Hamilton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2010
    Messages:
    569
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yeah. I just read that as Eve took him the fruit, told him where she got it from (and him seeing she had eaten of it) just did the same. No deception or knowledge of anything else. God told him not to and he did it anyways.

    Thanks!
     
  9. Amy.G

    Amy.G
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Messages:
    13,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    No he didn't blame the serpent. He blamed God.

    Genesis 3:12 And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat.


    Adam did what we all do. We sin, we hide from God, we blame someone else or we blame God.

    Eve was tempted by the loveliness of the fruit. She was deceived to think eating of it would give her something she didn't have. Adam knew better and as head of the woman it was his responsibility to protect his wife and he failed her and God. That is why it is through Adam's sin that death entered the world.

    Yes, he was with her. The Bible says so.
     
  10. Bobby Hamilton

    Bobby Hamilton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2010
    Messages:
    569
    Likes Received:
    0
    Prior to the fall, where does it say that Adam was the head of the woman?

    And where does it say that Adam was with her during the temptation?
    Verse 6 states she took of the tree, ate of it, and gave to adam who was with her. It doesn't state he was with her during that conversation between Eve and Satan.
     
  11. Bobby Hamilton

    Bobby Hamilton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2010
    Messages:
    569
    Likes Received:
    0

    I agree. My comment in my first post was more of me poking fun at my sister. But as our conversation went deeper it kind of tossed up a red flag.

    I spoke with my pastor on this topic last night. I also talked with a former pastor of mine from my days at Cedarville. Both of them stated that they believed that Eve fell to temptation, and Adam made a decision willingly knowing he was doing wrong, but both of them state based on the punishments handed out and accusations made by both Eve and Adam, that Adam wasn't with her during the temptation. My old pastor even mentioned that if he had been with her and ignored it/been passive/knew what would happen to her...that wouldn't indicate a characteristic of a perfect person (which they were before the fall)

    It's interesting either way.
     
  12. Amy.G

    Amy.G
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Messages:
    13,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ephesians 5:23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.

    1 Timothy 2:12-13 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve.

    Even if Adam wasn't present during Eve's conversation with Satan, he knew better than to eat of the tree because God had told him personally not to do it.
     
  13. Bobby Hamilton

    Bobby Hamilton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2010
    Messages:
    569
    Likes Received:
    0

    Last sentence first: I'm not disagreeing with that at all. I agree 100%...because it's clear he took of the fruit knowing he shouldn't. But he wasn't deceived...and due to his nature being passive and inactive wouldn't be a characteristic he should've had before the fall. So him standing there, watching his wife be decieved...makes zero sense based on the perfect nature of Adam and Eve at the time.

    Now again...where in Genesis, BEFORE the fall, does Moses write that Adam is head over Eve? That was done after the fall. If that was already the hierarchy, why make a point of it then AND make it a burden?

    Just some questions I have.
     
  14. Amy.G

    Amy.G
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Messages:
    13,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    It makes about as much sense as Adam eating of the fruit knowing he would die.

    Paul made it clear that man has authority over the woman taking it all the way back to the creation.

    1 Timothy 2:12-13 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve.


    If you don't trust Paul, that is another topic.
     
  15. Bobby Hamilton

    Bobby Hamilton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2010
    Messages:
    569
    Likes Received:
    0
    Two different things. Adam sees Eve eat the fruit, and she's fine...so he thinks "hey, I'll eat of it as well."...as compared to him watching the whole thing happen in the first place, knowing something wasn't right because Eve hadn't sinned yet.

    It's like anything: We know something is wrong. And we don't do it. But all of a sudden we see someone else do it and everything is okay. So then we do it. Same thing. But if we are with them and there is contemplation, we are far less likely to do it.

    As far as Paul, why would I distrust him? If you want to bounce Bible verse off of Bible verse, then by all means. People can use the Bible to contradict things all day long (and I'm not saying you are wrong, because I honestly don't know) But you already posted one verse that was vague and didn't answer my question. I didn't see you use it again this time. Why not?

    I'm simply wondering why through 3 Chapters and 17 verses or so, Moses would not write about this...and then when he finally does it's mentioned as a clear indication as a RESULT of the sin. God doesn't put Adam as head of Eve as a reward. It's a punishment. If he was already the head of Eve before...why would it change from good to bad all of a sudden?

    And Amy: I'm not trying to be a jerk...I'm just trying to spark something that'll open my eyes a little more, one way or the other. I appreciate your responses.
     
  16. Amy.G

    Amy.G
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Messages:
    13,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    Bobby, I think what you're saying is that man was not in authority over his wife until after the fall. Is that correct? I don't see any scripture for that. As Paul points out, the authority of husband over wife goes back to the creation, before the fall.
    Now when I say authority over the wife, don't think I'm talking about dictatorship. This authority carries great responsibility and can only be done through his submission to God.
     
  17. glfredrick

    glfredrick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    Messages:
    4,996
    Likes Received:
    0
    In reading Genesis 1-3, we see several things. First, in Genesis 1:27, we see "man" (אדם ' adam -- generic by context of "male and female") created in God's image. Man, generic, was given dominion over creation in 1:28, and also given the express command to "be fruitful, multiply, and fill the earth. Presupposed here is that there was an ability to do so, i.e., Adam and Eve were present. In 1:29-30, god orders the food chain, but no mention of the special trees, Life and Knowledge of Good and Evil.

    Second, in Genesis 2, we see a recapitulation of Genesis 1, with details. There, we see the ordering of Creation more specifically. Scrolling down to 2:7 we see God creating Adam (now specific by context -- A man named Adam) and breathing life into "his" nostrils. In 2:8, God placed the man He had formed into a Garden that He had also formed (special for human habitation, by context). In 2:15, man was given the task of tending the Garden described earlier in 9-14. In 2:16-17, the specific command, "You may surely eat of every tree of the garden, but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat [or when you eat] of it you shall surely die." There is no reference to a female partner for Adam during this exchange.

    Third, God says, "It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for [or corresponding to] him." The word "helper" ( עזר `ezer. specifically by context and by grammar, a "female" ) is used specifically in 2:18 and again in 2:20. It is here that the concept of "headship" begins. A "helper" is not the "head," but rather, the one who comes alongside the "head" as support.

    Paul picks up on this 1 Cor 11:8-9: "For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man." And, again, in more detail in Eph. 5:22-24: Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands. Paul is saying that male (husband) headship stems from the created order, and is so because God was specific in what and why He did what He did.

    Back to Genesis 2, woman is created from the "rib" (צלע tsela lit. "side-stuff" often translated "rib") of Adam. Many down through the ages have noted that it was not from Adam's head nor his feet that God took the materials used to fashion woman, but his side.

    I'm not sure that we can make any theological hay from that sentiment, but that, coupled with other writings of Paul, Jesus, etc., indicates that woman as "helper" does not mean "slave" nor "doormat," nor underling or lesser person in God's estimation. Sadly, however, many have taken "helper" (or helpmate) to mean just that, and have acted accordingly. If for no other cause, the act of God allowing women to be the first to discover the resurrected Jesus, and the many ministries that were supported in the life of Jesus by women, ought to send signals to us that God values women equally with men, but that each has a distinct role to play in "dancing the dance" of life. The "dance" allusion is simple. It takes one to take the lead step and to direct the dance, but equal strength to dance the dance. (Most of us are Baptist, can we even mention dancing? :smilewinkgrin:)

    So, after a rather lengthy explanation of God's hierarchy in the created order, with a NT explanation and additional context, there is great reason to see Adam as "head" of the woman, and woman as "helper" for Adam.
     
  18. Bobby Hamilton

    Bobby Hamilton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2010
    Messages:
    569
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thank you.
     
  19. Bobby Hamilton

    Bobby Hamilton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2010
    Messages:
    569
    Likes Received:
    0
    In a sense, yes. It seems to me that God bestows this upon Adam after the fall.
     
  20. Amy.G

    Amy.G
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Messages:
    13,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    gl gave a good explanation. I could have done that, but I'm just not as talky. :laugh:
    Strange for a woman huh? :eek: Did I say that?
     

Share This Page

Loading...