Adam and Eve and the Fall

[pinqy]

Note for those who do not believe in a literal reading of Genesis:
For the purposes of this discussion, we will assume that the Book of Genesis is literally true, though I am fine with an explanation of it as metaphorical truth as an explanation for perceived problems. I do not welcome dismissal of Genesis as myth, because my purpose is to figure out believers’ understanding.

So here’s what I don’t understand: Adam and Eve were naked in the Garden of Eden and had no concept of good and evil. But then Eve, then Adam, ate the fruit and gained that knowledge. And God punishes them and humanity in General forever for disobedience.

But if Eve had no concept of good or evil, then she didn’t know it was wrong to disobey God: she lacked intent. I suppose it’s arguable that once she did know, it was wrong to give Adam the fruit, but he didn’t know it was wrong.
So why were they punished for disobeying God when they didn’t know it was wrong?

Additionally, once they ate the fruit, they realized they were being sinful by being naked. But God had no problem with them sinning that way because they didn’t know it was a sin. So why was that okay, but not disobedience?

I’ve never read any apologetics that consider this problem and i’m curious how believers solve this problem.

 

[Daisy]

Because God told them it was wrong, that is all they needed to know...He created them, He had the right to guide them...their failure to rely on Him for guidance, thus disobeying, was their downfall and mankind has suffered the consequences ever since...

Their nakedness merely made them even more conscious of their exposure for their wrongdoing, they were attempting to hide from God as much as covering up to one another...their conscience right away began condemning them for what they had done...

 

[Daisy]

Oh, and Adam did know it was wrong, he willfully disobeyed...God told him directly, and as Eve's head, it was his responsibility to pass that command on to Eve...if he had exercised his headship in the proper manner over his wife, who knows...the outcome may have been very different...

"For Adam was formed first, then Eve. Also, Adam was not deceived, but the woman was thoroughly deceived and became a transgressor." 1 Tim. 2:13

 

[pinqy]

Oh, and Adam did know it was wrong, he willfully disobeyed...

How did he know disobedience was wrong? That’s my question.

God told him directly

God did not tell him disobedience was wrong, or even that eating the fruit was wrong. God told Adam he would die that day if he ate the fruit: so Adam would have refrained, not from obedience, but from self-preservation.

 

[Daisy]

How did he know disobedience was wrong? That’s my question.

God did not tell him disobedience was wrong, or even that eating the fruit was wrong. God told Adam he would die that day if he ate the fruit: so Adam would have refrained, not from obedience, but from self-preservation.

You are selling the first perfect man short...we really do not know how long Adam had the opportunity to live and observe the wonders of his Creator before he and Eve sinned...they were not mere babes, only had not experienced bad for themselves...they merely lacked the trust in their Creator to direct their steps...

"I well know, O Jehovah, that man’s way does not belong to him. It does not belong to man who is walking even to direct his step." Jer. 10:23

How much clearer could God make His command than to tell him if he ate of the fruit, he would die?

 

[Goshin]

Taken literally, the eating of the fruit was an act of knowing disobedience to God. The fruit itself may not have been anything special... what was special was God had said not to eat of it. Having done so, their spirit was no longer pure and was now open to the idea that they could disobey God in other ways, as well as the shame and cost of such disobedience. They were irrevocably changed by the act.


As a metaphor of human development to full self-awareness, it points out that once our species became sufficiently intelligent and aware that the possibility of acting in a willfully-wrong way for personal gain was understood and practiced, that our child-like innocence was lost and our responsibility for our actions began.

 

[pinqy]

You are selling the first perfect man short...we really do not know how long Adam had the opportunity to live and observe the wonders of his Creator before he and Eve sinned...they were not mere babes, only had not experienced bad for themselves...they merely lacked the trust in their Creator to direct their steps...

They had no knowledge or concept of good or evil. So how could they have sinned without knowing it was a sin or what a sin was?

How much clearer could God make His command than to tell him if he ate of the fruit, he would die?

Oh, it was perfectly clear. But that's not the point. The point is that they were not punished for the sin of nudity, because they didn't know it was a sin, but they were punished for disobeying an order when they didn't know that was a sin either. And in general, we do have different standards based on knowledge of sinfulness: while it would certainly be sinful for me to grab a stranger's breast, no one would say an infant sins when he does it, because he has no real concept of good or bad.

 

[Daisy]

They had no knowledge or concept of good or evil. So how could they have sinned without knowing it was a sin or what a sin was?


Oh, it was perfectly clear. But that's not the point. The point is that they were not punished for the sin of nudity, because they didn't know it was a sin, but they were punished for disobeying an order when they didn't know that was a sin either. And in general, we do have different standards based on knowledge of sinfulness: while it would certainly be sinful for me to grab a stranger's breast, no one would say an infant sins when he does it, because he has no real concept of good or bad.

Adam and Eve were not infants...they were perfect human beings, without sin...all they had to do was put their full trust in Jehovah God...and they failed...

 

[Angel]

How did he know disobedience was wrong? That’s my question.
...

And a good question it is.

But let's be clear. The original sin was disobedience. Obedience is not a matter of right and wrong; it is a matter of compliance with a command.

Adam did not know disobedience was wrong; nor did he know that obedience was right. He was innocent (=ignorant) of right and wrong.
And in fact there is nothing inherently right or wrong in obedience or disobedience per se. Disobedience is sometimes right; obedience is sometimes wrong.

The character of obedience or disobedience derives from either the nature of the command or the nature of the authority issuing the command, and since the nature of the command is absent in the case of innocent Adam (he had no knowledge of good and evil), then the character of his disobedience must derive purely from the nature of the authority.

He knew what what God told him not to do, and he went and did it anyway.

 

[Mizzy22]

God told them don't eat it but they did,of course the serpent tricked Eve

 

[pinqy]

Adam and Eve were not infants...

As far as knowing right from wrong, how were they different from infants?

they were perfect human beings, without sin...all they had to do was put their full trust in Jehovah God...and they failed...

Did they know they were supposed to trust God? Genesis doesn’t say so.

 

[Daisy]

As far as knowing right from wrong, how were they different from infants?


Did they know they were supposed to trust God? Genesis doesn’t say so.

If God spoke directly to you and told you not to do something, would you do it? Remember, there was no need for a mediator back then...

 

[pinqy]

If God spoke directly to you and told you not to do something, would you do it? Remember, there was no need for a mediator back then...

But I know the difference between right and wrong.

 

[Daisy]

But I know the difference between right and wrong.

And they knew the difference between obeying and being disobedient...

 

[pinqy]

And they knew the difference between obeying and being disobedient...

How do you know that? They didn't know right from wrong, good from bad.

Are you committing a sin if you don't know the act is a sin or wrong in anyway?

 

[Daisy]

How do you know that? They didn't know right from wrong, good from bad.

Are you committing a sin if you don't know the act is a sin or wrong in anyway?

We are not animals, we have the art of communication and the power of reason for a reason...God communicated with Adam directly and gave him the command...you are assuming a perfect man is dumb...why did they know immediately that they had sinned in an attempt to hide themselves from God?

 

[ludin]

Note for those who do not believe in a literal reading of Genesis:
For the purposes of this discussion, we will assume that the Book of Genesis is literally true, though I am fine with an explanation of it as metaphorical truth as an explanation for perceived problems. I do not welcome dismissal of Genesis as myth, because my purpose is to figure out believers’ understanding.

So here’s what I don’t understand: Adam and Eve were naked in the Garden of Eden and had no concept of good and evil. But then Eve, then Adam, ate the fruit and gained that knowledge. And God punishes them and humanity in General forever for disobedience.

But if Eve had no concept of good or evil, then she didn’t know it was wrong to disobey God: she lacked intent. I suppose it’s arguable that once she did know, it was wrong to give Adam the fruit, but he didn’t know it was wrong.
So why were they punished for disobeying God when they didn’t know it was wrong?

Additionally, once they ate the fruit, they realized they were being sinful by being naked. But God had no problem with them sinning that way because they didn’t know it was a sin. So why was that okay, but not disobedience?

I’ve never read any apologetics that consider this problem and i’m curious how believers solve this problem.

Free will requires a choice.

So in the garden were 2 tree's the Tree of Life and the Tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
along with many other tree's Adam was commanded very specifically by God.

16 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:

17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

Die in hebrew means a separation of two things.

that is the meaning behind the words.

if you read the next verse it says:

18 And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.

now let us look at chapter 3.

The serpent.
Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?

3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.

so here we see that she didn't even get that right. adam must have not told her correctly.
the 2nd thing we notice is that adam is not with her.

5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.

9/10 she never told him where she got it from.

And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

the punishment. separation from the tree of life.

before they gained knowledge they were innocent in all things. being naked was not naked it was simply them being.
they didn't have a concept of naked sin did not exist.

it wasn't until after that they gained knowledge of things both good and evil.

 

[ludin]

Oh, and Adam did know it was wrong, he willfully disobeyed...God told him directly, and as Eve's head, it was his responsibility to pass that command on to Eve...if he had exercised his headship in the proper manner over his wife, who knows...the outcome may have been very different...

"For Adam was formed first, then Eve. Also, Adam was not deceived, but the woman was thoroughly deceived and became a transgressor." 1 Tim. 2:13

He told eve but eve got it wrong.
This is evident in genesis.

after she ate she more than likely left out the fact of where she got it or what tree it came from.
now he should have seen that fruit before but more than likely he stayed away from that tree on purpose.

 

[ludin]

We are not animals, we have the art of communication and the power of reason for a reason...God communicated with Adam directly and gave him the command...you are assuming a perfect man is dumb...why did they know immediately that they had sinned in an attempt to hide themselves from God?

because they had finally gained knowledge of both good and evil.

7 And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.

their eyes had been closed to their state. they saw things through a pure lens.

 

[Daisy]

He told eve but eve got it wrong.
This is evident in genesis.

after she ate she more than likely left out the fact of where she got it or what tree it came from.
now he should have seen that fruit before but more than likely he stayed away from that tree on purpose.

He knew exactly where the fruit came from so he willfully sinned...as a proof that Adam’s sin was willful, the apostle Paul wrote...

“Adam was formed first, then Eve. Also, Adam was not deceived, but the woman was thoroughly deceived and came to be in transgression.” 1 Tim. 2:13, 14

 

[Logicman]

Note for those who do not believe in a literal reading of Genesis:
For the purposes of this discussion, we will assume that the Book of Genesis is literally true, though I am fine with an explanation of it as metaphorical truth as an explanation for perceived problems. I do not welcome dismissal of Genesis as myth, because my purpose is to figure out believers’ understanding.

So here’s what I don’t understand: Adam and Eve were naked in the Garden of Eden and had no concept of good and evil. But then Eve, then Adam, ate the fruit and gained that knowledge. And God punishes them and humanity in General forever for disobedience.

But if Eve had no concept of good or evil, then she didn’t know it was wrong to disobey God: she lacked intent. I suppose it’s arguable that once she did know, it was wrong to give Adam the fruit, but he didn’t know it was wrong.
So why were they punished for disobeying God when they didn’t know it was wrong?

Additionally, once they ate the fruit, they realized they were being sinful by being naked. But God had no problem with them sinning that way because they didn’t know it was a sin. So why was that okay, but not disobedience?

I’ve never read any apologetics that consider this problem and i’m curious how believers solve this problem.

God doesn't punish Adam and Eve and humanity forever. There is a heaven for those who have faith in God, which produces righteousness (Genesis 15:6, Ephesians 2:8-9, etc.).

The big question, though, is why it all happened and why Satan was allowed into the Garden. Here's the best explanation of that I've come across:

To Summarize:

1. Man was to be created in the likeness and image of God (Genesis 1:26).

2. Part of this “likeness” was a knowledge of good and evil (Genesis 3:22)

3. For Adam to be truly “like” God, he had to acquire a knowledge of (good and) evil.

4. The means to that end was eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

5. To do that a “tempter” was likely needed to entice Eve and Adam into sin.

6. God provided, or allowed, Satan as the tempter.

7. God knew in advance what the outcome would be, but allowed it anyway.

8. God knew atonement would be required, and provided Jesus Christ as the “Lamb slain from the foundation of the earth” (Revelation 13:8).

9. Man achieves the likeness of God, acquires a knowledge of and overcomes evil, partakes of Christ, and is reunited in paradise with God. Man is now an overcomer with a keen knowledge of evil.

The key to all this remains, “Is acquiring a knowledge of good and evil a prerequisite to coming into the likeness and image of God? If the answer is yes, I think Adam has to eat from that tree, and God has to make it happen. If the answer is no, then I think you have to look back to Genesis 3:22 and reconcile that with Genesis 1:26, explaining how Adam is “like” God, but at the same time lacks a knowledge of good and evil. Also, how does man acquire that knowledge without eating of the fruit of that tree?

https://righterreport.com/2013/10/10/satan-in-the-garden-of-eden/

 

[Conaeolos]

Note for those who do not believe in a literal reading of Genesis:
For the purposes of this discussion, we will assume that the Book of Genesis is literally true, though I am fine with an explanation of it as metaphorical truth as an explanation for perceived problems. I do not welcome dismissal of Genesis as myth, because my purpose is to figure out believers’ understanding.

So here’s what I don’t understand: Adam and Eve were naked in the Garden of Eden and had no concept of good and evil. But then Eve, then Adam, ate the fruit and gained that knowledge. And God punishes them and humanity in General forever for disobedience.

But if Eve had no concept of good or evil, then she didn’t know it was wrong to disobey God: she lacked intent. I suppose it’s arguable that once she did know, it was wrong to give Adam the fruit, but he didn’t know it was wrong.
So why were they punished for disobeying God when they didn’t know it was wrong?

Additionally, once they ate the fruit, they realized they were being sinful by being naked. But God had no problem with them sinning that way because they didn’t know it was a sin. So why was that okay, but not disobedience?

I’ve never read any apologetics that consider this problem and i’m curious how believers solve this problem.

A lot to unpack in this tight format, but first thing to contextualize would be the story whether taken literally or not is recorded and retold to convey a moral lesson/wisdom to future generations in a relatable way not simply retell history. So to simply take away, “grandpa” and “grandma” got punished for eating a fruit ignores the essence of the story. Why it was chosen to be preserved and retold by the sages, teachers and elders for generations in the form it takes. To be useful we have to look at the undertones.

In that way let’s focus on the metaphoric language which I say explains how you “solve” these problems as I would disagree the take away is simply “disobedience = punishment” (although that is in many ways true)

So first, a few set up points:

what was “their” purpose? Gen 2:16
“…work/craft the garden of paradise(small form of nature/heavens)”

why was this fruit forbidden? Gen 2:16
“…on that day you shall surely die”

Was their nakedness considered evil? Genesis 2:25
By God - unknown
By Creation - “…they were not ashamed”

So why were they punished for disobeying God when they didn’t know it was wrong?

Now interesting, if you watch the phrasing the consequences are not all listed as punishments….that is in one part, Gen 3:16, “I shall greatly multiply your sorrow…“ but for most of the rest of the Gen 3:14-19 it is stated as “because you have done this…” a reading of the effects including death “from dust you came and dust you shall return”.

One solution then is observing that God didn’t have to “punish” Adam & Eve for disobedience. The knowledge of good and evil simply prevents their purpose in the garden. For we already see them hiding and reacting, blaming others, all things we know can interfere with “crafting paradise”.

Now the temper lied, death did follow as a consequence of consuming the knowledge of good and evil (just not as they concived it) but it seems he also predicted a truth which is this act "elevated" the ability of man, the consequence of this was being denied the “tree of life”. An important take away. There is power also given to that fruit yet it wasn't eatten but later protected. This is likely on purpose.

once they ate the fruit, they realized they were being sinful by being naked.

There in lays a lesson. They were naked and not ashamed and were in paradise for they lived the purpose of their creation. They were however as stated in gen 3:22 not complete to be like God. Just like how adam/eve before adam & eve were not complete Gen 2:!8 but were made so in time but in a way unexpected. There in it was likely “the right plan” of God to make adam & eve "good" when it fit in the order of things but the couple instead rebelled against “perfection” when they took up the temptation of “being like God” and in so were banished and as God warned subject to death…more over it is thus implied that our sense of “good and evil” is flawed. A good thing yes but beyond our “evolutionary” abilities and the consequence is suffering.

It implies “salvation” requires retuning the knowledge of “good and evil” from ourselves back to God.Only then might we eat from the "tree of life" which is said to be eternal....

Anyway, hopefully that helps.

 

[tosca1]

Note for those who do not believe in a literal reading of Genesis:
For the purposes of this discussion, we will assume that the Book of Genesis is literally true, though I am fine with an explanation of it as metaphorical truth as an explanation for perceived problems. I do not welcome dismissal of Genesis as myth, because my purpose is to figure out believers’ understanding.

So here’s what I don’t understand: Adam and Eve were naked in the Garden of Eden and had no concept of good and evil. But then Eve, then Adam, ate the fruit and gained that knowledge. And God punishes them and humanity in General forever for disobedience.

But if Eve had no concept of good or evil, then she didn’t know it was wrong to disobey God: she lacked intent. I suppose it’s arguable that once she did know, it was wrong to give Adam the fruit, but he didn’t know it was wrong.

Does obedience have to come with the knowledge of right and wrong?

Little children don't really know about right or wrong.....but they still practice obedience to their parents.
I suppose, along with it comes trust - trusting that their parents know what's best.

Additionally, once they ate the fruit, they realized they were being sinful by being naked. But God had no problem with them sinning that way because they didn’t know it was a sin. So why was that okay, but not disobedience?

So why were they punished for disobeying God when they didn’t know it was wrong?

Because it was disobedience, that was the root of the problem. Had they obeyed God's instructions, they wouldn't have sinned.

It's comparable to a child who's been instructed not to touch the hot stove. The child who disobeys would burn his finger.
The child who obeys, won't.

 

[tosca1]

As far as knowing right from wrong, how were they different from infants?

Did they know they were supposed to trust God? Genesis doesn’t say so.

An infant instinctively trusts his parents. He relies on them.

 

[jet57]

Note for those who do not believe in a literal reading of Genesis:
For the purposes of this discussion, we will assume that the Book of Genesis is literally true, though I am fine with an explanation of it as metaphorical truth as an explanation for perceived problems. I do not welcome dismissal of Genesis as myth, because my purpose is to figure out believers’ understanding.

So here’s what I don’t understand: Adam and Eve were naked in the Garden of Eden and had no concept of good and evil. But then Eve, then Adam, ate the fruit and gained that knowledge. And God punishes them and humanity in General forever for disobedience.

But if Eve had no concept of good or evil, then she didn’t know it was wrong to disobey God: she lacked intent. I suppose it’s arguable that once she did know, it was wrong to give Adam the fruit, but he didn’t know it was wrong.
So why were they punished for disobeying God when they didn’t know it was wrong?

Additionally, once they ate the fruit, they realized they were being sinful by being naked. But God had no problem with them sinning that way because they didn’t know it was a sin. So why was that okay, but not disobedience?

I’ve never read any apologetics that consider this problem and i’m curious how believers solve this problem.

Well, as I understand it, she DID know she wasn't supposed to eat th' apple, God had told both of them stay away from it. They apparently felt shame at being naked so to THEM it wasn't okay. I'm not sure it's as much sin as it is the introduction to ego.