Adam or Eve? Who to ultimately blame for the fall?

  • Thread starter Thread starter matthew1624
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Della, I agree that the Church teaches that all passages of the bible must first be approached as a literal. However, this is a starting point other wise Pope JohnPaul II would not have said what he said about the possibilities of Evolution being a scientific possibility. It are those passages such as the the Gospel narratives of the Institution of the Eucharist at the Last Supper clarified by John 6 22 - 60 has to be taken literal however not Genesis 3 if you are approaching it as actual diologue etc. Looking back, however, on what I wrote I was ambigious at points seemily to imply that Original Sin was a Corporate Sin. Looking at those passages I was wrong (I knew what I was saying but most people are not mind readers therefore I didnot express myself clearly and thus I am grateful for your pointing out my error - THANKS!) Also, your reminder made me think about my answer again. The Bible itself is pretty clear on the subject in that throughout scripture it is refered to as “The Sin of Adam”.
 
40.png
matthew1624:
And why? I’ve heard both sides, Eve was to blame because she gave into the temptation, and the other, Adam was to blame because he failed to protect Eve.
Click to expand...
Why neither of them is responsible!

A Baptist friend of mine at work told me his preacher man said it was Adams FIRST wife Lilith that was responsible!

Don’t laugh, it’s Baptist and it’s true! Sometimes when I talk to Baptists I just have to bite my tongue and try to keep a straight face.
 
If I may, one more point, if you go to my original reply, I was attempting to express (and doings so rather poorly) what I believed was at the root “Adam’s Sin” - although I believe Genesis 3 does teach us a lesson about personal responsibility each of us has when we sin, through the actions of Eve - and how this “Root Cause” has effected all of us in our fallen human nature through Adam’s sin. For me, this is what I belived to be the revealed truth found in Genesis 1 - 3 and on, which I believe is not agaist Catholic teaching.
 
40.png
Della:
For Biblereader and TOME, the Catholic Church teaches that the words of the Bible are to be taken as literally true. Any spiritual interpretations are secondary in nature. So, the Church teaches that Adam and Eve were real people who really did rebel against God by disobeying him.
Click to expand...
Hi, Della. Textual emphasis below (capitals, italics, etc.) is merely just that – emphasis. I am not “yelling” at you.

Don’t forget that the BIBLE ITSELF is ALSO Catholic Church teaching.

Careful review of the Original Sin story strongly suggests that the Original Sin story is pure fiction which is teaching religious truth.

Adam means “red,” what would have been the color of the clay he was made out of, when God is portrayed as making man like a potter making a pot out of clay. Do you really believe the literal truth of that Dr.-Seuss-like portrait – that God made us like a potter making a pot? Or, do you reject the literal truth of that part of the story? Do you see the problem?

Eve means “living,” because Eve was “mother of all the living,” which Adam could not have forseen, in his fallen state. Genesis 3:20. Do you really believe the literal truth of that Dr.-Seuss-like portrait – that Adam new before Eve conceived that she would be mother of all the living? Or, do you reject the literal truth of that part of the story? Do you see the problem?

Adam also called Eve a “woman” because out of “her man” this one was taken. Genesis 2:23. What does that mean? That is a Dr.-Seuss-like pun, in Hebrew. The pun doesn’t make sense in English, BECAUSE it is a HEBREW pun. Preserving the critical Hebrew terminology, the verse reads, “This one shall be called ishsha, for out of ishah this one has been taken.”

If we translate THE LOGIC OF THE PUN into English, instead of the literal meaning of the words, the pun becomes apparent: “This one shall be called a ‘herman,’ for out of ‘her man’ this one has been taken.” Voila: Adam called Eve a “HERMAN”!!!

Now, do you REALLY think Adam called Eve a “herman”? Do you really believe the literal truth of that Dr.-Seuss-like portrait? Or, do you reject the literal truth of that part of the story? Do you see the problem?

The problem is that in the guise of loyalty to our Church and to the Bible, you are actually picking-and-choosing what you want to believe, while hypocritically condemning others for doing precisely, exactly that.

In truth, probably even ancient Hebrew children, sitting around the campfire listening to the storytellers repeating the Adam and Eve story, realized that it was a Dr.-Seuss-like fictional narrative teaching infallible theology.

By the way, why was Adam named “Red” by the Genesis text? In other words, why didn’t the Genesis text just say that Adam was made out of aphar, “dirt”? Hint: farmville.net/2001/20010816/images/20010816_45_small.jpg
 
Eve was decieved, but it was her choice. Adam was at fault because he should have interveined :banghead:
 
The way I see it, since both were expelled from the garden and both passed on original sin to their respective genders, it was both their faults. If it was only Adam’s fault, why do women have original sin and why did Eve get kicked out of the garden? Same thing if it was only Eve’s fault. Why didn’t Adam get to stay? Why are we guys stuck with original sin? It’s gotta be both.
 
40.png
PhilNeri:
The way I see it, since both were expelled from the garden and both passed on original sin to their respective genders, it was both their faults. If it was only Adam’s fault, why do women have original sin and why did Eve get kicked out of the garden? Same thing if it was only Eve’s fault. Why didn’t Adam get to stay? Why are we guys stuck with original sin? It’s gotta be both.
Click to expand...
Women love to test their men. When she ate the apple, she immediately realized that she might might be able to manipulate the man so he helps her take the fall.

In true manipulative fashion, she put Adam in a no-win situation. He had to pick between God and the girl. I guess she won, didn’t she? She showed she had what it took to control a man against his father and mother, thus establishing the pattern that a man leaves his father and mother.

To this day, satan causes many women to constantly be expecting men to be proving themselves. This drives men to violence and despair.

In summary, it’s all Eve’s fault. 😃

Alan
 
Since the two became one, I voted both. I see it as a sin by the communion of the two excluding the Spirit of God from their lives.
 
space ghost:
We were always taught and I personally believe, that until Adam ate of the fruit it was no sin… what do you think?
Click to expand...
If a second person murders after the first, then does the first person become a murderer only after the second?

I think it’s safe to say that Eve broke the commandment of God, so Eve is responsible for her own sin; as Adam is responsible for his own sin.

Now, if Eve ate but Adam didn’t, then God could have slain Eve and given him a new wife, thus sparing all of mankind from the Curse. When Adam ate of the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, all of mankind was then corrupt, both the male and the female made in God’s image. It was Adam’s folly that completed the Curse for mankind. Adam is then attributed to the Fall not Eve.

“The last will be first and the first last.” :cool:
 
then god could have simply destroyed them both and recreated Steve and Linda.

I believe that the love god has for man is something that we as humans can not comprehend.

God knew where satan was, and being within the garden of eden, wouldn’t satan at this time have been on good terms with god. Could this have been the last draw between god and satan. God told Adam and Eve to not eat of the fruit, maybe in anticipation of setting up a trap for Satan. aahhhh forget it, maybe i should be a philosopher, cya. lol
 
This thread isn’t that old, but it seems like it is. Yeah, I’m a “both” voter (I don’t know what I may have voted previously).

It really seems that there is really something in us that is so vulnerable that we can fall into sin, especially sin that comes to us from outside ourselves. It seems such sin is so real.

Whatever the biblical skeptics may say about Genesis not being historical, this is still the classic story of temptation and sin.

If sin had started up some generations after Adam and Eve, we might have a lot more to say about it. Sin is being depicted here from the beginning, when we (in our first parents) were in a paradise of relationship with God. Looking at them is a way of looking at ourselves.
 
I said both. There might have been different ‘areas’ that each transgressed, but they were each ‘called’ on to make their own choices. Ezekiel told the exiles in Babylon that every man would be judged for his own sins. We also are taught that God loves to weigh the acts and reasons of individual heart…his eye is on His saints and the choices they make. :yup:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top