Adam's Choice to Remain with Eve--The keeping of a commandment and blessing.

[Jay53]

Jay53,
My point has been that Adam faced a choice of which commandment(s) to break. He was going to be “sinning” either way, since every one of those commandments was a commandment from God. Should he sin by breaking three commandments, or sin by breaking one commandment?

He was showing loyalty to God either way, because he would have been keeping commandments which he had been given and understood, either way.

The dilemma that can be observed in all this is, how was Adam to decide which commandment(s) were more important in the midst of the choice he had to make? I think he made a wise choice and an unselfish choice.

The kind of thinking that would place Eve alone in the world while Adam stayed in the garden of Eden with an assumption on his part that God would make it up to him by giving him another “Eve” when he had been given her by God with no such assumption that she could be “replaced” (especially in view of the Savior’s clear example when he spoke of Jewish divorce versus the original concept of marriage between Adam and Eve), seems implausible. God had joined them together.

To just walk away from that “joining together” would be to do something that would show more disloyalty to God’s intents for them than to partake of the fruit and face the consequences which would be eventual “death” but would be keeping three commandments.

That’s the only thing you can think (that he made a wise choice), given that we don’t know what the alternate reality would have been. As I said, this is all speculation.

And Adam did not think that Eve would be simply cast out of the Garden of Eden all alone. God’s commandment said that he (and she) would “die”.

but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die."

I certainly don’t believe that Adam had any knowledge of what that would entail in terms of living on earth. He would/should have thought that there was no way for him to fulfill the “be fruitful and multiply” commandment if he took God at his literal Word that they would “die” if they ate of the tree.

As I said, he should have trusted God enough to know that if he showed obedience to God in this commandment, that God would take care of him, no matter what. But again, we don’t know what would have happened had he obeyed that commandment and not followed Eve.

 

[larkin31]

Larkin31,
Thank you for such a significant observation here.

Is this mockery or praise?

 

[ParkerD]

Is this mockery or praise?

Larkin31,
I’ll clarify that what I liked in your post was the following observation:

And wouldn’t you? I consider their choice (both of them the same one) to be their first fully human act, and the greatest, most fundamentally human act of all: to desire full knowledge. I know that this is not what the original writers intended in the message, but they (the writers) have also revealed one of the greatest truths of humanity: we desire knowledge of ourselves and our world first and foremost, even when it hurts to learn it.

Beautiful, really.

I think that makes sense and I enjoyed the comment as it was worded in that paragraph, but not the first item in your post. (I was not trying to “mock” your thoughts, at all.)

I do disagree as to whether Adam was choosing “disobedience”. With either choice he was going to make at that point, there was going to be disobedience on his part because he had commandments related to his relationship with Eve.

They were not afterthoughts. They were commandments.

Have a good day.

 

[SteveVH]

Jay53,
My point has been that Adam faced a choice of which commandment(s) to break. He was going to be “sinning” either way, since every one of those commandments was a commandment from God. Should he sin by breaking three commandments, or sin by breaking one commandment?

He was showing loyalty to God either way, because he would have been keeping commandments which he had been given and understood, either way.

The dilemma that can be observed in all this is, how was Adam to decide which commandment(s) were more important in the midst of the choice he had to make? I think he made a wise choice and an unselfish choice.

The kind of thinking that would place Eve alone in the world while Adam stayed in the garden of Eden with an assumption on his part that God would make it up to him by giving him another “Eve” when he had been given her by God with no such assumption that she could be “replaced” (especially in view of the Savior’s clear example when he spoke of Jewish divorce versus the original concept of marriage between Adam and Eve), seems implausible. God had joined them together.

To just walk away from that “joining together” would be to do something that would show more disloyalty to God’s intents for them than to partake of the fruit and face the consequences which would be eventual “death” but would be keeping three commandments.

ParkerD:

What you are saying is that God placed Adam in an impossible predicament; one in which he had no choice but to sin, but rather had to choose between which sin(s) to commit. God never causes us to sin and to even imply that He does is blasphemy. He made Adam and Eve with free will just as He made us. They chose their will over God’s will and we all have suffered the consequences of their decision. If I am faced with the choice of keeping God’s commandments or following my wife into sin, I am not obligated to sin out of some misguided sense of “responsibility” for my mate. Shall I follow her into hell? ParkerD, You should really think about the ramifications of what you are saying. Adam in no sense would be guilty of abandonment of Eve had he chosen to obey God. He had already abandoned her by not protecting her from the serpent to begin with.

 

[ParkerD]

ParkerD:

What you are saying is that God placed Adam in an impossible predicament; one in which he had no choice but to sin, but rather had to choose between which sin(s) to commit. God never causes us to sin and to even imply that He does is blasphemy. He made Adam and Eve with free will just as He made us. They chose their will over God’s will and we all have suffered the consequences of their decision. If I am faced with the choice of keeping God’s commandments or following my wife into sin, I am not obligated to sin out of some misguided sense of “responsibility” for my mate. Shall I follow her into hell? ParkerD, You should really think about the ramifications of what you are saying. Adam in no sense would be guilty of abandonment of Eve had he chosen to obey God. He had already abandoned her by not protecting her from the serpent to begin with.

SteveVH,
There is no sense from Genesis that Adam “abandoned” Eve to the wiles of the serpent, or that he knew Eve was being tempted.

You evidently are saying that to “multiply and replenish the earth” was not a commandment. Also, that regarding Eve as a “help meet” was not a commandment. Also, that “being with her” was not a commandment. (Note that being “with her” surely did not mean smothering her and not letting her make choices on her own–but being with her as she flourished in whatever became her choices.)

I regard those as commandments, just as sacred as the commandment not to partake of the forbidden fruit.

Also, God certainly knew that He had an Only Begotten Son who could redeem the situation, relieve the condition of the spiritual death Adam and Eve would face if they partook, and relieve the condition of their physical death by taking upon Him death and suffering and by using His power over the resurrection to bring resurrection to Adam and Eve and their children.

If we suppose that Adam needed to ask God, “which commandment should I break?” after Eve had partaken, then perhaps that makes sense, but perhaps Adam felt the pressure of the situation–that Eve was going to be taken at any moment, and he needed to make a decision now, immediately. Why fault him for such a choice in the midst of such a dilemma?

 

[SteveVH]

SteveVH,
There is no sense from Genesis that Adam “abandoned” Eve to the wiles of the serpent, or that he knew Eve was being tempted.

You evidently are saying that to “multiply and replenish the earth” was not a commandment. Also, that regarding Eve as a “help meet” was not a commandment. Also, that “being with her” was not a commandment. (Note that being “with her” surely did not mean smothering her and not letting her make choices on her own–but being with her as she flourished in whatever became her choices.)

I regard those as commandments, just as sacred as the commandment not to partake of the forbidden fruit.

Also, God certainly knew that He had an Only Begotten Son who could redeem the situation, relieve the condition of the spiritual death Adam and Eve would face if they partook, and relieve the condition of their physical death by taking upon Him death and suffering and by using His power over the resurrection to bring resurrection to Adam and Eve and their children.

If we suppose that Adam needed to ask God, “which commandment should I break?” after Eve had partaken, then perhaps that makes sense, but perhaps Adam felt the pressure of the situation–that Eve was going to be taken at any moment, and he needed to make a decision now, immediately. Why fault him for such a choice in the midst of such a dilemma?

ParkerD, I’m still traveling and trying to steal a few moments here and there. I’ll try to adequately answer when I can give this justice. In the mean time, Adam was charged both with “tilling” the land and “guarding” the Garden. Guarding it from what? It had to be the serpent. He failed to do that. I take it from your answer that you do believe that God basically forced Adam to sin, but it was ok because He would send His Son to redeem us. IMO this is flawed theology. There is one thing that God is incapable of doing, and that is committing sin. To cause someone else to sin is a sin in itself, therefore your scenario cannot be true. It does not consider the nature of God; all holy, all good, without sin. It is almost as if you are saying that God got Himself in a predicament - “now what do I do”? “Well I’ll tell you what, why don’t you choose the lesser of the sins since I haven’t worked out a way for you not to sin.” Adam has become the victim of God’s poor planning. I don’t think so.

 

[ParkerD]

ParkerD, I’m still traveling and trying to steal a few moments here and there. I’ll try to adequately answer when I can give this justice. In the mean time, Adam was charged both with “tilling” the land and “guarding” the Garden. Guarding it from what? It had to be the serpent. He failed to do that. I take it from your answer that you do believe that God basicaly forced Adam to sin, but it was ok because He would send His Son to redeem us. IMO this is flawed theology. There is one thing that God is incapable of doing, and that is committing sin. To cause someone else to sin is sin itself, therefore your scenario cannot be true. It does not consider the nature of God; all holy, all good, without sin.

SteveVH,
Although I don’t really agree with the word “guarding” unless one is reading in Spanish for the word for “to keep”, I have to wonder how you think Adam was supposed to know, if he happened to see the serpent, that this was an intruder who was dangerous to Eve and to him. After all, God had made the garden of Eden. As far as Adam could know, everything there was a good thing, except that he was not to partake of the fruit of a certain tree.

How was he to guard against something if he had no idea that it was going to happen and no idea that there was an intruder in the garden?

I have been adamant in saying that God did not “force” Adam to sin, nor did He “force” Eve to sin. He gave them commandments, and gave them choices and consequences. He let them choose. He did not “cause” them to sin. However, Adam was in a predicament once Eve had partaken of the forbidden fruit. That has been my point.

 

[larkin31]

Larkin31,
I’ll clarify that what I liked in your post was the following observation:

I think that makes sense and I enjoyed the comment as it was worded in that paragraph, but not the first item in your post. (I was not trying to “mock” your thoughts, at all.)

I do disagree as to whether Adam was choosing “disobedience”. With either choice he was going to make at that point, there was going to be disobedience on his part because he had commandments related to his relationship with Eve.

They were not afterthoughts. They were commandments.

Have a good day.

thanks for the clarification!

 

[ParkerD]

SteveVH,
Although I don’t really agree with the word “guarding” unless one is reading in Spanish for the word for “to keep”, I have to wonder how you think Adam was supposed to know, if he happened to see the serpent, that this was an intruder who was dangerous to Eve and to him. After all, God had made the garden of Eden. As far as Adam could know, everything there was a good thing, except that he was not to partake of the fruit of a certain tree.

How was he to guard against something if he had no idea that it was going to happen and no idea that there was an intruder in the garden?

I have been adamant in saying that God did not “force” Adam to sin, nor did He “force” Eve to sin. He gave them commandments, and gave them choices and consequences. He let them choose. He did not “cause” them to sin. However, Adam was in a predicament once Eve had partaken of the forbidden fruit. That has been my point.

SteveVH or Jay53,

I suppose that I might as well finish this thread with a couple of other observations.

I hope readers believe that God really is omniscient, and that He knows “the end from the beginning” and knows “all things.” Since He does, and since even adequate psychological analysis of the situations facing Adam and Eve could fairly easily predict their behavior given the constraints they faced (let alone a Perfect, Omniscient and Loving God who would certainly also be able to do that), then it ought to be not so difficult to realize that for God to have a plan that included the logical expectation that Eve would eventually desire knowledge beyond what she was experiencing in the garden, and that Adam would choose to be Eve’s protector and provider (especially since God had commanded Adam as regards his relationship with Eve) after she had partaken, is not such an unusual belief–it is a logical belief.

Christ is Alpha and Omega. His power to redeem was with Him from the beginning. God knew He had that power to redeem, through His infinite grace and His ability to be perfect and to atone for all of humankind’s sins. This would be a logical part of His plan from the beginning, knowing what He knew also about Adam and Eve when He placed them in the garden of Eden, and knowing that as they fell they would need a Redeemer as would their posterity.

This does not mean God caused Adam or Eve to sin, although after Eve had partaken it does mean Adam now had conflicting commandments and needed to choose between which he would keep. It means He knew what they would logically and actually do, given the constraints of their situations, and He blessed them with a way out of the condition they would fall to, through the Redemptive power of Jesus Christ, their Savior and ours.

Choosing redemption became another choice Adam and Eve could make, and we as their posterity can make. It is not a forced choice–it is truly a choice that needs to be voluntarily chosen. It is the greatest blessing given in eternity, along with the power to choose which is itself a wonderful blessing.

Have a good day, all, and much peace to you in all that you experience.

 

[Stephen168]

When Adam was asked if he had partaken of the forbidden fruit, we can observe his response: “The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat.” (Genesis 3:12)

After being told not to eat or he would die, he ate when Eve gave him the fruit. Now he is blaming Eve for his actions.

Eve was not only a gift to Adam from God, but with this supernal, crowning gift of the creation came the commandments and understanding that they:
1–“Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it…” (Genesis 1:28)
2–“have dominion” (meaning stewardship to help the earth flourish)
4–Eve was to be “an help meet for him.” God said that it “is not good that the man should be alone.” (Genesis 2:18)

The triune God of Christianity (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) made man. “Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. And God blessed them. And God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”(Genesis1:27-29)
We don’t know why he made them male and female until Genesis 2:18. It turns out it is not good for the man to be alone and he needs a helper, God made woman. No “crowning gift of creation.” The Bible says “helper.” So God made man and woman to be fruitful, multiply, and have dominion over other creatures. Because they are standing in the Garden of Eden when God gave these commands, they could have carried them out in the garden.

3–“Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.” (Genesis 2:24) This is far more than a physical “cleaving” and becoming “one flesh”. It is to gain a spiritual and communicative oneness also that brings joy to both partners, whereby they enhance each others’ abilities and unique gifts.

After God made all the creatures of the earth trying to find a helper for Adam, he made woman. Man was pleased because she was human (Genesis 2:23). One man and one woman is how marriage is described (Genesis 2:24). Jesus references this when he talks about how there is no divorce. (Matthew 19:3-9). We also know that a man is free to marry if his wife dies (Mark 12:18-25). I don’t see anything about “spiritual and communicative oneness.” I see Christian marriage which lasts all the days of their life; at death it ends.

Any notion that Adam was “choosing Eve over God” is simply not reading Genesis with any level of understanding, at all. How many ways did God need to say that Eve was to be with Adam and Adam was to be with Eve, for their mutual blessing?

God said man should not be along and he should be married to a (singular) woman for the rest of their lives together. Woman didn’t have a name until after they had sinned, and in some versions of the Bible; man didn’t either.
Gen 2:17 Man (not woman) was commanded not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil or he would die.
Gen 3:4 The serpent tells woman if she eats from the tree she will be like God. She eats the fruit, gives some to man and he eats it.
Gen 3:12-13 Man blames woman, and woman blames the serpent.
God told Adam he listened to his wife and not God. Gen 3:17 (And to Adam he said, "Because you have listened to the voice of your wife and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you, ‘You shall not eat of it,’ cursed is the ground because of you; in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life) Paul calls this the sin of Adam (1 Cor 15:21-23, Roman 5:12-19). Gen 3:17-19 clearly shows Adam to be is a worse situation that he was before. God said the sin of Adam was the fact that Adam chose to listen to his wife and chose not to listen to God. It is very clear in the text.

Adam had a choice dilemma. He had indeed received the commandment not to partake of the forbidden fruit or he would die, but one observes that his decision was that the commandments from God relating to his being a support and a companion to Eve, and she to him, was regarded by Adam as the more important commandments to keep. This is evident from his decision not to be selfish and remain in the garden of Eden while Eve would die and be sent away from the garden of Eden. He said “gavest to be with me” as he told God why he partook of the forbidden fruit. If one reads the words, the words have deep meaning about his reasoning and his choice.

Yes, Adam was given a command not to eat the fruit of the tree of knowledge. Eve was made by God to be a helper to Adam not the other way around. After Eve ate the fruit, she would die. After she died, Adam would be free to take a wife, so God could make another helper for man to be fruitful and multiply, etc. in the Garden of Eden. Adam was not in a dilemma; he chose Eve over God (Genesis 3:17)

There are so many ramifications with the kinds of questions such as: “Is Adam’s choice to stay with Eve something God would reward? Didn’t Jesus make it clear that if you chose family over him, you were not worthy of him?” and “is he choosing Eve over God?”

Is this the “asked lots of questions, it is all so confusing gambit” I see frequently in Mormon apologetics? God did not reward Adam for eating the fruit. Yes, Adam chose Eve over God (Genesis 3:17) Christ preferred celibacy but never demanded it; remember God made a helper for man.

 

[Stephen168]

Jesus Himself placed the union of Adam and Eve as an exemplary marriage–the prototypical marriage for all humankind. (See Matthew 19:4-6) Any notion that he regarded their marriage as something to be slighted in any way or something where Adam chose “Eve over God” is a notion that is not supported by Jesus’ words.

No, Christ placed the union of one man and one woman together for the rest of their lives together as the only marriage for all mankind. When Eve chose to eat the fruit, she would die. When a man’s wife dies he is free to marry. Adam chose Eve over God is supported by God’s (Father and Son) words. (Genesis 3:17)

Any implied notion that one cannot “choose God and family” as joint blessings in one’s life is a sad commentary on a view of family. God can be placed at the center of a family’s devotion and of a couple’s devotion. They need not choose family over God, at all. They should always choose God, choose to obey God, but also choose to be loving and responsible in relationships with family including being just as supportive (willing to die even, in the case of the man in his marriage) as Adam was with Eve, his supernal “help meet” and supernal gift from God for his blessing throughout his life.

Yes, When I chose my wife, I chose a woman who also chose God like I did. A woman who chose to worship in the Church created by God himself; through Christ our Lord. Yes, Man should love his wife as Christ loved his Church (Ephesians 5:21-33) and we know what Christ did for his Church. I also have free will and would not follow my wife into hell.

 

[ParkerD]

(Scriptures and explanations)

Originally Posted by ParkerD

When Adam was asked if he had partaken of the forbidden fruit, we can observe his response: “The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat.” (Genesis 3:12)

After being told not to eat or he would die, he ate when Eve gave him the fruit. Now he is blaming Eve for his actions.

Stephen168,
I can see why that is a conclusion that can be drawn, but it is not the only conclusion that is reasonable from the text. “Gavest to be with me” refers to what Adam’s reasoning was, and that it was an important aspect of his thinking. This is why a conclusion can be drawn in fairness to Adam, that he was considering that to “be with Eve” was a commandment, not just a “nice thing to do”. If those words were not there, one could assert that Adam was blaming Eve, but those words are there, and they have specific meaning.

 

[ParkerD]

Gen 2:17 Man (not woman) was commanded not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil or he would die.

Moving over to the next chapter, we see that Eve is aware that
“We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:
But 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.” (Genesis 3:2,3)

So I disagree completely with what you wrote about only Adam having received the commandment not to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. She knew she would die just as Adam would die.

 

[ParkerD]

Gen 3:5 The serpent tells woman if she eats from the tree she will be like God. She eats the fruit, gives some to man and he eats it.

No, she is told she “shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.”

Verse 6 shows her patterns of thought. She saw that the tree was good for food (met a physical need), was pleasant to the eyes (appealing), a tree “to be desired to make one wise” (opens the doorway to understanding), then she decides to take the fruit and “eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.”

We can note that her reasoning did not include “she became proud” or “she wanted to be like God”. Moses did not write anything like that at all, about her thoughts and intents.

 

[praise_Jesus_1]

I have been adamant in saying that God did not “force” Adam to sin, nor did He “force” Eve to sin. He gave them commandments, and gave them choices and consequences. He let them choose. He did not “cause” them to sin. However, Adam was in a predicament once Eve had partaken of the forbidden fruit. That has been my point.

Lots of talk about consequences… are you proposing that original sin should be replaced with “original consequence”.

Sure Adam was in a predicament, but you’re making it sound like it was okay for him to have eaten. Why would God be okay with us disobeying?

If my wife asks me to sin it is my duty to say no. My main priority is to help her get to heaven.

 

[ParkerD]

Gen 3:12-13 Man blames woman, and woman blames the serpent.
God told Adam he listened to his wife and not God. Gen 3:17 (And to Adam he said, "Because you have listened to the voice of your wife and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you, ‘You shall not eat of it,’ cursed is the ground because of you; in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life) Paul calls this the sin of Adam (1 Cor 15:21-23, Roman 5:12-19). Gen 3:17-19 clearly shows Adam to be is a worse situation that he was before. God said the sin of Adam was the fact that Adam chose to listen to his wife and chose not to listen to God. It is very clear in the text.

No–Adam identifies the fact that he was given this woman “to be with me” (a commandment), and she had eaten the forbidden fruit so when she gave him “of the tree”, he did eat. He identified his own reasoning, and the dilemma he faced in the situation.

Eve did indeed blame the serpent for beguiling her.

By Adam sin indeed entered the world, and by “the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.” Christ provides the redemption from Adam’s sin.

I disagree that Adam was in a worse situation than he was before. He never says such a thing, never shows regret for the situation, and in fact all he does is go ahead and name his wife “Eve, because she was the mother of all living.” Then, when Eve has a son, Cain, she says “I have gotten a man from the Lord.” So she is not showing regret–she is OK about her situation and acknowledges the Lord’s hand in her life.

 

[ParkerD]

Lots of talk about consequences… are you proposing that original sin should be replaced with “original consequence”.

Sure Adam was in a predicament, but you’re making it sound like it was okay for him to have eaten. Why would God be okay with us disobeying?

If my wife asks me to sin it is my duty to say no. My main priority is to help her get to heaven.

praise,
Adam had received three commandments, not just one. To obey the one about the forbidden fruit was to disobey two others about his wife, his help meet, his companion given to him by God to be “with him.” It was a relationship that “God hath joined together.”

I agree that you have a priority to help your wife get to heaven, and vice versa with her toward you. Have you ever considered that Eve was thinking about needing to progress and grow in order to “get to heaven”? How would you propose that she and he were to have progressed and grown, if everything was just lovely and there was no difficulty for them to overcome in their lives?

 

[ParkerD]

Originally Posted by ParkerD

There are so many ramifications with the kinds of questions such as: “Is Adam’s choice to stay with Eve something God would reward? Didn’t Jesus make it clear that if you chose family over him, you were not worthy of him?” and “is he choosing Eve over God?”

Stephen168,
I had taken those questions from a conversation I had had with another poster on another thread when the subject came up. Sorry to have confused you with those questions.

Questions are often intended to help a person think about ramifications of assumptions.

I disagree that Adam “chose Eve over God.” He chose “gavest to be with me” over “if you eat it, you will die”. God had given Adam his wife to be with him–not to assume she would be replaced if she died. There was no mention of any such assumption that he could have made about receiving another help meet. She was the “one and only”. She was a gift to him from God.

Christ never said he “preferred celibacy”–never.

 

[ParkerD]

Stephen168 or SteveVH or anyone else,
Please know with absolute assurance that the notion that by eating the forbidden fruit, Adam would be “following his wife into eternal fire” is not supported by the text, at all. He knew the consequence was death. He also knew it was breaking a commandment. But any notion that a person who had such a dilemma of two different commandments involving his God-given wife and whether to go into the unknown with her to be a help to her and accept the consequences together of a choice she had made, was thereby following her into “eternal fire” is simply wrong. Adam was not told that would be the consequence. He was told death would be the consequence, as was Eve (before she was named “Eve”).

 

[truthsilence]

Stephen168 or SteveVH or anyone else,
Please know with absolute assurance that the notion that by eating the forbidden fruit, Adam would be “following his wife into eternal fire” is not supported by the text, at all. He knew the consequence was death. He also knew it was breaking a commandment. But any notion that a person who had such a dilemma of two different commandments involving his God-given wife and whether to go into the unknown with her to be a help to her and accept the consequences together of a choice she had made, was thereby following her into “eternal fire” is simply wrong. Adam was not told that would be the consequence. He was told death would be the consequence, as was Eve (before she was named “Eve”).

If you don’t believe in the fall of man, or that it lead the human race into “eternal fire”, then why do we need Christ? What exactly was the effect of the fall? (Hint: Separation from God = “eternal fire”.)

Why is it so difficult to believe that God’s instruction was perfect and there was no need to disobey Him? It’s a matter of trust and something we all struggle with to some degree. That’s the problem. We need to learn to trust Him. Completely.