Revisited: Adam's fault

[Crumpy]

So often I’m skimming over stuff and I see that people say Adam’s sin was pride. He succombed to temptation to eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and bad, to be like God.

I don’t think that explanation has ever been enough for me. There’s a lot of complexity to the account of the fall in Genesis.

but, I was reading the Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture Vol VI Romans, and I ran across a comment on this subject from one of the early church guys, Cyril of Alexander.

He refers to the sin of Adam as unfaithfulness to God. So, that doesn’t cancel or override the previous idea about pride, but I think it more clearly shows a linkage of the pride to the sin itself, and that was unfaithfulness to God.

There’s a discussion near this about how all mankind inherits the sin of Adam. some of the early guys couldn’t understand that or accept it. But, it makes a lot of sense to me that we all have the same unfaithfulness, however we sin in our own lives. Our particular sins are a form or manifestation of unfaithfulness.

I think this is a key insight in what Paul is teaching in Romans, about justification by faith. Faith is the answer to unfaithfulness. It makes much more sense to me now.

Yeah, when I’m reading a commentary that I pay for, I hope that I don’t have to think too much, that I can understand things quicker by reading than by thinking. It’s not that thinking of “unfaithfulness” was so hard to come up with, but I just wasn’t thinking about that, and I don’t think I ever framed it that way, especially when others were saying that Adam’s sin was pride.

There also seems to be an understanding in these partristic commentaries that faith is often best understood as “faithfulness.” It’s not just believing something, but it is also acting on that faith in loyalty to God.

I hope that this may be helpful to others.

 

[thistle]

So often I’m skimming over stuff and I see that people say Adam’s sin was pride. He succombed to temptation to eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and bad, to be like God.

I don’t think that explanation has ever been enough for me. There’s a lot of complexity to the account of the fall in Genesis.

but, I was reading the Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture Vol VI Romans, and I ran across a comment on this subject from one of the early church guys, Cyril of Alexander.

He refers to the sin of Adam as unfaithfulness to God. So, that doesn’t cancel or override the previous idea about pride, but I think it more clearly shows a linkage of the pride to the sin itself, and that was unfaithfulness to God.

There’s a discussion near this about how all mankind inherits the sin of Adam. some of the early guys couldn’t understand that or accept it. But, it makes a lot of sense to me that we all have the same unfaithfulness, however we sin in our own lives. Our particular sins are a form or manifestation of unfaithfulness.

I think this is a key insight in what Paul is teaching in Romans, about justification by faith. Faith is the answer to unfaithfulness. It makes much more sense to me now.

Yeah, when I’m reading a commentary that I pay for, I hope that I don’t have to think too much, that I can understand things quicker by reading than by thinking. It’s not that thinking of “unfaithfulness” was so hard to come up with, but I just wasn’t thinking about that, and I don’t think I ever framed it that way, especially when others were saying that Adam’s sin was pride.

There also seems to be an understanding in these partristic commentaries that faith is often best understood as “faithfulness.” It’s not just believing something, but it is also acting on that faith in loyalty to God.

I hope that this may be helpful to others.

Adam’s sin was disobedience to God.

 

[fhansen]

So often I’m skimming over stuff and I see that people say Adam’s sin was pride. He succombed to temptation to eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and bad, to be like God.

I don’t think that explanation has ever been enough for me. There’s a lot of complexity to the account of the fall in Genesis.

but, I was reading the Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture Vol VI Romans, and I ran across a comment on this subject from one of the early church guys, Cyril of Alexander.

He refers to the sin of Adam as unfaithfulness to God. So, that doesn’t cancel or override the previous idea about pride, but I think it more clearly shows a linkage of the pride to the sin itself, and that was unfaithfulness to God.

There’s a discussion near this about how all mankind inherits the sin of Adam. some of the early guys couldn’t understand that or accept it. But, it makes a lot of sense to me that we all have the same unfaithfulness, however we sin in our own lives. Our particular sins are a form or manifestation of unfaithfulness.

I think this is a key insight in what Paul is teaching in Romans, about justification by faith. Faith is the answer to unfaithfulness. It makes much more sense to me now.

Yeah, when I’m reading a commentary that I pay for, I hope that I don’t have to think too much, that I can understand things quicker by reading than by thinking. It’s not that thinking of “unfaithfulness” was so hard to come up with, but I just wasn’t thinking about that, and I don’t think I ever framed it that way, especially when others were saying that Adam’s sin was pride.

There also seems to be an understanding in these partristic commentaries that faith is often best understood as “faithfulness.” It’s not just believing something, but it is also acting on that faith in loyalty to God.

I hope that this may be helpful to others.

Yes, that’s it! The truth can be simpler than we make it out to be. We don’t often hear it put this way, but the Catechism says that, with the first sin, that first act of disobedience, trust in God died in man’s heart. When we don’t trust God, we no longer have a God. God was no longer the god of man after the OS, for all practical purposes. And that’s why we’re born without faith now. And that’s why faith is the first step to restored justice between man and God. Trent put it this way:

**HOW THE GRATUITOUS JUSTIFICATION OF THE SINNER BY FAITH IS TO BE UNDERSTOOD

But when the Apostle says that man is justified by faith and freely,[44] these words are to be understood in that sense in which the uninterrupted unanimity of the Catholic Church has held and expressed them, namely, that we are therefore said to be justified by faith, because faith is the beginning of human salvation, the foundation and root of all justification, without which it is impossible to please God and to come to the fellowship of His sons; and we are therefore said to be justified gratuitously, because none of those things that precede justification, whether faith or works, merit the grace of justification.

For, if by grace, it is not now by works, otherwise, as the Apostle says, grace is no more grace.**

The purpose of Christ’s sacrifice, the reason for the Atonement, was to restore a faith in God that He never deserved to lose, but was willing to prove anyway. Atonement literally means at-one-ment-reconciliation between man and God, with God truly becoming the God of man again as per the New Covenant promise in Jer 31, man and God then reuniting, communing.

 

[grannymh]

Yes, that’s it! The truth can be simpler than we make it out to be. We don’t often hear it put this way, but the Catechism says that, with the first sin, that first act of disobedience,trust in God died in man’s heart. When we don’t trust God, we no longer have a God. God was no longer the god of man after the OS, for all practical purposes. And that’s why we’re born without faith now. And that’s why faith is the first step to restored justice between man and God. Trent put it this way:

HOW THE GRATUITOUS JUSTIFICATION OF THE SINNER BY FAITH IS TO BE UNDERSTOOD

But when the Apostle says that man is justified by faith and freely,[44] these words are to be understood in that sense in which the uninterrupted unanimity of the Catholic Church has held and expressed them, namely, that we are therefore said to be justified by faith, because faith is the beginning of human salvation, the foundation and root of all justification, without which it is impossible to please God and to come to the fellowship of His sons; and we are therefore said to be justified gratuitously, because none of those things that precede justification, whether faith or works, merit the grace of justification.

For, if by grace, it is not now by works, otherwise, as the Apostle says, grace is no more grace.

The purpose of Christ’s sacrifice, the reason for the Atonement, was to restore a faith in God that He never deserved to lose, but was willing to prove anyway. Atonement literally means at-one-ment-reconciliation between man and God, with God truly becoming the God of man again as per the New Covenant promise in Jer 31, man and God then reuniting, communing.

To get a grasp on the Catechism’s “trust in God died in man’s heart” (CCC 397) one needs to study CCC 396 - 400. To understand what we are really born with, one should study CCC 403 - 406.

To get the whole picture,
please begin with paragraph 355 and continue through paragraph 421. The Catechism is not a page-turner. It is tough reading; yet, it is worth every hour one puts in.

link to when Adam was created, body and soul, in the Image of God.
scborromeo.org/ccc/para/355.htm

general Catechism link.
scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

 

[Crumpy]

In my OP, I should have said “Cyril of Alexandria” not “Cyril of Alexander.” Sorry.

Thanks, I couldn’t find the exact part of the Catechism that I wanted to see. I’ll look up the recommended paragraphs.

---

yes, pride that led to unfaithfulness.
yes, disobedience that resulted from unfaithfulness.

false knowledge → pride → unfaithfulness → disobedience

true faith → humility → faithfulness → obedience

 

[mercytruth]

Yes, unfaithfulness is another way of saying disobedience. Another way of defining unfaithfulness would be the failure to trust in God’s revelation to us. In Adam’s case it was his failure to trust in God’s revelation that there would be deadly consequences from eating of the tree of the knowlege of good and evil.

Our Lord Jesus Christ was perfectly faithful, pefectly obedient, perfect in trusting his Heavenly Father in everything he was shown to say and do while he was on earth, leading ultimately to his perfect obedience in his sacrificial death for us. He is our only way of salvation for our own lack of faithfulness, obedience and trust in our Heavenly Father that we have inherited from Adam and Eve.

When we draw back from the saving obedience and faithfulness that we have in our Lord Jesus Christ, we are turning away from our heavenly Father.

 

[fhansen]

To get a grasp on the Catechism’s “trust in God died in man’s heart” (CCC 397) one needs to study CCC 396 - 400. To understand what we are really born with, one should study CCC 403 - 406.

To get the whole picture,
please begin with paragraph 355 and continue through paragraph 421. The Catechism is not a page-turner. It is tough reading; yet, it is worth every hour one puts in.

link to when Adam was created, body and soul, in the Image of God.
scborromeo.org/ccc/para/355.htm

general Catechism link.
scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

Yes, I get the feeling that most people who’ve read it fail to grasp it anyway. And I think there’s much more to understand there for all of us-as with nearly everything our faith proposes. Much in the Catechism is like a mirror-we’re trying to understand *ourselves *through the reflection God gives us via revelation-but that’s a difficult task and there’s much room for theologians et al to expand and expound on it all IMO. And as lengthy as the Catechism is, it can be relatively terse on many of these matters.