Why and how did Adam & Eve choose sin?

[HMetal]

Before a person can commit an act of sin he must first have a desire to perform that act. James says, each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. But the presence of an evil desire is already sin. We sin because we are sinners. We were born with a sin nature. We are fallen creatures with a free will. But Adam and Eve were not created fallen. They had no sin nature. They were good creatures with a free will. Yet they choose to sin. Why?
I have a theory, but want to see what kind of answers come up first.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

But Adam and Eve were not created fallen.

I thought that there wasn’t certainty on whether or not Adam and Eve were literal people or metaphors.

 

[grannymh]

Before a person can commit an act of sin he must first have a desire to perform that act. James says, each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. But the presence of an evil desire is already sin. We sin because we are sinners. We were born with a sin nature. We are fallen creatures with a free will. But Adam and Eve were not created fallen. They had no sin nature. They were good creatures with a free will. Yet they choose to sin. Why?
I have a theory, but want to see what kind of answers come up first.

May I gently suggest that any theories regarding the first parents of all humanity need to start with Genesis 1: 26.

For Catholic answers to this thread’s question, one needs to study paragraphs 355-421 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition. Warning! This is not a page turner.

Link to Catechism: scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

 

[HMetal]

I thought that there wasn’t certainty on whether or not Adam and Eve were literal people or metaphors.

Ok, how about we call them, (whomever they are), the first created humans?

 

[Jozefo]

They wanted to be like God, knowing good from evil, and having creative power. They wanted to usurp God’s sovereignty, and be their own gods. Proto-secular humanism.

 

[ProdglArchitect]

I thought that there wasn’t certainty on whether or not Adam and Eve were literal people or metaphors.

They are literal in so far as they are the few two people who can rightly be called human, being that they are imbued with a rational soul. We also do believe that the entirety of the human race is descended from them. As to their exact sin, that is unknown, and we are allowed to believe in the Genesis account of creation (including the garden and cause of the fall) either literally or metaphorically.

 

[Zachary]

They wanted to have it all and to hell with the consequences.

We all do the same today, a consequence of the Fall. Our “first parents” decided to spend all the money, lost the house and left us kids locked out in the cold to fend for ourselves so to speak. Jesus died to let us back in, giving the keys to Peter to help us move back into our home.

 

[HMetal]

At the risk of being mistaken I need to make it clear that I am not implying that sin was created by God. This is a just for fun thinking only.

 

[Zachary]

God gave us free will and we used to freely to sin. God allows for all that is possible to be possible, be we generally are the ones that make it happen by abusing our free will.

 

[Joe_5859]

Before a person can commit an act of sin he must first have a desire to perform that act. James says, each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. But the presence of an evil desire is already sin. We sin because we are sinners. We were born with a sin nature. We are fallen creatures with a free will. But Adam and Eve were not created fallen. They had no sin nature. They were good creatures with a free will. Yet they choose to sin. Why?
I have a theory, but want to see what kind of answers come up first.

I am curious what you mean by “the presence of an evil desire is already sin.” On its face, that statement is probably not wrong, but I would qualify that temptation is not the same thing as an inner evil desire.

In any case, the Catechism (as is often the case) does a great job of spelling things out:

397 Man, tempted by the devil, let his trust in his Creator die in his heart and, abusing his freedom, disobeyed God’s command. This is what man’s first sin consisted of. [278] All subsequent sin would be disobedience toward God and lack of trust in his goodness.

398 In that sin man preferred himself to God and by that very act scorned him. He chose himself over and against God, against the requirements of his creaturely status and therefore against his own good. Constituted in a state of holiness, man was destined to be fully “divinized” by God in glory. Seduced by the devil, he wanted to “be like God”, but “without God, before God, and not in accordance with God”. [279]

[278] Cf. Gen 3:1-11; Rom 5:19.
[279] St. Maximus the Confessor, Ambigua: PG 91,1156C; cf. Gen 3:5.

 

[grannymh]

They are literal in so far as they are the few two people who can rightly be called human, being that they are imbued with a rational soul. We also do believe that the entirety of the human race is descended from them. As to their exact sin, that is unknown, and we are allowed to believe in the Genesis account of creation (including the garden and cause of the fall) either literally or metaphorically.

Adam’s exact sin is known.

Once one recognizes the difference in status between God the Creator and Adam the human creature…and because of that status, one recognizes that the only way Adam could remain in friendship with his Divine Creator was through his free submission to this Creator, then it becomes obvious that disobedience in which Adam preferred himself over God is the Original Sin which shattered humanity’s relationship with divinity. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, paragraphs 396-399—please refer to post 10 above for the basic paragraphs)

 

[HMetal]

I am curious what you mean by “the presence of an evil desire is already sin.” On its face, that statement is probably not wrong, but I would qualify that temptation is not the same thing as an inner evil desire.

In any case, the Catechism (as is often the case) does a great job of spelling things out:

397 Man, tempted by the devil, let his trust in his Creator die in his heart and, abusing his freedom, disobeyed God’s command. This is what man’s first sin consisted of. [278] All subsequent sin would be disobedience toward God and lack of trust in his goodness.

398 In that sin man preferred himself to God and by that very act scorned him. He chose himself over and against God, against the requirements of his creaturely status and therefore against his own good. Constituted in a state of holiness, man was destined to be fully “divinized” by God in glory. Seduced by the devil, he wanted to “be like God”, but “without God, before God, and not in accordance with God”. [279]

[278] Cf. Gen 3:1-11; Rom 5:19.
[279] St. Maximus the Confessor, Ambigua: PG 91,1156C; cf. Gen 3:5.

Thanks for CC quotes. The Catholic church never stops to amaze me with their insight. I think desire being want in this case.When we go from choice to wanting to be disobedient even before the act. Lust for example is a want even before it is concieved or played out is a desire.

 

[HMetal]

Ok, here is my theory. Remember this just for thinking.
Here is the theory I have in mind. The first human creatures were made with free will. They were made with a good nature. However they were made to learn and discover all the wonders God had made. Unlike God who is all knowing, we as humans are curious creatures who desire knowledge. That is part of our make up. I think the command of God in Gen. 2:16, 17 became a curiosity when the serpent brought the question to mind,” did God really say?” in Gen.3. In the free-will given to the first people who had a good nature their choice could have been: “yes God did say so scram!” or, what did actually happen, the choice to know, out of curiosity, what this tree was all about despite the instruction of God. God did not put in them the desire to sin but a desire to discover. Things like His Glory, His Love, His handy work. Unfortunately they use this tool of discovery for disobedience. Again, this is just for fun.

 

[livingwordunity]

They wanted to be like God, knowing good from evil, and having creative power. They wanted to usurp God’s sovereignty, and be their own gods. Proto-secular humanism.

I would describe it as them wanting to trust their own human knowledge/opinion of what is good and what is evil in the sense that they can arbitrarily declare whatever they wanted to be good and declare whatever they wanted to be evil. And you are correct that it was secular humanism, the same thing we see in people today.

 

[ProdglArchitect]

Adam’s exact sin is known.

Once one recognizes the difference in status between God the Creator and Adam the human creature…and because of that status, one recognizes that the only way Adam could remain in friendship with his Divine Creator was through his free submission to this Creator, then it becomes obvious that disobedience in which Adam preferred himself over God is the Original Sin which shattered humanity’s relationship with divinity. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, paragraphs 396-399—please refer to post 10 above for the basic paragraphs)

Sorry for the confusion, I was specifically referencing Eve’s sin, the form of which is, as far as I know, not literally known, meaning that it’s not Dogmatic that the sin was the eating of a forbidden food item as Biblical literalists would interpret it.

Thank you for the info though. I really need to read the Catechism >_>

 

[Credo_in_Deum]

Ok, here is my theory. Remember this just for thinking.
Here is the theory I have in mind. The first human creatures were made with free will. They were made with a good nature. However they were made to learn and discover all the wonders God had made. Unlike God who is all knowing, we as humans are curious creatures who desire knowledge. That is part of our make up. I think the command of God in Gen. 2:16, 17 became a curiosity when the serpent brought the question to mind,” did God really say?” in Gen.3. In the free-will given to the first people who had a good nature their choice could have been: “yes God did say so scram!” or, what did actually happen, the choice to know, out of curiosity, what this tree was all about despite the instruction of God. God did not put in them the desire to sin but a desire to discover. Things like His Glory, His Love, His handy work. Unfortunately they use this tool of discovery for disobedience. Again, this is just for fun.

I think you are close. I believe the temptation to disobedience was a temptation of the intellect. Adam and Even unlike fallen mankind, were not subject to the flesh being their predominate passion. They had complete control over their bodies and desires. Yet they did not know everything and so they were tempted with the one thing they didn’t have and that was the knowledge which God alone has and this is what they wanted. All sin is the misuse and abuse of what is good. The desire to want the knowledge of God is good; however the desire to want the knowledge which God has that is beyond the reality for which He created you is an abuse of His knowledge because it is saying you do not want the knowledge of Him so that you may better serve Him but so He may serve you!

But look at what the serpent said. He said they would not die and that God would know that their eyes would be open and that they be like Him and know good and evil. What a prideful thing to say that a creature could know something like the Creator knows it! If a creature knew something the same way in which its Creator knows it then is ceases to be the creature and takes the spot of the Creator. This is pride.

 

[HMetal]

I think you are close. I believe the temptation to disobedience was a temptation of the intellect. Adam and Even unlike fallen mankind, were not subject to the flesh being their predominate passion. They had complete control over their bodies and desires. Yet they did not know everything and so they were tempted with the one thing they didn’t have and that was the knowledge which God alone has and this is what they wanted. All sin is the misuse and abuse of what is good. The desire to want the knowledge of God is good; however the desire to want the knowledge which God has that is beyond the reality for which He created you is an abuse of His knowledge because it is saying you do not want the knowledge of Him so that you may better serve Him but so He may serve you!

But look at what the serpent said. He said they would not die and that God would know that their eyes would be open and that they be like Him and know good and evil. What a prideful thing to say that a creature could know something like the Creator knows it! If a creature knew something the same way in which its Creator knows it then is ceases to be the creature and takes the spot of the Creator. This is pride.

Wow! Excellent observation. Especially the temptation of the intellect. Thanks for giving me some food for thought.

 

[Joe_5859]

Thanks for CC quotes. The Catholic church never stops to amaze me with their insight. I think desire being want in this case.When we go from choice to wanting to be disobedient even before the act. Lust for example is a want even before it is concieved or played out is a desire.

Okay, I understand what you’re getting at. The Catechism quote kind of bears that out. Notice it starts with the fact that “man let trust in his Creator die in his heart” and then he disobeys God’s command. On that level, one could argue that Adam and Eve had already fallen before they ever actually took a bite of the fruit.

 

[HMetal]

It is interesting to me that God says in Gen. 2:17 “When you eat of it” not if you eat of it. Its seems to me that free-will in the hand of man (Adam) or angels (Satan) ends up trying to take God’s position. Let me clairify that, free-will outside of Christ. The man or women outside of Christ is his or her own god in their mind. Good outside of Christ is fallen good at best. So don’t think it suprised God when the fall happened. But the point is that He didn’t make it happen or create sin in the new creatures. It just comes down to; " apart from me you can do nothing" when it comes to obeying God.

 

[grannymh]

Okay, I understand what you’re getting at. The Catechism quote kind of bears that out. Notice it starts with the fact that “man let trust in his Creator die in his heart” and then he disobeys God’s command. On that level, one could argue that Adam and Eve had already fallen before they ever actually took a bite of the fruit.

Regarding a possible theory or “argument” on CCC 397:
“Notice it [CCC 397] starts with the fact that “man let trust in his Creator die in his heart” and then he disobeys God’s command. On that level, one could argue that Adam and Eve had already fallen before they ever actually took a bite of the fruit.”
First of all. It is Adam, not Eve, who has the responsibility of the whole human race “as one body of one man”. (CCC 404; St. Thomas Aquinas, De Malo 4, 1;
Genesis 2: 15-17; Romans 5: 12-21; 1 Corinthians 15: 21-22)

“The beginning of sin and of man’s fall was due to a lie of the tempter who induced doubt of God’s word, kindness, and faithfulness.” (CCC 215). On the level of “beginning”, it would be more precise to refer to three elements of Adam’s one Original Sin. The middle element is the necessary intellectual process.

CCC 397, first sentence begins: “Man, tempted by the devil, let his trust in his Creator die in his heart…” This is the great seduction scene, the first element. (Genesis 3: 1-6) No doubt Adam was listening to the cunning serpent tempting him with fruit desirable for gaining wisdom.

At this point, it is necessary to turn our attention to Adam’s free choice to let his trust in his Creator die in his heart. This initial act is solely personal within Adam. Essentially, Adam is using his intellective powers of reasoning, the second element, to determine whether he will freely remain in God’s friendship. Or would he go against the requirements of his creaturely status and therefore against his own good? Actually, the final element of scorning God required a serious action capable of destroying humanity’s relationship with divinity. This serious action is described in Genesis 2: 16-17 along with “death” as a consequence.

While letting go of trust in God can be seen as a personal sin committed by Adam, it did not carry the particular consequence of banishment from the garden. Only the one Original Sin of disobedience of a direct command (Genesis 3: 11) is able to shatter humanity’s relationship with divinity.