Why did sin enter the world through Adam?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Danny69
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Danny69

Guest
If Eve sinned before Adam since she was deceived before Adam (1 Tim 2:14) why did sin enter the world through Adam? Why doesn’t the Church say that sin entered the word through Eve?

Also didn’t Satan sin before Eve?
 
Danny69 said:
If Eve sinned before Adam since she was deceived before Adam (1 Tim 2:14) why did sin enter the world through Adam? Why doesn’t the Church say that sin entered the word through Eve?

Also didn’t Satan sin before Eve?
Click to expand...
A few possible explanations, which may or may not be totally intellectually satisfying, and could probably be expanded:
  1. Adam and Eve were “one flesh”, and the sin of one or both was treated as the sin of each individually.
  2. Adam, as the leader, was held responsible for the spiritual state of his entire family.
  3. Adam had the command directly from God, prior to Eve’s creation (see Genesis 2), Eve had the command second-hand, and so Adam was held “more” responsible (this concept of teachers/leaders being held more accountable is also taught in the NT).
  4. If you look at the story, Adam was with Eve when the serpent deceived her. It was a failure of leadership.
There are probably many variations of the above explanations and each have some overlap with the others and maybe it’s a combination of all of them.
 
It’s my understanding that, because the command was given directly to Adam, then it was his sin, not Eve’s that condemned us. I also agree the other points ckempston made. I would also point out that it wasn’t until Adam ate the fruit that their eyes were opened (another indication, to me, that it was directly on Adam).

In answer to the other part of the question - yes, Satan (Lucifer) had sinned before this. However, he corrupted himself through pride, and was an angel (the covering cherub), and (possibly) the leader of the heavenly choir.
 
When Eve sinned, only half of humanity had sinned. Once Adam sinned, all of humanity had sinned. If only Adam or only Eve had sinned, it probably wouldn’t have been as bad for us.
 
Mintaka said:
When Eve sinned, only half of humanity had sinned. Once Adam sinned, all of humanity had sinned. If only Adam or only Eve had sinned, it probably wouldn’t have been as bad for us.
Click to expand...
Eve seems to get the majority of the blame, but theologically it was only because of Adam’s fall that we are born into a state of Original Sin and concupiscience. Since Adam was the head of the race of man, it was only because of his fall that his progeny suffered the consequences. St. Paul addresses this: “. . .as in Adam all die, so in Christ shall all be made alive. . .Thus it is written, ‘The first man Adam became a living being;’ the last Adam became a life-giving spirit. . .Just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the man of heaven,” 1 Cor. 15:22, 45, 49. Eve cooperated in this fall, but in a lesser way (had only she fallen, mankind would not have fallen), just as Mary, the New Eve, cooperated in man’s redemption (and continues to cooperate as Mother of the Redeemed), but in a lesser way.
 
The posts so far have been really great … 👍

Yes, Adam was with Eve when she was approached by the Serpent [Satan] … and though the serpent is usualy illustrated as a snake … the same word can be used to mean dragon … like the dragon in the Book of Revelation … At any rate, the presence of the Serpent represented danger, some eveil and scary [though cunning] had entered into the Garden …

Adam was given the command to care and protect the Garden … the same command was given to the Levites - entrusted with the care of the Tabernacle of the Lord … to protect it with their lives …

Some theologians have surmised that the 'Sin" of Adam was his failure to protect Eve and the Garden from the invader Serpent [satan] out of fear … that Adam [and Eve] feared for their life [and though I am not a hebrew scholar - I have been told the actually words of Satan are sommething like - 'surely God did not say you would die die" [the word die being repeated - which can be translated as “to die the death” - perhaps a reference to spiritual death as well as a physical death] …

And thus the sin was probably - Adam’s lack of faith in His creator to sustain him in warding off the threat…
 
Danny,
It is interesting that the command not to eat of the tree was delivered to Adam alone, before Eve was made and the realization of wrong doing does not ‘kick in’ until they both eat.

Peter K
 
Eve ate the birds egg that the serpent intended to eat. The serpent was to eat the egg because it was not fertile. The egg that she gave Adam was a warm fertile egg. He ate it which killed the life of the unborn dove.

The dove was slain, the world was founded…

There is a Jewish saying in response to the question, “Where is the Messiah?”

He is in the birds nest…
 
Right… Jewish tradition says the fruit was a fig. Not an egg.
 
Through Eve death entered the world. Adam wasn’t decieved. He chose with fuller freedom probably a fuller understanding. Adam was once alone and she was taken out of Adam. It’s Ada’ms nature that is generated. It’s Adam’s nature that becomes fallen. All humanity is a generation of him. It’s his fallen nature that we are a generation of.
 
Nathan_Wagar said:
Right… Jewish tradition says the fruit was a fig. Not an egg.
Click to expand...
I believe that what the fruit actually was is regarded as a matter of oppinion. It has not been dogmatically established. Tell me more about the fig idea…
 
Total speculation here …

Maybe in the great scheme of things Eve’s sin was venial where Adam’s sin was MORTAL. This is why it would say IN ADAM all die - because his sin was mortal. Eve’s sin was venial and perhaps (just a speculation) wouldn’t have necessarily brought about the original sin that caused the death of the soul that’s passed on to mankind. It seems logical that it would take a mortal sin to have brought about the consequences of this original sin.

MonFrere
 
MonFrere,

I don’t think it’s mortal or venial. For me that’s reading later ideas backward into the narrative. Original sin is it’s own unique class and category of sin, it can’t be repeated as an act but continues as a state. Compounding the confusion is the use of the term to be the name of an act - the first sin committed - and to also be the name of the general state or condition of fallen mankind.

just thoughts,

Peter K
 
I think the answer is probably simpler.

In scripture, see how often one name (e.g. Jacob or one of his sons or even one of his grandsons) is used to indicate the entire nation.

Here “Adam” stands for both Adam and Eve (and all of us, too) just as “Ephraim” or “Manasseh” or “Jacob” stands for the entire people of Israel.

It’s the way they talked.

IMHO
 
PeterK said:
MonFrere,

I don’t think it’s mortal or venial. For me that’s reading later ideas backward into the narrative. Original sin is it’s own unique class and category of sin, it can’t be repeated as an act but continues as a state. Compounding the confusion is the use of the term to be the name of an act - the first sin committed - and to also be the name of the general state or condition of fallen mankind.
Click to expand...
Perhaps. But it does seem to me that for that original breach that resulted in original sin the qualities of mortal sin would certainly have been present in Adam

A) it was a serious matter
B) have full knowledge that its a serious matter
C) it was done with the full consent of the will

I’m saying these three qualities were present in Adam; but perhaps not present in Eve.

I’m not disagreeing with your point that the original sin is not repeatable - but I still think the seriousness of the act, and the gravity of the act (whatever it was), the knowledge of Adam about the act and the free consent of Adam’s will would still be present. I don’t necessarily think this would be “thinking back” – I think when the Church formulated the qualities that make a sin mortal have always existed - and that through reflection came up with what would constitute a grave or mortal sin. Just like historians that have studied history can through hindsight see why a civilization fell and make formulae – those who participated in the fall were fully culpable of their error without the fact that they could articulate that what they were doing was going to bring destruction to their civilization.

MonFrere
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top