How was Adam’s choice to sin any different from ours?

[SkovandOfMitzae]

We often hear that we are able to sin because of our “sin nature” which we inherited from Adam. How was Adam able to sin without already having a “sin nature” and how was his ability to choose sin any different from our own? It seems, biologically, socially, and psychologically Adam was just as human as us.

 

[Unqualified]

He was perfect, but he sinned because he had choice. And actually it was only to cover Eve.

 

[SkovandOfMitzae]

He was perfect, but he sinned because he had choice. And actually it was only to cover Eve.

How do you know he was perfect? I’ve yet to ever read he was perfect? Was Jesus perfect and was Adam and Jesus both perfect in the same way?

 

[Unqualified]

How do you know he was perfect? I’ve yet to ever read he was perfect? Was Jesus perfect and was Adam and Jesus both perfect in the same way?

yah I think it says somewhere in the Bible Adam was a perfect man. He was sinless, in the presence of God. Gods going to create the first not an example for us all. But no not perfect like Jesus. Jesus never sinned, He had power, was the perfect sacrifice.

I couldn’t find a scripture but Noah and Job were said to be perfect. Surely Adam.

 

[SkovandOfMitzae]

What verses did you see saying Noah was perfect or Job? Are you referring to “blameless”.

 

[Soyeong]

Before eating from either tree, Adam and Eve were at a crossroads between mortality and immortality, where eating from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil caused them to become mortal while eating from the Tree of Life would have caused them to become immortal. In Deuteronomy 30:15-20, the Israelites were and the same crossroads and were presented with the identical choice, where obedience to God's law through faith in the promise would bring life and a blessing while disobedience would bring death and a curse, so choose life! Likewise, we are given the identical choice as Adam and Eve based on where we are going to choose to the gift obeying God's law.

The gift of obedience to God's law is the way to receive gift of eternal life in verses like Romans 2:6-7, Romans 6:19-23, and Matthew 19:17, and the way to eat of the Tree of Life by returning to the Garden (Revelation 22:14). In John 17:3, the gift of eternal life is the experience of knowing God and Jesus, and the gift of God's law is again His instructions for how to receive that gift. In Exodus 33:13, Moses wanted God to be gracious to him by teaching him His way, and in Matthew 7:23, Jesus said that he would tell those who are workers of lawlessness to depart from him because he never knew them, so the gift of knowing God and Jesus is the goal of the law. In Genesis 3:24, Cherubim were places in the Garden to guard the way to the Tree of Life, and, the only other place that Cherubim are referred to is guarding God's law over the Ark of the Covenant, which is a tree of life for all who take hold of her (Proverbs 3:18).

 

[SkovandOfMitzae]

Being blameless among his people at his time does not mean sinless. It’s a reference to being not defiled by his local community. As in he was far better than then. But nothing there means sinless and perfect. We know all fall short.

Strong's Hebrew: 8549. תָּמִים (tamim) -- complete, sound

 

[SkovandOfMitzae]

Before eating from either tree, Adam and Eve were at a crossroads between mortality and immortality, where eating from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil caused them to become mortal while eating from the Tree of Life would have caused them to become immortal. In Deuteronomy 30:15-20, the Israelites were and the same crossroads and were presented with the identical choice, where obedience to God's law through faith in the promise would bring life and a blessing while disobedience would bring death and a curse, so choose life! Likewise, we are given the identical choice as Adam and Eve based on where we are going to choose to the gift obeying God's law.

The gift of obedience to God's law is the way to receive gift of eternal life in verses like Romans 2:6-7, Romans 6:19-23, and Matthew 19:17, and the way to eat of the Tree of Life by returning to the Garden (Revelation 22:14). In John 17:3, the gift of eternal life is the experience of knowing God and Jesus, and the gift of God's law is again His instructions for how to receive that gift. In Exodus 33:13, Moses wanted God to be gracious to him by teaching him His way, and in Matthew 7:23, Jesus said that he would tell those who are workers of lawlessness to depart from him because he never knew them, so the gift of knowing God and Jesus is the goal of the law. In Genesis 3:24, Cherubim were places in the Garden to guard the way to the Tree of Life, and, the only other place that Cherubim are referred to is guarding God's law over the Ark of the Covenant, which is a tree of life for all who take hold of her (Proverbs 3:18).

I don’t see any evidence that Adam or Eve was ever going to be immortal. The tree did not physically kill him, it spiritually killed them causing contention in their relationship with Yahweh. The fruit does not say one bite, one time makes them immortal. The story is most commonly understood within ancient Mesopotamian cultures as meaning they were kicked out so they could not continue to eat daily of the fruit that keeps them alive. The Bible says only God is immortal. Is not even angels are immortal. The work within conditional immortality lays that out well. Also the books by John Walton in his “ Lost World of Genesis 1 and LWO Adam and Eve “.

 

[Jamdoc]

We often hear that we are able to sin because of our “sin nature” which we inherited from Adam. How was Adam able to sin without already having a “sin nature” and how was his ability to choose sin any different from our own? It seems, biologically, socially, and psychologically Adam was just as human as us.

I have a theory that Adam's sin was deeper than we normally think.

note that God originally created marriage and considered it good. but in the New Testament Jesus said in eternity there will be no marriage.
Some people think of marriage as just a means of procreation and since there's no need to procreate there's no need for marriage anymore (which I consider extremely depressing that they look at this gift of God as just a means to an end to reproduce, when an entire book of the bible is about romantic love between a man and his wife (Song of Solomon)). God did design romantic love to be a good thing, He designed it BEFORE the fall, it is not a result of the fall.

However because of the fall, God plans not to restore marriage in the restoration of all things. Romantic love is apparently important enough to have inspired scripture about and be preserved in scripture forever.
However the normally allowed platform for romantic love, marriage... is not.

It is a question that spins my head to no end.

But the best I can figure out, relates to Adam's particular sin and WHY Adam chose to disobey God.
Why is it Adam's sin and not Eve's sin?

It is because Eve was deceived, tricked. But Adam made a conscious, informed choice.

Adam chose to die with his wife, rather than obey God and live forever without her. Adam must have known the consequences, and believed, that if he ate, he would die, but chose to anyway, because he valued his wife, more than the God that gave her to him.

That to me, is the only reason why God not restoring marriage in eternity can make sense.
To remove that temptation to value one single person above God.

However again, God does consider romantic love between men and women to be important enough to inspire an entire book about it.
and that makes my head spin.
Why have a book about something, and treat it as a good thing, when you don't intend that good thing to last forever?

Does God want men and women to love each other romantically, but without the monogamous attachment that marriage brings? so that no one single person is so important to us that we'd be tempted to choose them over God? But we know fornication and adultery are sin. So that can't be it either.

Or does God eliminate romantic love entirely as many people believe?
If Song of Solomon was not Inspired, it'd be simple to believe that was the answer, that romantic love just passes away.

We know from Jesus' 2 commandments that loving each other is important, not AS important as loving God, but Jesus does not want God to be our SOLE love, but our first love. I do not believe that Jesus intends us to love Him romantically.
I do believe that God created a desire to love the opposite gender romantically, and even considers it a need.
Genesis 2:18 is the very first thing that God says is not good, for a man to be alone without a companion, and God walked with Adam, so God did not intend to be man's sole companion.

God chose to fulfill that need by creating woman, not just being that companion Himself.
But then because it caused man to choose woman over obeying Him.... he takes away marriage in eternity.
If the supernatural interpretation of Genesis 6 is correct, and it is alluded to be in Jude, and 2 Peter 2, then Angels, who beheld God in all His glory in Heaven... chose to have human wives. This is more explicitly referred to in 1 Enoch however that's not considered Inspired scripture. But Jude and 2 Peter 2 referring to it, says there is a seed of truth to it.

If Song of Solomon was not Inspired, then the answer would be simple. God repented of making marriage, maybe even repented of making women entirely, and just eliminates desire for them, because it is a temptation that caused both men and angels to sin.

However Song of Solomon is Inspired.

it makes my head spin.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

We often hear that we are able to sin because of our “sin nature” which we inherited from Adam. How was Adam able to sin without already having a “sin nature” and how was his ability to choose sin any different from our own? It seems, biologically, socially, and psychologically Adam was just as human as us.

The difference is, when you sin or I sin, this does not introduce corruption into the creation that isn't already present.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

We often hear that we are able to sin because of our “sin nature” which we inherited from Adam. How was Adam able to sin without already having a “sin nature” and how was his ability to choose sin any different from our own? It seems, biologically, socially, and psychologically Adam was just as human as us.

Just as human but only under one law. His disobedience uncovered all the laws.
Blessings

 

[Unqualified]

What verses did you see saying Noah was perfect or Job? Are you referring to “blameless”.

noah-gen6:9
Job-job1:1; 1:8; 2:3
Son of man- eze38:12
Jesus- acts3:16
James 3:2

The word is perfect in KJV

 

[Jamdoc]

noah-gen6:9
Job-job1:1; 1:8; 2:3
Son of man- eze38:12
Jesus- acts3:16
James 3:2

The word is perfect in KJV

Do remember that at the time the KJV was written, perfect sometimes meant "complete" or "total" rather than what we think of as perfect these, which is without flaw or blemish. See Psalm 139

22 I hate them with perfect hatred: I count them mine enemies.

You wouldn't normally call hatred to be flawless.
But what is meant there is it is a total or complete hatred, that David feels nothing BUT hate for the enemies of God.

I think with Noah it was not that Noah was morally flawless, but rather that Noah's genealogy had no mingling in it, no Nephilim genes. Note the language, Noah was perfect in his generations. That is, his gene line was perfect or complete. It was not tainted.

But again, that is based on a supernatural interpretation of Genesis 6, where many people just think it was full blooded humans but I think the supernatural view, of hybrid offspring has credibility given Jude mentioning angels leaving their estate and referring to 1 Enoch which contained the story about the Watchers taking human wives.

 

[disciple Clint]

How do you know he was perfect? I’ve yet to ever read he was perfect? Was Jesus perfect and was Adam and Jesus both perfect in the same way?

Jesus was the 2nd Adam, where Adam failed Jesus remained without sin.

 

[SkovandOfMitzae]

I have a theory that Adam's sin was deeper than we normally think.

note that God originally created marriage and considered it good. but in the New Testament Jesus said in eternity there will be no marriage.
Some people think of marriage as just a means of procreation and since there's no need to procreate there's no need for marriage anymore (which I consider extremely depressing that they look at this gift of God as just a means to an end to reproduce, when an entire book of the bible is about romantic love between a man and his wife (Song of Solomon)). God did design romantic love to be a good thing, He designed it BEFORE the fall, it is not a result of the fall.

However because of the fall, God plans not to restore marriage in the restoration of all things. Romantic love is apparently important enough to have inspired scripture about and be preserved in scripture forever.
However the normally allowed platform for romantic love, marriage... is not.

It is a question that spins my head to no end.

But the best I can figure out, relates to Adam's particular sin and WHY Adam chose to disobey God.
Why is it Adam's sin and not Eve's sin?

It is because Eve was deceived, tricked. But Adam made a conscious, informed choice.

Adam chose to die with his wife, rather than obey God and live forever without her. Adam must have known the consequences, and believed, that if he ate, he would die, but chose to anyway, because he valued his wife, more than the God that gave her to him.

That to me, is the only reason why God not restoring marriage in eternity can make sense.
To remove that temptation to value one single person above God.

However again, God does consider romantic love between men and women to be important enough to inspire an entire book about it.
and that makes my head spin.
Why have a book about something, and treat it as a good thing, when you don't intend that good thing to last forever?

Does God want men and women to love each other romantically, but without the monogamous attachment that marriage brings? so that no one single person is so important to us that we'd be tempted to choose them over God? But we know fornication and adultery are sin. So that can't be it either.

Or does God eliminate romantic love entirely as many people believe?
If Song of Solomon was not Inspired, it'd be simple to believe that was the answer, that romantic love just passes away.

We know from Jesus' 2 commandments that loving each other is important, not AS important as loving God, but Jesus does not want God to be our SOLE love, but our first love. I do not believe that Jesus intends us to love Him romantically.
I do believe that God created a desire to love the opposite gender romantically, and even considers it a need.
Genesis 2:18 is the very first thing that God says is not good, for a man to be alone without a companion, and God walked with Adam, so God did not intend to be man's sole companion.

God chose to fulfill that need by creating woman, not just being that companion Himself.
But then because it caused man to choose woman over obeying Him.... he takes away marriage in eternity.
If the supernatural interpretation of Genesis 6 is correct, and it is alluded to be in Jude, and 2 Peter 2, then Angels, who beheld God in all His glory in Heaven... chose to have human wives. This is more explicitly referred to in 1 Enoch however that's not considered Inspired scripture. But Jude and 2 Peter 2 referring to it, says there is a seed of truth to it.

If Song of Solomon was not Inspired, then the answer would be simple. God repented of making marriage, maybe even repented of making women entirely, and just eliminates desire for them, because it is a temptation that caused both men and angels to sin.

However Song of Solomon is Inspired.

it makes my head spin.

there are various opinions on is love and marriage actually eliminated or if it’s simply symbolic speech or about heaven, vs restored earth.

in Isaiah’s when it talks about new heaven and earth there is still procreation and death.

 

[Jamdoc]

there are various opinions on is love and marriage actually eliminated or if it’s simply symbolic speech or about heaven, vs restored earth.

in Isaiah’s when it talks about new heaven and earth there is still procreation and death.

Yeah that's one of the passages (Isaiah 65) that also makes my head spin thinking about it. Now.. I'm not sure that the language conveys that there will still be death, Jesus was clear that it is eternal life, Isaiah 65:20 could just be referring to there not being death anymore just a weird way of wording it, I'm not sure.
But Isaiah 65 does mention offspring.

So no marriage... but... offspring, and an entire book of the bible about love between men and women, with sexual imagery in places.

It's like, when all is fulfilled, the monogamy might be taken out of relationships between men and women, but procreation and intimacy are still allowed.

Of course.. then again.. right now that's called fornication.
But at the same time, some people's ideas of intimacy on the new earth is we get personally married to Jesus, well, I'm a man, Jesus is a man, no thanks, that's called an abomination.
Some others say oh we'll all be gender non binary (okay they don't call it that but that's really what they're saying).. but the bible teaches that crossdressing and being effeminate is also abomination.

So any of those 3 views works against the fact that all 3 would be sin.

The view where people all just become celibate with no sex drive and no desire for other people doesn't involve sin... but it also doesn't make sense of why Song of Solomon is Inspired scripture, or Isaiah 65 mentioning offspring on the New Earth.

But what do you think about Adam's sin actually being not just that he chose to disobey God in eating the fruit, but more that he consciously chose his wife over God?

For me that's the only way marriage not being in Eternity makes sense, is that God won't allow that temptation anymore.

 

[Unqualified]

S of S is for married people. It is also Gods deep love for His church. Like we will have for Him, up there. Not sex, not flesh. A new perfect body and whatever that is stopping intimacy here will be gone. Just no sex or procreation. Sounds free to me.

 

[returntosender]

I have a theory that Adam's sin was deeper than we normally think.

note that God originally created marriage and considered it good. but in the New Testament Jesus said in eternity there will be no marriage.
Some people think of marriage as just a means of procreation and since there's no need to procreate there's no need for marriage anymore (which I consider extremely depressing that they look at this gift of God as just a means to an end to reproduce, when an entire book of the bible is about romantic love between a man and his wife (Song of Solomon)). God did design romantic love to be a good thing, He designed it BEFORE the fall, it is not a result of the fall.

However because of the fall, God plans not to restore marriage in the restoration of all things. Romantic love is apparently important enough to have inspired scripture about and be preserved in scripture forever.
However the normally allowed platform for romantic love, marriage... is not.

It is a question that spins my head to no end.

But the best I can figure out, relates to Adam's particular sin and WHY Adam chose to disobey God.
Why is it Adam's sin and not Eve's sin?

It is because Eve was deceived, tricked. But Adam made a conscious, informed choice.

Adam chose to die with his wife, rather than obey God and live forever without her. Adam must have known the consequences, and believed, that if he ate, he would die, but chose to anyway, because he valued his wife, more than the God that gave her to him.

That to me, is the only reason why God not restoring marriage in eternity can make sense.
To remove that temptation to value one single person above God.

However again, God does consider romantic love between men and women to be important enough to inspire an entire book about it.
and that makes my head spin.
Why have a book about something, and treat it as a good thing, when you don't intend that good thing to last forever?

Does God want men and women to love each other romantically, but without the monogamous attachment that marriage brings? so that no one single person is so important to us that we'd be tempted to choose them over God? But we know fornication and adultery are sin. So that can't be it either.

Or does God eliminate romantic love entirely as many people believe?
If Song of Solomon was not Inspired, it'd be simple to believe that was the answer, that romantic love just passes away.

We know from Jesus' 2 commandments that loving each other is important, not AS important as loving God, but Jesus does not want God to be our SOLE love, but our first love. I do not believe that Jesus intends us to love Him romantically.
I do believe that God created a desire to love the opposite gender romantically, and even considers it a need.
Genesis 2:18 is the very first thing that God says is not good, for a man to be alone without a companion, and God walked with Adam, so God did not intend to be man's sole companion.

God chose to fulfill that need by creating woman, not just being that companion Himself.
But then because it caused man to choose woman over obeying Him.... he takes away marriage in eternity.
If the supernatural interpretation of Genesis 6 is correct, and it is alluded to be in Jude, and 2 Peter 2, then Angels, who beheld God in all His glory in Heaven... chose to have human wives. This is more explicitly referred to in 1 Enoch however that's not considered Inspired scripture. But Jude and 2 Peter 2 referring to it, says there is a seed of truth to it.

If Song of Solomon was not Inspired, then the answer would be simple. God repented of making marriage, maybe even repented of making women entirely, and just eliminates desire for them, because it is a temptation that caused both men and angels to sin.

However Song of Solomon is Inspired.

it makes my head spin.

He directly disobeyed God.

 

[Jamdoc]

He directly disobeyed God.

Correct, but so did Eve.
but the sin is attributed to Adam, not Eve.
How was Adam's sin different than Eve's? Why is Eve given the promise of the Messiah being her seed, not Adam's seed?

I believe it's because Eve was deceived, but Adam knew the consequences and chose anyway.

 

[returntosender]

Correct, but so did Eve.
but the sin is attributed to Adam, not Eve.
How was Adam's sin different than Eve's? Why is Eve given the promise of the Messiah being her seed, not Adam's seed?
Because we all knew the women would get blamed for everything in the end, lol.
I believe it's because Eve was deceived, but Adam knew the consequences and chose anyway.

because we all knew women would be blamed for everything in the end, lol