My how the errors in choices creep in.
Adam received “the command” from God, the quite entirely infamous “do not eat OR ELSE” command that we apparently all fell under.
Eve was not yet separated and formed from Adam. But Eve apparently had heard the command. How so?
Gen. 3:
2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:
3 But of the fruit 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.
So we have 3 basic possibilities where this repeating of the command from God came from. We have no record of God repeating it to Eve. She may have had an inert or inner understanding of the command, being “within” Adam at the time, (God called them BOTH Adam on the day they were created-Gen. 5) OR the most likely source, Adam himself.
In any case Eve clearly got the command wrong, adding to it the statement that they may not “touch it.” God never said that. In fact they were meant to tend to the Garden and presumably every tree therein, inclusive of the infamous tree of knowledge of good/evil. An error was already in place and an unknown violation of God's Intentions for them, again most likely from the recount of Adam of that command, which would essentially prove his own fault in listening or retelling or tending the Garden. Or Eve made up the error herself, again showing error was in her own mind. In any case the command was mangled in her own mind and statements in stating the command to the serpent. She basically erred to the serpent and of course the serpent struck from there, getting her to consider making a “MORAL CHOICE.” Perhaps not even cognizant of the fact that she already erred.
So Eve starts her decision making with a built in fault. An error in recounting the exact command, to not “touch” the tree.
And here is where her decision making starts, all quite in line with making a good moral decision for herself:
Gen. 3:
6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.
A classic setup for making a moral choice.
Good/Pleasant/Wise. What could possibly go wrong?
What’s wrong with the picture is that we fail to see that lawlessness was already at work within both Adam, who never even bothered to correct Eve’s misstatement of the command, and Eve, showing that LUST, LUST and PRIDE was already within her, referring to this pattern stated by John in:
1 John 2:16
For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.
Basically the things of the Father were NOT in Eve, but things of the world: good for food, pleasant to the eyes, the pride of being wise. All seemingly legitimate on the surface using the world’s decision making moral choice methods.
I honestly would hardly find fault in the decision making process, that we all employ daily. In many ways this decision making course is required to even survive. We have to eat. We like to eat things that please our eyes and we certainly are not rewarded for making foolish decisions.
But you see none of these observations are even accurate. What is accurate is that the package of Adam and Eve came PREPACKAGED with FAULTS.
Paul outlined this clearly in 1 Cor. 15:42-46 showing us exactly the conditions that
Adam and “all” natural people are planted in. These 3 things also correlate to Eve’s built in flaws:
Planted in corruption
Planted in dishonor
Planted in weakness
Is there supposed to be some surprise if outcome of making decisions with those pre-existing conditions is not and can never be moral? We make every decision from those planted conditions. Basically being seeded in dung, within the darkness of earth, our own dust body.
And lets not ignore what really happened to both Adam and Eve. Where the Word is sown, Satan comes immediately in our hearts to STEAL, to SIN in our own hearts via THEFT.
Obviously both Adam and Eve were stolen from within.
I believe the tempter was already at work within them both from the moment they first heard the Words of God. Yet hardly a one of us can see it, because we too have been stolen from.
And in this state we can’t even be honest with ourselves about it.
Instead we’ll claim that we justify ourselves by making good moral decisions, even with the hard line fact of EVIL CHOICES WITHIN TO CHOOSE FROM.
Remember these Words from Jesus: EVIL COMES FROM WITHIN.
It’s not optional, so let’s not try to pull Jesus’ Leg about it claiming we’re legally obedient and making good moral cnoices. Evil thoughts defile us all, period.
Mark 7:21-23
You have to love an HONEST BOOK. And of course not everything is as it appears on the surface, or in the mirror
Evil thoughts defile us all, period.
Yes. This is a product of our sinful nature, our sinful flesh. Yet, while I concur, I disagree with your claims regarding A and E.
A difficulty addressing your position is the ambiguity of the meaning of some phrases.
For example, what does “lawlessness was already at work within both Adam…Eve” mean?
Regardless, the evidence for this claim is not persuasive.
Eve, showing that LUST, LUST and PRIDE was already within her
Except the word “lust” is never used in relation to Eve and illuminating John had no difficulty using the word repeatedly of “
the lust of the flesh, and
the lust of the eyes, and the
pride of life” and there’s no compelling reason why the author of Genesis couldn’t have likewise used the word “lust” in relation to Eve. After all, there are threw Hebrew words for “lust,” ′ăâ as a longing or desiring, zimmah for sinful, wicked, lewdness, lust, there’s avah, chamad, and again. Yet, not one of these Hebrew words is ever used in relation to Eve.
Simply, there’s nothing in the plain text meaning or textual meaning of that Genesis verse claiming, alleging, inferring, or implying Eve had or experienced “lust.” It is not a paucity of evidence, or de minimis evidence, but no evidence in the plain text to support a proposition of lust was applicable to Eve at this juncture. As a result, this doesn’t substantiate lawlessness “already at work within” A and E.
And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise
Yeah but so what, regarding the good for food and pleasant to the eyes. It is rational to deduce this was how A and E in part based their decision as to what to eat, much like today. Humans today and since existence make a decision to eat or not to eat based upon how appetizing it is in appearance, and whether it is “good for food.” That’s not inherently sinful or lustful.
And the phrasing “when the woman saw…good for food, pleasant to the eyes” suggests looking at food in this way previously but not in regards to this specific source of food until the Serpent spoke to her.
Now, the “desired to make one wise” is more of the oddity. But it’s interesting the author didn’t say “lust” but “desired,” which reflects that sin having not yet entered the world at this juncture, Eve wasn’t subjected to the sinful lust spoke of by John.
What is accurate is that the package of Adam and Eve came PREPACKAGED with FAULTS.
Paul outlined this clearly in 1 Cor. 15:42-46 showing us exactly the conditions that
Adam and “all” natural people are planted in. These 3 things also correlate to Eve’s built in flaws:
Planted in corruption
Planted in dishonor
Planted in weakness
No, those verses do not establish, show, demonstrate, or allege “prepackaged faults” of A and E.
“42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown [
p]a perishable
body, it is raised [
q]an imperishable
body; 43 it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; 44 it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual
body.45 So also it is written: “The first man, Adam, became a living [
r]person.” The last Adam
was a life-giving spirit. 46 However, the spiritual is not first, but the natural; then the spiritual.”
There’s nothing in these verses that substantively has anything to do with “prepackaged with faults.” Neither did Paul assert Adam was “planted” in “corruption, dishonor, weakness.”
The context Paul writes is with a condition of existence and set of affairs and circumstances after Adam’s sin and fall, and not conditions and set of circumstances of existence before the sin and fall. After all, Paul is discussing resurrection of the dead and there isn’t any resurrection of the dead without first A.) Adam’s sin and B.) God’s punishment of a physical death. Hence, the comment of “sown in dishonor…sown in weakness…raised in glory/power” is within the context and conditions after sin has entered the world, after the curse and rendering physical death upon humanity by God.
www.christianpost.com
