Adam's sin?

I have a question I thought of about the sin of Adam.

Some say Adam sinned by eating the apple, others say it was by the will to eat the apple. Some say Eve sinned, some don’t.

It occurred to me that maybe the sin, in itself, isn’t what separated the first Adam from God.

The thing that made Adam cover up was triggered by whatever sin it was, but the result is Adam felt shame. That’s why He didn’t want God to see him. It wasn’t until he felt shame that I think he really could have understood the full burden of knowing good and evil.

Does this mean anything to anybody but me, or am I still crazy?

Alan

He doubted the truth…

Actually your on the right track.

Adams nakedness before God was that he knew God could see inside of his heart. His feeling of nakedness was the exposure of his true being to God and that he was now corrupted by sin.

Jim

Yes, the role of shame in human life is easily dismissed but I believe it affects us profoundly and I think it needs to be explored more deeply to understand who we are and why things are the way they are in this world. In any case, shame points us to an innocence lost, a division with God and within ourselves, an original sin.

http://www.jesusfame.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/adam-eve-serpent.jpg

Adam’s Test of Love
When the man was created to be the first person of this human communion he was also assigned to be “vicar” of God to his familial communion, as well as a royal priest offering the praise and gratitude of his domestic familial communion of persons back to the Creator. He was created to protect and to serve the familial communion as well as to accept a headship role at the risk of any danger to him. Thus no man should ever agree to marry unless he is ready to suffer and die for his wife.* “Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her… so husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself.” * (Ephesians 5: 25 & 28)

When the narrative tells us that man is to *“till and guard” * the garden, it doesn’t tell us what the garden is to be guarded from. Behind the disobedient choice of our first parents lurks a seductive voice, opposed to God, which makes them fall into death out of envy. Scripture and tradition see in this being a fallen angel, called “Satan” or “the devil.”

*“Now the serpent was more subtle than any other wild creature that the Lord had made.” *As the serpent enters the garden, his pointed questions to the woman, reveal his obvious awareness of God’s commandments to the first couple. He must know that the headship of this family rests in Adam, but instead he addresses the woman, why? Is he aware that he is violating familial order of Adam’s family? Does he realize that he is inviting the woman to make a decision that she shouldn’t make without her husband? Undoubtedly he does, but he is out to offend God by destroying the harmony of ‘His image on earth’: the first human family…

Continued:

The Creation narrative also reveals to us that Adam remains silent throughout this invasion and violation of his familial domain. Why? It has been suggested that he is intimidated by the intruder. But why should the man be intimidated by a creature that has been made subject to him? The Scriptures tell us that after telling Adam to "be fruitful and multiply,” the Lord told him “fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth." It was God’s will for man to be the one who named every one of the creatures of the Garden as a symbol of authority over them. This means that even the serpent, like every other creature, was to be subject to the man.

Another fact that weakens the theory of intimidation by the serpent is the fact that text tells us that the serpent had also been created by God and that all the creatures had been created to be vegetarians: *“And to every beast of the earth, and to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, everything that has the breath of life, I have given every green plant for food.” * Thus the man had no reason to be intimidated by a vegetarian creature that had been assigned to his dominion. Furthermore, the prophet gives us an insight to the kind loving environment that the Creator expected, if the man had exercised his dominion over Creation: “The wolf shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid, and the calf and the lion and the fatling together, and a little child shall lead them. The cow and the bear shall feed; their young shall lie down together; and the lion shall eat straw like the ox. The sucking child shall play over the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the adder’s den. They shall not hurt or destroy in all my holy mountain; for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea.” (Isaiah 11: 6-9)

Scripture tells us that the wife “took of its fruit and ate; and she also gave some to her husband." As the husband observed his wife sin and eat of the fruit, what went through his mind? Did he fear for his wife’s life, between the time that she ate of the fruit and the time when he finally decided to eat of it also? Was he certain that his wife would not die at the moment that she ate, in accordance to God’s warning? Why did he not stop her? He could not be sure, so he actually allowed and silently witnessed a possible act of self-destruction on the part of his wife. The cost of this fatal act was the spiritual death of his wife. At this point the man had failed to protect his “communion of persons,” just as his successors Abraham and Isaac would do later.

When the Creator announced *“You are free to eat from any of the trees of the garden except the tree of knowledge of good and bad. From that tree you shall not eat; the moment you eat from it you are surely doomed to die,” * He was not making a death threat to his children. If this were the case they would have physically died after eating of the fruit, because God cannot lie. God was warning them of the spiritual consequences that their sin of disobedience would bring about.

Would Adam have eaten of the fruit, if his wife had fallen physically dead at the moment of her sin? Not likely, for then the deception of the serpent would have been obvious and he would then know that they had not become “like God.” The husband had failed to ‘selflessly’ love his wife and therefore broke the marriage covenant. According to this, one could suggest that the man had failed even before he actually ate of the forbidden fruit!

Based on the previous observations, the following questions come to mind: Why did the man not protect his wife? One can deduce that it is self-love and pride. Apparently, the tempting opportunity of being “like God” merited the risk that his wife was undertaking. His concerns for his own “well-being” was far greater than his love for his wife or his Fatherly Creator.

And, why did the woman make such a decision without submissively consulting with her husband, the guardian of the garden? Again, self love and pride; it appears that her prerogative to *‘become like God’ *was not going to depend on the final decision of her husband. To “be like God,” would obviously also mean the end of her submission to her husband’s leadership. Eve could have also asked for help or advice from God, but Scripture shows us that she chose to act out of her own accord

Conclusion:

Where was God during the time of the deception? He most assuredly was standing by, respecting his human son’s freedom and attentively awaiting for his plea for His assistance. So why did Adam not invoke the help of his Creator? When God assigned man to till and guard the garden, the Fatherly Creator never forbade him to invoke his Name for assistance. Saint James instructs: “‘God opposes the proud, but gives grace to the humble.’ Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil and he will flee from you.” God never forbade man to call on Him, instead we know that God often spoke with his first human son and gave him instructions.

It is without a doubt that the All-seeing Creator and the whole court of the obedient angelic armies witnessed silently as the serpent entered the garden to seduce the first family. But their intervention and assistance was never invoked. Some theologians hold that if the first Adam had exercised his gift of Divine Sonship and had turned to the Heavens for assistance he might have experienced what the ‘Second Adam’ claimed, “Do you think that I cannot appeal to my Father, and he will at once send me more than twelve legions of angels?”

When Our Lord, the Second Adam, was also allowed to endure the seductions of the tempter, He defended the primacy of the Father, “Be gone Satan…You shall worship the Lord your God and him only shall you serve.” Immediately after the Second Adam had passed the test, the reward came: “the devil left him and behold, angels came and minister to him." But the first man remained silent. Man broke not only his marriage covenant, but also broke the covenant bond of filial trust and love with his Creator, His loving Father. He failed to love his wife and he failed to love his Creator above his own self love. He didn’t comprehend the mystery of suffering

An unfortunate factor that usually hinders the proper understanding of God’s justice in testing man, is the arrogant viewpoint inculturated into our 20th Century mentality of viewing the judgment capability of people of former times as inferior to ours. Adam’s original state was one well above what 20th Century men enjoy. He had been given freedom, wisdom and moral discernment. His preternatural intellect had not yet been corrupted nor weakened by sin. If this were not true, the test would have been unfair. Adam’s intellect was keener and more discerning before than what we inherited and enjoy after the fall. His intellect had not yet been corrupted by sin, and confused society values. God had been his only teacher… and his only Father.

Adam was the high priest of humanity, made on ‘the sixth day,’ but made for ‘the Seventh.’ He was made for loving communion with his human family and with God. God did not deny man the gift of moral discernment, however it was not wisdom and knowledge that man needed, but rather he needed to love. He failed the test as a husband, as a son, as a priest and as an assigned ruler of Creation. But most of all, he failed to love as God loves, to the point of “laying down his life down for His beloved.” (Gospel of John 15: 13)

http://www.jesus-explained.org/images/adam-and-eve-joseph-brickey-smaller.jpg

I pray this helps,

To Jesus through Mary :thumbsup:

:bible1:
1 Timothy 2:13
For Adam was first formed;
then Eve.

2 Corinthians 11:3
But I fear lest, as the serpent seduced Eve by his subtilty,
so your minds should be corrupted,
and fall from the simplicity that is in Christ.

1 Timothy 2:14
And Adam was not seduced;
but the woman being seduced,
was in the transgression.

1 Corinthians 15:22
And as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all shall be made alive.
+

. . . :coffeeread: . . . **
[INDENT]
[size=]ARTICLE 1**[/size]
“I BELIEVE IN GOD THE FATHER ALMIGHTY, CREATOR
OF HEAVEN AND EARTH”

III. Original Sin
**
Freedom put to the test**

396
God created man in his image and established him in his friendship. A spiritual creature, man can live this friendship only in free submission to God. The prohibition against eating “of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil” spells this out:

“for in the day that you EAT of it, you shall die.” 276

The "tree of the knowledge of good and evil"277 symbolically evokes the insurmountable limits that man, being a creature, must freely recognize and respect with trust. Man is dependent on his Creator and subject to the laws of creation and to the moral norms that govern the use of freedom.

Man’s first sin

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

399 **
Scripture portrays the tragic consequences of this first disobedience. Adam and Eve immediately lose the grace of original holiness.280 They become afraid of the God of whom they have conceived a distorted image—that of a God jealous of his prerogatives.281
**
400 **
The harmony in which they had found themselves, thanks to original justice, is now destroyed: the control of the soul’s spiritual faculties over the body is shattered; the union of man and woman becomes subject to tensions,
their relations henceforth marked by lust and domination**.282 Harmony with creation is broken: visible creation has become alien and hostile to man.283 Because of man, creation is now subject **“to its bondage to decay.”**284 Finally, the consequence explicitly foretold for this disobedience will come true: man will "return to the ground,"285 for out of it he was taken. Death makes its entrance into human history.286

**401 **
After that first sin, the world is virtually inundated by sin. There is Cain’s murder of his brother Abel and the universal corruption which follows in the wake of sin. Likewise, sin frequently manifests itself in the history of Israel, especially as infidelity to the God of the Covenant and as transgression of the Law of Moses. And even after Christ’s atonement, sin raises its head in countless ways among Christians.287 Scripture and the Church’s Tradition continually recall the presence and universality of sin in man’s history:

What Revelation makes known to us is confirmed by our own experience. For when man looks into his own heart :heart: he finds that he is drawn toward what is wrong and sunk in many evils which cannot come from his good creator. Often refusing to acknowledge God as his source, man has also upset the relationship which should link him to his last end; and at the same time he has broken the right order that should reign within himself as well as between himself and other men and all creatures.288

The consequences of Adam’s sin for humanity

**402 ****
All men are implicated in Adam’s sin, as St. Paul affirms: “By one man’s disobedience many [that is, all men] were made sinners”: "sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned. . . ."289 The Apostle contrasts the universality of sin and death with the universality of salvation in Christ. “Then as one man’s trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one man’s act of righteousness leads to acquittal and life for all men.”**290[/INDENT]

[RIGHT]. . . all for Jesus+
thank You Sweet Spirit of our Holy God+
thank you Holy Mother Mary+
thank you Holy Mother Church+
[/RIGHT]

Hmm, not sure I understand your question exactly but I’ll give it a go. You said maybe it wasn’t the sin that separated Adam from God, that the sin triggered the feeling of shame and the resulting action of “covering up” his sin. Did I get that right?

If I interpreted you correctly, then I think you’re overthinking it. Sin is a turning away from God, Shame is what keeps us turned away instead of asking forgiveness.

Doesn’t mean you’re not crazy :smiley:

Excellent article, lots of food for thought. Thanks for sharing :slight_smile:

Excellent article, lots of food for thought. Thanks for sharing :slight_smile:

Thank you, I pray it helps.

To Jesus through Mary :thumbsup:

by eating from the tree of life he disobeyed god and listened to the devil instead…he followed evil instead of god…and it lost him and eve some innocence they had…they realised they were naked (as they had always been) but now they felt they had to cover up…and they also hid from god

Indeed!

But not only the sin of Disobedience but also the sin of LUST in realizing their nakedness.

And Satan has been hard at work through several umpteen millennium to destroy human souls through Pride (Disobedience) and (Lust) of the Flesh…especially lusts dealing with that of our lower sexual nature.

Peace
Chris

The sins Adam and Eve commited can be viewed better by looking at Jesus Temptation in the desert.

Everything that Jesus was tempted with, Adam and Eve gave into.

They are the three great tempations that all lesser temptations generate from.

Pride
Lust
Greed

Jim

Yes, and all of those led to shame – and they hid. :frowning:

Or wait, could it have been more about fear than shame?

Alan

he sinned cos he disobeyed god by eating the fruit from the tree of knowledge

That sums it up pretty nicely.

Alan

I believe that both were present.

Lots of question-begging going on here Alan. First of all, was Adam separated from God? To me, there is no existence without God, so God is with Adam whether Adam accepts it or not. God chooses us, and chooses unconditionally. Adam will suffer a separation by suffering a disconnect on his own end, it is his own self-condemnation that causes the divide in his self, between the self (persona, etc) and the shadow, where forgiveness (of self and of God) is ultimately the catalyst to reunification. If a person projects a punitive God, however, the idea I just presented doesn’t make sense - but the punitive projection is perfectly understandable, and part of a necessary stage.

Another wonderful question begged, even by my first paragraph, is “Why did God create the human with a capacity for shame?” I think the emotion of shame is tied to the drive for popularity. It has been beneficial to our species to have a “popularity instinct” as part of our God-given nature. When we lose popularity, we feel shame; when we gain popularity, we feel acceptance and “pride”. This popularity drive has motivated us to cooperate with group leadership, which greatly enhances survival of the group. Beautiful, isn’t it? It is a carrot-and-stick emotion package that lends itself to cooperation. Just a theory…

So, if the “bad” is what is unacceptable to the powers-that-be on Earth, or to a projected God, then shame is certainly an emotion that is supposed to tell us that we have taken a route that is contrary to the wishes of our overseers. (culturally defined, of course)

I have read a book recently that posited the emotion of righteousness, and I think it is a pretty accurate description. When we follow all the rules, we avoid shame, we get acceptance from authority, and we also gain the feeling of righteousness by following our own rules! I think that there are actually two “instincts” involved in the nudity part of the creation story. Adam felt shame and guilt. When we break the rules, personal or communal (if owned by the individual) then we feel guilt too. So the creation story actually addresses the evolution of emotion in the human, emotions only shared by other creatures in a rudimentary way (shame is experienced by some other species, guilt, not that I know of). What does the creation story say? That God made us this way, and that what he made is very good. I agree!

In my line of thinking here, the “punishing” that takes place in the creation story is Adam on Adam. Does God actually punish a species for behaving in a way that was made possible by His own hands, or is it actually that we punish ourselves, and we project that God does not accept us?

Oh, I forgot to mention that yes, you are still crazy. :smiley: Welcome to the club. I once took a class in “abnormal psychology”. The instructor would describe a personality disorder or some other labeled psychosis, and the room would experience a period of silence as all the students were self-diagnosing. I would raise my hand, the teacher would call on me, and I would ask “aren’t we all a little like that?”. This happened at least four or five times.

She would acknowledge that, yes, we all experience some degree of all these “abnormalities”. I went into the class with an attitude about labels, when I completed the course, my attitude was confirmed by the truth.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.