What is "the fall" when I can't accept a historical Adam and Eve?

@AMWolfe

Thanks for the link to the post. I largely agree with its substance, i.e., “one flesh” = kinship. To the extent the kinship is a familial relationship, the author (verse 2:24) makes the case that the marriage bond is a family one. Husbands and wives are to be considered kin. But the author goes much further. Indeed, in 2:24 the author describes the nature of that relationship and how that relationship has priority over the man’s relationship with his parents.

Thanks, again

Michael

I’m not sure what to make of your question, Christy. I’m certainly not Jewish, I’m Lutheran. Moreover, if you are basing your conclusion on the fact that 2 of the three scholars (Westermann was a German Lutheran) to whom I referred in the previous post are Jewish, then so what?

In truth, my commentary draws from a range of scholars (see here - scroll to the bottom of the page) of a variety of religious traditions, including those who follow no religious tradition.

Blessings,

Michael

Oh, I don’t have any ulterior motives and I’m not trying to insinuate anything negative. Just curious where people are coming from and trying to fit different views into my mental map of possibilities. This was one I hadn’t really heard of before.

I encourage you to read St. Athanasius of Alexander’s treatise on the Incarnation of the Word of God (De Incarnatione Verbi Dei), especially chapters 2 and 3 on “The Divine Dilemma and Its Solution in the Incarnation.” This is available to read on the internet.

“The Fall” was a religious interpretation more or less invented by a Greek centuries after the New Testament was put down in ink.

There was no Fall… it was an EXPULSION.

If God had not expelled Adam and Eve, they would have eaten from the Tree of Life, and lived as Gods with Yahweh. Yahweh did not want this.

So how is this a Fall?

Your fall happened when you first sinned. Thats all the original sin you need.

It is interesting to note that though “the Fall” is a popular Christian doctrine (which makes the necessity of baptism and salvation necessary to the religion), the word “fall” is not actually used in the passages in Genesis. And I’ve heard so much doctrine built on these passages that not only doesn’t make much sense, but, in some cases, goes against what the Bible actually says. For instance, Christians say that our sin separates us from God. Well, God is omnipresent, so I don’t see how that could be possible. Even the apostle Paul, who was big on salvation, says that God is “the One in whom we live and move and have our being.” And God certainly did not separate himself from Adam and Eve after they disobeyed. He continued to care for them as his beloved creatures. So I’m not big on the idea that after the “fall”, God and humanity are forevermore separated by sin. Jesus was around sinners all the time and none of them spontaneously combusted. :slight_smile:

Okay, two things:

  1. I don’t take the Genesis accounts as historical. But I still find them metaphorically meaningful.
  2. As a metaphor, let’s consider the truth of the accounts. Why put the “Forbidden Tree” in the Garden (especially at the center and especially as the most desirable) if God didn’t (secretly) want them to eat from it? Why let the serpent into the Garden if God didn’t (secretly) want them to listen to the serpent? Why hold Adam and Eve accountable for disobeying when they were innocent, having no idea whatsoever of what obedience or disobedience was?

Lastly, so what I see this as is God allowing human will into relationships and the consequences and responsibilities of that freedom. We could never have matured as humans if we had not learned right from wrong, facing up to the consequences of our decisions. Despite what the text says on the surface, it sure reads like a setup to get humanity out of the nest (so-to-speak) and to live life in the real world where there are hardships to face every day. Nevertheless, God does not abandon us. We are still his children. He is not confined to the Garden. And he is not so holy that he never relates to sinners. Rather, the relationship continues as we mature. We even find in Jesus that God prefers the company of sinners rather than those who claim to have all the religious boxes checked. Ouch! So I don’t see “the fall” as a step down for humanity, but as the first step of knowing good from evil, of learning to live without Divine Protection, of knowing that God will not do for us what he expects, as a parent, for his children to do for themselves. Thanks for listening to my heretical views of this story. :slight_smile:

1 Like

I think the Apostle Paul would disagree with you. :slight_smile:

Over and over again in the New Testament, Christians are the ones that are called the children of God; Jesus even called the religious hypocrites of his day “children of the devil,” not children of God (see John 8). We become children of God through adoption (as Romans 8 makes clear).

That’s quite a bit of speculation. In both of the Apostle Paul’s commentaries on Adam’s sin (Romans 5 and 1 Corinthians 15), he makes the point that because of the sin of Adam, human beings have died spiritually, and must be resurrected by Christ. Whatever view you have of the historicity of Adam is moot, because the point still stands. In Adam, all die, but in Christ, all shall be made alive. This relates to the concept of federal headship common to the ancient near east.

Isolating the Genesis account without letting the rest of the Bible speak to our interpretation is not good exegesis.

If that’s the case, then why does Paul say otherwise to the Areopagus?

as even some of your own poets have said, ‘For we also are His children.’
ὡς καί τινες τῶν καθ’ ὑμᾶς ποιητῶν εἰρήκασιν, Τοῦ γὰρ καὶ γένος ἐσμέν.
Acts 17:28

@AdCaelumEo,

Would you agree that this 2 verses from Genesis hardly describe a FALL?

Gen 3:22-23

And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.

.
.
.
If the Lord thought humanity has “become as one of us…” and that just by putting “forth his hand … live for ever” - - this is a concise description of Humanity’s PROGRESS towards Union with the godhead… or at the very least, it certainly is not a description of human degradation!

From what I understand, there are two different senses in which “children of God” is used:

  1. A creation of God
  2. An adopted son or daughter of God, making someone a brother or sister of Christ and therefore an heir with him.

I believe the former is what Paul is referencing here, that in a general sense, as creations of God, we can be called his children. But of more importance, theologically speaking, is the latter, as Paul mentions in Romans 8: “For all who are being led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God. For you have not received a spirit of slavery leading to fear again, but you have received a spirit of adoption as sons by which we cry out, “Abba! Father!” The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, heirs also, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him so that we may also be glorified with Him” (Romans 8:14-17). There is a special sense in which we, as his creation, become more fully his children, with Christ as our elder brother. This is an act of love on God’s part; indeed, John says this when he states, “See how great a love the Father has bestowed on us, that we would be called children of God; and such we are” (1 John 3:1).

Greek-wise (and I say this with humility and am open to correction, because I have a limited knowledge of Koine), the word for “children” in 1 John 3:1 and Romans 8:16-17 is “tekna,” and the word for “sons” in Romans 8:14 is “huios,” different from “genos” used by Paul in Acts 17. I am not sure of all the significance that this carries, but from what I know, genos is used when speaking of physical begetting (this word is where we get “generations” or “gene”), while the other two are used in a more legal sense, where we are declared to be sons/children of God. So I do think that there is a difference.

So in the previous reply, I meant “children of God” in the special, salvific sense; Paul, at Mars Hill, refers to the general sense, that we are God’s creation. If all of humanity were God’s children, then all would be indwelt by the Spirit and would be heirs with Christ; the New Testament makes it clear that not all are saved.

Hopefully that clears things up.

Blessings,
Jay

I notice that you fail to reference the preceding verses, where God clearly curses the serpent, woman, and man for their disobedience to his command. If that does not constitute a fall away from a previous state of blessedness with God, then I don’t know what does. :slight_smile:

Yes, we humans became as God; whereas previously we were innocent and knew not our own sin, so now we knew the difference between good and evil. Adam and Eve were given a command from God not to do something, and they willfully rebelled against that law. Therefore, when they transgressed the law, they knew their sin, and hid from God. It’s awfully backwards to say that humans became closer in relationship with God by disregarding his command and going against what he said.

Further, I’m not sure you guys understand the weight the Bible puts on the sinfulness and corruption of man. It’s not a pretty picture. Like I said, when you take one text in isolation (Genesis 3) without looking to the rest of Scripture to inform your theology, you end up with a skewed theology. We must allow all of Scripture to speak.

Blessings,
Jay

@AdCaelumEo

And you provide your very own words to disprove your point.

God provides the CURSE … not because Adam and Eve had become DEGRADED … but because they had become EXALTED counter to God’s plan.

There is just no way to see God’s statements about Adam as an indication that Adam was FALLEN … God virtually proclaims Adam virtually God… if Yahweh would LET HIM - - which he wills not !

What is all this talk of degradation or exaltation? I am concerned with man’s nature, not his status. Mankind, prior to the events of Genesis 3, was innocent. They knew not sin. They weren’t perfect, but they were without sin. Having sinned, their nature was fundamentally altered; all they knew now was sin (again, the rest of the Scriptures testify to this plainly; it is folly to isolate one text of Scripture from the rest). As Augustine said, prior to “the Fall,” mankind was posse non peccare, “able to not sin.” After “the Fall,” mankind was non posse non peccare, “not able to not sin.” Only when we are “in Christ” do we truly become able to not sin, yet again. And only when the New Creation is revealed are we truly non posse peccare, “not able to sin.”

That’s just bad theology. Nothing happens counter to God’s plan. God works all things according to the counsel of his will (Ephesians 1:11). He declares the end from the beginning, and from ancient times things not yet done, proclaiming, “My counsel shall stand, and I will accomplish all my purpose” (Isaiah 46:9-10). I’d be interested in learning your theological background.

The only way we had become “like God,” according to the text, was that we knew good and evil. No mention is made of our “exaltation.” A plain reading does not give any indication that we had somehow become greater than what we were before because we knew good and evil; on the contrary, as Paul makes clear, the reason for man’s spiritual deadness is because of Adam’s sin (Romans 5:12). One does not become exalted by directly disobeying God; that is also bad theology. The whole reason we need Christ is because we are sinful, rotten to the core.

Blessings,
Jay

I’m comfortable with that claim. It works either way.

But saying Adam becomes like US (the Elohim) is hardly a FALL. It’s an admission on the glorification of Humanity … but now the two must be expelled from the vicinity of the Tree of Life.

Eviction. Yes.

Expulsion. Yes.

Man, on the verge of God-hood is hardly a Fall.

Your line of reasoning is…befuddling.

@AdCaelumEo

No more befuddling than Evangelicals trying to chracterize these words as “the Fall” of humanity… rather than the EVICTION of humanity. To be on the verge of immortality is simply NOT a Fall.

Gen 3:22-23
And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken."

That was not the fall. That was the eviction from the Garden. The fall happened when mankind broke God’s law and became sinful creatures. That’s what you’re missing.

To be FALLEN is to be corrupted to the point where immortality is not available to you.

But God makes it clear that unless God DRIVES Adam OUT … he will have natural access to the tree of life and GOD-LIKE IMMORTALITY.

God CURSES Adam and Eve … for their sins.

But their sins do NOT make them intrinsically unable to enjoy immortality! If that were true, there would be no need of a flaming sword to keep them away.

What a bunch of un-orthodox hogwash. Is history meaningless to you? Do you have any respect for those who interpreted this passage long before you came on the scene? Are you seriously saying that the past 2000 years of biblical interpretation mean nothing?

I have presented nothing except the historical position on original sin.