Adam And Eve

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Justified Saint' post='1835918' date='Apr 14 2009, 11:22 PM']Not according to St. Paul who writes that "For Adam was formed first, then Eve. Further, Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and transgressed. But she will be saved through motherhood, provided women persevere in faith and love and holiness, with self-control." 1 Tim 2: 13-15

Aside from Eve being more blameworthy, women have incurred special punishment and need saving irrespective of Adam's sin.[/quote]
Certainly Eve was deceived, but had Adam not succumbed there would have been no fall. It is Adam, as the head of humanity, who brings death into the world, not Eve.

[Justified Saint]

I was not suggesting that Eve brought death into the world as much as demonstrating, along with St. Paul, woman's agency in incurring special wrath, at least for women, through Eve's transgression. As long as we are speculating, there is no reason to believe that transgression would not have existed had Adam not succumbed, especially in light of the St. Paul's words. For if Adam is the head of humanity (father?) then Eve is the mother of humanity.

[Apotheoun]

The analogy between Adam and Christ requires it. Just as Christ alone is the savior, so Adam alone brought death into the world. The most that can be said in relation to Eve is that she begins the fall, much as the Theotokos begins redemption, but neither Eve nor Mary are the efficient cause of what happens to humanity.

[Justified Saint]

Correct, but insofar as Eve and thus women are considered a subset of creation and humanity, I don't see why Adam's sin requires their plight. Would God have rescinded his curse on Eve and the rest of women had Adam not sinned? Hard to imagine, because Eve repeated God's command not to eat the fruit to the serpent, so she knew the consequences if she did and thus it was just as binding on her.

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='Justified Saint' post='1836101' date='Apr 15 2009, 11:02 AM']Correct, but insofar as Eve and thus women are considered a subset of creation and humanity,[/quote]

Excuse me? A [i]subset[/i]??

[Justified Saint]

I do not claim the word as my own, simply summarizing what has often been the position of the church and might be interpreted from some passages of the Bible.

[StColette]

[quote name='HisChildForever' post='1837245' date='Apr 16 2009, 11:14 AM']Excuse me? A [i]subset[/i]??[/quote]

Stop being such a drama queen. A subset can mean a set contained within another set, meaning women are a subset of humanity as a whole and the same can be said for man. It can also mean a set whose members are all contained in another set (ie humanity).

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='Justified Saint' post='1837249' date='Apr 16 2009, 11:22 AM']I do not claim the word as my own, simply summarizing what has often been the position of the church and might be interpreted from some passages of the Bible.[/quote]

Thank you for politely clarifying.

[Madame Vengier]

[quote name='Justified Saint' post='1837249' date='Apr 16 2009, 12:22 PM']I do not claim the word as my own, simply summarizing what has often been the position of the church and might be interpreted from some passages of the Bible.[/quote]


Do you have a link or something?

[Madame Vengier]

[quote name='StColette' post='1837251' date='Apr 16 2009, 12:26 PM']Stop being such a drama queen.[/quote]


Uncalled for.

[StColette]

[quote name='Madame Vengier' post='1837381' date='Apr 16 2009, 02:09 PM']Uncalled for.[/quote]

No what's uncalled for is jumping to conclusion before taking a look at a dictionary just because you think a particular word is somehow demeaning women. Again let HCF handle her own business.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Justified Saint' post='1836101' date='Apr 15 2009, 09:02 AM']Correct, but insofar as Eve and thus women are considered a subset of creation and humanity, I don't see why Adam's sin requires their plight. Would God have rescinded his curse on Eve and the rest of women had Adam not sinned? Hard to imagine, because Eve repeated God's command not to eat the fruit to the serpent, so she knew the consequences if she did and thus it was just as binding on her.[/quote]
The teaching of St. Athanasios, and the other Eastern Fathers, is that if Adam had not sinned bringing corruption and death into the world, no one (not even Eve) would have experienced any suffering.

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='tinytherese' post='1833053' date='Apr 12 2009, 08:25 PM']So I've heard some people argue that Adam ate the forbidden because he knew that Ever would be banished and that he did it so that he could be with her. So he did it out of love. I know that we can't determine what he exactly was thinking at the time but I thought about it the other day and wondered, "What if Eve had been the only one who at the forbidden fruit? Would she and Adam be apart from each other? What would have happened. Surely, God wouldn't have sent her out alone and unprotected." Thought that it was an interesting topic to discuss.[/quote]

Whatever has been said in this thread doesn't matter... the answer is No. Adam's job was to intervene before Eve ate the fruit. Therefore, he sinned by his inaction, or sin of omission, without even taking a bite.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='LouisvilleFan' post='1837464' date='Apr 16 2009, 02:02 PM']Whatever has been said in this thread doesn't matter... the answer is No. Adam's job was to intervene before Eve ate the fruit. Therefore, he sinned by his inaction, or sin of omission, without even taking a bite.[/quote]
He sinned by eating the fruit in disobedience to God's commandment. The text quoted by Aloysius is ambiguous in both the Greek and the Hebrew about whether Adam was with Eve when she was tempted.

[StColette]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1837458' date='Apr 16 2009, 03:52 PM']The teaching of St. Athanasios, and the other Eastern Fathers, is that if Adam had not sinned bringing corruption and death into the world, no one (not even Eve) would have experienced any suffering.[/quote]

That's very interesting.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='StColette' post='1837471' date='Apr 16 2009, 02:09 PM']That's very interesting.[/quote]
Yes, St. Athanasios taught that if it were simply a matter of trespass against God's commandment that He could (and in fact did) forgive Adam (and by extension Eve as well), but because Adam is the head of mankind his sinful action brought corruption and death to his descendants by removing our common created nature from God's life giving power, so that the effect of his sin began a process whereby human existence itself began to unravel. Christ, the new Adam, became man in order to destroy death by death, and give everlasting life to all mankind.

Edited April 16, 2009 by Apotheoun

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1837467' date='Apr 16 2009, 05:05 PM']He sinned by eating the fruit in disobedience to God's commandment. The text quoted by Aloysius is ambiguous in both the Greek and the Hebrew about whether Adam was with Eve when she was tempted.[/quote]

I suppose it's ambiguous if he was actually there with her or if she went to him, but either way, Adam didn't oppose her.

Another reason to believe his silence played a role in bringing about the Fall is that Jesus' silence played a role in our redemption:

"He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth; like a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and like a sheep that before its shearers is dumb, so he opened not his mouth." -Isaiah 53:7

[Apotheoun]

Speculation about Adam's silence in connection with Eve's temptation being the cause of ancestral sin is not a part of the Church's tradition. To be blunt: Adam, as the head of mankind, caused the fall by eating the forbidden fruit.

Edited April 16, 2009 by Apotheoun

[StColette]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1837481' date='Apr 16 2009, 04:18 PM']Yes, St. Athanasios taught that if it were simply a matter of trespass against God's commandment that He could (and in fact did) forgive Adam (and by extension Eve as well), but because Adam is the head of mankind his sinful action brought corruption and death to his descendants by removing our common created nature from God's life giving power, so that the effect of his sin began a process whereby human existence itself began to unravel. Christ, the new Adam, became man in order to destroy death by death, and give everlasting life to all mankind.[/quote]

I had never heard this. I'll have to look more into this. Wish I would have known this when I did my exegesis for Dr. Minto on this passage.

[Lil Red]

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1833064' date='Apr 12 2009, 05:41 PM']Since Eve wasn't even created when God told Adam to not eat of the Tree of Knowledge, then if she had been the only one to eat it, maybe she might have gotten a lessor sentence. It's obvious from her discussion with the serpent that she was aware of it, but since she wasn't a party to the original contract, a good lawyer might have gotten her leniency.[/quote]
+J.M.J.+
thanks for the laugh.