| Home | Our Hope | |
| Bible Study |
|
December 14, 2022 |
| Was Adam There? | ||
We know that the snake deceived Eve into eating the fruit, but it isn't clear if Adam was there or off someplace else. If he was there, why didn't he stop her?
This seems like a small point but it has larger theological implications.
The reason this is an issue is that the Bible is not clear about whether Adam was there or not.
When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate. (Genesis 3:6)
The quote above comes from the NASB translation and the majority of translations also translate it as "with her". They are unwilling to do what a minority of translations do. They translate it as "who was with her". The words "who was" are not in the Hebrew nor does the Hebrew support the idea presented by adding those words.
In fact, the word "her" is also not in the Hebrew. The Hebrew only has a word that is translated here as "with". Strongs indicates a better translation of that word is "together". It presents the idea of being together. The word is used in the same way to describe Abram's trip back from Egypt.
And went up Abram from Egypt he and his wife and all that he had and Lot with him to the Negev (Genesis 13:1)
Again, NASB is translating it as "with him." Here, as elsewhere, this preposition means "being together", in this case traveling together. Having the word in the sentence seems to clarify that they were not traveling separately. So a better translation would say this.
And went up Abram from Egypt he and his wife and all that he had and Lot, together, to the Negev (Genesis 13:1)
The word does not mean "present" as in "he was present with him". So a better translation of the original verse would say this.
and she gave also to her husband, together, and he ate.
This indicates there was a togetherness in what they were doing. That is still less than clear, though. What is meant by "together"?
To resolve this we will look in the New Testament. In these verses Paul is giving two reasons why God made the man the head. In doing that, though, he provides us with some information we can use to determine if Adam was present when Eve sinned.
for I do not allow a woman to teach, neither to usurp over a man, but she should be quiet. For Adam was formed first, and then Eve. 14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and violated the commandment. (1 Timothy 2:13-14)
It very clearly says that there was a difference in their sins.
Eve was deceived into eating the fruit. The dictionary defines "deceived" as "cause (someone) to believe something that is not true." Satan convinced her that it was in her best interests to eat the fruit that God had said "do not eat". Earlier the snake had asked her a question about what God had commanded. So Eve knew God's will and was deceived into violating it.
But Adam was not deceived. Yet we know that he also ate the fruit. How is it possible that they both ate the fruit but only Eve was deceived? Note also that Paul says "the commandment". He feels no need to differentiate the commandment not to eat this fruit from some other commandment. There is no other commandment. We'll come back to this much later.
When God talks with Adam and Eve later, Adam knows what was wrong - he ate the fruit. He tries blame-casting onto Eve, "she gave me the fruit."
What Adam says is important. His attempt to justify himself is based on the idea that she gave him the fruit. His point is that Eve can't be trusted; she tricked him. He also tries to blame-cast onto God by saying God made this woman who can't be trusted.
If he had been there to hear the snake's words and to see Eve eat the fruit, he would have known what fruit he has being offered. That would have made him a deceived person also, just like Eve. He would have known God's will but was deceived (by Eve) into eating it anyway.
If we accept that Adam was there then Paul is wrong because Paul says only one was deceived. But we can't accept that Paul is wrong because that would mean the Bible is not the inspired words of God. So we have to say that Adam was not there.
Adam inferred that he was tricked. That means he didn't know what fruit he was offered. This only makes sense if he wasn't present. If he had been present then he would have known. That means Eve came to him later and offered him the fruit without telling him what fruit it was.
It also doesn't make sense that Adam would be present, from the snake's perspective. If Adam is around while the snake is deceiving Eve, there is a chance that Adam will call out the snake and interfere. The snake isn't going to risk that. The snake has already seen that both Adam and Eve have weaknesses. He believes he can deceive Eve and use her to get to Adam but he has to get Eve first, then Adam.
Whether Adam was tricked or deceived may seem like a distinction without a difference, but the difference is critical here. Leviticus explains that there are two ways of committing a sin, really that's two "hearts".
If a person sins unintentionally in any of the things which the Lord has commanded not to be done, and commits any of them, … (Leviticus 4:2)
When a leader sins and unintentionally does any one of all the things which the Lord his God has commanded not to be done, and he becomes guilty, … (Leviticus 4:22)
Now if anyone of the common people sins unintentionally in doing any of the things which the Lord has commanded not to be done, … (Leviticus 4:27)
These verses specify sacrifices for sin for these three groups of people, who are at different levels in society. The word "unintentionally" appears in each one. The Bible never specifies an animal sacrifice for a sin committed intentionally. That is because a sin committed with that heart is a declaration that you are king and God is not.
That's really where Eve's heart was at. She wanted to be like God.
This is why it matters whether Adam and Eve were tricked or deceived. A deceived person knows what is wrong but has been convinced to do wrong anyway. A tricked person does not know he is doing wrong. It matters to God because an intentional sin is like a slap in the face to him.
If we accept that Adam was not there, other verses fall into place. Paul makes sense because Eve's sin was more serious. So Paul is saying that difference in seriousness was one of the basis that God used to decide who would lead.
Adam was correct in saying that he was tricked, but he is not correct that he was sinless in all of this. God corrects him by saying he trusted Eve too much. Eve had a higher place in his life than she should have had. Adam was responsible to be sure he didn't eat the fruit. That responsibility could not be delegated to Eve.
When Eve ate the fruit, she was changed. She realized what she had done and how the snake had deceived her. Instead of admitting the failure, she came up with a different plan, one she would have never thought of before the change. She would trick Adam into eating the fruit.
Now we are finally back to the original verse and the meaning of "with" or "together". Eve tricked Adam so that they would be together in this matter. She didn't want to be the only one who had sinned. That would be really uncomfortable when God arrived.
We can now say that Adam was not there when Eve sinned. To assume otherwise turns Paul into a liar and just makes no sense.
I think a lot of the people who say Adam was there have not really thought it through. Unfortunately that idea requires a person to have a different explanation for what Paul is saying.
This is usually accomplished by claiming that Adam's sin was different from Eve's. This usually comes as the idea that his sin was that he was the head but he didn't stop Eve from eating the fruit. This is often presented as a greater sin than Eve's sin. This is necessarily further twisted to say that Adam was given headship as a punishment.
This leaves the world upside down. The head role that Eve desired so much must now be seen as punishment for Adam. It also leaves us with the bizarre notion that Adam failed as the head and is therefore given the position of head as a punishment.
There are other problems with that idea. Adam clearly believes that his sin was eating the fruit. God doesn't contradict that.
Nowhere does the Bible say that there was a commandment for Adam to stop Eve from sinning or that his failure was in not stopping her. Adam was the head of Eve from the start but it isn't clear that Adam was in charge of her, in the sense that we use that word. Yes, she was tasked with being a helper, but she seems more independent before the sin. God's judgment, after the sin, in the part spoken to Eve, is that Eve would be more needful of him. That he would rule over her seems to be a consequence of that. So it seems that a tighter relationship between them is being created, one where the man can help the woman in her weaknesses.
Nowhere in the Bible does a person become guilty of a sin for failing to stop someone from sinning. The truth is that we can't stop someone from sinning. If they are a hand's grasp from sinning, they have already determined in their heart to sin, and have, therefore, sinned. We are not guilty of the sins of others. They have freewill.
It isn't even possible to physically stop a person from sinning. Like a beached whale, the person will just go somewhere else and beach himself there.
As head, Adam was responsible for those under him. That means he is to teach and to correct. Here again we see a hint of this early independence of Eve. God would be expected to have Adam deal with Eve, but God "micromanages" by dealing directly with her.
We do see a hint that Adam was working in that role of teacher. Eve says God said she isn't even to touch the fruit. She didn't get that from God.
It isn't likely she added "don't touch" herself because those are the words you give to someone else to fortify them against doing wrong. We say to our children, "Don't open that box. Don't even touch it." That expression shows suspicion that they will be tempted to open the box and that the first step will be to touch the box.
Those added words must have come from Adam. Thus, they indicate that he saw how Eve was drawn to the fruit, just as the snake saw. Like us, he would have said, "don't even touch" to impress on her the importance.