The culpability of Adam and Eve

General
1

The story of Adam and Eve is interesting to me in relation to the culpability placed on them as to the decision they made to disobey God’s command in the Garden of Eden.

From what I gather, The Church teaches that even though Adam and Eve had no experiential knowledge of good and evil, they had “infused knowledge” of right and wrong (even before their choice to disobey) and therefore were culpable for their decision. Can someone explain that further?

Adam and Eve’s first act of disobedience is indistinguishable from a toddler’s first act of disobedience in terms of what they could understand. Even if a parent tells a small toddler, “Don’t touch that.”, the toddler in their first act of disobedience has no real understanding of the command, the seriousness of the parent’s directive or the consequences. Zero understanding of the command. A toddler is completely trusting (as Eve was of the serpent) and also does not distinguish or have “infused knowledge” that their parent/parents are the sole authority. The toddler is not culpable.

In Eden, there was no death, no known evil, no known Adversary, nothing counter to God that Adam and Eve were aware of before their choice. Everything in Eden was equally good. God never told them: “Listen only to me. There is deception in this garden.” Moreover, Genesis 3:6 says: “The woman saw that the tree was good for food, pleasing to the eyes, and desirable for gaining wisdom. So she took some of its fruit and ate it; and she also gave some to her husband, who was with her and he ate it.”

Eve didn’t say: “I know God said we shouldn’t eat this fruit, but let’s do it anyway.”. Adam didn’t say: “Wait, God said we shouldn’t eat that fruit.”

Eve sees good, not danger, pleasing, not forbidden, desirable, not deceptive. Adam simply eats, he doesn’t evaluate or morally deliberate. Neither weighs alternatives (there were none in Eden). There was no sense of rebellion, distrust of God and no sense of danger on their parts. It was toddler-level cognition on their parts. They didn’t understand enough for their choice to count as real moral responsibility. The insistence on their full culpability is philosophically problematic.

2

Well…I have a different spin on this story, but that’s because intellectually the story doesn’t make much sense to me.

However, what I think went on isn’t important. We’re talking about what’s in The Holy Bible, not what other ancient text had to say.

So, in the context of what we know about Adam and Eve, I’ll be honest with you, I have not heard of this. May I ask where you got this information from? Because to me, if a person has “infused knowledge” of right or wrong, then Adam and Eve would’ve known from the get-go what would have happened if they ate from that tree. Yes, they would only carry knowledge of what would happen if they did eat from that tree, but you would think that with that knowledge they wouldn’t give into temptation as easily as they did.

But…the problem I have with that is, that by eating of that tree they realized they were naked. So that tells me that, if Adam and Eve actually did have knowledge prior to eating from that tree, apparently they didn’t know everything. Either that or they were knowledgeable in most things but not in cases of what is truly right and what is truly wrong (because again they ate from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil).

But, I have all sorts of problems with the Adam and Eve story. If you wish to know my thoughts you can private message me (cause I don’t want to spam the forums with a civil debate). But where did you get this information? Cause now I’m curious lol.

3

St. Paul wrote that Eve was deceived, but that Adam was not.

4

One position I have heard (and it makes sense) is that Adam was culpable, because God specifically gave the command to Adam (Geneses 2:16-17) before Eve entered the world. We can assume that Adam told Eve about the warning from God, because Eve tells the serpent about the rule in chapter 3, verse 2-3.

The Early Church Fathers point out how Christ is the new Adam and Mary is the new Eve. Where Eve played a part in the fall of man, Mary played a part in bringing about the Redemption of mankind. Adam’s sin brought forth sin and death into our world and Jesus brings forth reconciliation and new life in Christ.

Where Eve and Adam disobeyed The Father, Mary and Jesus chose to be obedient to The Father.

5

I recall the Adam/Christ and Eve/Mary typology, so that tracks. My point is simply that none of that addresses the fact that Adam and Eve had no prior awareness, no prior experience with right and wrong at the moment of the Fall. They were making their first moral choice ever, structurally similar to a toddler’s first act of disobedience. That’s the issue I’m trying to examine.

6

I think it is also important to ask what was the tree of knowledge of good and evil? There are hints in some of the serpent’s persuasions (Genesis 3:1-5).

“…you will be like God.”

God is God and we are not God. Many think they are gods today or ignorantly believe they are above God in their knowledge.

Isaiah 5:21 warns, “Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes and clever in their own sight.”

It is interesting that part of the serpent’s tactics was saying, “God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened…” (Genesis 3:5).

He is presenting it as if God doesn’t want you to have this knowledge. He wants to keep it for Himself. That isn’t fair.

Some advertisers use this same tactic today, because it still works on many! “The government is keeping this information from you” or “Big greedy corporations don’t want you to know this…” Depending on the target audience, the villain changes.

The serpent tries to convince Adam and Eve that the villain is God.

One of the reasons some music artists sell so well to teenagers is because many at this age see their Parents as trying to keep them from listening to certain types of music. And the result of this is often rebellion. They mistake the artist who is selling them lies for their hero.

It is interesting that we call an individual who deceives others as a con-artist?

Prior to becoming President of the Divided States of America, Donald Trump put out a book titled, The Art of the Deal (1987).

The serpent, in a sense was not only a con-artist, but also a deal maker, or rather a deal breaker : )

One of the things that I have heard said about the Devil is that he cannot create new creations, but rather perverts creation. So, he takes the works of art that God has created and mimics it to pass it off as something good and authentic. The word mimic stems from the Greek word mīmikós, which means “to mime” or “imitate.”

The serpent is an imitator and a deceiver.

And to the deceiver, he does not view himself as culpable for conning individuals, because after all, they consented or took the deal that they did not have to.

So, going back to is Adam and Eve culpable? I would say that they are culpable of disobeying The Father, but I would also say that the serpent is culpable of deceiving the couple. And because, Biblically speaking, the man is the head of the household, Adam is more culpable than Eve and the serpent may be more culpable than both Eve and Adam, but The Father cares more about His children than he does for a snake. And that is why The Father sent His only begotten Son to free us from sin and death (John 3:16). That is The Good News.

7

I think obedience is something that is ingrained in our DNA from the time of creation. Though, they might not have had a word for good, a child (who cannot understand good and evil) naturally knows that it is good to be obedient to their loving Father and Mother, but because of the fall, we have a concupiscence to disobey. Especially when we hit the teen years and many of us are/were convinced by the world that we know better than our Parents and that our Parents want to keep us from being “free” while at the same time becoming enslaved to sin.

I wonder if Adam and Eve were created as late teenagers or early twenty year olds. That is something that I’ve never really thought about. They say that our brains are not fully developed until about 25 years of age (for men and maybe a little younger for women). I have the suspicion that God did not create Adam to be a forty year old man (not that that’s old, but rather wise : )

8

I’m grateful for our theological communications, Cade and I appreciate your responses. One aspect that I appreciate and wish to thank you for is your adherence to keeping discussion civil and not take things personally.

Are you saying that Adam & Eve had concupiscence before the Fall and that they had diminished impulse control (ie like an adolescent)? If so, are you also saying they had diminished culpability?

It’s a natural inclination for humans in present day and in our “fallen state” to retroactively apply post-Fall realities to Adam and Eve to explain their action, but I want to laser focus on their state, pre-Fall when they were completely innocent in all respects, living in a perfect place with no known (to them) evil, deception, etc. Equating their states prior and up to their very first act of disobedience as that of a very small toddler committing their very first act of disobedience is valid. In both cases, they’re completely trusting of everything, even if they were told, “I am your authority figure. Don’t listen to others who tell you something different (they were not told that). Obey me or suffer consequences.”, they have no reference point, zero prior experience and no real basis for making a reasoned decision. We need to avoid applying post-Fall “anthropology”, for lack of a better word with pre-Fall anthropology.

The reason for my post is to focus on and ask for explanation based purely on Adam & Eve, pre-Fall and their situation as it was, up to and at that point.

9

I am not. Concupiscence is a result of the fall, but this does not mean that Adam and Even could not be deceived prior to Concupiscence. I could be wrong here, but this is what makes sense to me.

I understand what you are saying. And I do think Adam and Eve do get a lot of flack for things that any one of us might have fallen for in our youth.

I don’t think “knowledge of good and evil” is quite what we mean by it today. I don’t know that it literally refers to ignorance of what is good, but rather adopting what the world says is good or bad vs, what God says is good or bad. Does that make sense?

I believe Adam and Eve knew deep down that disobeying The Father is not good, but were momentarily convinced by the deceiver that God does not want what is best for them, while also dangling this shiny object in front of their face. Who would not like to be like God?

How many times have you heard, or maybe have we, when we were children, said that we cannot wait to be an adult, because then we get to make the rules. And then you get older and realize that we still do not get to make the rules truly.

I have another analogy that relates to your question. If someone is drunk and in a state where they are easily manipulated, is the individual still culpable for his/her actions while in that state of influence? Clearly, the one who is doing the manipulating is culpable. In some ways, I guess you could call it diminished culpability for the individual(s) who chose to participate in allowing him/herself to be in such a state, but there is still culpability.

10

Yes,a post-Fall person in a drunken state could be culpable. I’m not an expert on the degrees of drunkenness. I don’t drink or get drunk. I know there are degrees of drunkenness where a person “blacks out” and has a complete lack of memory of that time and their actions during that time, but I don’t think that’s what you’re referring to.

My post in summation is not understanding how a rational creature can be fully culpable for failing to detect deception when the creature has no prior concept of deception, no experiential reference point for deception, no reason to suspect deception, and no warning that deception exists. Given that all of these were true of Adam & Eve, post-Fall, they fit the definition of being a Patsy. I say this not to blame or malign God because my position is that God as Omniscient can do literally whatever God wants and there’s no useful reason for critiquing God’s decisions as such.

11

Good for you! I too have never been drunk in my life, but I have been around some who have been and I do not feel comfortable around them : )

I watch way too much true-crime and this comes up from time to time as a defense. Let’s say that someone drinks to the point that they have blacked out (allegedly) and this individuals has murdered someone you love. Would you be okay with that individual walking free as though no crime had been committed?

I’m not asking if that individual should be forgiven if repentant. I am specifically referring to the culpability of this individual. Should they still be held accountable for murdering someone, even in the state of drunkeness?

Next question, some have lower impulse control than others, even when they are in their natural state. Some individuals steal things and they cannot explain why they do it. We see Hollywood actresses shoplift and they have the money to pay for things.

Or what about serial killers who have this itch to kill someone and the only way to make that itch go away is to murder someone who’s life is devalued (like a lady of the night or the derogatory “lot lizard”).

In all of these cases, and individuals had the choice to not only entertain the evil thoughts, but also act upon them, though they are more prone to being influenced or swayed than others.

Adam and Eve chose to engage with the serpent. They could have walked away. They could have said, “Get behind me Satan!” : ) But, they might have been under his spell. And spells are not always supernatural. Sometimes spells are words of manipulation. Pick-up artists (there is that word again) make a living off of teaching young men how to get women to fall for them using techniques that abuse or mimic biological things that God has designed to be naturally good.

So, again, my position is that there is still culpability, but more culpability on the part of the deceiver. But, again, God is not as concerned about the deceiver as much as He is concerned about you and me. Not because we are special (in a prideful sense), but because we are His children and He knows what is best for us.

12

I didn’t say that I’ve never consumed alcohol or never consumed it to the point of excess. Youthful transgressions a “lifetime” ago. Even then though, I did not care for the sloppy mental impairment and feeling it induces.

You’re right to feel uncomfortable around drunk people. I spent my share of time in bars as a younger man and also worked a law enforcement related job back then where I witnessed the effects of drunkenness firsthand on multiple occasions. Your uncomfortable feeling was likely your senses picking up on how dangerous things can quickly become with a drunk person; especially men. Things can happen/“turn” in mere seconds to violence. The greater the degree of drunkenness the greater the volatility and level of danger. I refuse to engage with a drunk person on any level based on my prior experiences.

1 Like
13

Greeting Pax! Now you are talking about important and meaningful subject matter. I understand that the church will reject my words…but I present them for your consideration.
You have already pointed out that “In Eden, there was no death, no known evil, no known Adversary, nothing counter to God”. We will not find this garden on this planet. This “garden” is a description of the the spiritual realm. The whole narrative of the fall of Adam and Even is an allegorical description.
The serpant: in this allegory: the serpant is the symbal of “temptation”. The serpant is also the symbol of “envy”.
The “apple” is the “fruit”: God speaks of “klowledge”. “Knowledge of the the fruit of the tree of good and evil.” As you have written. In the “garden” there is no duality. There is only “good.” Therefore the question arises: “What is the fruit, the eating of which gives one the taste of the Knowledge of by which one acquires the experience of duality, the experience of good and evil?”
Also you raise the question as to how Adam and Eve had any understanding of the subject of duality, of right and wrong, before deciding to eat the fruit. This raises the subject of “Free will and Deterninism”. And the subject of “Free will and Determiniism” leads us to the subject of “Love”.
God creates us with the ability to love. But when He created us, we were not programmed in such a way that we are forced to love Him. We are created with the eternal freedom to choose. Love without freedom to choose love…is not love. Without the freedom to choose, what is the value of our love? So God created us with the ability to choose, whether we love Him or not.
The opposite of love is jealously, envy. Even in this world, if we love someone, we are happy for them in their success, in their good fortune, in their power. But if we don’t have love in our heart there is a tendency to covet, (“Thou shalt not covet.”). If we love God, we glorify His unlimited greatness, power, authority, etc. But if we don’t love God, or we don’t have love in our heart, we will tend to be envious. Just consider. Everyone in the material world wants to be a great person, a person that everyone respects and fears, a person who has a fan club of followers who worship him, etc.

Therefore, even in the the Graden of Eden, the place of no birth and no death, every soul has the freedom of choice…to love God…or to be envious of God. That temptation is a potential in the hearts of every spirit soul…because we are created with free will. This temptation is symbolized as the serpent, who says, “Go ahead, check it out. What would it be like to have the position of God, to be powerful and independent?” This temptation is the serpant. Therefore Jesus instructs us to pray: “And lead not into temptation but deliver us from evil.”

If we partake of the taste of this fruit…the temptation , to covet the position of God, we immediately acquire “knowledge of good and evil”, and are put out the Garden of Eden, into the material realm, where we have to earn our livlihood “by the sweat of our brow”.
Then we live in the world of birth and death, the world, of success and failure, the world of victory and defeat, the world of comfort and discomfort, the world of sickness and health…and this is the “knoweldge of the fruit of good and evil”.
In this world of good and evil, everyone has a egotistic desire to be a significant person. We want God’s position. “Let every man fear my power. Let every man glorify me. Let every woman adore me. Let me be the wealthiest of the wealthy. Let me be recognied as the most intelligent. Let me be the most beautiful. The most powerful. The most famous. The most equipoised.” These are the qualities of God.
But a problem arises: I am not alone. Every other person on earth has the same desires. This means that everyone is my competitor. I have to conquer and subjugate. Global imperialism becomes the plan. But not all of us are equally powrerful. If I have lessor power, then I can exert my influence through my little business. I can do this in my family structure. I an do this in my relationships. Trying to be number One. Trying to be God.

But God is very kind. Kind and loving. He has placed us here for our rehabilitation. Most of the souls, “the heavenly host”, they abide in the Garden of Eden, the spiritual realm. We are the rebels, the envious. We are born in this condition of envy. It is our “original sin”. God has taken the envy of our hearts, and put us together where we all live, projecting our envy towards each other…in this way we suffer. So much exploitation. Slavery. Imperialism. Wars.
Then He sends His prophets, His sons, His ambassadors, His messengers…Generally we try to kill them. They are trouble-makers. Those who are in power…these men who run the world…they want power, control…these messengers, they are trouble-makers. They have to be removed. They are a threat to the status quo.
And what is the message of Jesus? “Love the Lord with all your heart, all your strength; and love your neighbor as much as you yourself.” “Give up your envy, your covetting nature.”
Right and wrong: These exist only in the material dimension. In the spiritual realm, there is only good. There is no duality. In this world, every good act has a built-in dual nature. No matter what we do in this world, there is a dual side effect. All the men who have tried to do in this world… have been imprisoned or killed. To obtsin our health, plants and animals are killed. To have wealth, there has to be a poverty-stricken group side. We know health, in relation to sickness. This is knowledge of the fruit of the tree of good and evil. This knowlege is given to us so that we become bewildered, frustrated, exhausted. What does Jesus say? “All ye who are heavy-burdened, accept the yoke that I wear. It is so nice.” (paraphrase). What is that yoke? It is the yoke of love of God. Therefore this material world is a spiritual insane asylum created by God for our rehabilitation, our reclamation. Although we are deathless, as spirit soul, we experience death. Repeatedly, until we are ready to hear. “Those who have ears, let them hear.” When we are children, if we don’t pass our grade in school, we repeat, and continue our education from where we left off. This is called “sewing and reaping.”
This perspective is not in line with the Catholic Church. But it makes more sense to a thoughtful mind.

The day will never come when archeologists find a spont on this planet and declare, "We have found the place of the original Graden of Eden. Because the real Garden of Eden is the spiritual realm which is our real home. Everyone on earth is what scripture refers to as “the prodigal son”.

Returning to the subject of Free will Vs. Determinism. There are two masters: God and Mammon. (or God and the Devil). Jesus says that no man can serve two masters. He means that we have to make a choice. We are in service of one of the other. But we are always servants. If we actually cultivate feelings of love for God in our heart, as Jesus instructed, God enters our hearts in a way that makes our every action progressive in our march towards God. And if we turn our backs on God, and act without that feeling of love for Him in our heart, we fall under the control of the dictates of Mammon. In either case we are servant. In this way, our actions are determined. But at every moment we have the responsibility of free will, whether we are opening our heart of God or not. Therefore Saint Francis prays, “Lord, make me Your instrument.” We are either an instument of God, or an instrument of Mammon. People think they are free. We are not. But we are free to choose under which master we are serving. Therefore, being a religious person, or a spiritual person is not a matter of officially being a member of an institution, or participating in a ceremony. Those things can be helpful. But the moment to moment challenge is…are our hearts open to God, or are we official members of a church, while living in forgetfulness?

14

Researching this a bit more I do see that The Church considers the beginning chapters of Genesis, including the Adam & Eve story to be allegorical and mythic stories that are not necessarily fictional, but are meant to convey ideas that address the greater human condition. Noah, for example, may or may not have existed. The Tower of Babel may or may not have happened.

In relation to story of Adam & Eve, that makes more sense than a Sola Scriptura interpretation of the story. My point of this post is that if the Adam & Eve story is to be taken literally, then God would be similar to an unstable and even deranged parent of an early toddler in a similar situation of an early toddler committing their first act of disobedience without any prior understanding, knowledge or experience, in other words, being set up as an innocent patsy.

15

When my Wife was in RCIA our Priest explained that the Church has neither explicitly defined Geneses as either allegorical nor literal, so as Catholic Christians we are free to hold either view. However, he told us that we must believe God created man and woman and that they did indeed disobey God (original sin). Not sure if that still throws a wrench into your understanding, but this is my understanding.

16

I believe that is likely the case up through the Tower of Babel but ending there. I think The Church considers Abraham et al to be historical, the account of which comes right after the Tower of Babel story.

17

The idea to be considered (if one is willing) is that everyone in the material world (other than God’s prophets and messengers) is a willful rebel against God’s Supremacy due to enviousness of God’s position. We can see in the material world, how empire after empire is built as a form of self-glorification, and that every person exercises his own little power of control over the affairs of this world, as far as he is capable. This independent enjoying spirit is the original sin of the soul. The real function of the soul is to seek the enjoyment of God with every thought, word and deed. In this sense, we are all rebels attempting a coup d’etat against God.
Also there are religious movments wherein the members approach God, asking Him to contribute to their personal enjoyment of life in the material world, instead of asking God, “My dear Lord, please help me to live for Your satisfaction.” In this way they are approaching God, asking Him to make the chains that hold them outside of the Garden more strong and secure…all in the name of spiritual cultivation.
The tower of Babel is the metaphor of material advancement with the aim of making life outside of the Garden safe and secure and fulfilling in every way. Technology becomes the God that they turn to for making thier lives perfect. The result is that they all become strangers to each other, and cannot understand each other, are even at odds with each other, which is the situation on earth today.
Then there are the draughts, and floods and forest forest fires, and earth quakes, and tsunamis all over the world today. This is God’s wake-up call to the people of the earth.
And wars. As long as the slaughterhouses of the earth are in operation, there will be wars among the people of the earth. “An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.”
The very people who shed tears when their cat or dog or horse dies…eat other animals as if they are fruits growing on trees, without giving a second thought to the horiffic suffering of these creatures…the chickens, the turkeys, the pigs, the cows…millions killed, on a daily basis, for the pleasure of the human tongue.
Apparently the Essenes, who were followers of Jesus, were vegetarians in the time after Jesus returned to the the spiritual dimension. Religions even teach the followers that animals have no spirit inside their bodies, that they are machines made of mud and water…although they cannot create life in their scientific laboratories. Take a shovelfull of earth and water and try to make it run around. But they have no idea that without the spirit within, even the human body ceases to move. They say, “He is gone.” But the body is still there! Why do they insist that he is gone? Because without the presence of spirit, nothing moves. Not in the man. Not in the animal or bird. But the church will not teach this basic principle. And the result is draughts, and floods and forest fires. After all, every believer will admit, that “God is in control!” “He’s got the whole world in His hands.” Therefore, why so much disaster on earth? This is the feed-back of God, the wakeup call. But no one wants to hear it. Therefore they follow teachers who sanction these atrocities.