Did adam sin out of love for eve? Or because of wickedness?

brinny said: ↑
See post #7.

Click to expand...

createdtoworship said:

I read it, but I did not see anything that I in particularly said against that verse in romans. So if you could please copy and paste my words and please quote how I violated scripture. Again I have never said they didn't sin. just because adam loved eve, did not mean it wasn't sin. I think in part adam justified his sin by thinking "I love her" and if she is punished, if she does die, like God said, I want to die with her. So he attempted to justify his sin due to his love for his wife. But what he was doing was loving another human more than God, which never works out the right way. We are to love vertically first, then out of our love for God and our obedience for God, we love others.

Click to expand...

I think in part adam justified his sin by thinking "I love her" and if she is punished, if she does die, like God said, I want to die with her. So he attempted to justify his sin due to his love for his wife.

Click to expand...

This is not written anywhere in God's Word.

Did adam sin out of love for eve? Or because of wickedness?

brinny said: ↑
This is not written anywhere in God's Word.

Click to expand...

createdtoworship said:

what part? I apologize but you need to make your arguments, and cut and past whatever quotations you want, I made a lot of statments in those sections, and just a blanket statement saying it's not in God's word, is confusing for me. I don't know what part you are referring to. At this point you can say "all of it" if you choose, but again I would not know what part of all of it you specifically want me to talk about.

Click to expand...

See post #21. It's quite clear what i quoted from your post is not ANYWHERE in God's Word.

In answer to the question in the title of this thread, Adam sinned because of wickedness. I addressed this wickedness in my first post in this thread (post #7).

I will not be responding any further to any of your posts.

Thank you kindly.

createdtoworship said:

I look at it like having a marital fight between spouses and they stand before Jesus and he asks them, why are you fighting. They point the finger at each other but they still love each other. See if it was not God there in their midst they would not have been blaming each other. That's typical for any marriage that is in for counseling, for example. But that is not a litmus test for love, at least not IMO. Sometimes true love does not mean you ignore your differences, but that you talk them out, but blaming one another is not the best option.

Click to expand...

so I hope you can see that this doctrine of yours, if you want to be consistent with scripture, requires too many ad hoc assumptions.

Occam’s razor will thus not support that

createdtoworship said:

Thanks for the debate I appreciate it. But I disagree. None of us were there in the garden and the scriptures Don not specify anything about Adams love.

Click to expand...

Okay then, but just to confirm, you understand what Occam's razor stands for right?

createdtoworship said:

If you can fin Occam’s razor in scripture I would rather just see the verses, after all God's word is what matters.

Click to expand...

hmm I will take that as a no then. No biggie, nice discussion with you

createdtoworship said:

sir occams razor from my quick search says "the simplest solution is often the correct one." And while logically that is typically wise for logical deduction and for saving time due to overthinking a matter, Francis Crick once said that elegance science is not always true. For example in biology you have more complicated laws, and it's not so simple and elegant. So with the Bible while it is always true to seek the most basic interpretation, "the plain meaning." Some things are not always best just because they are simpler. For the trinity for example the simplest meaning would be one God and three different offices. But that is not the correct definition of the trinity. The correct definition is three persons within one God, and that is not only illogical, it's more complex than the simplistic alternative of one God, three different job titles.

Click to expand...

Ultimately we have scripture that gave us Genesis 3:12.

The word "love" appeared for the first time in scripture when God instructed Abraham to take his only son and sacrifice him as a burnt offering.

There is a principle in bible interpretation called the law of first mention, basically, the first time scripture uses a term, the meaning during that first mention will be especially important in future usage of that word.

So scripture define love as sacrificing your only son for another, this gels with what the famous John 3:16 used the word love.

What you are doing here is to go out of scripture to claim that Adam loved Eve, that was why Adam ate the fruit even though he knew death would occur.

Now that might be fine, but, as we can see from here, it kind of implies Genesis 3:12 was wrong, and since you need so many ad hoc assumptions to make that hypothesis gel with that verse, it is unlikely to be the correct one.

createdtoworship said:

Sir the law of first mention does not mean first of all that love did not exist prior to abraham offering his son, if that was the case abraham would not love his son UNTIL that day. Which is sort of strange, secondly the law of first mention does not mean that love is defined solely by the first mention of love. I believe what the law of first mention means is that perfect love is sacrificial. It may not be sacrificing one's life persay, but sacrificing part of yourself, your time, your efforts or what not. My wife sacrifices for the home all the time, she will go without new shoes so the kids can have the latest and greatest. That is a perfect love, even though she didn't offer our kids for example in a child sacrificial ceremony to God. So I fail to see what you mean here. Lastly, to say love did not exist until the sacrifice of isaac is to infer God himself did not love man until that time, which would also be wrong.

Click to expand...

I am certainly not saying love did not exist prior to that. I am using scripture to show you how it defines love, that is all.

You told me earlier that

If you can fin Occam’s razor in scripture I would rather just see the verses, after all God's word is what matters.

Click to expand...

You seem to want to let others here know that you are very much into scripture, which is excellent.

But then you go ahead and make all these ad hoc assumptions in order to form a doctrine that scripture happens to be silent on.

createdtoworship said:

I don't think it's far fetched to believe adam loved eve, why would God create a woman from his own rib that he despised. So again scripture may not mention the love part but still we assume it was there. Just as we assume they ate food and defecated on a regular basis, just as much as we assume they breathed air, and slept, and walked on two feet instead of on all fours. Those are all common assumptions that the Bible is silent on but that we still believe, so I would not call it ad hoc at all.

Click to expand...

Okay, so when you meet someone else that tells you what you have stated to me, that he "would rather just see the verses, after all God's word is what matters", how would you reply?

The question of did Adam love Eve can only be speculated upon. The Bible does not say he loved Eve, perhaps he did perhaps he didn't, or perhaps he was quite found of her and love came later.

6 When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. 7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves.

We know that he was with her so we can assume he heard what the serpent said but made no move to object or try and stop things. If he did it must have been so weak or unimportant as to not be mentioned. So it appears as though he listened and was in agreement with eating.

While both knew it was wrong because God commanded them not to eat that is not the same as wickedness, wickedness came after they ate and had the knowledge of good and evil inside of them. Before eating they didn't have this inner knowledge. Eve ate because Satan tempted her and she believed him.

1 Timothy 2:14
And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.

To me that means Satan deceived her in that she genuinely thought she would gain knowledge and be like God and that it would be something good to eat. She was nieve.
Adam wasn't deceived by Satan's words but ate anyway. So if he wasn't deceived that means he knew he would not become like God and/or he didn't believe what God had told him about death. Maybe he took and ate with a blase attitude without concern, but upon eating suddenly realized what a huge mistake he had made.

6 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.