Did the Nature of Sin Change with the Fall? (mental sin)

[Soyeong]

This is a quirky inconsistency that might be the result of theological / Revelation development in the Judeo-Christian tradition. That I've thought about every so often when thinking about Sin etc.


Genesis 2:17-18

17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.”

There is nothing in the passage about such things as touching it, or even fantasizing about it. Eve later on when talking to the Serpent mentions about not touching it, and their are a number of theories we might have for that. 1) Some people have speculated that was Eve somehow expanding on what God said, essentially "going above the line" of scripture figuratively speaking 2) Maybe Adam told her not to do that as a kind of Rabbinic fence, or 3) maybe God somehow expanded on verse 1 in one of those walks he use to take with Adam in the cool of the Garden.

But in theory based on that original scripture and how the later narrative is with the Serpent it looks like things are pretty much about actually eating the proverbial fruit, which incidentally in Middle Eastern culture/tradition is a fig and not an apple. So basically Eve could spend multiple occasions lusting after the fruit, touching it etc. but not actually eating it, and no Fall etc. the bomb does not go off so to speak till that first bite.


I however find the Garden of Eden scenario very interesting compared to when Jesus talks about sin: as far as lust, anger even greed goes. Where the mental life is very important to the point of being equated with completing the physical deed.


So what is your thoughts on this..? Do you think this is something 1) that changed with the Fall, 2) A result of theological development / Revelation, 3) The New Testament take on mental sin was true for the pre-Fall, but the situation is maybe unclear because of the genre, vocabulary or some other aspect of bronze age near eastern antiquity? Why and/or how? etc.

Do you have any other random thoughts on the topic?

Before the Fall, good and evil was true and false, but when our desire enters into the picture, then it corrupts our perception of what is true so that we are not sure whether something is truly good or whether it is just what we desire. There are a number of details that are changed in Eve's account, are how her desire changed her perception. The actions that are righteous or sinful are based on what is in accordance with God's nature and God's nature is eternal, so the actions that are righteous or sinful will never change. The command not to look at a woman with lust in our hearts is just the correct application of the 7th and 10th Commandments against adultery and against coveting in our hearts, not something brand new.

 

[sawdust]

This is a quirky inconsistency that might be the result of theological / Revelation development in the Judeo-Christian tradition. That I've thought about every so often when thinking about Sin etc.


Genesis 2:17-18

17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.”

There is nothing in the passage about such things as touching it, or even fantasizing about it. Eve later on when talking to the Serpent mentions about not touching it, and their are a number of theories we might have for that. 1) Some people have speculated that was Eve somehow expanding on what God said, essentially "going above the line" of scripture figuratively speaking 2) Maybe Adam told her not to do that as a kind of Rabbinic fence, or 3) maybe God somehow expanded on verse 1 in one of those walks he use to take with Adam in the cool of the Garden.

But in theory based on that original scripture and how the later narrative is with the Serpent it looks like things are pretty much about actually eating the proverbial fruit, which incidentally in Middle Eastern culture/tradition is a fig and not an apple. So basically Eve could spend multiple occasions lusting after the fruit, touching it etc. but not actually eating it, and no Fall etc. the bomb does not go off so to speak till that first bite.


I however find the Garden of Eden scenario very interesting compared to when Jesus talks about sin: as far as lust, anger even greed goes. Where the mental life is very important to the point of being equated with completing the physical deed.


So what is your thoughts on this..? Do you think this is something 1) that changed with the Fall, 2) A result of theological development / Revelation, 3) The New Testament take on mental sin was true for the pre-Fall, but the situation is maybe unclear because of the genre, vocabulary or some other aspect of bronze age near eastern antiquity? Why and/or how? etc.

Do you have any other random thoughts on the topic?

Nothing has changed. Lucifer's sin was in his thinking.

Is.14:13 For you have said in your heart:
‘I will ascend into heaven,
I will exalt my throne above the stars of God;
I will also sit on the mount of the congregation
On the farthest sides of the north;

All sin, including the eating of the fruit, is the outworking of one's evil desire within the soul.

James 1:14&15 But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed. 15 Then, when desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, brings forth death.

As long as they wanted to eat the fruit, they would have eventually succumbed. The serpent's words gave them the opportunity to "justify" (in their own minds) and act out their desire resulting in the sin of eating the fruit.

 

[pittsburghjoe]

I have this weird feeling that this picture illustrates what happened as Eve touched the fruit.