What Would Have Happened if Adam Didn't Eat the Fruit?

[hhodgson]

Hmmm... I will make this interesting..!


Adam, Eve, and the "snake" all sinned. I know that because "they all got punished.."

Romans 3:23
"All" have sinned and fall short of the glory of God."
​

Here are the punishments…

The snake got three punishments:

1. "You are going to lie on your belly…" (Snakes originally had legs and walked upright) but now they have to crawl) Gen. 3:14

2. "eat dirt…" (snakes eat the lowest animals aka mice and rats) because he convinced eve to eat the apple. Gen. 3:14

3. "will cause hostility between you and the women." Gen. 3:15


Adam got three punishments:

1. Has to "work the field" (he used to have all the food he needed (in the Garden of Eden) but now he needs to work for it) Gen. 3:17

2. "Eat from the cursed ground" (painful toil you will eat of it all the days of your life.) Gen. 3:17

3. "sweat from his brow" (thing will not come easy to him anymore for he has to work hard for what he wants. The ground will be full of thorns and thistles) Gen. 3:19


Eve got two punishments:

1. Painful childbirth (Greatly multiply your sorrows and your conception.) Gen. 3:16

2. Men rule over women (Your husband will rule over you.) Gen. 3:16

worth....


Greater works...
_____________
Harry

 

[ABlessedAnomaly]

So do you think that the part of her that was part of Adam heard and entered into the covenant with God that if he ate from the tree that he would die...

It's not that simple, no. But she, and all mankind, is bound to both the Edenic and the Adamic covenants. If it was only for Adam then ONLY he has dominion over the animals and over this earth. ONLY he has the command to be fruitful and multiply. Etc., etc., etc. ONLY Adam and Eve fall under the curses bestowed: pain in childbirth, toil in the earth, death being inescapable. And ONLY Adam and Eve would be included when enmity were put between Satan and the woman.

I don't think so, that was specific to Adam, Adam was told that if he ate from the tree he would die, then God created Eve...

Genesis 3 shows us that Eve was intimate with the commandment. Not only did she know it -- so either Adam or God told her -- but she took it personal: v2 - "The woman said to the serpent, "From the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat;"

God didn't say... Oh and by the way that goes for everyone else too...

Actually He did: check out the difference between H120 and H121 and where and how many times each is used. H120 = mankind/humans; H121 is Adam (proper name).

If you look at the context God spoke to Adam in the singular as a man and not plural as in mankind...

Again look at H120 v.s. H121.

And as for God teaching them both in the garden, we can't assume or imply anything was taught, we just don't know...

While it is true that we should not preach from silence, this issue is far from coming from silence. Chapter 3 shows us Eve with an intimate knowledge of the commandment and its consequences. She not only fully understands it, but she is fully under this covenant -- as is all of mankind.

 

[ABlessedAnomaly]

I agree with Pastor Mike!

Notice when ya read the account.

When Eve ate(made the decision) nothing happened.

Everything changed(happened) when Adam made the decision and acted on it by eating.

If Adam and Eve had then "eaten" of the Tree of Life they would have been "set" in the spiritual state of separated from God instead of "joined" with God.

That is why God guarded the way to the Tree of Life after Adam "fell".

If they had been allowed to eat of the Tree of Life after they fell their could have been no redemption for man.

They would have been "set" in a permanent state of separation from God.

Hi .

You speak of a particular man named Adam (proper name) who sinned. Adam is classified in Strong's as H121.

Strong's H120, which is translated as either man, the man or even adam (and throughout the OT) actually means mankind or humans.

This could turn into quite an interesting conversation....

 

[Optimax]

Hi .

You speak of a particular man named Adam (proper name) who sinned. Adam is classified in Strong's as H121.

Strong's H120, which is translated as either man, the man or even adam (and throughout the OT) actually means mankind or humans.

This could turn into quite an interesting conversation....

Adam was and is a man. Yes, the term is mankind in the sense of creation, all of mankind being "in" Adam and Eve.

In Gen. when Adam is spoke about mostly it is the one man Adam and his actions spoken of.

Why complicate something simple?

 

[PastorMike]

Adam the man was the federal head of the human race, he was the mediator of the covenant God made with him in the garden and as such he spoke for all mankind...

Eve on the other hand didn't...

 

[ABlessedAnomaly]

Adam the man was the federal head of the human race, he was the mediator of the covenant God made with him in the garden and as such he spoke for all mankind...

This is true, yet vacuumous.

Eve on the other hand didn't...

What is unknown here is if her sin would affect mankind. I think there is enough semantic information in the language to show it would.

The reason I say that (and the reason that I will bow out of this thread soon) is that the Bible does not provide support for what could have been, but rather for what is Truth.

1 Corinthians 15:22 (NKJV)
22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive.
​

And in the Greek this is the proper name Adam, not just mankind as I alluded to in the Hebrew in Genesis chapters 1 & 2.

Some use this verse to support Adam's federal headship and rightly so. But this verse has a built in assumption: Adam ate the fruit too!

Biblically, the husband is the head of the wife. So it makes sense, given the facts of the fall, that Adam is the point man. And there is nothing that does or should suppose a direction if Eve sinned but Adam did not. I think there is evidence in the Hebrew language to look at times at Adam, at times at the woman, and at times at mankind (the difference between Strong's H120 and H121, and the fact that the Hebrew word we translate as Eve is not a proper name but a title).

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

This verse has been used to say that the woman was deceived, but Adam went into it eyes wide open, and thus sinned. This is simply not true. In fact the concept of Adam being the federal head has strong support from the fact that Eve also sinned. She was deceived. She knew full well what the commandment was and what the consequences were.

Mankind (H120, not H121) was told not to eat from the tree, that it was sin and that death would follow. Since Adam did eat the bible speaks from his headship over the family, over mankind. If he wouldn't have eaten, I think the bible STILL would have pointed to him as the federal head even through the transgression came through the woman. He should have stopped it; he should not have hidden himself; he should have repented.

I guess it just comes down the hardship of analyzing what might have been.

 

[PastorMike]

This is true, yet vacuumous.


What is unknown here is if her sin would affect mankind. I think there is enough semantic information in the language to show it would.

The reason I say that (and the reason that I will bow out of this thread soon) is that the Bible does not provide support for what could have been, but rather for what is Truth.

1 Corinthians 15:22 (NKJV)
22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive.
​

And in the Greek this is the proper name Adam, not just mankind as I alluded to in the Hebrew in Genesis chapters 1 & 2.

Some use this verse to support Adam's federal headship and rightly so. But this verse has a built in assumption: Adam ate the fruit too!

Biblically, the husband is the head of the wife. So it makes sense, given the facts of the fall, that Adam is the point man. And there is nothing that does or should suppose a direction if Eve sinned but Adam did not. I think there is evidence in the Hebrew language to look at times at Adam, at times at the woman, and at times at mankind (the difference between Strong's H120 and H121, and the fact that the Hebrew word we translate as Eve is not a proper name but a title).

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

This verse has been used to say that the woman was deceived, but Adam went into it eyes wide open, and thus sinned. This is simply not true. In fact the concept of Adam being the federal head has strong support from the fact that Eve also sinned. She was deceived. She knew full well what the commandment was and what the consequences were.

Mankind (H120, not H121) was told not to eat from the tree, that it was sin and that death would follow. Since Adam did eat the bible speaks from his headship over the family, over mankind. If he wouldn't have eaten, I think the bible STILL would have pointed to him as the federal head even through the transgression came through the woman. He should have stopped it; he should not have hidden himself; he should have repented.

I guess it just comes down the hardship of analyzing what might have been.

I don't believe Eve went into it with her eyes opened that is why she was deceived and Adam sinned...

Also I don't believe Adam would have been called to account for Eve's sin if he hadn't eaten...

But again without clear scriptural precedent it is all based on perception...

 

[ABlessedAnomaly]

lol. touche

I don't believe Eve went into it with her eyes opened...

Genesis 3 (me thinks) says clearly that she knew the command and the consequenses. But...

...that is why she was deceived and Adam sinned...

THIS is what I'm wondering about. I know where you get that she was deceived and Adam wasn't, but where do you connect that to "she didn't sin" (ie: her deception wasn't a reason for a sin)?

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

This verse SAYS (a) Adam was not deceived, (b) the woman was deceived. What this verse does NOT SAY is (a) Adam sinned (although we KNOW he did), and (b) Eve did not sin.

In fact "the woman being deceived, fell into transgression" tells me point blank that she in fact DID SIN.

But again without clear scriptural precedent it is all based on perception...

Absolutely.

 

[PastorMike]

Part of her deception I believe is because she didn't fully understanding the facts, if you read in Gen 2

• God said don't eat from the tree
• you will surely die...

In Gen 3 Eve said

• God said don't eat from the tree
• Don't touch it
• You might die

Seems to me her deception began by not knowing or understanding all the facts, seems she didn't fully understand the terms of the covenant...


God gave them to Adam before Eve was created, did Adam pass them on accurately?


I don't know but Eve didn't know them...

 

[ABlessedAnomaly]

I was hoping you had more that this...

Part of her deception I believe is because she didn't fully understanding the facts, if you read in Gen 2

• God said don't eat from the tree
• you will surely die...

In Gen 3 Eve said

• God said don't eat from the tree
• Don't touch it
• You might die

Seems to me her deception began by not knowing or understanding all the facts, seems she didn't fully understand the terms of the covenant...

Not sure which translation you are reading from. NKJV and NASB both have her saying: "you shall not eat it," "don't touch it" and "you will die."

So other than the touch part her version matches what we see in chapter 2. And again, if we were reading somewhere else in scripture we wouldn't be having this conversation -- we would union all the data and use it all, not assume the "odd man out" is wrong in some way.

Mark 11:24
all things for which you pray and ask, believe that you have received them, and they will be granted you.

1 John 5:14-15
if we ask anything according to His will, He hears us. 15 And if we know that He hears us in whatever we ask, we know that we have the requests
​

If we ask then we shall have. But John adds "according to His will." Is John wrong? Did he learn this wrong? No, we take ALL this as Truth and we build the whole of truth from both these sources.

God's Word (to me) is such that it shows us Truth. If there is something that is to be taken as "wrong" then it will be pointed out as wrong somewhere -- God doesn't let us hang on supposition. And certainly there are things that we are not told -- they must not be important to our reason for being here.

In the last chapter of John, in the last paragraph we are told:

John 21:25
25 And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written. Amen.
​

...told explicitely that there are many other things that happened in Jesus' life that simply could not be enumerated and written down. If these things were very important to us then God would have written them down. But for whatever reason we don't need to have them enumerated.

I believe the same to be true in Genesis (and other places in the Bible). We have enough to know what is going on with Adam, with Eve and with the fall of man. Enough to understand what we need to understand. Past that we are in conjecture.

And when supporting conjecture I simply take the route that what is written in the Word is Truth, and it is what is usable, what is known, what is said, what it done -- unless some scripture tells me otherwise. So if Eve says that they couldn't touch the fruit, then they couldn't touch the fruit. God never told us anywhere that she was confused or without knowledge -- only that she was deceived [by the serpent].

So....

God gave them to Adam before Eve was created, did Adam pass them on accurately?

I don't know but Eve didn't know them...

...this I don't completely buy into.

My take: God gave them to mankind. The Life-giver (for that is what Eve means -- it is a title, not a proper name) was formed/seperated out of mankind and male and female were formed. As male and female the formed female either learned of the tree from the male, from God or from both. I side with the latter. For we are given enough information to know that God walked with mankind in the garden. He came back, walking in the garden in the cool of day, after the fall and the man and the woman hid.

When we play games of conjecture we need to be very careful with the Word of God. The Word says that Eve said "nor shall you touch it." I believe that she said this. I believe that she believed this. And I believe that these two statements are true because God walked with mankind in the garden and edified them daily.

 

[Optimax]

Part of her deception I believe is because she didn't fully understanding the facts, if you read in Gen 2

• God said don't eat from the tree
• you will surely die...

In Gen 3 Eve said

• God said don't eat from the tree
• Don't touch it
• You might die

Seems to me her deception began by not knowing or understanding all the facts, seems she didn't fully understand the terms of the covenant...


God gave them to Adam before Eve was created, did Adam pass them on accurately?


I don't know but Eve didn't know them...

Maybe Eve just thought that if eaten it would kill ya, touching it was not a good idea either!

 

[WordofHisPower]

What free online programs are the best to look up these verses in the original language?

 

[Optimax]

What free online programs are the best to look up these verses in the original language?

Try e sword.

Google e sword, that should get ya to it where you can try it and see if ya like it.

 

[ABlessedAnomaly]

Try e sword.

Google e sword, that should get ya to it where you can try it and see if ya like it.

I second that notion....eSword is very, very good.

You have to use the KJV, then press the "#" at the top tool bar -- this turns on Strong's (only in KJV). While word study is not the end all for meaning and definition (especially when a given word can mean many things) it is a good start.

Another place to get in trouble (hee hee) is http://biblos.com