When is it sin?

[Reformationist]

Free will is the ability to choose right or wrong.

I assume by "right" you mean what God deems as "right," correct? If so, I don't deny that Adam and Eve, pre-Fall, had the ability to determine and choose between right and wrong. We cannot, however, discount the truth of their original created nature. God created Adam and Eve to desire to do the Will of God. They did not wrestle with a fallen nature as does post-Fall mankind. When tempted to disobey God the only desire they would have initially had is to obey and please God. And, they were "free" to do so.

God placed the forbidden fruit in the garden--they were tempted by evil through the forbidden.

I don't know what you mean by "through the forbidden" but yes, the fruit was a temptation to them. However, in their original created state they had no desire to disobey God so the temptation to disobey God would have had no power over them. They would have responded to the temptation the same way that Christ responded to the temptations that He faced. If they desired to obey God when tempted they would have done so. The fact that they, not only desired to disobey God, but actually did disobey God shows that they, at that point, already had sinful desires. How could their desires change from only desiring to obey God to desiring to disobey God? Any desire they may have had to change their desire from good to bad is a bad desire in itself and by the words of Christ it would have been morally impossible for them to desire such a thing. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit. Adam and Eve, being good fruit, could not have, on their own, desired to disobey God. It went against their very nature to even desire such a thing. Something external to them had to have changed their desires. What could that external thing have been?

They believed what temptation told them even when it contradicted God's command and they desired it.

What temptation told them? Pray tell, are you suggesting that the fruit spoke to them in a way that changed their desires from good to bad?

They took the fruit because they gave into their temptation or desire.

How can Adam and Eve, who were created with only a desire to please and obey God give into a temptation that was contrary to their very nature? How did they come to have a desire to disobey God?

We are at first told what is right and wrong. It doesnt mean anything to us because we cannot comprehend this. However, when the temptation is placed in front of us, we then have a choice to choose right or wrong.

Okay. And why do we choose one way or the other?

Adam and Eve gave into that temptation. Jesus in his humaness was tempted as well and yet he was without sin. He did what adam and eve couldnt.

Why couldn't Adam and Eve resist temptation and remain sinless?

God bless

 

[suzie]

Reform-

Adam and Eve were created with free will to choose. If God had constructed the Garden of Eden so that there were no rules and no way for Adam and Eve to do wrong, then Adam and Eve would be effectively forced to obey God. In order for us to be free - which in this case refers to the freedom to follow or ignore God - we have to be able to make choices. Adam and Eve couldn't have chosen to follow God if they literally had no other choice.

They were tempted. They chose to sin. They desired what they were not to have. It became desirable to them. It wasnt evil within them, or intent to sin, but desire to disobey was greater than their desire to obey. They knew this was not what God wanted, but they went ahead anyway. Why? They desired what they did not have.

The Bible never says Adam and Eve were perfect. It also never says they were incapable of sinning. Rather, the Bible only shows that they were very good, and they were "sinless", in that they had not sinned. They were still capable of exercising free agency and able to make a choice about sin.

Though Adam and Eve lacked knowledge of good and evil before eating from the tree, that doesn't necessarily mean they had no understanding of obedience and disobedience, or that they were totally ignorant of right and wrong. Even today, we lack a complete understanding of good and evil - we continually debate and question various moral issues - yet we are not completely ignorant of good and evil either. God explained to Adam both what he was not to do (eat from the tree) and what the consequences of disobedience were (death) in Genesis 2:16-17. In other words, God taught them that eating from the tree was wrong, so they did know it was wrong, even if they were ignorant of other ethical matters. Eve clearly understood the command and the negative consequences, for she was able to explain it to the serpent

 

[Reformationist]

Adam and Eve were created with free will to choose. If God had constructed the Garden of Eden so that there were no rules and no way for Adam and Eve to do wrong, then Adam and Eve would be effectively forced to obey God. In order for us to be free - which in this case refers to the freedom to follow or ignore God - we have to be able to make choices. Adam and Eve couldn't have chosen to follow God if they literally had no other choice.

Who said they had no other choice? I didn't. What I said was that they originally lacked the moral ability to sin. They most certainly, as creations of God, had the natural ability to choose to disobey God. The issue here isn't whether they could disobey God. They did disobey God. The issue is that, at least originally, they had no desire to disobey God because they were created with only a desire to please Him. Something had to change that. We cannot act contrary to the greatest desire we have at the time we are faced with a moral temptation. If our greatest desire is to obey God at that moment then we will obey God. If our greatest desire at that moment is to disobey God then that is what we'll do. We must always act according to our greatest desire when faced with a choice.

They were tempted. They chose to sin.

Yes. I'm not disputing this.

They desired what they were not to have.

Why? Why, when they were in perfect communion with God and originally desired only to please God, because that's the way they were created, would they begin to desire what they were not to have? Morally that would be impossible for them. Their desire was always to obey God. Even the desire to change their desires from good to bad is impossible because they only had good desires and that is definitely a bad desire.

It became desirable to them. It wasnt evil within them, or intent to sin, but desire to disobey was greater than their desire to obey.

It most certainly was a willful intent to sin. They didn't sin accidentally. They knew they weren't supposed to disobey God. Tell me, how did two people who were created with only a desire to please their Creator ever desire to disobey more than they desired to obey?

They knew this was not what God wanted, but they went ahead anyway. Why? They desired what they did not have.

Why did they desire it? They were morally upright creations. They only had righteous desires. They cannot have desired what God said not to because that would go against their very nature, which only desired to obey God.

The Bible never says Adam and Eve were perfect.

Nor am I.

It also never says they were incapable of sinning.

They were not naturally incapable of sinning. However, as they were created they could never desire to sin so they never would sin. Something had to change their desires. They couldn't do it themselves because even desiring to disobey goes against the nature they were created with. Satan couldn't do it. He too is a created being and cannot force someone to desire something they don't already desire. The inanimate objects, like the fruit, could not force Adam and Eve to desire to disobey God. It has no power over them.

Rather, the Bible only shows that they were very good, and they were "sinless", in that they had not sinned. They were still capable of exercising free agency and able to make a choice about sin.

Hello!!! I agree that they were able to make a choice about sin. What I'm saying is that, given the nature they were created with, their only choice, had their nature stayed the same, would have been to choose not to sin. Something, or someone, external to them changed their desires.

Though Adam and Eve lacked knowledge of good and evil before eating from the tree, that doesn't necessarily mean they had no understanding of obedience and disobedience, or that they were totally ignorant of right and wrong. Even today, we lack a complete understanding of good and evil - we continually debate and question various moral issues - yet we are not completely ignorant of good and evil either. God explained to Adam both what he was not to do (eat from the tree) and what the consequences of disobedience were (death) in Genesis 2:16-17. In other words, God taught them that eating from the tree was wrong, so they did know it was wrong, even if they were ignorant of other ethical matters. Eve clearly understood the command and the negative consequences, for she was able to explain it to the serpent

I never purported otherwise so I'm not sure what your point is.

God bless

 

[suzie]

Reformist-

Something, or someone, external to them changed their desires.

Exactly!! Temptation caused them to change their desires. They desired what they did not have and it became more important to have this knowledge than to obey God.

 

[Reformationist]

Exactly!! Temptation caused them to change their desires. They desired what they did not have and it became more important to have this knowledge than to obey God.

Temptation cannot change your desires. What you're saying is proven to be a false assertation in the Bible. And it is very clear that what you're saying is false.

Christ was tempted in every way that we are. It is important to distinguish the nuances of the word tempt. We can say that Christ was tempted to disobey in every way but that He was never tempted to disobey. I can say, "suzie, you can mail me a check for $100." Surely I have tempted you but you are most likely not tempted. See the difference?

If you do not already desire to send me $100 then you aren't really tempted to do so, even if I tempt you.

It's the same thing with Adam and Eve. If they didn't already desire to disobey God then the temptation of the devil or the temptation to disobey and eat the fruit would have no power over them.

 

[suzie]

What you're saying is proven to be a false assertation in the Bible. And it is very clear that what you're saying is false.Christ was tempted in every way that we are. It is important to distinguish the nuances of the word tempt. We can say that Christ was tempted to disobey in every way but that He was never tempted to disobey. I can say, "suzie, you can mail me a check for $100." Surely I have tempted you but you are most likely not tempted. See the difference?

If you do not already desire to send me $100 then you aren't really tempted to do so, even if I tempt you.

It's the same thing with Adam and Eve. If they didn't already desire to disobey God then the temptation of the devil or the temptation to disobey and eat the fruit would have no power over them

No, reformist, to tell me to mail you a check for $100 would not be a temptation. For you to send me a check with money that I was not to keep would be a temptation. I would think I could gain from that. I wasnt looking for your money, but you sent it to me. Temptation isnt temptation unless it stirs some desire within. Christ was tempted in his humanity. He felt the desires we have as humans, however, he did not sin. Adam and Eve knew they should not eat from the tree. They were not looking to eat from the tree until the serpent tempted them with knowledge. They didnt desire to disobey God but temptation drew them into sin. They desired to have knowledge. Then they acted on it.

 

[Reformationist]

No, reformist, to tell me to mail you a check for $100 would not be a temptation. For you to send me a check with money that I was not to keep would be a temptation.

You are the most argumentative person I've ever seen on this MB. There are to different meanings for "tempted." Whatever scenario you feel helps you understand is fine by me. The point is, "tempted" is a verb, i.e., what someone does to someone else, and, "tempted" is an adjective, i.e., a word to describe how you feel about a particular stimulus. I'm not going to get into a grammatical discussion with someone who won't take the time to consider the obvious nuances of a word. It's pointless and, to be honest, not something I'm interested in.

Adam and Eve knew they should not eat from the tree. They were not looking to eat from the tree until the serpent tempted them with knowledge. They didnt desire to disobey God but temptation drew them into sin. They desired to have knowledge. Then they acted on it.

Right. Their greatest desire when faced with the moral choice of obeying God or disobeying God was to disobey God, so that's what they did.

The problem arises because Adam and Eve were not neutral beings with regard to their desires. They were created with a natural desire to please their Creator. Something changed that. I've already explained that the source of that change had to be external to them because the very desire to change your desires from good to bad is a bad desire and it's not one that a good creation, with no fallen desires, would have. That external thing cannot have been satan because, like Adam and Eve, he was a created being. Just like I cannot change your desires, he could not change theirs. He can tempt them but if they don't desire what he tempts them with then it would result the same way as temptation resulted when Christ was tempted. It cannot have been the inanimate, impersonal objects present on the scene at the time of their transgression. They, too, exert no power to change the desires of a person. So, here are our suspects:

• Adam
  Eve
  satan
  God
  The birds and the bees and the rocks and the trees

We've discussed that it can't have been Adam, Eve, satan, or the impersonal objects on the scene, i.e., birds, bees, etc.

Who do you think that leaves? Was God there? Could God have had a motive for wanting his creation to fall into sin? Did He have the means (power) to make it happen?

The answers to those questions are God, yes, yes, yes.

If you studied this a bit more in depth you might understand it a bit better. I recommend Almighty Over All by R. C. Sproul to start with.

 

[suzie]

The Bible records that the serpent only spoke twice to Eve, but this was enough to offset the trust she had in her Creator. Scripture says that Adam and Eve gave in to the temptation of the serpent.

So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree desirable to make one wise, she took the fruit and ate. She also gave to her husband with her, and he ate (Genesis 3:6).

Saw, Coveted, Took

There was a threefold progression of Eve's sin. She saw, she coveted, she took. The Book of James says of temptation:
But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed. Then, when desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is fullgrown brings forth death (James 1:14,15).

The same threefold progression that caused Eve to sin is outlined in the New Testament.

For all that is in the world—the lust of the flesh (good for food), the lust of the eyes (pleasant to the eyes), and the pride of life (desire to make one wise) is not of the Father but of the world (1 John 2:16).

 

[MikeMcK]

bump