Adam And Eve

[StColette]

[quote name='Madame Vengier' post='1837381' date='Apr 16 2009, 02:09 PM']Uncalled for.[/quote]

No what's uncalled for is jumping to conclusion before taking a look at a dictionary just because you think a particular word is somehow demeaning women. Again let HCF handle her own business.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Justified Saint' post='1836101' date='Apr 15 2009, 09:02 AM']Correct, but insofar as Eve and thus women are considered a subset of creation and humanity, I don't see why Adam's sin requires their plight. Would God have rescinded his curse on Eve and the rest of women had Adam not sinned? Hard to imagine, because Eve repeated God's command not to eat the fruit to the serpent, so she knew the consequences if she did and thus it was just as binding on her.[/quote]
The teaching of St. Athanasios, and the other Eastern Fathers, is that if Adam had not sinned bringing corruption and death into the world, no one (not even Eve) would have experienced any suffering.

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='tinytherese' post='1833053' date='Apr 12 2009, 08:25 PM']So I've heard some people argue that Adam ate the forbidden because he knew that Ever would be banished and that he did it so that he could be with her. So he did it out of love. I know that we can't determine what he exactly was thinking at the time but I thought about it the other day and wondered, "What if Eve had been the only one who at the forbidden fruit? Would she and Adam be apart from each other? What would have happened. Surely, God wouldn't have sent her out alone and unprotected." Thought that it was an interesting topic to discuss.[/quote]

Whatever has been said in this thread doesn't matter... the answer is No. Adam's job was to intervene before Eve ate the fruit. Therefore, he sinned by his inaction, or sin of omission, without even taking a bite.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='LouisvilleFan' post='1837464' date='Apr 16 2009, 02:02 PM']Whatever has been said in this thread doesn't matter... the answer is No. Adam's job was to intervene before Eve ate the fruit. Therefore, he sinned by his inaction, or sin of omission, without even taking a bite.[/quote]
He sinned by eating the fruit in disobedience to God's commandment. The text quoted by Aloysius is ambiguous in both the Greek and the Hebrew about whether Adam was with Eve when she was tempted.

[StColette]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1837458' date='Apr 16 2009, 03:52 PM']The teaching of St. Athanasios, and the other Eastern Fathers, is that if Adam had not sinned bringing corruption and death into the world, no one (not even Eve) would have experienced any suffering.[/quote]

That's very interesting.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='StColette' post='1837471' date='Apr 16 2009, 02:09 PM']That's very interesting.[/quote]
Yes, St. Athanasios taught that if it were simply a matter of trespass against God's commandment that He could (and in fact did) forgive Adam (and by extension Eve as well), but because Adam is the head of mankind his sinful action brought corruption and death to his descendants by removing our common created nature from God's life giving power, so that the effect of his sin began a process whereby human existence itself began to unravel. Christ, the new Adam, became man in order to destroy death by death, and give everlasting life to all mankind.

Edited April 16, 2009 by Apotheoun

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1837467' date='Apr 16 2009, 05:05 PM']He sinned by eating the fruit in disobedience to God's commandment. The text quoted by Aloysius is ambiguous in both the Greek and the Hebrew about whether Adam was with Eve when she was tempted.[/quote]

I suppose it's ambiguous if he was actually there with her or if she went to him, but either way, Adam didn't oppose her.

Another reason to believe his silence played a role in bringing about the Fall is that Jesus' silence played a role in our redemption:

"He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth; like a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and like a sheep that before its shearers is dumb, so he opened not his mouth." -Isaiah 53:7

[Apotheoun]

Speculation about Adam's silence in connection with Eve's temptation being the cause of ancestral sin is not a part of the Church's tradition. To be blunt: Adam, as the head of mankind, caused the fall by eating the forbidden fruit.

Edited April 16, 2009 by Apotheoun

[StColette]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1837481' date='Apr 16 2009, 04:18 PM']Yes, St. Athanasios taught that if it were simply a matter of trespass against God's commandment that He could (and in fact did) forgive Adam (and by extension Eve as well), but because Adam is the head of mankind his sinful action brought corruption and death to his descendants by removing our common created nature from God's life giving power, so that the effect of his sin began a process whereby human existence itself began to unravel. Christ, the new Adam, became man in order to destroy death by death, and give everlasting life to all mankind.[/quote]

I had never heard this. I'll have to look more into this. Wish I would have known this when I did my exegesis for Dr. Minto on this passage.

[Lil Red]

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1833064' date='Apr 12 2009, 05:41 PM']Since Eve wasn't even created when God told Adam to not eat of the Tree of Knowledge, then if she had been the only one to eat it, maybe she might have gotten a lessor sentence. It's obvious from her discussion with the serpent that she was aware of it, but since she wasn't a party to the original contract, a good lawyer might have gotten her leniency.[/quote]
+J.M.J.+
thanks for the laugh.

[Apotheoun]

[i]Below is a post I wrote some time ago on the ancestral sin that may be helpful:[/i]


Death is natural to created beings, because God created them [i]ex nihilo[/i]. Thus, creatures do not contain innately within themselves the power to exist, and this is even true of man when he is first created. In other words, man is created only with the potential to become eternal, but this potential requires that he live virtuously in likeness to God.

Now, in the Byzantine tradition, following the teaching of the Eastern Fathers, there is a distinction to be made between man's being created in the image of God, and his being made in the divine likeness. From the very beginning the image of God is essential to humanity; and so, Adam possessed the divine image in full act, while the likeness to God is acquired through living a life of virtue in synergy with the divine energy, and Adam only possessed that quality in potency. Of course, as the Genesis narrative reveals, Adam failed to "liken" (Gr., [i]omoiosis[/i], i.e., assimilate) himself to God, and by his failure he brought death to himself and to all of his descendants, but death was not what God intended for humanity, although it was something that Adam -- and all men after him -- could choose. That said, it is clear that the ancestral sin of Adam doomed humanity to annihilation, but as the Eastern Fathers explain (and in particular St. Irenaeus and St. Athanasios) the incarnation of the eternal Logos restored the communion with God lost by Adam in the beginning, and opened up once again to man the possibility of integrating his nature with his hypostasis (i.e., person) in order to live virtuously, and in the process to transcend his created existence. This assimilation to God through grace (i.e., divine energy) and virtue is called [i]theosis[/i] (i.e., divinization), and this eternal and uncreated gift of [i]theosis[/i] was part of God’s plan for humanity from the very beginning.

Finally, as far as creation in general is concerned, it is finite by its very nature, and it is only deified by man as a part of his own [i]theosis[/i] (divinization), because man is properly the priest of creation. As St. Maximos the Confessor explained in his “Chapters on Love,” being is given through creation, and ever-being through the incarnation, while ever-well-being (i.e., the vision of God) or ever-ill-being (i.e., damnation) are in the power of each man's will in cooperation with the divine energy.

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1837500' date='Apr 16 2009, 05:32 PM']Speculation about Adam's silence in connection with Eve's temptation being the cause of ancestral sin is not a part of the Church's tradition. To be blunt: Adam, as the head of mankind, caused the fall by eating the forbidden fruit.[/quote]

Hmm... I'm confused because I didn't say Adam's silence caused sin to enter the world. I said it played a role. I suppose that role would be either allowing Eve to eat the forbidden fruit or failing to oppose Eve when she approached him with it, but either way, Adam wussed out and ate the fruit. It's not like he was ignorant of what he was about to do before he did it.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='LouisvilleFan' post='1837598' date='Apr 16 2009, 03:41 PM']. . . I didn't say Adam's silence caused sin to enter the world. I said it played a role.[/quote]
That assertion is a modern idea attributable to something that Dr. Hahn said in one of his books, but it has no support in the patristical tradition.

[HisChildForever]

Where do you think Adam was while Eve was being tempted? Has there ever been any speculation?

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='HisChildForever' post='1837673' date='Apr 16 2009, 04:42 PM']Where do you think Adam was while Eve was being tempted? Has there ever been any speculation?[/quote]
I have no idea where he was, because it is not a part of divine revelation.