Who Sinned First?

[Skip]

To continue then.
Nevertheless the next scene we are introduced to the Serpent.
There are various interpretations re the word 'subtil' and it is generally regarded along the lines of being "cunning/of malicious intention"
As we know, Adam named the Serpent a "serpent" so we can conclude from that, that Adam was familiar with said creature.

Whoa, Sherlock. He'd seen it once, in a parade of thousands of reptiles. That's all we know; there is no reason to suppose he's having any kind of relationship with any of them. (...or he wouldn't have been lonely, right?)

So we know that the Serpent could speak at least one language and be understood.

There's just the one language, I think. Babel hasn't happened yet. No suggestion that the serpent is the only animal in Eden that speaks - only that he's more of a lateral thinker than lions and lambs.

So next bullet point is the words the serpent spoke to Eve.
[Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?]
From this one sentence we have some interesting evidence to examine.

Firstly: It is what is known as a "leading question" - a question that prompts or encourages the answer wanted.
Secondly: The serpent was aware that the god had given specific instructions regarding a certain fruit of a certain tree.

Sure. God probably went around telling all the creatures to leave his k-o-g-a-e tree alone, and they complied, having no particular interest in it and plenty of other food. But this new girl appears more curious; up for a shot at wisdom.

[And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.]

1: Where did the serpent get this knowledge from?

Eavesdropping on the gods, probably. He'd got this god's number, anyway: all bluster; no follow-through. Also, there is a suggestion here that God isn't allowed to kill them, once they become self-aware - i.e. godlike.

2: Was this knowledge true? [in relation to the bullet points about the story.]

Evidently.

Back to that leading question. Since we know that the serpent already had the information re the forbidden fruit, he framed his question to the Woman in order that the woman would focus upon the one tree which she had been told "not to touch or eat of" because that was the tree the serpent wanted the Woman to focus on.

Of course he has an agenda.

We can see clearly here that the Woman believed that they were not even to touch the fruit and told the serpent as much. Since the serpent knew that this was not actually part of the gods instructions, the serpent had identified a possible weakness in the Woman's argument. Therefore IF it could get the Woman to simply touch the fruit and she did not 'surely die', then she would most likely also then eat of the fruit.

You don't need quite so much subtlety. She wanted it anyway - it's the Pandora situation again. (I wonder why all the myths show women as more curious, and all cultures bar them from studying science for 2000 years.) All he did was reassure her. She had never heard a lie - didn't have any reason to doubt the last thing she was told.

But what was the serpents motivation for getting the Woman to eat the fruit and die? We can examine that soon...

Why should he want her to die? He knows God was bluffing. And he knows why: God never told the man and woman about the other, more important tree. We may be forgiven for assuming that he figured, if he could scare them off Knowledge, they'd never guess about Immortality.
He's making mischief because he's bored... According one (very popular, much later) story, because he's jealous and wants to deprive God of his favourite toy. Or he's liberating captive animals. Or inventing the concepts of informed consent, choice and autonomy. Or helping a thwarted mind fulfill its potential.
... Or inventing sin, confident that God will jump at the notion of damning anybody who disobeys him; soon the barracks of the netherworld will start filling up with soldiers...Well, that's if God curses humankind with an uncontrollable sex drive and thirst for power. (Which he proceeds to do in another few verses.)
Of course, the serpent hasn't metamorphosed into Satan yet, but the readers have that image firmly in mind.

[Skip]

Your examination of the evidence seems to be all over the place.

Sequential, according to the King James.

the focus of this thread is to try and identify who of the pair actually sinned first

Obviously: neither. Sin hadn't been invented yet and hadn't happened yet.
Disobeyed first: Eve, by a minute or so.
Tacitly transgressed: the serpent, who hadn't been explicitly told not to talk the woman into tasting Knowledge, but was aware that she had been forbidden to.

[Dontaskme]

Can you give an example from the story where it shows us that Eve did not know?

For example, If you are told not to do something and that to do so was wrong, and you did it anyway...does the story convey this information?

According to the story. The very first human being on earth wouldn't have known anything for obvious reasons. So in order to know something this first human being would have to cause an effect, and the effect would be known instantly in the moment of it's cause. This is commonly known as being aware of a thought, which appears to cause a division, whereby there is a something aware of something else, even though the apparent split is only ever happening as one unitary action.

Knowledge can only become available to the very first person in the realm of cause and effect duality, as and through a knee jerk reflexive reaction, when the subject is aware of an object appearing to be outside of itself, when in fact it's always within the subject only, appearing as an illusory twoness because the reaction was a only a response to what is always a unitary action. Only reactions are known, as knowledge dictates after the event has already happened. In other words, knowledge is a fictional story within the real unknowable witness.

Adam and Eve are characters within the fictional story, fictional characters do not have a real reality, they exist as thoughts only, within the real reality which is the unknowable witness.

The biblical story is open to interpretation, so there will be many interpretations that will all differ according to what flavor is being proccessed by the reader- even though each interpretation is nothing but a unique appearance within the same one real unknowable reader, aka the witness.

I know that's not the answer you wanted but I just thought I'd throw the data in, so that you can do what you like with it. It's just the way I personally interpret the Biblical story.

.

.

[DPMartin]

Adam or Eve?

read the text, Eve

[VVilliam]

The serpent was aware that the god had given specific instructions regarding a certain fruit of a certain tree. Where did the serpent get this knowledge from?

Eavesdropping on the gods

Nope. As the story goes, the god instructed Adam regarding the fruit of the trees in the garden before the god created the other creatures.

As we know, Adam named the Serpent a "serpent" so we can conclude from that, that Adam was familiar with said creature.

Whoa, Sherlock. He'd seen it once, in a parade of thousands of reptiles. That's all we know; there is no reason to suppose he's having any kind of relationship with any of them.

Since the serpent is one of the main characters in the story, I think it is acceptable to think that relationship would have formed between Adam and the serpent. Especially since it explains how the serpent got access to the information only Adam was told.

So we know that the Serpent could speak at least one language and be understood.

No suggestion that the serpent is the only animal in Eden that speaks -

While it may be that all the creatures could speak, there is only indication that the one [the serpent] was able to communicate with Adam and the Woman.

[Dontaskme]

The serpent was aware that the god had given specific instructions regarding a certain fruit of a certain tree. Where did the serpent get this knowledge from?

The serpent was God in disguise. God is knowledge. And knowledge is nothing, not a thing, and every thing.

[VVilliam]

Next up we have;

And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.

This event in the storyline brings everything together and shows us that it was Adam who sinned first.

Why?

As I have pointed out.

1: Adam must have been the one from which the serpent got the information about the forbidden tree.
2: Adam must have been the one who added to the command "do not touch"
3: Adam used the Woman as a lab-rat to test whether there was any truth to the gods prediction that to eat the fruit one would will surely die.

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.

It is undeniable that Adam was the one who wanted to eat the fruit and gain this knowledge. Perhaps the serpent and he reasoned that the god was keeping knowledge from him and wondering how they could test the theory to see if it were true?
Of course!
Use the Woman!

How do we know this is the most likely case?

We know because bullet points of the story tells us.

Adam was with Eve throughout the temptation. He never raised any points of concern regarding either Eves adding to the gods command [do no touch...further evidence that it was Adam who told the Woman not to touch the fruit] nor did he raise any voice of concern at the serpents tempting his wife to do something they were told not to do.
Clearly this is indicative of behavior of someone with a hidden agenda.

Eve would have seen Adams silent presence during her conversation with the serpent, as indicative of Adams approval.

Indeed, the evidence this was the case, is apparent in the same bullet point. [verse]

And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.

Clearly the Woman had not died, just as the serpent had told her she would not. Therefore, Adam had confirmation it was safe to eat the fruit, and did not hesitate to partake.

Since Adam behaved in such a cowardly, unprotecting subtil manner and used the Woman - "bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh" as nothing more than a guinea pig, it can be said that Adam sinned [acted wrongly] first. He co-conspired against the Woman. [the serpent planting the seeds of doubt etc...in his mind prior to this event is likely what occurred]

[Skip]

Nope. As the story goes, the god instructed Adam regarding the fruit of the trees in the garden before the god created the other creatures.

As the second version of the story goes. I prefer the Chapter 1 version, when the humans are made last.
However, even in the other time-line, there is no indication of how long between the desist order and the fruit-eating, whether the man and woman discussed the desist order, whether any other conversations on that subject took place between named or off-stage characters during that period. The serpent - much later revealed as a supernatural being of great power - might have simply known it without being told.
You choose to believe the serpent could only have been told by Adam; I suggest that there were a number of others ways he might have found out; I threw in the most flippant, for fun.

Since the serpent is one of the main characters in the story, I think it is acceptable to think that relationship would have formed between Adam and the serpent.

Why? The serpent is one of the main characters in this chapter. There's not a word about a relationship with Adam in either version. And how would Adam have known which of the other creatures would soon become a main character?
You were talking about detective work when you first posited this theory; I merely pointed to lack of evidence.

Especially since it explains how the serpent got access to the information only Adam was told.

One possible [and unnecessary] explanation. I proposed another.

As for the communication, what's in the story is a single conversation between the serpent and the woman with no name. There is no indication of previous socializing, linguistic abilities, relationships or sources of information. Nor that any of those are relevant.
According to the story.

[VVilliam]

Nope. As the story goes, the god instructed Adam regarding the fruit of the trees in the garden before the god created the other creatures.

As the second version of the story goes. I prefer the Chapter 1 version, when the humans are made last.

Be that as it may. This thread is focused upon the bullet points of the [other] storyline to do with the advent re which of the two [Adam or Eve] committed wrong first.

However, even in the other time-line, there is no indication of how long between the desist order and the fruit-eating, whether the man and woman discussed the desist order, whether any other conversations on that subject took place between named or off-stage characters during that period. The serpent - much later revealed as a supernatural being of great power - might have simply known it without being told.

It does not matter. What the serpent or the god knew and said is not the main point of this thread topic, which is to find out which of the two humans first acted wrongly.

IF the serpent was as you say, this in itself does not impact upon the fact that it was Adam who sinned first.

You choose to believe the serpent could only have been told by Adam; I suggest that there were a number of others ways he might have found out; I threw in the most flippant, for fun.

Since the stories are given to us in bullet-point form, we can flesh out the story as long as we stay close to the bone of the bullet points.

Since the serpent is one of the main characters in the story, I think it is acceptable to think that relationship would have formed between Adam and the serpent.

Why? The serpent is one of the main characters in this chapter.

I agree. That is why.

There's not a word about a relationship with Adam in either version.

Anything written in bullet point has that disadvantage. The relationship however, is obvious enough. Clearly neither Adam or the Woman are surprised by the presence of the Serpent. This bodes well with the idea that they were familair with its presence in the garden. iow, They had likely conversed with the serpent on any number of occasions, as one might do with a neighbor.

And how would Adam have known which of the other creatures would soon become a main character?

Generally this requires some type of relationship. That is what creates 'main characters' in each of our lives.

You were talking about detective work when you first posited this theory; I merely pointed to lack of evidence.

Which I am happy to correct you about...

Especially since it explains how the serpent got access to the information only Adam was told.

One possible [and unnecessary] explanation. I proposed another.

According to you, the one you proposed was "thrown in flippantly for fun"

I think fleshing out the bullet points is necessary to understand the evidence within said bullet points, and am neither flippant in that, nor doing it purely for fun. {although admittedly I do think detective work is fun]

As for the communication, what's in the story is a single conversation between the serpent and the woman with no name. There is no indication of previous socializing, linguistic abilities, relationships or sources of information. Nor that any of those are relevant.
According to the story.

Nope. According to the bullet points which altogether provide us with an outline of a story.

As such, it requires detective work to flesh out the details in the best way as the bullet points allow. Keep close to the bone re the points made [be non flippant]. The cop at the scene of the crime gives the detective the bullet points. The detective does the rest - fleshing out 'the most likely' story based on said bullet points.

[Skip]

[ a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.]
This event in the storyline brings everything together and shows us that it was Adam who sinned first.

Why, indeed?

As I have pointed out.

As you have posited with zero evidence.

1: Adam must have been the one from which the serpent got the information about the forbidden tree.

Not must - might.

2: Adam must have been the one who added to the command "do not touch"

Or god, or the woman.

3: Adam used the Woman as a lab-rat to test whether there was any truth to the gods prediction that to eat the fruit one would will surely die.

In which case, it would be really, really stupid to take a bite in the very next minute.

It is undeniable that Adam was the one who wanted to eat the fruit and gain this knowledge.

It is by no means even probable.

Perhaps the serpent and he reasoned that the god was keeping knowledge from him and wondering how they could test the theory to see if it were true?
Of course!
Use the Woman!

Perhaps.... Of course, she's the only woman he has; his single most valuable possession and resource. And he doesn't even know what good and evil are or why they should matter to him. So, he's going to
1. sacrifice his queen
2. and God's approval
3.for a fruit he doesn't know whether it's any good
3.and immediately endanger himself? [/quote]
How do we know this is the most likely case?

We know because bullet points of the story tells us.

It doesn't, but we can make **it up.

Adam was with Eve throughout the temptation.

Maybe. Or he might have been looking for her, or he might have heard voices and become curious, and arrived just as she was taking a bite.

He never raised any points of concern regarding either Eves adding to the gods command [do no touch...further evidence that it was Adam who told the Woman not to touch the fruit] nor did he raise any voice of concern at the serpents tempting his wife to do something they were told not to do.

He has exactly one line in the whole story, and sounds like a six-year-old attempting to deflect blame.

Indeed, the evidence this was the case, is apparent in the same bullet point. [verse]
Indeed, we are aware of the authorship of the bullet point.
It's a story, it's just not the Genesis story.

[Skip]

PS That is the most trouble I've ever seen anyone take in the telling of a shaggy-dog joke.

[VVilliam]

He never raised any points of concern regarding either Eves adding to the gods command [do no touch...further evidence that it was Adam who told the Woman not to touch the fruit] nor did he raise any voice of concern at the serpents tempting his wife to do something they were told not to do.

He has exactly one line in the whole story, and sounds like a six-year-old attempting to deflect blame.

Yes. *Not the sharpest tool in the shed.

As to your other arguments [if they can be called arguments] I have already covered those in my past posts and shown without a doubt that the evidence points to Adam being the first of the pair to sin.

Obviously your mind is not that of a detectives.

If you can show improvement in that department, then I would be happy to seriously converse. I lack the necessary interest in jabbering with the *frivolous.

(Others reading my observations may fair better in their appreciation for a job well done.) *wink*

So please don't think bad of me if I ignore any further frivolous comments, as those you have so far offered.

[Skip]

Obviously your mind is not that of a detectives.

Not a corrupt one, anyway.
Try bringing your bullet points into a courtroom, the defense attorney would make mincemeat of them.

(Others reading my observations may fair better in their appreciation for a job well done.) *wink*

What makes you think anyone else has bothered to read them?

So please don't think bad of me

I wouldn't dream of it!
Good night!

[VVilliam]

So - moving on then...after Adam sinned first by allowing the Woman [bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh] who he named "Woman" to be tempted by the serpent rather than standing up in defense of - not only - that which the god had told Adam [and thus preventing a serious outbreak of curses upon humanity from the god] - but also in defense of the which the god had gifted to Adam in the form of the Woman.

Let us examine the next few bullet points.

And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.

The effect of eating the fruit appears to have caused Adam and Woman to feel shame, as if the author of the bullet points believed that knowing 'good' from 'evil' meant that being naked was 'evil' and thus something to be ashamed of.

Or perhaps the author was trying to say that the pair were internally ashamed of their action and this transferred into the external world they shared together as "the need to cover up"...this appears to be what occurred when the god [apparently immediately - but perhaps some days or weeks later] enters the situation, by paying them a visit. They had 'cover up stories' to explain their knowledge of being naked.

And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden.

[interesting to note the author is now referring to the Woman as Adams "wife"]

Hiding - covering up - not wanting to be exposed...So well hidden that the god could not even find them and had to call out to Adam like a parent who has a missing child.

And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou?

Adam come out from hiding and says;

I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself.

Now the extremely interesting question which to this day, [to the best of my knowledge] has not been biblically answered.

Who told thee that thou wast naked?

"Who" indeed. Certainly the bullet points do not indicate anyone told them they were naked.
Then the god asks a rhetorical question.

Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat?

Obviously the god knows Adam has done exactly that, for why else would he be hiding? The god was interested in Adam's answer. [a simply yes might have been all that was required, but apparently more covering up was what occurred.]

Adam answered the gods question by trying to cover up his wrong-doing.

The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat.

What a slithery little coward this man 'made in the gods image' was. Not only does Adam blame the Woman [instead of manning up] but he also implies that it is the gods fault because the god made the Woman from Adams own 'flesh and bone' 'and gave Adam the Woman to be with Adam.' [!]

The god hears Adams excuse and then - seemingly accepting it - [talk about having favorites] the god asks the Woman;

What is this that thou hast done?

The Woman replied:

The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.

Given that it has been established in the evidence of the bullet points of the storyline, that Adam behaved as if he had every intention of eating the fruit if it proved that the Woman survived eating it herself, we can appreciate that Adams excuse is a lie.

On the other hand we can see that the Woman's excuse was the truth.

We can also see that the god was not interested in the details as to who was telling the truth and who was lying...

[gaffo]

Adam or Eve?

Eve