I began last week answering some questions of one of the readers. There were actually 3 questions and we covered the first two. Here is the third:
3.) Why does it say Adam brought sin, when Eve broke the rules first?
The passage referred to is Romans 5:12 which says; "Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned."
Several things deserve consideration when answering this question.
"Federal Headship"
First, I want to introduce a term to any who may be unfamiliar with it. "Federal Headhsip" is a term that Theologians like to use in reference to Adam. The idea is, that just like in the human family, the husband is the head of the wife and children, so too, Adam relates to the entire human race. Not that Adam has or had some authority over every human who later lives, but He does have a unique relationship to every human being who has ever lived since all of us (every single one of us) trace our lineage back to his rib.
It is important to point out here, that many in the religious world make what I think is an unwarranted leap when they discuss the "Federal headship of Adam." The idea that is propagated by many is that since Adam is our ultimate ancestor, and the one through whom sin came that we all now inherit a fallen, depraved nature from him. In other words, many people believe that we are born with a compulsion to sin. That we are "sinners from the second we're conceived" as one man put it. I do not believe that to be true. Without getting to far afield from the topic at hand, I will point out that I believe we all answer to God for our own sin (2 Cor 5:10) because we all sin (Ro 3:23) and we all need to be reconciled because we all go away.
Now, I have said all of this simply to make this point: While I believe that some have overextended the implications of Adam's headship, that does not mean there are no implications at all. Adam is God's first created man. He is the one to whom God first calls out in the garden following the sin. And He is guilty. If we can grasp the significance of this relationship between Adam and God, then we can beign to understand one reason that Adam is mentioned as the initiator of sin and not Eve.
A Different Time and Culture
Also, it is important to understand the cultural milieu in which the letter to the Romans is written. Paul's epsitle to the saints in Rome is not written in the post-modern context in which we are reading it. As we read a news story or a journal, or even the Bible we view it, to some degree, through the lenses our teachers and our culture have placed on us. We assume that men and women's opinions and testimonies are all equal...but it has not always been this way. If you can try to imagine a society that just assumes the inferiority of women, even to the point of believing that they are intrisically less intelligent and inferior, then you can picture the first century mindset. Now imagine Paul had said something like this; "now by one woman sin entered the world, and death because of that, since all have sinned." How do you suppose his male readers would have reacted to this statement? I imagine that they would have said things like; "what does that woman's problem have to deal with me." Or; "that explains why women are so ignorant and weak, but what about us men." And before you deny that Christian men could ever be so callous, let me assure you that I have heard "Christian" men say worse things about women in this century.
I am convinced that there is some element of cultural communication to this. However, this is certainly not a stand alone argument. I mean, I do not think that this one point answers the question sufficiently. However, when we coupl it with the understanding of Adam's headship and one other point, it seems to make sense to me.
A distinction with a difference
Go back and read Genesis 3. Do you see any difference in Adam and Eve's mistakes? Do they both break the rules? Yes. Do they both sin? Yes. Is there sin identical? I think not.
The Genesis account says that the serpent was crafty and deceived Eve. What does that mean? If you look at the passage, the devil convinces Eve that what God has said is not true. He assures her that God is just "holding back" from her and Adam. And she falls for it. She takes the bait (temptation) and starts to look at the tree and examine it (lust) and gives in to her desire. But where is Adam during all this? By the time she eats of the fruit he is "right next to her" according to the text. But where has he been during this process of tempptation and deception? We don't know. What we do know is that Eve is deceived and eats, and then she hands a piece to Adam, and what does he do? Does he say; "no, this is wrong?" No! He just eats it. No deception, no struggle, just a blatant diregard for God's order to abstain from that tree.
But the logical question is this; Is one sin worse than another? In one sense no, they both "fall" or create a separation between themselves and God due to their sins. But in another sense, of course there is a difference.
Suppose you won an award from your company because of your long and tireless service to them. Imagine that they gave you a gold watch for 40 years of loyal service. Now imagine two scenarios. In the first scenario your oldest son is showing the watch to your grandchildren because he is overwhelmed with pride. Now maybe you had asked him not to remove it from the box. But he assumes that you are just being a little over protective and takes it out anyway. While showing the watch to your grandkids, one of them tries to get it, and your son pulls it away quickly, losing control and it flies against the wall...and shatters. Soon, your son tells you what happens and you are hurt. He didn't listen, and look what has happened. What's worse is that the company will not replace it, so your son can never fix his own mistake. Now imagine a second scenario. In this scene, your youngest son sees you come home from your retirement party with that same watch. You are beaming with satisfaction over this hard earned accolade, and he watches as you place it in your desk drawer. Several days later you go back to look at it, and it's gone! You search and search for it, but it cannot be found. You are heart broken. Then several days pass and you recieve a receipt in the mail. It's from a pawn shop, and it has your youngest son's name on it. You nearly suffer a heart attack when you realize that your beloved child has committed the ultimate btrayal. He has stolen something that took you a lifetime to earn and sold it! And you realize that he did not even care enough to hide his evil deed from you.
Is there a difference between those two events? Of course there is! This does not diminish the consequences of both actions. Both cause damage, separation, and hurt the Father's heart. But one is obviously more heinous to us. And while we often claim that sin is sin, and sin separates from God, and we infer that God ranks all sin identically. I think we are missing the point. Just because the result is the same of two different actions doesn't mean that the actions are equally hurtful.
Does this correlate to our discussion? I think it might. God was watching when Adam and Eve committed their wickedness and He was listening as Eve was subtily convinced to sin. I know His heart must have broken when she disobeyed His singular request and bite into that forbidden fruit. And how much more when He saw the first of all his creation take that same fruit, without deception, without justification and sink his teeth in, caring not about the heart of his father.
There is no excuse for Eve's sin. It was wrong. But when we understand these facts about the "sin" story. I think it makes sense that Romans 5 would say; "by one man..."
What are your thoughts?
-JC3
Posts
