Why did God tempt Adam and Eve?

[metis]

This curse was given to you ladies for a crime you didn't commit. Why? Do you have Adam and Eve to thank or God?

We all are suffering from original sin...just read the news and you can see evidence for it.

Why did God want us to be so disordered, confused, and have such a fallen nature?

Why give Adam and Eve a test he knows they will fail , and then punish everyone for it?

IMO, I think I can answer these questions with one word: "allegory".

The importance of the Fall narrative is not did these these events occur as written but what are "the meanings behind the words", which is a common Jewish phrase when dealing with interpretations.

So, in brief here's my take: if we sin by disobeying God, we're screwed, [later in Torah] but there's repentance and forgiveness.

 

[Kenny]

It was in response to your vague condescending statement avoiding responding to the substance of the argument.

Hardly

Does not resolve the problem of the 'Fall' and 'Original Sin.'

Jesus resolved he problem

Accounting for time is not an issue here, in could be several thousand to a million years, this does not change the issue of blaming the succumb to temptation of two fallible human beings with the 'inherited guilt' of the suffering, sin, war and death for all human history.

And so we have completed the circle.... A wife told her husband, after they married, that he shouldn't touch another woman and then she thim to the beach and the temptation cause him to sin causing suffering and war OR

13 Let no man say when he is tempted*, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted* with evil,neither tempteth he* any man:
14 But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.
15 Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forthdeath.

Therefore, God is not the tempter nor is He the one that causes people to sin.

Disagree as you wish, there is no evidence of this,

It isn't the evidence that is the problem, it is the interpretation of the evidence

 

[Faithofchristian]

Why ask why? Christ was foreordained to die for Adam and Eve prior to the Garden's creation, says the scriptures.

God did not want Adam and Eve to fail, But on the contrary, God wanted Adam and Eve to exceed to over come the deceptions of Satan's.
Before Eve came to be, How many times do you suppose Adam pass by the tree and was not deceived by Satan's deceptions ?

Only until Eve came to be, then Eve being deceived by satan, then Eve being deceived then Eve gave to Adam. But it was Eve who was first deceived by satan, not Adam.

Satan deceiving Eve, then Satan got Eve to deceive Adam and then Adam took it hook line and sinker. Swallowed the bait.

Satan was not after Eve, actually Satan was more after Adam. To take away Adam's domain of rulership from the earth.
Satan wanted the rulership of the earth.

So Satan Eve, then Satan working thru Eve to deceive Adam, Now Satan claim's rulership over the earth.

 

[robocop (actually)]

In Raelism, God is a group of Aleins some of which created life on earth. The one's at home had a different opinion than those on earth. The Aliens on earth (Lucifer) gave man scientific knowledge. Those at home didn't like that and punished Lucifer and them. Yahweh came around to being pro-human, but some Aliens in "Heaven" still believe humans aren't worth it (these are Satan).

 

[shunyadragon]

Original Sin was not committed by Adam and Eve.
God did force Adam and Eve to take of any of the tree's.
Adam and Eve took of the tree's willfully.

Just like you wearing a hat, you wear it by choice, no one is forcing you to wear the hat.
Therefore no one force Adam or Eve to take of the tree, what Adam and Eve did was by their choice.

I never said, Adam and Eve were forced to eat the fruit, that was never the issue.

Look how many times do you suppose Adam pass by the tree before Eve came, So Adam never took of the tree, until Eve came and was deceived in taking of the tree.

Still not the problem, and hypothetical unknowns are meaningless.

The problem is that two fallible human beings are held responsible for 'inherited guilt,' the cause of the the curse of the 'Original Sin and 'Fall' causing the suffering, sin, death of all humanity since.

 

[shunyadragon]

Hardly



Jesus resolved he problem


And so we have completed the circle.... A wife told her husband, after they married, that he shouldn't touch another woman and then she thim to the beach and the temptation cause him to sin causing suffering and war OR

13 Let no man say when he is tempted*, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted* with evil,neither tempteth he* any man:
14 But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.
15 Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forthdeath.

Therefore, God is not the tempter nor is He the one that causes people to sin.


It isn't the evidence that is the problem, it is the interpretation of the evidence

You still have failed to provide a response to the real problem. Two fallible humans who apparently sinned and are held responsible (inherited guilt) for all the suffering, death, violence including in the animal kingdom since under the rouse of 'Original Sin' and the 'Fall.'

 

[metis]

Two fallible humans who apparently sinned and are held responsible (inherited guilt) for all the suffering, death, violence including in the animal kingdom since under the rouse of 'Original Sin' and the 'Fall.'

Which I agree makes no sense if taken literally. We don't go out and arrest, try in court, and sentence someone because their gramps committed a crime. For God to do such a thing defines both common sense and basic morality, imo.

Instead, I believe that the "sins visited upon future generations" [paraphrased] is a recognition that sin affects more than just the sinner, plus it taints the entire family, maybe for generations. It's more "group think", which most of us in the modern west don't like to deal with but was and is very common throughout the Asian continent.

 

[shunyadragon]

Which I agree makes no sense if taken literally. We don't go out and arrest, try in court, and sentence someone because their gramps committed a crime. For God to do such a thing defines both common sense and basic morality, imo.

Instead, I believe that the "sins visited upon future generations" [paraphrased] is a recognition that sin affects more than just the sinner, plus it taints the entire family, maybe for generations. It's more "group think", which most of us in the modern west don't like to deal with but was and is very common throughout the Asian continent.

I can easily agree with this from the Jewish, and Baha'i perspective. Unfortunately the problem is with the traditional Christian understanding of the 'Fall' and 'Original Sin,' and the concept of 'inherited guilt,' which basically holds to a variation of a more literal understanding of Genesis. It need not be literal interpretation held by Fundamentalist Christians, but the traditional churches believe that the 'Original Sin' and the 'Fall' are real and associated with the inherited guilt of Adam and Eve.

 

[metis]

I can easily agree with this from the Jewish, and Baha'i perspective. Unfortunately the problem is with the traditional Christian understanding of the 'Fall' and 'Original Sin,' and the concept of 'inherited guilt,' which basically holds to a variation of a more literal understanding of Genesis. It need not be literal interpretation held by Fundamentalist Christians, but the traditional churches believe that the 'Original Sin' and the 'Fall' are real and associated with the inherited guilt of Adam and Eve.

I hear and agree with ya, but let me also add to what you posted that there's certainly not universal support for it even within one church, such as the CC.

One of the top Catholic theologians in the latter half of the last century, Edward S+++++ (?) from the Netherlands, felt pretty much the same as us, and he was the main author of one of the most widely used adult catechisms several decades ago. However, what he had to do was to first give the official "company line" in the catechism, and then include his take near the end of the book as an alternative thought-- iow, notta "teaching".

 

[Faithofchristian]

I never said, Adam and Eve were forced to eat the fruit, that was never the issue.



Still not the problem, and hypothetical unknowns are meaningless.

The problem is that two fallible human beings are held responsible for 'inherited guilt,' the cause of the the curse of the 'Original Sin and 'Fall' causing the suffering, sin, death of all humanity since.

At the time when Adam and Eve took of the tree, they were not fallible as you claim they were.
What Adam and Eve did was no difference what one third of the angels did and were deceived in doing.
Adam and Eve had their choice to take from the tree of life or the tree of good and evil. So Adam and Eve took from the tree of good and evil.
Which they disobeyed God.

No more than a stop sign, if a person does not stop, there is a penalty for disobeying.
No more than Adam and Eve disobeyed God.
Look there's a pit of rattlesnakes, the sign does say, do not put your hand in.
But a person disobeyed the sign so they got bitten.
So who's at fault?
If you have a dog and it's fence in, and you have a sign that says do not enter dog.i will not be at blame if you chose to enter at own risk.
So a person disregards the sign and gets bitten.
So who's at fault?
You or the person that Disobeyed.

 

[shunyadragon]

At the time when Adam and Eve took of the tree, they were not fallible as you claim they were.
What Adam and Eve did was no difference what one third of the angels did and were deceived in doing.
Adam and Eve had their choice to take from the tree of life or the tree of good and evil. So Adam and Eve took from the tree of good and evil.
Which they disobeyed God.

No more than a stop sign, if a person does not stop for disobeying, there is a penalty for disobeying.
No more than Adam and Eve disobeyed God.
Look there's a pit of rattlesnakes, the sign does say, do not put your hand in.
But a person disobeyed the sign so they got bitten.
So who's at fault?
If you have a dog and it's fence in, and you have a sign that says do not enter dog.i will not be at blame if you chose to enter at own risk.
So a person disregards the sign and gets bitten.
So who's at fault?
You or the person that Disobeyed.

Failure to address the issue at hand. This is not a question as to who is at fault. It is the question of the consequences of Adam and Eve's sin, and that their act caused the 'inherited guilt,' suffering, sin and death for all future generations of humanity.

 

[shunyadragon]

I hear and agree with ya, but let me also add to what you posted that there's certainly not universal support for it even within one church, such as the CC.

One of the top Catholic theologians in the latter half of the last century, Edward S+++++ (?) from the Netherlands, felt pretty much the same as us, and he was the main author of one of the most widely used adult catechisms several decades ago. However, what he had to do was to first give the official "company line" in the catechism, and then include his take near the end of the book as an alternative thought-- iow, notta "teaching".

I am aware of the dissenters within the ranks of the traditional churches including the Roman Church (CC), and I sympathize with their efforts, but unfortunately it is naive to believe that their efforts will really bear fruit. As a witness to this the Catechism of the Roman Church reads and teaches the same as it did 100 +years ago, and nature of the Theology of these traditional churches is in some way grounded in this teaching.

I was raised in the Roman Church, and studied for the priesthood for a little over a year during the time of the release of Vatican II, and the controversy that ensued. The reality was the Vatican II changed nothing concerning the foundation Catechism of the Roman Church, In fact, it set the stage for the release of the One Universal Catechism, and the censuring of alternate Catechisms like the Dutch Catechism.

The only reform in Vatican II was to open the doors to an increase dialogue, and diplomacy to other churches, religions and non-Roman Church countries, but with the emphatic proviso that there would be no compromise, negotiation for purposes of Ecumenism or change to the Catechism of the Roman Church. The stated purpose of this increased dialogue with other churches is to bring them back into the One True Church.

Believe it or not the fundamental Catechism cannot be changed in the Roman Church. See underlined section.

From: Catechism of the Catholic Church - The Fall
ARTICLE I
"I BELIEVE IN GOD THE FATHER ALMIGHTY, CREATOR OF HEAVEN AND EARTH"

Paragraph 7. The Fall

385 God is infinitely good and all his works are good. Yet no one can escape the experience of suffering or the evils in nature which seem to be linked to the limitations proper to creatures: and above all to the question of moral evil. Where does evil come from? "I sought whence evil comes and there was no solution", said St. Augustine,257 and his own painful quest would only be resolved by his conversion to the living God. For "the mystery of lawlessness" is clarified only in the light of the "mystery of our religion".258 The revelation of divine love in Christ manifested at the same time the extent of evil and the superabundance of grace.259 We must therefore approach the question of the origin of evil by fixing the eyes of our faith on him who alone is its conqueror.260

I. WHERE SIN ABOUNDED, GRACE ABOUNDED ALL THE MORE

The reality of sin

386 Sin is present in human history; any attempt to ignore it or to give this dark reality other names would be futile. To try to understand what sin is, one must first recognize the profound relation of man to God, for only in this relationship is the evil of sin unmasked in its true identity as humanity's rejection of God and opposition to him, even as it continues to weigh heavy on human life and history.

387 Only the light of divine Revelation clarifies the reality of sin and particularly of the sin committed at mankind's origins. Without the knowledge Revelation gives of God we cannot recognize sin clearly and are tempted to explain it as merely a developmental flaw, a psychological weakness, a mistake, or the necessary consequence of an inadequate social structure, etc. Only in the knowledge of God's plan for man can we grasp that sin is an abuse of the freedom that God gives to created persons so that they are capable of loving him and loving one another.

Original sin - an essential truth of the faith

388 With the progress of Revelation, the reality of sin is also illuminated. Although to some extent the People of God in the Old Testament had tried to understand the pathos of the human condition in the light of the history of the fall narrated in Genesis, they could not grasp this story's ultimate meaning, which is revealed only in the light of the death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ.261 We must know Christ as the source of grace in order to know Adam as the source of sin. The Spirit-Paraclete, sent by the risen Christ, came to "convict the world concerning sin",262 by revealing him who is its Redeemer.

389 The doctrine of original sin is, so to speak, the "reverse side" of the Good News that Jesus is the Savior of all men, that all need salvation and that salvation is offered to all through Christ. The Church, which has the mind of Christ,263 knows very well that we cannot tamper with the revelation of original sin without undermining the mystery of Christ.

How to read the account of the fall

390 The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man.264 Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents.265

 

[Faithofchristian]

Failure to address the issue at hand. This is not a question as to who is at fault. It is the question of the consequences of Adam and Eve's sin, and that their act caused the 'inherited guilt,' suffering, sin and death for all future generations of humanity.

Yes I see what your saying, it's an inheritance that we as humans can not shake off. Death has pass upon all humans.
What Adam and Eve did was open the door and let death pass thru, that now death is here, But we can defeat death and over come death, by the cross of Christ Jesus.

 

[shunyadragon]

Yes I see what your saying, it's an inheritance that we as humans can not shake off. Death has pass upon all humans.
What Adam and Eve did was open the door and let death pass thru, that now death is here, But we can defeat death and over come death, by the cross of Christ Jesus.

The problem remains that 'inherited guilt' is the relationship described in the Bible, and believed by most Christians between Adam and Eve and all future human generations, concerning the 'Fall' and 'Original Sin.' It is further bizzaro that a world existed before the 'Fall' was some ideal world without sin, suffereing and violence even in the animal kingdom, like all animals were vegetarian, which is myth beyond any known history of humanity based on the evidence.

 

[metis]

I am aware of the dissenters within the ranks of the traditional churches including the Roman Church (CC), and I sympathize with their efforts, but unfortunately it is naive to believe that their efforts will really bear fruit.

I was raised in the Roman Church, and studied for the priesthood for a little over a year during the time of the release of Vatican II, and the controversy that ensued.

I'm putting these two together to make a point that doesn't disagree with you but still needs to be said for the sake of others here.

The CC could be looked at as if it's a Roman traffic cop who's waving and pointing to what the drivers should be doing, but if you've been to Rome you probably are aware of the fact that so many of the drivers simply "do their own thing". IOW, the church has the role to teach what it thinks is correct, but you and I have the role to take these teachings and do with them what we may-- except...

In some case, my actions may interfere with the actions of others, and this is where the church has to come in and try and figure out who's going to prevail, such as the Roman cop trying to sort things out after an accident. It also prevents a teacher within the church from teaching a "false" doctrine since this also affects others as well. Probably most priests and bishops don't agree 100% with all that the church teaches, and that's all fine & dandy as long as he doesn't teach that which goes against the church's positions.

There was a good book that covered this several decades ago that I read and it was entitled "Let Your (Informed) Conscience Be Your Guide", and that was the gist of what the book was saying. But notice the word "Informed", which is to mean one should try their best to understand what the church teaches and why it teaches as such.

 

[Faithofchristian]

The problem remains that 'inherited guilt' is the relationship described in the Bible, and believed by most Christians between Adam and Eve and all future human generations, concerning the 'Fall' and 'Original Sin.' It is further bizzaro that a world existed before the 'Fall' was some ideal world without sin, suffereing and violence even in the animal kingdom, like all animals were vegetarian, which is myth beyond any known history of humanity based on the evidence.

Most Christians if not all Christians are taught by man's teachings that the "Original Sin" came by Adam and Eve.
Unto which is not true.

The first sin "Original Sin" came by Lucifer which God renamed Satan, the Devil, the dragon, the wicked one. Death,
the son of perdition. The old Serpent, Baal.
god of darkness.

Actually there was a world that then was.
Before this world came to be.

Alot of Christians will profess that the earth is only 6000 years old.

But God thru His witnesses proves the earth as being Millions if not Billions of years old.
The dinosaurs bones are God's witnesses to the fact that the is alot older than 6000 years what man's teachings, teach people.

Look if you read Genesis 1:1--"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
Look after the earth there's a period, which means there is nothing more to be said or add to Period.

We do know that before man added periods after words, the Scribes Written the word left blanks between sentences. Which were periods

Like this, I left a blank between here and the top sentence. To indicate nothing more to be said or added unto.

When you read the Bible you notice blanks between words like this To show a comma in between words, which to day we add a , comma between two sentences and a period to indicate the end of a sentence.
Where as the testament writers would drop down a line or two and start a whole new sentence.

Therefore after the earth you find a period to indicate the end of sentence.

Now the question is, In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth,
So when was the beginning?

 

[shunyadragon]

God did not want Adam and Eve to fail, But on the contrary, God wanted Adam and Eve to exceed to over come the deceptions of Satan's.
Before Eve came to be, How many times do you suppose Adam pass by the tree and was not deceived by Satan's deceptions ?

hypothetical conjecture does not make an argument.

Only until Eve came to be, then Eve being deceived by satan, then Eve being deceived then Eve gave to Adam. But it was Eve who was first deceived by satan, not Adam.

Satan deceiving Eve, then Satan got Eve to deceive Adam and then Adam took it hook line and sinker. Swallowed the bait.

Again, again, and again the primary issue is NOT whether God wanted Adam and Eve to sin and fail. I may address this a little later, but the up front main problem is the fact that Adam and Eve are the ones that failed and succumbed to sin and are blamed as responsible for the 'pain,' suffering, death, and violence since for all humanity through 'inherited guilt.

 

[shunyadragon]

Most Christians if not all Christians are taught by man's teachings that the "Original Sin" came by Adam and Eve.
Unto which is not true.

It is true, the doctrine of 'inherited guilt' is directly attributed to Adam and Eve. Note underlined in the citation below.

From: Catechism of the Catholic Church - The Fall
ARTICLE I
"I BELIEVE IN GOD THE FATHER ALMIGHTY, CREATOR OF HEAVEN AND EARTH"

Paragraph 7. The Fall

385 God is infinitely good and all his works are good. Yet no one can escape the experience of suffering or the evils in nature which seem to be linked to the limitations proper to creatures: and above all to the question of moral evil. Where does evil come from? "I sought whence evil comes and there was no solution", said St. Augustine,257 and his own painful quest would only be resolved by his conversion to the living God. For "the mystery of lawlessness" is clarified only in the light of the "mystery of our religion".258 The revelation of divine love in Christ manifested at the same time the extent of evil and the superabundance of grace.259 We must therefore approach the question of the origin of evil by fixing the eyes of our faith on him who alone is its conqueror.260

I. WHERE SIN ABOUNDED, GRACE ABOUNDED ALL THE MORE

The reality of sin

386 Sin is present in human history; any attempt to ignore it or to give this dark reality other names would be futile. To try to understand what sin is, one must first recognize the profound relation of man to God, for only in this relationship is the evil of sin unmasked in its true identity as humanity's rejection of God and opposition to him, even as it continues to weigh heavy on human life and history.

387 Only the light of divine Revelation clarifies the reality of sin and particularly of the sin committed at mankind's origins. Without the knowledge Revelation gives of God we cannot recognize sin clearly and are tempted to explain it as merely a developmental flaw, a psychological weakness, a mistake, or the necessary consequence of an inadequate social structure, etc. Only in the knowledge of God's plan for man can we grasp that sin is an abuse of the freedom that God gives to created persons so that they are capable of loving him and loving one another.

Original sin - an essential truth of the faith

388 With the progress of Revelation, the reality of sin is also illuminated. Although to some extent the People of God in the Old Testament had tried to understand the pathos of the human condition in the light of the history of the fall narrated in Genesis, they could not grasp this story's ultimate meaning, which is revealed only in the light of the death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ.261 We must know Christ as the source of grace in order to know Adam as the source of sin. The Spirit-Paraclete, sent by the risen Christ, came to "convict the world concerning sin",262 by revealing him who is its Redeemer.

389 The doctrine of original sin is, so to speak, the "reverse side" of the Good News that Jesus is the Savior of all men, that all need salvation and that salvation is offered to all through Christ. The Church, which has the mind of Christ,263 knows very well that we cannot tamper with the revelation of original sin without undermining the mystery of Christ.

How to read the account of the fall

390 The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man.264 Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents.265

 

[Faithofchristian]

hypothetical conjecture does not make an argument.



Again, again, and again the primary issue is NOT whether God wanted Adam and Eve to sin and fail. I may address this a little later, but the up front main problem is the fact that Adam and Eve are the ones that failed and succumbed to sin and are blamed as responsible for the 'pain,' suffering, death, and violence since for all humanity through 'inherited guilt.

The only fault Adam had is listening to Eve, before Eve came, Adam may haved walk by that tree many times before Eve came to be.
But after Eve came, then Adam listening to her, then Adam fail.

But as you say, Yes both are held responsible for their sin, in disobeying God.

Therefore because of Adam's and Eve's sin in disobeying God, death has pass upon all men. This being all mankind of course.

 

[Faithofchristian]

It is true, the doctrine of 'inherited guilt' is directly attributed to Adam and Eve. Note underlined in the citation below.

From: Catechism of the Catholic Church - The Fall
ARTICLE I
"I BELIEVE IN GOD THE FATHER ALMIGHTY, CREATOR OF HEAVEN AND EARTH"

Paragraph 7. The Fall

385 God is infinitely good and all his works are good. Yet no one can escape the experience of suffering or the evils in nature which seem to be linked to the limitations proper to creatures: and above all to the question of moral evil. Where does evil come from? "I sought whence evil comes and there was no solution", said St. Augustine,257 and his own painful quest would only be resolved by his conversion to the living God. For "the mystery of lawlessness" is clarified only in the light of the "mystery of our religion".258 The revelation of divine love in Christ manifested at the same time the extent of evil and the superabundance of grace.259 We must therefore approach the question of the origin of evil by fixing the eyes of our faith on him who alone is its conqueror.260

I. WHERE SIN ABOUNDED, GRACE ABOUNDED ALL THE MORE

The reality of sin

386 Sin is present in human history; any attempt to ignore it or to give this dark reality other names would be futile. To try to understand what sin is, one must first recognize the profound relation of man to God, for only in this relationship is the evil of sin unmasked in its true identity as humanity's rejection of God and opposition to him, even as it continues to weigh heavy on human life and history.

387 Only the light of divine Revelation clarifies the reality of sin and particularly of the sin committed at mankind's origins. Without the knowledge Revelation gives of God we cannot recognize sin clearly and are tempted to explain it as merely a developmental flaw, a psychological weakness, a mistake, or the necessary consequence of an inadequate social structure, etc. Only in the knowledge of God's plan for man can we grasp that sin is an abuse of the freedom that God gives to created persons so that they are capable of loving him and loving one another.

Original sin - an essential truth of the faith

388 With the progress of Revelation, the reality of sin is also illuminated. Although to some extent the People of God in the Old Testament had tried to understand the pathos of the human condition in the light of the history of the fall narrated in Genesis, they could not grasp this story's ultimate meaning, which is revealed only in the light of the death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ.261 We must know Christ as the source of grace in order to know Adam as the source of sin. The Spirit-Paraclete, sent by the risen Christ, came to "convict the world concerning sin",262 by revealing him who is its Redeemer.

389 The doctrine of original sin is, so to speak, the "reverse side" of the Good News that Jesus is the Savior of all men, that all need salvation and that salvation is offered to all through Christ. The Church, which has the mind of Christ,263 knows very well that we cannot tamper with the revelation of original sin without undermining the mystery of Christ.

How to read the account of the fall

390 The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man.264 Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents.265

All evil comes from Satan ( Lucifer ) it was Satan in his sin rebellion against God. That lead one third of the angels in Rebellion against God.
This was way back in the first earth age, before this earth age came to be.