Oh, what an amazing world we have been given, especially if we imagine what it was like right after creation. “And the LORD God planted a garden in Eden, in the east, and there he put the man whom he had formed.” (Gen 2:8). The Garden of Eden wasn’t a creation of man but of God. He made it for the zenith of His creative work: man—the man which God had carefully and specially made in His own image. He put trees in this garden which were pleasant to look at and good for food. A river flowed into the garden, and then it divided into four more rivers. One can imagine the brooks and creeks leading to these rivers. Maybe even waterfalls from the brooks coming down from the hills to feed the rivers.
The rivers were full of fish and life. All the animals and birds would congregate around these bodies of water. With all this wildlife, there was no fear or danger. All lived in peace and harmony with each other and with man. All creatures ate the bounty of plants God had created. No eating of each other, and more importantly, no man-eaters.
There was just one thing missing for Adam. He checked out all the critters; he even named them, but still, something—or rather, someone—was missing. So, from Adam’s side, God made a woman: Adam’s wife. From their very first day, they were husband and wife. Talk about love at first sight!
The Garden of Eden—what a honeymoon spot! How they must have loved those first days, wandering around the garden. Seeing new plants and animals around every bend in the rivers. Going for their first swim. Eating all the various fruits, vegetables, and nuts. Just discovery, peace, and time together. No intrusions. No interruptions. No disagreements or fighting! Pure peace and harmony. Yet this was not the best part, for they not only had peace and harmony with nature and each other, but they also had direct communion with God. There was no separation between people and their maker. They were in a state of perfect peace and love with God. If it could have only stayed this way. But no.
God had said at the end of the sixth day, after creating Adam and Eve and all the universe, including even the angels and other spiritual beings, that it was very good. There was no sin in the cosmos. Yet some time between God’s declaration stating all was very good and the event we are about to retell, there was a rebellion. We have very few details of what happened, and what little we have would take us too far afield, but suffice it to say Satan and about a third of the angels rejected God. They decided they were the authority for themselves.
These corrupt angels were cast out of heaven. They have been known ever since as demons and evil spirits. They wait for their final judgment, seeking to bring down God’s crown jewels: humans. But notice, this is not like the Fall of man. Nothing had really changed in the universe other than their place in it. Sin had not entered the world or affected the cosmos. Why did this sin not have the impact we will see later from the sin of Adam? Because angels were not created in the image of God. As image-bearers, humans’ sin made all the difference. So much so even before the creation of the world, God knew how He would bring about the redemption of man. Not so with angels. There is no gift of grace for them. There is no way out of the judgment which awaits them. This is not so for us!
Back to our account: as with so many honeymoons, something went wrong. In this case, it went very wrong. In the garden, there were two special trees: the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. It was the latter, as you know, which was the issue. “And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, ‘You may surely eat of every tree of the garden, but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.’” (Gen 2:16–17). (In case you were wondering, it is clear from the larger context either Adam told Eve this commandment or God told them both again after He made Eve.)
There it is. One simple rule for one stupid tree. They could eat from any other plant; just leave this one alone. Oh, sure, there was still morality to rule behavior. God’s holiness has always existed. Adam and Eve were moral beings who knew right from wrong. They knew it was wrong to be cruel to the animals. They had tasks to do, like subduing the earth and working the garden. They knew it would be wrong to be lazy and not fulfill their responsibilities. So, it wasn’t they didn’t know how to do right, but this was a test. Were they going to follow their Creator or their own desires? Would Yahweh be their Lord, or would they make themselves the authority in their lives?
You see, it was not about the tree; it was about loyalty, obedience, and glorifying God. It was also about sin. Wayne Grudem, in his Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine, defines sin as “any failure to conform to the moral law of God in act, attitude, or nature.” The advantage of Grudem’s definition is multifaceted. First, it correctly ties sin to a lack of compliance with God’s standards. Second, it emphasizes that sin is more than just an act. It’s also our attitudes. Included in our acts and attitudes are our thoughts and feelings. As Jesus taught, it is more than the act of adultery but lustful thoughts and feelings which are sinful (Matt 5:28). Finally, Grudem places sin in our nature, for our very nature is sinful, not just what we do, think, or feel. We, at our core—the essence of who we are as persons—are in rebellion against God (Rom 5:8; Eph 2:3). We will go into more detail about the nature of sin in the next article in this series.
It is so important we set the stage for what Adam and Eve were about to lose. What they were so willing to throw away. At this point, sin was not an issue. Neither Adam nor Eve had a sinful nature or had ever sinned in any way. They had everything they could need or even want. Skipping ahead to Genesis chapter 3, what was Satan, the serpent, offering them? Let’s take a look at what happened, taking special note of what he offered them.
Satan doesn’t even start with the fruit of this forbidden tree. He twists the truth and gets Eve to come to his way of thinking, questioning the truth she knows from God. Isn’t this how he always works? A little truth, a bit of a twist, a full lie. “Did God actually say, ‘You shall not eat of any tree in the garden’?” (Gen 3:1, emphasis added) Question God, then change the command. Then Eve moves in Satan’s direction. A twist on what God commanded. “Neither shall you touch it” (Gen 3:3). Wait, when did God say they couldn’t “touch it”? It sounds good. It’s a clever way not to eat it if you don’t touch it. I’m sure the Pharisees would love this addition.
As a little aside, it is remarkable humans were not created with a blank slate and had to learn everything from scratch. They could talk and understand God. They had the ability to work, name the animals, and relate to each other. They had a moral compass. This was also part of their likeness of God. They even understood the concept of death, even though the only thing which would have died in their short existence would have been the plants they were eating. They had a base of knowledge, intellect, and understanding. Humans did not evolve to have these qualities; they were created with them. They were innocent, for they had not sinned, yet they were responsible for their actions.
Satan was now ready for the second step of his plan. He had Eve doubting, questioning, and now a frontal attack. “But the serpent said to the woman, ‘You will not surely die.’” (Gen 3:4). God is wrong. He doesn’t know what He’s talking about. You will not die. Moreover, “For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” (Gen 3:5). Stop! There it is. What were Eve and Adam offered? Yes, Adam too; from the context, it is clear he was right there. He wasn’t being any help. He wasn’t jumping in to save his wife. No, he was just there, going along with it all.
She and Adam were offered the status of being like a god. Wait! Are we missing something? How could a fruit make someone a god? The very definition of God is He is eternal, from everlasting past to everlasting future. No one can change into a god and still have an everlasting past. God is immutable; one cannot change into God. The simplicity of God says He is whole and complete. He does not have parts. There are no qualities or attributes which can be added to anyone to make them God. This is just a couple of the infinite reasons it is impossible for someone to become “like God” in the sense of becoming a god.
So, if they wanted to be like God rather than a god, well, that’s just stupid. They were created in the image and likeness of God. They were seeking to gain what they already were. They diminished in themselves the very thing they wanted to gain. The old saying is true: “Don’t look for logic in the heart of a sinful man.”
There was one other thing Satan promised: their “eyes will be opened… knowing good and evil.” Well, first of all, Satan was blinding them with his lies, not opening them. Second, they already knew all the good in the universe. So, all the evil in the world, all the pain and suffering—all of this was so they could know evil. This was going to make them like God? Would knowing evil make them like the holy and righteous God? We can see Satan is the same forever. Layering one lie on top of the other with no concern for truth.
So, quickly, as we seek to bring this to a close, verse six may be one of the saddest verses in the Bible. “So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate.” Eve creates a list of reasons to justify her sin (remarkably similar to the reasons we have for our sin): It is good for me; it is desirable; it will benefit me; I will be better, wiser, and smarter after doing this. Adam, meanwhile, just stands there, takes it, and eats. Where was his backbone? He was supposed to subdue all the animals, not allow his wife and himself to be manipulated by one of them.
In this article, we have seen the beginning of sin, but before we leave, let’s take a quick look at the extent of sin. The Bible plainly teaches a doctrine known as “original sin.” This doctrine teaches we inherited guilt and a sinful nature from Adam’s sinful disobedience. It is not that we are guilty of eating the fruit, but by temperament we are guilty and sinful. We start life unholy and separated from God. So, we deal with our sin, not Adam’s. David talks of being born in sin, even conceived in sin (Ps 51:5). David is not thinking of his mother’s sin or that sex was somehow innately sinful, but as he speaks of his sin throughout Psalm 51, he sees he was sinful from the very start.
We are regarded as guilty because of Adam’s sin. In Romans 5:12-21 Paul shows that by Adam, sin and death have come into the world. He is saying more than we all sin, but it is through Adam we are all sinful. The evidence of this is we all die. The idea Paul presents is, more than being our forefather, Adam was our representative in the garden and in the test of the fruit. When Adam failed, we were counted as guilty as our representative.
When we think God is wrong or unfair to hold Adam’s sin against us, consider a few things. First, we have all sinned enough on our own to make Adam’s inheritance beside the point. Second, it is very, if not absolutely, likely if in Adam’s place we also would have sinned. Third, how is it unfair to be represented by Adam and his sin imputed to us, but fair when Christ represented us on the cross and His righteousness is imputed to us?
Finally, the more devastating effect of Adam’s fall on our lives is that our nature has been corrupted. We are now distorted image-bearers of God because we now have a sinful nature. Our nature, the core of our being, is one of rebellion against God and a disposition to sin, as Paul speaks of in Ephesians 2:3.
To be sure, there is a lot which goes on in chapter 3 of Genesis, and we only touched on part of it. In our next article, we will look at the results of the Fall, this rejection of God. It goes beyond our own sinful nature. We will see, unlike the fall of the angels, the Fall of man caused seismic changes to the cosmos.
Until the next time we see you here at CultivatingFaith.org, God Bless! #CultivatingFaithOrg