There's no "Fall of Man" in Genesis

[blü 2]

Some strands of Western Christianity say that Adam and Eve ‘fell’ when they ate the fruit; that this was the sin of disobedience; that this was the ‘fall’ of all humans; and this made a ‘savior’ (Jesus) necessary.

But if you read Genesis carefully, you’ll find no mention of

a fall of man
a charge of disobedience
original sin
death entering the world
a need for salvation​

All of these are later add-ons. (I’ve read somewhere the view that the roots of the ‘fall’ are found in the debates of Alexandrian Jews around 120-100 BCE about Platonic and Stoic ideas that humans are essentially good. If so, this may be the basis of Paul’s remark in Romans 5:12, which Augustine picked up and ran so hard with in the 5th cent CE. Certainly questions about the heritability of guilt were being discussed by the 5th century BCE ─ see eg the Ezekiel quote at the end.)

The Garden story says this –
Genesis 2:

16: Yahweh says to Adam, Eat any fruit you like
17 except the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (‘tree of kge’) BECAUSE if you eat it you’ll die the same day.​

Note 1: it does NOT say, ‘because I’ve told you not to’.

Genesis 3:

1. The snake was ’aruwm [‘cunning’, ‘prudent’, ‘crafty’ ‘sensible’, ‘subtle’].
3. Eve quotes Yahweh to the snake.
4. The snake says, You won’t die.
5. Instead, like Yahweh, you’ll be able to tell the difference between good and ra [that which is ‘bad’, ‘hurtful’, ‘displeasing’, ‘unhappy’, ‘unkind’, ‘wicked’, ‘evil’].​

Note 2: the snake speaks the truth.

6. Eve saw that the fruit was desirable to make one wise, and ate it. And she gave one to Adam and he ate it,​

Note 3: Until she ingests the fruit, Eve can’t tell good from evil. The same is true of Adam. Therefore at the moment they respectively eat the fruit, each is in a state of innocence, and so incapable of forming a bad (evil, sinful) intention. Without intention to do bad, there can be no disobedience, no sin, no evil on their part. This proposition is never contradicted in the text.

7. Then they both became aware of the difference between good and bad. Their nakedness then became uncomfortable to them and they covered their external genitals with ‘aprons’.​

Note 4: by inference the author assumes nakedness is ‘bad’.

11. Yahweh sees and says, Have you eaten the fruit of the tree of kge?
12. Adam says, It was HER fault,​

Note 5: In the text, giving Adam the fruit is the immediate next thing Eve does. Whether Eve had kge when she did this therefore depends on how fast you think the fruit worked to impart kge. And it leaves open the question of whether (if indeed she had kge) Eve did wrong to give Adam the fruit.

14-18. Yahweh punishes snake, Eve and Adam.​

19. Yahweh says to Adam (inter alia), “‘In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; you are dust, and to dust you shall return.”​

Note 6: Those who say that Adam and Eve sinned, and that this caused death to enter the world, rely on 19 to justify the latter claim. However, 19 can’t mean that Adam and Eve were immortal until they ate the fruit – it’s flatly contradicted by 22.

Note 7: Adam and Eve ate the fruit but they did not die the same day (rather, they lived on for a serious number of years). So the snake spoke the truth, and Yahweh – ahm – misspoke.

22 Yahweh says, “Behold, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever"
23 ‘therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from which he was taken.’​

Note 8: So it’s explicitly stated that the expulsion from the Garden is to prevent Adam and Eve from obtaining immortality. It is NOT because they disobeyed.

So there you have it. The Garden story is NOT about the ‘fall of man’.

(If you ask me, it’s a parable about childhood (innocence), puberty (no longer naked), and adulthood (partnering and leaving home).

Note 9: Oh, and on the subject of original sin, Ezekiel 18 has this to say –

20 The soul that sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son; the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.​

 

[Skwim]

Some strands of Western Christianity say that Adam and Eve ‘fell’ when they ate the fruit; that this was the sin of disobedience; that this was the ‘fall’ of all humans; and this made a ‘savior’ (Jesus) necessary.

But if you read Genesis carefully, you’ll find no mention of

a fall of man
a charge of disobedience
original sin
death entering the world
a need for salvation​

​

Fall of man

But if you read Genesis carefully, you’ll find no mention of
a fall of man

Are you expecting to see those exact words, "fall of man"? I wouldn't wait up. Events in books and elsewhere are often restated using different words, or even re-characterized. And considering what happened to A&E I think it's quite appropriate to describe it as a fall. A fall from god's grace if nothing else.


Disobedience

a charge of disobedience

I believe this is a logical conclusion. God commanded A&E not to do something.

Gen 2:16-17
16 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, “Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; 17 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.”​

And they did it anyway. They disobeyed god.


Original sin

original sin

Obviously, in order to be considered an original anything there must be others that follow it, so it's reasonable that the notion of original sin not show up in Genesis. Although the words “original sin” aren’t found together in Scripture, the doctrine is taught in many passages:

“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” (Romans 5:12);

“one trespass led to condemnation for all men” (Romans 5:18);

“In Adam all die” (1 Corinthians 15:22).

“Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.” (Psalm 51:5),​

Ephesians 2:2 says that all people who are not in Christ are “sons of disobedience.” Ephesians 2:3 also establishes this, saying that we are all “by nature children of wrath.” If this is the case, it can only be because we are all by nature sinners. While God did not create the human race sinful, but upright, we fell into sin and became sinful due to the disobedience of Adam.
source


Death entering the world

death entering the world

Considering the common concept of death, I think Gen 3:19 fits quite nicely

In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread
Till you return to the ground,
For out of it you were taken;
For dust you are,
And to dust you shall return.”​

Need for salvation

a need for salvation

I think you finally have a point here. I haven't seen anything in Genesis or the rest of the OT that looks for salvation from the effects of original sin.

.

 

[blü 2]

Yo, Skwim

considering what happened to A&E I think it's quite appropriate to describe it as a fall.​

I agree that the story can be read as a fall of Adam and Eve. But nothing in it supports the idea that it's The Fall, the dawn of original sin, the entry of death into the world, the necessity of a savior.

Disobedience / I believe this is a logical conclusion. God commanded A&E not to do something.​

Yahweh never mentions or complains of disobedience.He never mentions a command. He says the reason they shouldn't do it is because then they'd die the same day. He says the reason he chucks them out of the Garden is his fear that they'll become immortal if he doesn't. In each case he gives no other reason.

it's reasonable that the notion of original sin not show up in Genesis.​

Indeed it doesn't show up in Genesis. As I mentioned, and as you say, it's asserted elsewhere, and Paul attributes it to Adam, but as you can see if you follow the OP, he's not getting that from the text of Genesis. Nor is anyone else. That leaves open the question, if there really was an original sin, what was it?

And as to whether sins by parents are visited on the children, see OP Note 9.

Death entering the world.​

I dealt with that specifically in the OP, Note 6.

Pleasant to agree with you on redeemers.

 

[Magus]

The Hebrew word for 'Fall' is Naphal (נָפַל), used in Genesis 6:4

Gen 6:4
There were nĕphiyl in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men

Adam is the 'Son of God' and Eve is the 'Daughter of Man' , since she came out of Adam , the figures listed between Adam and Noah are chronological fillers, Lamech is Adam, Zillah is Eve .

Nephilim, appear once more in Numbers 13:33 , which reads 'Nephilim, the sons of Anak, according to Joshua 15:13, Arba ( another word for Hebron), is the father of Anak, whom had three children, Sheshai, Ahiman and Talmai.

Sheshai (Son of Anak), resemble שִׁשִּׁי meaning 'Six', the Aramaic word for six is 'Seth' (שֵׁת) (Son of Adam).

The sons of Anak, where evicted from Hebron, by Caleb , since Hebron is in the Judean mountains and thus high up, this possibly explains why they are named Nephilim ( Fallen), posthumous.

Jos 11:21 ( 5th-4th century allegory)
And at that time came Joshua, and cut off the Anakims from the mountains, from Hebron

Talmai, appear outside the Torah, as the son of Ammihud , the King of Geshur ( related to Gershon, son of Levi or Moses, Hebron, was also the grandson of Levi ), his daughter , Maacah was married to King David, this causes serious problems with the so-called Linear Biblical chronology.

I am still working on this problem.

 

[The Holy Bottom Burp]

The story of "The Fall" is of course a myth, and not a coherent one as far as I'm concerned. Magic fruit that imparts knowledge and immortality, talking snakes etc., if the story came from another tradition it would no doubt be ridiculed by Christians as nothing but a charming and naïve myth. However, like the virgin birth for example, it is a myth deeply ingrained into much of Western culture, so here we are in 2017 still discussing it.

I think this myth is the source of much of the guilt traditionally associated with Christianity, the idea that it is always our fault. The deity is blameless, when the deity farts it smells of perfume, we cant get anything right though. We are the stuff the deity has wiped of the bottom of his shoe, we should praise it for letting us exist at all.

I think the concept of the deity being perfect, of being the source of all life and reason, is one reason why religious people often have a mistrust of science. It is man "dabbling with nature", what does our knowledge, our advancements mean to the deity who can crush us like bugs, who knows so much more than us? We will no doubt screw things up, because we don't have the "wisdom" of god. Unfortunately this doesn't take into account the tremendous benefits science has given us over the centuries; life expectancy, infant mortality, the quality of life, the benefits are too long to list. It is why I particularly dislike the myth of "The Fall", we are born "sick" and commanded to be well, we should not be proud of or venerate the achievements of humanity, but instead grovel in the dirt and worship the deity. Hogwash. Knowledge doesn't come from eating apples people, you have to exercise your grey matter!

 

[blü 2]

Magus

Good luck with your further research.


THBB

Indeed a myth, but not one that can be based on anything Genesis says.

 

[Yohanan ben Yaaqov]

It is rather difficult to discuss this topic in a brief and concise manner. Judaism and chr-stianity are light years apart; they do not share the same universe; they do not share the same dimension; they do not even share the same reality. The fact is that Judaism and chr-stianity do not share any common beliefs, at all. The two could not possibly be any more opposite from one another.

There is no such thing as “the fall of man” in Judaism, in fact there is nothing even remotely similar. There is no such thing as “original sin” in Judaism, in fact there is nothing even remotely similar. There is no “devil” or “fallen angels” or anything similar in Judaism. There is nothing remotely similar to the chr-stian concept of “heaven and hell” within Judaism. The entire tale of the conception and birth of the protagonist of the chr-stian story is in and of itself far too blasphemous and idolatrous to even think about.

Perhaps if chr-stians were able to read the disobedience narrative without first filtering it through their chr-stian theology goggles, they might be able to see things a different way. If they were able to read it in the language in which it was written, they would definitely see things a different way.

Chr-stians start off by believing that it was their imaginary “devil” speaking through the snake, except chr-stian translations sensationalize the word naḥash, by using the archaic mythological term “serpent” to further associate it with their fictional “devil” character. Chr-stians believe that the snake lied by saying they would not die. However, if you read Genesis 2:15 onward, you will realize that at the time God gave Adam the commandment not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, woman had not yet even been thought of yet, let alone created.

Now wrap your head around this for a minute. The snake was there when God gave Adam that commandment, the woman was not. God spoke to Adam using Singular Masculine Verbs and Singular Masculine Infinitive Absolutes. Adam, and Adam alone, was subject to this commandment. The snake knew that Adam, and Adam alone, was forbidden from eating from the tree under penalty of death, the woman did not, because she had not yet been created.

Chr-stians see a story of “the fall of man;” whereas I see a story of lust, envy, trickery and attempted murder.

Here is where the craftiness comes into play. The snake spoke to the woman using plural verbs. “Did God indeed say both of you cannot eat from every tree of the garden?” That was a trick question, because he knew that command was given exclusively to the man. She answered him, again using plural verbs, “from the fruits of the trees of the garden we shall eat, but from the fruit of the tree that is in the center of the garden, God said: ‘both of you shall not eat from it, and both of you shall not touch it, or else both of you will die.”

There’s the catch. The woman told the first lie, and this was before she ate the fruit. She used plural verbs, whereas God used singular verbs, before she was even created. Not to mention, God did not say a single word about touching it. First sin… woman lying to the snake.

However, that is only hindsight being 20/20. She did not know the difference between right and wrong, so therefore, she could not sin. Yet the yétzer hara was still there and very active.

The snake responded to her again using a plural Infinitive Absolute: “you both will not absolutely die.” There is no lie here. The snake knew that only the man would receive the death penalty for eating the fruit and the woman would not. The commandment was never given to her by God.

Chances are that one day Adam saw the woman about to grab a piece of fruit from that tree, and he hollered at her “Stop, don’t touch that! God told me I would die if I ate from that tree.” So she automatically assumed that it meant her too, and because he told her not to touch it, that must have been part of it too.

The only creature in this event that was cursed was the snake. The man and the woman were not cursed, they were only given additional punishments because they committed additional crimes.

If Adam would have rebuked the woman for obeying the snake, there would have been an entirely different outcome. Even if Adam had still went along with the woman and ate the fruit, all he had to do was take responsibility for his actions, show remorse and beg for forgiveness. But no, everybody had to play the blame game.

Punishment for eating the fruit; no more continued access to the tree of life. Punishment for the woman blaming the snake; greatly increased pain during pregnancy, labor and birth. Punishment for Adam blaming God; the ground is cursed to him for the rest of his life.

The moral of the story is not: “We need a dying demigod to save us from our stupid mistakes.” The moral of the story is “Take responsibility for your stupid mistakes; admit them, apologize for them and ask for forgiveness from them.”

There is no “fall of man,” and there is no “original sin.” There is only crime and punishment.

 

[Yohanan ben Yaaqov]

The Hebrew word for 'Fall' is Naphal (נָפַל), used in Genesis 6:4

This statement is completely false. Neither the Root Verb – נָפַל – nafal, which means to fall, to lie down, to be dropped, etc., nor any word derived from it occurs in B’réshiyt 6:4.

The Masculine Plural Noun – הַנְּפִלִים – han’filiym, which means the giants, the marvelous ones, the astonishing ones, the wondrous ones, etc., is the word that appears in B’réshiyt 6:4. This is the plural form of the Masculine Noun – נָפִיל – nafiyl, which means giant, wondrous, marvelous, astonishing, etc. The root verb of nafiyl is not nafal, it is – פְּלָא – p’laʾ, and even more specifically the Afél Conjugation - אַפְלֵי – ʾaf’léy, which means to do strange, wondrous things; to go to the extreme; to amaze; to perplex; to astonish.

Think about the final line in the passage: “they are the mighty men from ancient times, the men of renown.” What makes more sense: the fallen ones are the mighty men from ancient times, the men of renown; or the wondrous ones are the mighty men from ancient times, the men of renown?

 

[Magus]

They are two verses in the Hebrew scriptures where - נָפִיל - occurs , Gen 6:4 & Numbers 13:33, they are described more vividly in Number 13:33 as the offspring of Anak - עֲנָק -

- עֲנָק - appear in Joshua 15:13 as the son of Arba -אַרְבַּע- also known as Hebron -חֶבְרוֹן- but Hebron was the son of Kohath ( a levi)

Does this mean the - נָפִיל - are Levi

These 'Giants' or 'Fallen' come under different names, such as 'Rapha' , which either means Giant or Physician, other names are Emin -אֵימִים- , Zuzim -זוּזִים- and Zamzom -זַמְזֻמִּים-

I believe these 'giants' are Cholcians ( West Georgia).

 

[Yohanan ben Yaaqov]

If you actually read the previous verse in “numbers” you would be aware that they were lying about the giants they reported.

 

[Yohanan ben Yaaqov]

Did you ever stop to think that it could have meant larger than life accomplishments as opposed to larger than life physical stature?

 

[Magus]

You seem to ignore the relation between the 'Giants' and 'Anak', also known as the son of Arba-Hebron , these are all clues to the where about of the Cave of Patriarchs.

Abraham purchased the 'Field of Ephron' in the 'City of Arba' that was named 'Hebron' near Shechem

I believe the 'Cave of Patriarchs' is the 'New Athos Cave' , In the Iberian Mountain, in Anakopia which is near Sukhumi ( West Georgia) , known in Ancient times as 'Kolhis' (Kulha) ( Biblical Haviliah) where we find the River Pison ( Phasis ) .

 

[Magus]

Did you ever stop to think that it could have meant larger than life accomplishments as opposed to larger than life physical stature?

The mythical giants is related to the Cyclops in Greek mythology, known for being Blacksmiths ( Qayin) and they originate in West Georgia ( Caucasus region near the Black Sea) and they are also mentioned in Hammurabi, as coming from Causcasus mountains.

Note. Eastern Europeans are taller then Western Europeans .

 

[Yohanan ben Yaaqov]

Your personal conspiracy theories are your own. There is no possible way I could care any less about them. You are entirely wrong about this subject, but you are entitled to believe whatever delusions you want to believe.

 

[Magus]

Your personal conspiracy theories are your own. There is no possible way I could care any less about them. You are entirely wrong about this subject, but you are entitled to believe whatever delusions you want to believe.

If they are wrong, care to disprove it, cos the 'Cave of the Patriarchs' as never ever being found in Israel.

Genesis 2:11
The name of the first is Pison: that is it which compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold;

חֲוִילָה ( KUILE)
חוּל ( KUL)

The Hebrew - חוּל - means twist / round and Cyclops means 'Round Eyes'
'Cholchis' ( KUL HA )

Gen 2:11 describes 'Compass' ( סָבַב ) , the Septuagint word here is 'KUKLON' ( Cyclops / Cholchis)
and 'Cholchis', known in Ancient times as the 'Land of Gold' and 'River Pison' means 'Gold River'. ( River Phasis).

Cave of the Patriarch and the Temple of Solomon or his Kingdom as NEVER being found in Israel, maybe they are elsewhere .. Eastern Europe , where you most likely came from.

 

[Yohanan ben Yaaqov]

I have no idea what you've been smoking, but I sure wish you'd give me some of it.

 

[Magus]

I have no idea what you've been smoking, but I sure wish you'd give me some of it.

All the Jews today are 'Eastern European' , I guess your suffering some sort of denial , How can one be 'Eastern European' and a 'Canaanite-Semitic' at the same time. The Jews today have obvious Eastern European features, are they lying about there own identity ( Thou shalt not bear false witness? )

My research is based on Herodotus 2.104

Colchians and Egyptians and Ethiopians are the only nations that have from the first practised circumcision

You only read one book, the Talmud ( not the Torah) , so you won't understand anything outside your narrow vision.

 

[Yohanan ben Yaaqov]

I was born in Haifa Israel. I know my father to son lineage all the way back to Sinai. Hebrew and Aramaic were the first two languages I was taught to speak.

You, who spew your filth, have no idea what the Talmudiym even are. You certainly can't read them.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

...
The Garden story says this –
Genesis 2:

16: Yahweh says to Adam, Eat any fruit you like
17 except the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (‘tree of kge’) BECAUSE if you eat it you’ll die the same day.​

...

Note 7: Adam and Eve ate the fruit but they did not die the same day (rather, they lived on for a serious number of years). So the snake spoke the truth, and Yahweh – ahm – misspoke.

No.

 

[Magus]

I was born in Haifa Israel. I know my father to son lineage all the way back to Sinai. Hebrew and Aramaic were the first two languages I was taught to speak.

You, who spew your filth, have no idea what the Talmudiym even are. You certainly can't read them.

Talmud is a Quran , a book that interprets the Torah and makes a religion out of it, Judaism is a political cult that as no relation to any cult in the ancient world.

Benjamin Netanyahu, his real name is 'Benjamin Mileikowsky' with obvious Eastern European Caucasian features, He changed his own name to aesthetically appear more ' Canaanite ' ( the historical ethnic of that Region), the same is obviously true for you.

Pretending to descent all the way back in 'Sinai' ( no one knows where the Biblical Sinai is) from Egyptian Exodees ( No evidence it happened), who founded the Fictional United Kingdom of Israel & Judea ( No evidence this existed) , ***mod edit***