Cheryl Schatz

truthseeker,
On the other post about Eve you asked:

I see absolutely nothing stated in the text about Adam or anyone else developing/now having a sin nature. It is completely and totally absent. Would God have not stated something clearly that was this monumental?

Adam hid his sin which was a continuation of the sin pattern:

Job 31:33 (NASB)
33 “Have I covered my transgressions like Adam,
By hiding my iniquity in my bosom,

Adam is also predicted to sin against his wife by ruling over her. In Genesis 3:22 God stops only one future sin from taking place and that would be the sin of Adam eating from what is now forbidden. This verse is very monumental as it is the first time that God forbids something that was given freely before and it is forbidden because of the need to stop a sin from taking place.

If, as egals, we claim to be so careful about what is and isn’t clearly evident and stated in the text regarding women and their ‘roles’, then why do we just jump right in there on this one and pronounce that there is, indeed, such a thing as a sin nature showing up here? It is like the emperor’s new clothes, if you ask me.

How do you explain only one man hiding his sin? How do you explain only one man looked on as one who could again sin with knowledge? I see Adam’s continued sin in three ways. Do you see an innocence or do you see something that has changed in the man? God didn’t have to set a guard on the tree knowledge of good and evil in the beginning. Why does God have to set a guard to the garden now? What has changed?