Adams transgression

[Persuaded]

No!

That is a separate issue.

Only that he was a type of Christ, and this is how- by choosing to follow Eve.

What is the symbolism of the snake on a pole, that is said to be a figure of Christ in John 3? John equates the snake with Christ. It doesn't take much symbolic insight to realize what a snake represents to a Jewish mind.

The point of the comparison to Adam or the snake isn't that they are like Christ, but that Christ made Himself like them, on the cross. He was "made sin". He experienced separation from the Father for the first time in eternity. I believe that separation hurt far more than the physical ordeal. His cry of anguish from the cross wasn't about physical pain, but about the realization that with the weight of our sins resting on/in Him, He could no longer have fellowship with the Father.

2 Corinthians 5:21 (KJV)

For he hath made him [to be] sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

I think the significance of this verse is generally overlooked. Being "made sin", is to experience the full wrath of a righteous God, who cannot abide any sin. Christ's physical death was insignificant in comparison.

Edited July 19, 2014 by Persuaded

[Edwin]

OneLight.

 

You ask, "are you saying that Adam was sinless?"

 

Adam was sinless when he decided to take the necessary action to save Eve, and this resulted in him becoming a sinner.

 

Edwin.

[Persuaded]

That might be overstating Adam's motive a bit- I don't see that Adam knew his choice would save Eve, just that he chose (perhaps carnally or selfishly, perhaps out of selfless love) to join her in whatever future she then had before her. God's promise of the redeemer through the seed of the woman came after both sinned.

[Willa]

Eve did it from deception.....there is a difference...  Remember that Eve didn't hear God give them the directions as far as we know.   Appearantly Adam told her that if she touched the fruit she would die.....   The snake showed her that wasn't the case and talked her into eating the fruit.

 

Adam on the other hand knew exactly what God had told him and had no excuse as far as I can see, and it appears that God agreed and laid all the blame on him.

I so agree with otherone. Adam directly heard the voice of God here. Eve had not yet been created. So she may have disobeyed Adam's warning, but she had not heard about this directly from God. So her greater sin was in being deceived by the serpent, the father of lies. But Adam openly rebelled against the Creator of the universe. God had told Adam face to face not to eat of the tree, but chose to follow his wife instead of following God. Also, as head of the family he probably is held partly responsible for her transgression as well as his own.

[Cog]

Maybe the connection is that Eve was made from Adam and Adam from Jesus.

Body > Body > Body

And Jesus is the head of Adam and Adam the head of Eve

Head > Head > Head?

The head took on the sin of the body.

But Jesus doing so was a gift and not a transgression. (Which is what the topics passage is about.)

You guys are looking to Eve as if she was innocent but she had heard from her head not to eat and so like everyone, her body suffered.

Just another thought: The punishment is fitting the crime. They ate an imperfect fruit after not listening to their heads and then had to bear imperfect fruits with their body -- but again, Jesus doing so was a gift not a transgression.

Edited July 19, 2014 by Cog

[Edwin]

That might be overstating Adam's motive a bit- I don't see that Adam knew his choice would save Eve, just that he chose (perhaps carnally or selfishly, perhaps out of selfless love) to join her in whatever future she then had before her. God's promise of the redeemer through the seed of the woman came after both sinned.

What then is your understanding of Adam being a type of Christ?

[Persuaded]

I think I stated it as clearly as I could on the first page of this thread.

Basically, Adam's choice had the end result of Eve's salvation. I don't think Adam did, nor needs to, understand the redemptive/future aspect of his action for the model/type to apply, and most models get distorted of we try to apply them over-zealously. I see no evidence in the text that says he knew his act would redeem her, just that he chose to eat, which he knew was sin, and this act had the paradoxical end result of Eve's redemption (and the curse! -see, the model doesn't fit Christ in every aspect, just up to a point).

As I try to put myself in Adam's shoes, I see his choice being motivated in love for Eve, in not wanting to be separated from her as she faced exile. He chose to sin and go with her, than to let her go and he himself stay in Eden. I don't think we know the theological ramifications of what would have happened if Adam refused the fruit from Eve.

[Cog]

but he didn't do it to save her so I don't think we can call him a messiah archetype to her.

Where Jesus took on the sin to save the flesh, Adam did not. Adam just did it because he loved the flesh - he wasn't trying to save her.

[Persuaded]

- he wasn't trying to save her.

...agree, not for that reason, but his actions were used to that result. He was a type of Christ, but not in every conceivable detail- that leads to the absurd.

[gdemoss]

Yes, Adam laid down his life for his bride. He had no choice because he thought just like God as he was filled with the Spirit of God until Sin and Death by sin entered into him. After that his thinking was no longer pure.