web analytics

Genesis – The First Marriage Problems

We are going to start by looking at just a few aspects of this story of the Fall.

The MAN walked away from the 6th day having been told by God:
And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, “Of every tree of the garden you(si) may freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you(si) shall not eat, for in the day that you(si) eat of it you(si) shall surely die. (in the Hebrew all the “you” are singular) Gen 2:16-17
(See all these singular/plurals for yourself)

Then God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth. And God said, “See, I have given you(pl) every herb that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed; to you(pl) it shall be for food. Also, to every beast of the earth, to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, in which there is life, I have given every green herb for food”; and it was so. (in the Hebrew all the “you” are plural) Gen 1:28-30

The WOMAN walked away from the 6th day having been told by God:
Then God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth. And God said, “See, I have given you(pl) every herb that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed; to you(pl) it shall be for food. Also, to every beast of the earth, to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, in which there is life, I have given every green herb for food”; and it was so. (in the Hebrew all the “you” are plural) Gen 1:28-30

Here we see that God told the man he could freely eat of all the trees, but also commanded the man to not eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, before the woman was made. God is not recorded as having given the woman this command. The woman was told by God that all the fruit-bearing trees had been given to them for food, without any exception mentioned in what God told her. It should be noted that God telling her she could eat from all the fruit-bearing trees was one of the few interactions the woman had with God on her first day, and probably made her feel special, respected, and loved by God that He told her He gave her dominion over the animals and the herbs to eat and fruit trees to eat from.

From the woman’s perspective: God told her she could eat from all the trees.

From the man’s perspective: God told him that he could eat from all the trees except for one. There was one tree he was commanded not to eat from, and if he did he would surely die. Then the man saw God told the woman she could eat from all the trees.

Which leads up to the next events, of Genesis Chapter 3:
Now the serpent was more cunning than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made.
And he said to the woman, “Has God indeed said, ‘You(pl) shall not eat of every tree of the garden’?”
And the woman said to the serpent, “We may eat the fruit of the trees of the garden; but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God has said, ‘You(pl) shall not eat it, nor shall you(pl) touch it, lest you(pl) die.’” (in the Hebrew all the “you” are plural)

Then the serpent said to the woman,
“You(pl) will not surely die. For God knows that in the day you(pl) eat of it your(pl) eyes will be opened, and you(pl) will be like God, knowing good and evil.” (in the Hebrew all the “you” are plural) Gen 3:1-5

Here the woman knows of something similar to the command God gave Adam, before she was made. It contradicts what God told her directly, which was that she could eat from all the trees. The most logical conclusion, as the Bible does not record God repeating this command to her, is that the man told the woman about what God had commanded him. As such, the most logical conclusion is that she heard this command second-hand from the man, not from God directly.

So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree desirable to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate. She also gave to her husband with her, and he ate. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves coverings. Gen 3:6-7
Note: the woman’s eyes are not recorded to have opened until after the man ate the fruit, and no time delay is mentioned between her and his eyes opening.

And they heard the sound of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God among the trees of the garden. Then the LORD God called to Adam and said to him, “Where are you(si)?” (In Hebrew this “you” is singular)

So he said, “I heard Your voice in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; and I hid myself.” And He said, “Who told you(si) that you(si) were naked? Have you(si) eaten from the tree of which I commanded you(si) that you(si) should not eat?” (in the Hebrew all “you” are singular) Gen 3:8-11
God confirms that He said to Adam singularly that “you should not eat.”
God could have said,
“Have you eaten from the tree I commanded you(si) that ‘you(pl) should not eat’?”
But this is not what the text says. When God says “you should not eat”, He is repeating his command given to Adam in Gen 1, which reads in the singular, and here also is repeated in the singular. God makes it clear and confirms here that the command to not eat was solely given to Adam.

Then the man said, “The woman whom You gave to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I ate.” And the LORD God said to the woman, “What is this you have done?”
The woman said, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.”

So the LORD God said to the serpent: “Because you(pl) have done this, (the “you” here is plural) Gen 3:12-14
The “you” here is plural. As such this “you” seems to be directed at the serpent and the woman.
What did they do together? Tempt the man to eat from the tree.

You are cursed more than all cattle, And more than every beast of the field; On your belly you shall go, And you shall eat dust All the days of your life. (the other “you” are singular)
And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her Seed; He shall bruise your head, And you shall bruise His heel.”
To the woman He said:
“Multiply, I will multiply your pains, and your conception in pain you shall bring forth children;
Your desire will be for your husband, And he will rule over you.” Gen 3:14-16
(Note: “he will rule over you” is a negative consequence of the fall told to the woman, not a permission or instruction given to the man.)

Then to Adam He said, “Because you(si) have heeded the voice of your wife, “she ate from the tree” of which I commanded you(si), saying, ‘You(si) shall not eat of it’:
The “you” here is singular in all instances. God confirms a second time that He said to Adam singularly that “you shall not eat of it.” God could have said, “I commanded you saying ‘You(pl) shall not eat of it.” But this is not what the text says. It is singular and God’s command was just addressed to Adam. This is a 2nd witness by God of what His original command was, even specifying what He said most precisely, and so there are 2 witnesses of God’s original command being to Adam alone.

Cursed is the ground for your sake; In toil you shall eat of it All the days of your life. Both thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you, And you shall eat the herb of the field. 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.” (in Hebrew all the “you” are masculine singular) Gen 3:17-19

And Adam called his wife’s name Eve, because she was the mother of all living.
Also for Adam and his wife the LORD God made tunics of skin, and clothed them.
Then the LORD God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil.
And now, lest he put out his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever”— therefore the LORD God sent him out of the garden of Eden to till the ground from which he was taken. So He drove out the man; and He placed cherubim at the east of the garden of Eden, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to guard the way to the tree of life. Gen 3:20-24

Let’s look at the cause and effect in this story, of what was done, and what God said as a result.
The woman is not specifically told that she will die because of eating from the tree, but the man is told he will die because he ate from the tree.
If the woman would die because of eating from the tree, what would make sense is that God would have mentioned she would die for eating from the tree in what God told her were her punishments.

But God does not.

Instead the only reason given for her punishment is found in the statement directed to the serpent in the plural “you”. As this you is plural, it seems that God was addressing both the serpent and the woman. It would better read “because you two have done this“. What had they done together? They had tempted the man to eat from the tree. So the most straightforward reading of the text is that what God says to the woman as punishments or consequences are because of her participation with the serpent in tempting the man to eat from the tree that was forbidden to the man.

Here God forces man to leave the garden, for the stated reason to prevent the man, just the man, from eating of the tree of life. God specifies much to the man. Included is that the man will return to the dust from which he was taken. It is not specified that the woman will die, only that the man will die.
Without making any assumption, based just on what God says, it seems that if the man dies, then the woman will die also, which is implied as a cause and effect.

All this raises the question, as to whether the woman would have died if only she had eaten the fruit of the tree. Most people seem to think the woman was set to die once she ate from the tree. But is this actually what the Bible teaches?
1. God commanded the man alone to not eat, and God confirms this twice after they ate.
2. Man is told he (singular) will die because he ate.
3. Woman is never told she will die because she ate, and she was not commanded to not eat. Despite 2 opportunities to confirm she had been commanded not to eat also, God only says that He had singularly commanded the man to not eat, and God twice confirms this is the case.
4. Apparently God telling the man he (singular) will die also means the woman will die.
5. The woman’s eyes are not recorded as having been opened until after the man ate the fruit.

What might this mean? Is it possible that the woman did not die because of eating from the tree? While she did face negative consequences and punishment from the fall, the only time she is addressed as to why she is being punished, seems to be as the serpent is addressed.
The serpent is told “because you(plural) have done this” Or another way to put it would be “because you two have done this”. What did the serpent and the woman do together? The serpent deceived the woman into tempting the man to eat, and as such they both tempted the man to eat the fruit that God had commanded him to not eat. And after God is done addressing the serpent, without any “because you did….” to the woman, God then addresses her. As such, just based on what the Bible actually says, it makes the most sense that her crime was participation in tempting the man to eat from the tree which God had commanded him to not eat from. This argument has more going for it, based on what God’s Word actually says, than the argument that she was punished for eating the fruit herself.
That she is punished for eating the fruit is never specified. Rather, it is specified that her punishment is for participation with the serpent, in what they both did together.

Is it possible that the man was the only one who was forbidden to eat the fruit? Is it possible that the woman would not have died, nor had her eyes opened, if she alone had ate the fruit? Based on the punishments specified to her, which does not include anything about her dying, and based on that her eyes were not opened until after Adam ate the fruit, this does seem to be at least a possibility that the Bible indicates. The most straightforward reading of the causes and effects in the story shows this to be a possibility.

Most people have been taught, and assume, that the woman died because she ate, and the man died because he ate. But this is not specified in the Scriptures. Rather, as Adam is the only one told that he will die, and the woman is not told her punishments are for eating from the tree, and because twice God confirms His command was singularly to Adam, this all points to the possibility that the woman died because Adam died.

And you may be surprised to learn there is additional corroboration and support for this argument in the rest of scripture. And I found these as I looked for further references to the story of the first man and woman:
1 Cor 11:8 “For the man is not out of the woman, but the woman is out of the man”

1 Tim 2:13-14 “For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived became in the transgression.”

Rom 5:12-21
Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come. But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many. And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification. For if by one man’s offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ. Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound: That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord. KJV

Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned– for until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come. But the free gift is not like the transgression. For if by the transgression of the one the many died, much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abound to the many. The gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned; for on the one hand the judgment arose from one transgression resulting in condemnation, but on the other hand the free gift arose from many transgressions resulting in justification. For if by the transgression of the one, death reigned through the one, much more those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ. So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men. For as through the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous. The Law came in so that the transgression would increase; but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, so that, as sin reigned in death, even so grace would reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. NASB

1 Cor 15:21-22, 45
For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

What these verses state is that by Adam’s sin, death passed to all men, including women. This is something assumed to pass genetically from the parents to child, and many assume that mortality passed from both Adam and Eve to all of their children. However, this is not what the Bible actually teaches. It teaches that death passed to all men from the sin of 1 man, which is specified to be Adam. There are 2 witnesses to this in the New Testament as being the true. And we know that death passed to all of Adam’s male and female children, and that “all men” thus includes women as well.

Not only that, but the balance of Jesus’ righteousness being given to many, is directly compared to Adam’s condemnation being passed on to many. Jesus is specified as one originator of forgiveness and life, and so is Adam one originator of condemnation and death, in this direct comparison.
Just taking the Bible as God’s Word, God states that death passed to all people, the children of Adam, because of Adam’s sin.
It is believed that the death caused by eating from the tree was a spiritual death, and many people teach this. It makes sense because Adam did not immediately physically die from eating the tree. As such it is thought that he spiritually died, and because he spiritually died, his body started dying as well.

Also it should be noted that eating from the tree of life is what would cause immortality:
Then the LORD God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil. And now, lest he put out his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever”— therefore the LORD God sent him out of the garden of Eden to till the ground from which he was taken. So He drove out the man; and He placed cherubim at the east of the garden of Eden, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to guard the way to the tree of life.

If Adam was already immortal, the tree of Life would not have been necessary, and it is specified that eating from it is what would cause immortality, to live forever. This also may have referred to a spiritual living forever. It may be that when it came to the trees in the garden, that a spiritual death caused a physical death, and a spiritual immortality caused a physical immortality. This seems to make sense and be likely. Neither tree referred to physical death or life directly, but rather to the life or death of the spirit, leading to the life or death of the body. But if this is the case, then why does the verse saying he must leave the garden so he won’t eat from the tree of life, indicate that the tree of life would only affect Adam, and not Eve?

Gen 2:7 says, “And the LORD God formed man [of] the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.”

1 Cor 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

The word here for “soul” is “psyche” and it means “life” and “soul”. It is also used in Matt 10:28
“And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.”

And so we know that the soul lives on past physical death as something spiritual, and that therefore what God breathed into Adam was something spiritual, when God breathed into Adam and he became a “living soul”.

Now, granted, it is difficult to tell sometimes when the Bible is referring to the soul, and to the spirit. We know they are different, but sometimes the words used for each leave us with slightly fuzzy definitions. Why this is so seems to be alluded  to In Heb 4:12,
For the word of God [is] quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and [is] a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
The soul and spirit are so tightly joined together, that it takes something like a very finely sharpened instrument, to divide them apart. That being said, it still seems that the death or life from the trees in the garden had an effect upon the soul or spirit of man, which would then have an effect on the body.

From what is recorded in the Bible, God breathed  the “breath of life” into Adam and he became a living soul. Then God formed the woman out of Adam’s rib. (See previous article). What is the “breath of life”? The Bible indicates that the “breath of life” is the “spirit” of life.

“The Spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life.” Job 33:4

“All the while my breath [is] in me, and the spirit (ruach) of God [is] in my nostrils Job 27:3

“And the LORD said, My spirit (ruach) shall not always strive with man, for that he also [is] flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.” Gen 6:3

And so it seems that in Genesis, God made Adam’s body, and then breathed the spirit of life into Adam, also called the “breath of life”, and then Adam became a living soul.

The Bible teaches that the life of the body is found in the blood, as seen in Lev 17:11, For the life of the flesh [is] in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it [is] the blood [that] maketh an atonement for the soul.
At first Adam had a body, but it was not alive, and he was not a living soul, until God breathed into him a spirit, which gave him life. Then Adam became a living soul. And once Adam became a living soul, then his body also had life. This implies that the life in the body comes from the life of the soul, and the life of the soul comes from the spirit which is the breath of life. So the life of the spirit gives life to the soul and gives the body life. And the life of the flesh is in the blood. Which must mean the spirit is tied to or in the blood somehow.

Now, when God formed the woman of Adam’s flesh and bone, Adam then said she was flesh of his flesh and bone of his bones. The blood is in the flesh, and also blood is in the marrow of the bone of a rib, and the life is in the blood, and the spirit gives life, so the spirit must be in the blood or tied to it somehow. Which would mean that whatever the spirit or “breath of life” is made of, I’ll call it “spirit-matter”, was in or tied to the flesh and bone God took from Adam and used to make the woman. Adam’s blood was in the rib God took from Adam and made the woman with. She then had her individual soul, and he had his individual soul, but they both had a soul made alive from the same substance of spirit or “breath of life”, like “spirit-matter”, which came from Adam. Just like they had two bodies, both made of the same skin and bones and blood, they were separate, but each was made of the same stuff. And in the same way, they each had a separate soul, but their souls were both made alive of the same stuff, the same “spirit” giving life or “breath of life”. And the individual body and spirit of the woman was formed out of the substance of the body and spirit of the man; and the combination of both body and spirit of life is what made each of them to be individual living souls.

As the Bible does not specify that God again breathed life into the woman, but only into the man, then this must mean that her living spirit came from Adam’s living spirit, as her body was built from a rib taken from Adam. And as the spirit is tied to the blood, and a rib contains blood, that all adds up very well. Her spirit was built from the “spirit-matter” taken from Adam.

The spirit is the “breath of life” which gives life to an individual soul. As Adam was the one who was given the original living spirit, could this mean he was effectively the guardian of it, and all human spirits? The woman’s spirit in her, giving her life, had been built from Adam’s spirit that God had breathed into him. Could it be if his spirit died spiritually, that her spirit would die spiritually also? And if his spirit died, and his body began to die as a result, could it be that the woman’s spirit would die, and her body would begin to die also?

Well, in the case of children, the Bible always lists lineage by the father. There is some reason to think that the spiritual condition of the father is what defines the spiritual condition of the child. For instance, Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and spiritually He also IS God. He is as His Father is. He did not inherit just a normal sinful spiritual state from his mother, He was human, but He was not just human, He was also God. (*And some people argue there is another case, in Gen 6, having to do with the origin of demons, for anyone familiar with the example, the argument also shows that the spirit of the father determines the type of spirit of the child.)
We also see in Ex 20:5 that God says, Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God [am] a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth [generation] of them that hate me;
And the terms here do refer to paternal ancestors, but not maternal ancestors (though it could refer to paternal ancestors on the mother’s side). The Bible seems to indicate strongly that the paternal line passes on the spiritual state of the child.

Also the Bible directly says that men come THROUGH a woman, in the same manner that the first woman came out of the first man. This word does mean to “pass through” as in motion through.
1 Cor 11:8,12
For the man is not out of the woman, but the woman is out of the man;  For just as the woman is out of the man, in this manner also the man is through the woman; but all together from God.”

And as such, the Bible teaches that children come from their father, through their mother, to having life. And this is specified as in the same manner as the first woman came out of the man, to life. What is spoken of here is not just the body, but as the life is from the spirit, and the life is in the blood, this also is referring to the substance of the spirit coming through the body and the flesh and the blood. Children gain a living spirit from their father, through their mother, and also in this manner the first woman gained her spirit out of the man. It is not just the flesh and bone spoken of here, but the blood, which contains the life, and the spirit is what gives life, so this speaks of the substance of the spirit also. The spirit of life of a child comes from the father as it’s origin, passing through the mother. The spirit of life of a child does not originate from the child’s mother, but the child’s father. Nor does the Bible teach that God breathes the “breath of life” or life-giving “spirit” into a child at conception. Many people believe this, but the Bible does not read this way. God builds from the materials already in place, which are “multiplied“.

The first man and woman were told to “multiply”. Now, multiplying implies something is copied, thus becoming more, a self-generation. We can know what the Bible means by the term “multiplied” from the example of the first “multiplication” which is recorded for us. God did the first multiplication of 1 into 2, multiplying Adam into being both Adam and Eve. One body became 2, one spirit became 2, one soul became 2. And then by the children they were multiplied into many more.  But Adam was the original, and both the first woman, and all the children, were multiplied from Adam. We procreate children by multiplying, not adding, though each new child and new soul is still a miracle from God. And this is how it has been since the beginning, and is taught in Genesis. The man had his own body, spirit and soul, and the woman had her own body, spirit, and soul, just like a father and a son each have their own body, spirit, and soul. But the woman’s spirit was multiplied from the man’s, as a child’s spirit is still multiplied from the spirit of the child’s father. Ultimately all of humanity has the origin of its spirit (giving life, the “breath of life”) as multiplied from Adam’s one spirit, which came from God when God breathed into Adam. This is similar to how all of us are bodily related to Adam.

So when Adam sinned, and died spiritually, because the original spirit had changed, therefore the other multiplied spirits changed, and all sinned and died because Adam sinned and died and had his eyes opened. This is what Romans 5 and 1 Cor 15 actually say. All die because Adam died, all sin because Adam sinned.

And in a way, Eve was a multiplication of Adam like all Adam’s children. The same spiritual change that effected all Adam’s children (which we know is true) also effected Eve. And as such, the reason Eve’s eyes were opened, and the reason Eve died, was because Adam ate from the tree. And this is in the same way, for the same spiritual reason, that all of his children have had their eyes opened, and died, ever since. The spiritual reason that all of Adam’s children would die and sin and have their eyes opened, is the exact same spiritual reason that Eve would die and sin and had her eyes opened.

1 Cor 15:21-22, 45
For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

Romans 5
Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned– for until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come. But the free gift is not like the transgression. For if by the transgression of the one the many died, much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abound to the many. The gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned; for on the one hand the judgment arose from one transgression resulting in condemnation, but on the other hand the free gift arose from many transgressions resulting in justification. For if by the transgression of the one, death reigned through the one, much more those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ. So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men. For as through the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous. The Law came in so that the transgression would increase; but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, so that, as sin reigned in death, even so grace would reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. NASB

In any case, however it worked, Romans 5 clearly states that all died because of Adam’s sin. If my thoughts above on this are incorrect as to how this worked, nevertheless the Bible does state that everyone (Eve included) died from Adam’s sin. Because of the comparison used of Jesus Christ, saying Eve did not die because of Adam’s sin would be like saying someone could be forgiven and have eternal life without Jesus Christ’s gift to them of salvation. If you doubt this, I suggest you read Romans 5 again, as I am only saying as it’s logic dictates.

Now, some people might protest that it is not fair for the woman’s eyes to have been opened and for her to have died, because of Adam’s sin. How is it any more or less fair than every child born from them, and their children’s children, etc, to have had their eyes opened and to have died? Babies die while still innocent, and have ever since the fall. Their eyes are not yet opened in that way, but they still die. This understanding I am teaching actually gives more of a reason as to why this is like it is, than the idea that God breathes  ”the breath of life” into each child at conception. Yes, God does a miracle to multiply. But God does not add anew. God builds an individual child, and that child’s spirit,  from what is already there, pre-existing materials, in the case of each child, just as in the case of Eve.

And others might say that the children were like both their parents, born to have their eyes opened, born to die someday. And would say that it was the sin of both the parents, Adam and Eve, in eating the fruit, that caused this upon the children. But this is not what the Bible actually teaches. The Bible teaches that in Adam all die, and that through the sin of Adam, just 1 man, sin passed to all humanity. The Bible even states it was just 1 sin that took place, done by 1 man, and does not state it was 2 sins done by a man and a woman.

So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men. For as through the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous. Romans 5

And the same spiritual rules of how things work also seem to apply to men, not women, when it comes to the sins of men. The Bible specifies it is the sins of the fathers that are visited on the children to the 3rd and 4th generation. And then there is the example of Jesus, who was one with His Father, but not of the same spiritual nature of His human mother, because He Himself was and is also God.

1 Jn 5:1 Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth Him that begat, loveth him also that is begotten of Him.

Jesus Christ was begotten of God the Father. The same word for “begat” is used in Matt 1:2 
Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren;

A child being begat is intrinsically tied to the father and the spiritual paternal line. There is more to being begat than being sired physically, because also there is a spiritual heritage and line. There is a physical multiplication, but also there is a spiritual multiplication, which gives the body life and makes someone to be a living soul. In some way, the spirit of the father also passes to the children, as multiplied to them. And children come through their mothers, but they are not spiritually given life from her, but from their father. This also explains why lineages in the Bible often leave women out entirely. It is not without a cause, or some sexist thing, but rather the Bible speaks the truth, and it tells a truth of how the spiritual heritage, the life of a living spirit, is passed down, being multiplied. Fathers alone begat their children, and this term is never used of mothers. This proves that the Biblical truth is that there is something fathers contribute that mothers do not, a bottom line which makes it true that fathers should ultimately be understood as generating the child. What the fathers solely contribute cannot be the body, as all modern knowledge of reproduction precludes this. Therefore, it must be the “breath of life” or “spirit” that is multiplied solely from the father of the child, and this “breath of life” is the essential ingredient for the child to become alive and become and individual “living soul”.

And the same as if Eve had been Adam’s daughter or son, because she came from him, and her spirit was multiplied from his original spirit, death passed from Adam to Eve, by his sin. In a way, God only did ever make 1 human spirit giving life, which then multiplied into more spirits giving life to all men and women. But it was the male, Adam, who carried both the power and the responsibility of the well-being of both of the first 2 humans, and their children, and he was the one given a commandment, to not eat the fruit. Whatever he did that affected his spirit, would affect all other spirits that had been multiplied from his original. He was the original, and all multiplications of his spirit were still tied to him, by spiritual rules of how things work.

So could this be possible, which I think is what the Bible actually teaches and is true:

The reason the woman died and her eyes did open was not because she sinned in eating of the tree, but because Adam sinned in eating of the tree, and because his eyes were opened from eating. And in sinning, his spirit died, so his body died (over time). And because of this, the woman’s spirit, multiplied from his, also died, and so her body died (over time). And this is also why all the children of Adam would sin, die, and would have their eyes opened. (The spiritual death here caused an immediate separation from God spiritually, but apparently even the presence of the spirit in a “dead” state was already tied to the body and blood, and continued to give the body and soul life for some time, though eventually the “dead” state of the spirit would catch up to the body, and people would die.)

This also would explain why the woman’s eyes were not recorded to have opened until after Adam ate of the tree. If the woman alone ate of the tree, she would not die, because she had not been commanded by God to not eat of it, so it was not sin to her. Therefore, if she ate of it, she had done no sin, and so would not die. She would have been unchanged. And because her spirit was multiplied from Adam’s, it’s likely she could not have her eyes opened, a spiritual matter of the soul, unless Adam ate. If so, then the reason would be because if she ate she would not know good from evil, from sinning in disobeying God, because it was not a sin for her to eat from the tree.

If Adam had eaten of the tree and sinned, but she had not eaten of the tree, her eyes would still have been opened, and she still would have died. The same as would her children, because he was their father, and he would be the original of their spirits (giving life), and was the original of her spirit also, as all spirits were multiplied from his.

This is why Adam was commanded to not eat of the tree, but the woman was given no such command. Adam had the original spirit giving life, who all spirits were multiplied from. What he chose to do had power to effect the woman and all the children, real power, and so he carried the responsibility of not eating from the tree.

This idea has the weight of the verses included above, and also is entirely allowable by what is said in Genesis, and what is not said in Genesis.
Looking at Romans 5, some might argue that the one sin is “accounted” to Adam, as he was originally given the command to not eat, and making sure the woman did not eat was his responsibility, as he was in charge. But this is not what the Bible actually says, anywhere. Adam was never charged by God to keep the woman from eating from the tree. God only commanded Adam to not eat, but God told the woman directly that she could eat from all the trees. (Gen 1:29)

Many people claim to take the Bible literally. A “day” is a “day”, and so on. But in Romans 5, people take the statements as not being literal. But if you want to take the Bible as literal, it literally does say Adam singularly sinned, and by this one sin, death passed to all of humanity. It is not a figurative responsibility, it is a literal one.

We will look in detail at Genesis 3 in more detail next.

 

 

[[ Addendum for later Revision: Also see and incorporate Malachi 2:15 which mentions that though one, "he" (Adam) had the "residue of the spirit".

And did not he make one? Yet had he the residue of the spirit. And wherefore one? That he might seek a godly seed. Therefore take heed to your spirit, and let none deal treacherously against the wife of his youth. KJV

And did he not make one, although he had the residue of the Spirit? And wherefore one? He sought a godly seed. Therefore take heed to your spirit, and let none deal treacherously against the wife of his youth. ASV

And did he not make one? Yet had he the residue of the spirit. And why one? That he might seek a godly seed. Therefore take heed to your spirit, and let none deal treacherously against the wife of his youth. WEB

Did he not make one, although he had the residue of the Spirit? Why one? He sought a godly seed. Therefore take heed to your spirit, and let none deal treacherously against the wife of his youth. HNV  ]]