Should the Original Sin be called the Original Entrapment instead?

Question

If before Adam and Eve ate of the fruit of the "Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil" they were completely pure and had no knowledge of evil (including deception), wouldn't it have been impossible for them to discern that they were being deceived?
Now, you can posit that God warned them about eating the fruit, but anyone who knows anything about children will know they're easily deceived into doing things they've been warned against because of naivete. it's safe to assume Adam and Eve were as naive as children because of their lack of knowing good from evil.
When you warn young children not to talk to strangers, you still don't let them out your sight under the belief they're safe because of your warning
So, my question is wouldn't this be considered entrapment, or a case of bad parenting on God's part for even letting satan into eden?

Answer 1

The story of Adam and Eve is one my favorites, it's been perverted by literalists. I have asked the literal people the same thing. They are content with blaming the downfall of all mankind on Eve.

This story attempts to explain our nature. We're curious and need to learn. We also don't take well to over reaching authority. We should try and avoid the destructivity that our nature burdens us with.

If we look at the story allegorically, there is wisdom in it. If we see it as a literal, the beauty and depth is completely lost.

But to get to your theory which is mine as well. Adam and Eve were made the scapegoats for all of mans problems. God can't be held culpable. So.... sure, it was the newbie humans who are to blame.

What's more even if they did disobey, it was within God's power to forgive them, just forgive and give them a fresh start. He could have even punished them and just them. God laid the ground rules, A and E didn't invent original sin or hell but they are responsible for it all....not God.

Taken literally it's a horrible story of a hateful vengeful manipulative tyrant of a God. Who planned a way to torment his creation into perpetuity. It lends itself to the self hate Christians feel. They have a sense of shame that is deep. How else can the death of a Savior arise in them feelings of utter gratefulness. It is a perverted love story.

Pantheist

Answer 2

If there were a god, it would appear that 'he' is against curiosity. 'He' also comes off as a bully and a complete control freak. These are not traits conducive to a strong leader. Many of his followers seem to emulate these childish character traits. Take Cruz C for example. He starts his answer by stating that he will not answer. That would make him a blatant liar. Then he makes another angry statement insulting your 'heathen pals' that only serves to display a deep insecurity that he next tries to bolster with a rather arrogant statement about his power. He appears to be a legend in his own mind. Not very impressive, but conducive to the mentality of a ten year old child. Evidently Cruz C didn't read the rules; you have to be at least 13 years old to participate. I’m sorry; I appear to have gone off on a tangent. To answer your question I would have to say that the ‘original sin’ concept could very easily be considered entrapment. If this god did not want people to become knowledgeable, why did he ‘create’ them with a strong sense of curiosity? If all he wanted was sheep, why did he not just clone Cruz C?

Addition:
If this response makes no sense to you it's because Cruz C deleted his response.

Answer 3

There is no such thing as total depravity. That was invented by John Calvin. Even with original sin, there is enough grace left in the soul of humans to choose to do good, and choose to believe in God. If we are totally depraved, we could not do that. Matrimony was instituted before the Fall, and it has always been holy, and did not suffer the consequences of the Fall, making it a unique sacrament, and disproving Calvins invention. There is also the natural law that is written on every persons heart. Humans instinctivly know that certain things are wrong and certain things are good. Killing is wrong no matter what religion (or no religion) you follow. People choose to harden their conscience to commit evil acts. Because evil exists does not mean that God willed it.

Answer 4

No, because the instruction was given by God NOT to eat from the tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. That simple. They should have obeyed, instead of listening to the snake, who told them something completely opposite. Adam actually was more responsible, since he had actually seen God creating things, and knew that He was the Creator; but Eve never saw God create anything. However, Adam certainly would have told her. If the snake told her something that completely disagreed with the command of God, she should have gone to God and consulted him right away.
The fact that they didn't know good from evil is no excuse - they certainly knew how to obey, and that was all that was expected of them.
If God had eliminated the tree and Satan from the Garden, then there wouldn't have been a choice, would there? Free will means nothing if there's no choice, and obedience would mean nothing, either. It was a test of obedience.
If you tell your child not to do something and they do it anyway, not obeying you, that warrants punishment. They made their "free will" choice, but no choice comes without consequences. There's no such thing as a "consequence-free choice".

Answer 5

As an atheist, I like to think that children are not developed fully to understand thier actions, so would not hold them fully accountable until they had developed sufficently to understand the full gravity of thier actions.

However, religion does not work like this. The age of accountability is one of many misleading terms which are often used in Christian circles. Most people would agree that basically it means, 'a person who is young enough that he is not yet able to understand fully the results of his actions'. Adam and Eve would fall into this argument, however where we would not hold a child accountable - God seems to be a little more black and white.

The problem with your argument is that you are twisting God's law for the sake of what seems right in our own eyes. There is nothing in God's law that says man must fully understand sin, before it is actually sin. On the contrary, this doctrine is both un-biblical and self serving, for it presupposes unrighteously that sin must first be recognized as sin before it is actually accountable. Nothing in scripture supports such a thesis - religion is not compassionate - nor is the god of the old testament!

Proverbs 20:11

"Even a Child is known by his doings, whether his work be pure, and whether it be right."

Your tollerant christian can see sin in children at every age if they dare look close enough. In some cases they think it's cute, or mischievous, or call it strong willed or some other label to avoid the 'truth'.

If we looked at children honestly, we would see that they are simply small adults, sinning in every way just as we do. Any serious attempt to actually determine the age of wilful sin would automatically drive that age downward until it reached birth. At which point, we would then be in agreement with God's Word in the Bible.

Psalms 58:3-5

"The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies.


We make the mistake of all gentiles approaching this tollerant religion, the same mistake made in 1st John 3:4

tells us that sin is the transgression of the law, and without knowledge of the law there is no sin,

But when the scriptures say that Adam had no 'Knowledge of Good and Evil' prior to his fall, he had no accountability, but the God of the old testament was not a fair, or just God, he killed people and was quite irate at times. Life is not fair, and the god created by Man has all mans faults a well.

Answer 6

While God did know what was happening, he was aware that Adam and Eve needed to be tested, if Eve wouldn't of fallin' for Satans snair then they would of lived longer. Not knowing God from Evil, nor sweetness from bitterness. Satan's tempting Eve was part of God's plan, but God does not do evil nor entraps his children.
If Eve wouldn't have eatin of the Forbidden Fruit, then you wouldn't be here asking this question.

Answer 7

What if we existed before we were actually born into this world (our spirits) what if just like satan and a third of the angels rose up against God and were cast to earth, some of God's spiritual children were also tempted to follow that bad example? What if God put us down in here in human bodies for us to see for ourselves whether we would obey or disobey him? God already knew what they would do I'm not sure they knew for certain. I think life is a test and we have to come to a place where God can trust us with heaven so we do not disobey him, rise up against him and wreck it.......he won't let that happen it would not be just. Your question is hard and very thought provoking nobody should be afraid of it. I pray God answers you in Jesus' name.

Answer 8

Were they like little children? Perhaps. Were they responsible fo their actions. Of course. God said so. We are all responsible for our own actions so I don't believe in the concept of "original sin" that a child is guilty because of parents. In order for Adam and Eve to have free will and to have the opportunity to choose and experience for themselves the consequences for actions, there HAD to be opposition and opportunity to make a bad choice, otherwise, they would never be able to choose for themselves. Did God know what would happen and provide a way for them to return to him. Of course he did.

Answer 9

You are right. From a Christian Methodist perspective for example God was acting in an evil way by putting a stumbling block ahead of Adam & Eve.

Answer 10

No. Adam and Eve were not entraped into disobeying God. They chose on their own to do wrong. God cannot be blamed for their sin.