[Milton-L] Abdiel

James Rovira jamesrovira at gmail.com
Tue Jun 24 21:06:30 EDT 2008


Might want to be careful about importing Christian notions of
fallenness into the Garden of Eden.  Thought and desire can be sin
even as of the Mosaic law (do not covet), and sin in thought and
desire is emphasized in the Sermon on the Mount, but the only command
available to be broken for Adam and Eve was not to eat the fruit.  I
don't think it's possible for them to have sinned until they
physically acted.  It's also possible to commit wrong acts out of
"right" motives -- the Genesis account ascribes the desire for wisdom
(a positive motive) to Eve in her motivation to eat the fruit.  NT
commentators claim that by thinking this Eve was deceived.  Adam's sin
is worse, then, in that he deliberately chose to sin to remain with
Eve.

Since Tanner's work was mentioned we should perhaps consider
Kierkegaard's treatment of the subject.  In The Concept of Anxiety his
pseudonym, Haufniensis, asserts that as innocents Adam and Eve were
not fully developed subjectivities and did not fully distinguish
themselves from their environment.  This makes them highly susceptible
to external influence.  Tanner works with this model in his
interpretation of PL.

Jim R


More information about the Milton-L mailing list