The nature of Eve’s sin is different from Adam’s.

In previous posts, I ask if Eve is culpable for her sin. Was she created second to provide a way for Jesus to be born of Adam, yet without Adam’s sin? One reason why I question her culpability is that her sin is different from Adam’s.

Psychopath Theory?

My husband and I discussed the temptation a few weeks ago. He insisted that Adam had to have been “insane” to witness the serpent’s deception, knowing it was wrong, and then go along with it to please Eve. I think he used the word “psychopath.”

Adam was formed first. That means his experience with God was farther along than Eve’s. We know that Adam witnessed the creation of the animals, his wife and possibly the Garden planting. (Gen 2:18-20, 7-8) After seeing the power of God; after experiencing His creative abilities; after knowing that God is something completely “other” than he was; after all this, how could Adam believe the serpent when he says, “You will not certainly die…For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil?” He wouldn’t have. Adam knew the serpent lied. Yet, he didn’t step in at any point to defend God, defy the serpent or enlighten Eve.

Treachery.  As my husband puts it, this is the disregard of a psychopath. My husband concludes there is no way Adam could have been present when the serpent was tempting Eve.  He’d rather stretch out the temptation timeline so that Adam would not be present than believe perfect Adam would let his wife be duped. He thinks Adam ate later, after Eve was tempted. Adam then ate because he wanted to join his wife in her actions; in the process, defying God and sinning. That appeals to his chivalrous nature better, I guess!

We don’t know. It’s all theories and conjecture.

But we do know this.

  1. Eve was thoroughly deceived. (1 Tim 2:14) She was led astray. (2 Cor 11:3) She thought eating and giving the fruit to Adam would be beneficial. (Genesis 3:6)
  2. Adam knew better and ate to defy God.  Adam treacherously rebelled. He purposely broke God’s command. He disobeyed. (Job 31:33, Hosea 6:7, Romans 5:12-21).
  3. God discerns heart motives and desires mercy and compassion. (Hosea 6:6, 1 Sam 16:7)

Adam’s sin was intentional.

Some may theorize Adam is responsible for the fall because of his “federal headship.” Because he was responsible to keep the command about eating from the tree, not Eve. Because he had spiritual authority over Eve. Where is the proof of this? Adam was held responsible for sin because of…

the spiritual value of the sin he committed. Adam was not special.  Adam’s sin was special. (

Romans 5:14 says that Adam’s sin is not like all sin. His sin was in breaking God’s command or covenant. But it is like some. Israel also dealt treacherously with God. They both were unfaithful and ungrateful for God’s favor. (Hosea 6:7)

Eve’s sin was unintentional.

Eve’s sin was a result of being fooled. Like the Apostle Paul, she believed she was working for good, for the glory of God. She sinned out of ignorance, and I believe she was shown mercy.

Even though I was once a blasphemer and a persecutor and a violent man, I was shown mercy because I acted in ignorance and unbelief. 1 Timothy 1:13

Is Eve guilty? Yes, of being easily deceived and ignorant. Her guilt is not like Adam’s. She didn’t intend to break with God. But, Adam chose life apart from God. God showed Eve grace because she was in ignorance, but He could not show mercy to Adam, until repentance. Adam, like Israel, deliberately rebelled and broke God’s covenant.


Women in the Text: Creation Order 4

Photo: José A. Warletta

Let’s stretch forward thousands of years. The creation order figures into the Apostle Paul’s letters in a few spots. Those spots are hot beds of patriarchy confusion. Can we look at these passages with “ignorant” eyes and hope for clearer understanding? I doubt it. But, I’ll give it a shot. The texts that reference the creation order are 1 Timothy 2, 1 Corinthians 11 and  Ephesians 5. I’ll start with 1 Timothy 2.

A bit of understanding

These verses are foundational to hierarchists. Foundational because the Bible is viewed through this lens. It is the starting point for interpreting any passage that references women. These verses are the filter by which understanding of men and women is sifted. In my previous posts, this is the filter I tried to remove to honestly examine if God designed gender roles into the psyche of humans before the fall.

1 Timothy 2

9 I also want the women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, adorning themselves, not with elaborate hairstyles or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, 10 but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God.

11 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15 But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.

Whew, there is a lot to argue about in that passage! Fancy hair, “bling”, quiet women, non-teaching women, the only use of the word authenteō for authority in the Bible, deceived women and women saved by babies! This passage is exceptional…it mentions a number of things that aren’t discussed anywhere else. This makes me reticent to base any major belief on my understanding of it.

The topic for this post is the creation order of genders and roles. The question… is gender authority tied to the creation order or cultural context? I will try to sum one reason why I answer cultural.

Chronological order and deception

Verse 13 says Adam was created first. Yep, he was. Verse 14 links that first formation to what? Authority? Nope. Adam’s  first formation is linked to not being deceived to sin. Does this mean Adam didn’t sin? Nope. It means his sin wasn’t because of deception. His sin was intentional, but that isn’t the point being made in the text.

The implied point (Implying and assuming is where the arguing starts, I realize.) is that Eve’s formation after Adam contributed to her being duped. The deception was due to Eve chronologically arriving later than Adam. This is the reason Paul gives for limiting the role of women in this church. I interpret this reference to the creation order as specific to Adam and Eve’s situation. Eve didn’t witness God’s power as Adam did (Gen 2:8-9;19-23).  Proclivity to deception isn’t hard wired into all women. But Eve was prone to deception because of her immaturity. Just as some women, maybe those Paul is referring to in this letter (1 Tim 2:9-15; 3:11; 4:7; 5:3-16), are limited in understanding and also prone to being deceived and spreading heresy.

I believe Paul uses the chronological creation order in this passage to illustrate proclivity to deception due to limited understanding, not as props for hardwired male authority.

Guard against deception

Paul uses Eve’s particular deception again in 2 Corinthians 11. This time he leaves the creation order out.

I promised you to one husband, to Christ, so that I might present you as a pure virgin to him. 3 But I am afraid that just as Eve was deceived by the serpent’s cunning, your minds may somehow be led astray from your sincere and pure devotion to Christ. 4For if someone comes to you and preaches a Jesus other than the Jesus we preached, or if you receive a different spirit from the Spirit you received, or a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it easily enough.

Paul condemns putting up with another gospel; going along with false teaching. We should not follow Eve’s example regardless of our gender or spiritual maturity.  The only two places Eve is mentioned outside creation, is in context of being easily deceived. And Paul wants us to protect ourselves better than Eve did.

What filter will you use?

We all have our favorite angles. We understand scripture based on what is important to us. Patriarchy supporters use their understanding of the unusual 1 Timothy 2 to interpret gender roles at creation; to dismiss the women leaders in the early church; and compromise the authority-rejecting teaching of Jesus. I don’t. I begin with creation and work through to Jesus, and let that filter my understanding on this passage. What Paul says here will not contradict the truths found at creation and in Christ.

I realize there is much more in this passage related to gender roles, but creation order is relevant to this post.

Previous Creation Order Posts

Creation in Genesis

Headship established at creation?

Last shall be first!

Creation Order and the temptation