But how does that work since God had this to say about his creation?
God saw that it was good (Genesis 1:18)?
Well, since you ask...
It is usually accepted that the Satanic fall happened before or just after creation. We know it was early because the serpent arrived in the garden with sinful intent, already fallen and damned. The
very good of
Gen 1:31 then must include the evil angels of the satanic rebellion who were, at that time, being held in chains of darkness in Sheol,
2 Peter 2:4 For if GOD spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to Tartarus and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgement.
It is not proven that
very good refers to a moral state of being and not to GOD's purpose. If the purpose of God's creation of the earth was as a rehab centre for those addicted to evil, ie, a reform school to chasten, convert and sanctify His fallen sinful Church by teaching them to be righteous,
Hebrews 12:5-11, then His creation of the earth for the purpose of the redemption of His church could indeed be called very good even though part of the church was already fallen and not doing so good.
The words of
Genesis 2:18 are very familiar to us today:
The Lord God said, ‘It is not good for the man to be alone.’” Have you ever considered the implication of this NOT GOODNESS
being corrected before everything was judged to be VERY GOOD, one verse away ? Why does it not imply that GOD created something as not good? Did HE make a mistake or did something change within HIS creation so Adam was alone in a bad way, that is, needing to be corrected?
Do we not believe that the only thing that can separate us from GOD is the free will choice to be sinful, to rebel against HIM because GOD cannot create evil?
And how does GOD fix this not good? HE brings the animals to Adam to name them and to see if his helpmeet was among them:
Gen 2:20 The man gave names to all the livestock, to the birds of the air, and to every beast of the field. But for Adam no suitable helper was found.
helper: S5828. ezer
Definition: a help, helper
suitable: S5048: neged:
in front of, in sight of, opposite to
Does anyone have a reason so many, ie, most, commentators of this verse leave out any reference to the word suitable, that is, “in front of, in sight of, opposite to” as to its meaning to the verse or to the English, suitable? It seems like a wild guess as to what it means here...
So Adam did not just need a companion (perhaps a wife as most commentators suggest?) but he needed help with something... and the help was not just a general help such as with his gardening job but a specialized, suitable, helping as if by a teacher, mentor or example, maybe.
Does this need for a specialized helper impact at all upon the question:
"Whose idea was it that Adam look among the animals for a his suitable, ie specialized, helper?" GOD knew HE had Eve in the wings for him so it must have been Adam's idea that an animal might be suitable, right? So why did GOD acquiesce to Adam's wanting to look among the animals for his helper instead of just telling him, "Nope, I got someone special for you!?" It seems like there was some separation between them after all, eh? Some lack of communication between GOD and HIS perfect, faithful, creation? Only a bit of miscommunication?
Or does it imply that Adam was not as he was created, ie perfect and innocent, but was being a little rebellious to GOD, ie, unfaithful in his heart against what GOD wanted for him? Does this story imply that Adam was sinful at this time in the garden? Was this why he and Eve were characterized as
`RM, erm, that is,
naked, the exact same word also used of the serpent to describe his being
cunning in evil in the very next verse?
If so, then this cannot have been their creation because they had had time after their creation to understand GOD's commands and to break at least one of them to become sinful, that is,
`rm.
If they were in fact merely unclothed and not sinful, then why when they ate were their eyes opened to their unclothedness, the unclothedness they had before they ate, as their sin and not to their eating as their sin?? What is sinful about being unclothed as GOD created you in the privacy of your own garden? Even if this is a euphemism for sex then how is it sinful when they were ordered to procreate? Nothing about this makes sense since being unclothed cannot be a sign of sinfulness! ! ! But as
naked is a metaphor for being
sinful throughout the bible, then this makes a lot of sense. Being naked as sinful is also strongly correlated wiht being blind to your sin and needing your eyes to be opened:
Rev 3:17 You say, ‘I am rich; I have grown wealthy and need nothing.’ But you do not realize that you are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind, and naked. Berean Standard Bible
Since the rabbis were convinced Adam and Eve were created in the garden, they rejected the idea they were already sinners when they arrived in the garden (GOD cannot create evil people - at least, not until HE needs to do so for some unknown reason, a reference to the original or inherited sin fiasco, another blasphemy altogether...) so they interpreted
`rm as
naked, not
cunning in evil though the spelling was exactly the same. The Church Fathers agreed with the Hebrew scholars and ignored the implications of this story. Eisegesis can be fun, eh?
I also have concerns how this story of the fall in the garden and not before fits with
Timothy 1:9 We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, etc, etc. which tells us clearly that the law was NOT given to the righteous to steer their decision but to the sinful to convict them of their sin,
Rom 3:20 Therefore no one will be justified in His sight by works of the law. For the law merely brings awareness of sin. which suggests that the command to not eat was given to them as sinners to convict them of their sinfulness as it did, very well.
To sum up the hints that there was sin in the garden (not just in the serpent) before they ate:
1. It was not good that Adam was alone.
2. There is no reason for Adam to be looking amongst the animals for Eve if he was not being rebellious.
3. Adam and Eve are called
`rm which is both naked or equally possible, cunning in evil.
4. They were given a command which implies that they were sinners needing to have their eyes opened to their sin to convict them so they could repent and return to Christ.
5. And there is the small point of Adam being the first to bring sin into the world. In my book the serpent entered the garden with sinful intent to sin and tempted Eve, the first to sin. Then Eve ate, the second to sin and tempted Adam, the third to sin, when he ate.
The only way it makes sense to say Adam brought sin into the world is if Adam was a sinner when he was moved from Sheol into his human body,
Matthew 13:36-39, by the breath of GOD and as the first person in the garden, he was the first to bring sin into world.
