Is a mistake a sin?

[RICHinCHRIST]

Just thought about this tonight... Is a mistake a sin?

Genesis 2:16-17

Genesis 3:2-3

Eve added to the command of God. She added, 'nor shall you touch it'. God said nothing about whether they could touch it or not (although it probably wasn't a bad idea to not touch it... because by touching it, you'd probably be tempted to take a bite.) Anyway, the point is that Eve added to the word of God. She misinterpreted the exact command of God. Therefore, she made a mistake. Yet, she did not sin. But isn't adding to the word of God a sin?

Deut 4:2

Proverbs 30:6

The first time I heard the idea that a mistake was not a sin was when I read John Wesley's "A Plain Account of Christian Perfection". He believed that the Christian could live a perfect life, completely empty of self and filled with the fullness of God. However, his definition of perfection included some mulligans. He believed that someone could make a mistake and yet still be perfect (in conscience) in regards to fulfilling the law of God through love.

Apparently, God would agree. He did not judge Eve for making this mistake, or adding to His word, but rather it was the conscience-searing, willful disobedience of Adam that brought death into the world.

[RICHinCHRIST]

I think one of the revealing things about this is that Eve was capable of making this mistake before the Fall.

When I've contemplated human life pre-Fall (which is often a waste of time, since Scripture doesn't address much at all), I always previously thought that Adam and Eve were just super-humans, only capable of being perfect in every area of existence. Rather, it seems that they were still susceptible to mistakes, and conundrums (Eve was incapable to intelligently dismiss the serpent's cunning deception). It seems that God had still formed them with inherent intellectual weaknesses (or innocence, I guess you could say), although these weaknesses did not inhibit them from living victoriously and resisting temptation (freedom of will). If God just created super-beings, with superior intelligence, they would have never fell for such temptations.

However, it could have been that they were truly inpeccably intelligent, but the temptation to experience something unknown to them was appealing (that is often a weakness derived from intelligent people; the need to explore the unknown). Looking back, it came down to a test of faith for them (which would argue that intelligence is irrelevant in the realm of faith; although it's helpful, it is not the driving force of the life of faith).

I have often heard Eve's mistake as being attributed to legalism (adding a regulation to the initial command of God), which does make sense. It's just amazing to me that she was capable of that pre-Fall.

[mattrose]

I am not quite as ready to describe Eve's action as merely a 'mistake'

It may have been a 'mistake' to add to the word of God (or had Adam done that for her when he conveyed the command?), but it was not a mere 'mistake' to disobey the part of the command she knew for sure. It was a willful sin. Nor would I try to pinpoint "The Fall" to an exact moment in that narrative. I think "The Fall" refers to the series of events in 3:1-13. That it is attributed to Adam specifically in the NT may say more about the fact that he was the head than that he was chronologically the first to sin.

But I think I agree with your general point that mistakes are not sin, or, at least, not sin of the same kind as a willful sin. I would not be surprised to find that Adam & Eve were capable of forgetfulness, gullibility, or tripping over a stone. These are accidents/mistakes that don't necessarily come from "The Fall" in my opinion.

[RICHinCHRIST]

It may have been a 'mistake' to add to the word of God (or had Adam done that for her when he conveyed the command?), but it was not a mere 'mistake' to disobey the part of the command she knew for sure. It was a willful sin. Nor would I try to pinpoint "The Fall" to an exact moment in that narrative. I think "The Fall" refers to the series of events in 3:1-13. That it is attributed to Adam specifically in the NT may say more about the fact that he was the head than that he was chronologically the first to sin.

Good points, Matt. I didn't think about Adam being the one to convey the command; it's possible. I agree with you that it wasn't a 'mere mistake' to eat of the tree, I was only talking about the fact that she added to the command, perhaps being unaware that she was doing so. I did not go further and suggest that her 'eating of the tree', was not a sin, although now looking back, my original logic would be implying that. But is there a difference between her willful sin and Adam's? I think Scripture would make that distinction, due to her being deceived, and Adam not being deceived (1 Tim 2:14).

When you apply the Fall to Genesis 3:1-13, are you using some method of interpretation implying that it was not chronologically played out as it was written?

"She also gave to her husband, and he ate. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they [were] naked" (Genesis 3:6c-7a). I've just assumed that Eve's eyes were not first opened because she was deceived, and Adam is clearly stated as being the one who 'transgressed' apart from being deceived (1 Tim 2:14). I assume your position is that since they were 'one flesh', it wasn't until they both willfully sinned that the created order was then affected by sin and death? I do wonder, what would have happened had Adam not transgressed, although we have no way of knowing.

Also, God clearly cursed the serpent for what he did, no doubt about that (Gen 3:14-15). He also cursed the ground specifically for what Adam did (that he listened to Eve, and ate contrary to the command; Gen 3:17). However, Eve suffered and was affected, but God did not specifically mention that it was because of what she did, like in the serpent and Adam's case (Gen 3:16)...

[mattrose]

But is there a difference between her willful sin and Adam's? I think Scripture would make that distinction, due to her being deceived, and Adam not being deceived (1 Tim 2:14).

I would venture to say that there is a distinction b/w every single individual sin ever In this case, one point of distinction is indeed what you noted. But I think both sins (eating the fruit) were willful violations of a known law of God.

When you apply the Fall to Genesis 3:1-13, are you using some method of interpretation implying that it was not chronologically played out as it was written?

I think 3:1-13 is in chronological order. My point was that I don't think any specific moment in that story necessarily constitutes "The Fall". The Fall was the episode itself and included Eve's eating of the fruit, her sharing of it, Adam's accepting of it, and their both hiding from God. The reason NT Scriptures refer to Adam specifically has, in my opinion, less to do with who willfully sinned (since they both did) and more to do with who should have been exercising better leadership (or, mentioning Adam could have just been the culturally appropriate place for the blame).

I assume your position is that since they were 'one flesh', it wasn't until they both willfully sinned that the created order was then affected by sin and death?

No, that's not really what I was trying to say. I guess my point is that I don't think it's very important to pinpoint the exact moment when the created order was affected by sin and death. I don't think that's what the NT mention of Adam is interested in communicating. What is important, I think, is that through that story (3:1-13) sin entered into the world via humanity. The aftermath discusses the consequences of the entire story, not of a particular moment in the story.

But I also think this is not a very important distinction

I do wonder, what would have happened had Adam not transgressed, although we have no way of knowing.

I think the story would not be as powerful The end result would have probably been the same. Adam would have sinned sooner or later, but more blame would have been heaped on Eve for bringing sin into the world. I think it is good, for us as guys and gals, that both Adam and Eve participated significantly to the problem lest we try to pin all the blame on either/or.

Also, God clearly cursed the serpent for what he did, no doubt about that (Gen 3:14-15). He also cursed the ground specifically for what Adam did (that he listened to Eve, and ate contrary to the command; Gen 3:17). However, Eve suffered and was affected, but God did not specifically mention that it was because of what she did, like in the serpent and Adam's case (Gen 3:16)...

I don't really agree with this. You've rightly noted a lack of symmetry. 3:14 has the word 'done' in regard to the serpent and 3:17 lists a specifically sinful action on Adam's part. Eve's punishment, as you mentioned, doesn't have a parallel phrase in 3:16. But I think this point is rendered dull by the fact that the word 'done' is used of Eve in 3:13... "What is this you have done?" The judgment of evil action, in Eve's case, simply comes earlier and so isn't mentioned again in 3:16.

[RICHinCHRIST]

Interesting...

I guess I just assumed that since God did not immediately blame Eve for her transgression, that she was not the one being scolded. God immediately condemns the serpent's action, but not Eve's. Obviously, God is omniscient and would have no need of asking "What have you done?", but I think it's interesting how God responds to the question by condemning the serpent first.

It's possible though, that God addressed the punishments of the sins in the chronological order in which they were committed: 1) the serpent, 2) Eve, 3) Adam. Hmmm.. Now I think about this a little differently. It seems that if God wanted to, He could have judged the serpent and Eve immediately after Eve ate. Instead, He waited, in order to test Adam as well. It isn't specified how long the interim was between Eve's eating and Adam's eating.

Your view makes some more sense to me. I guess I had a preconceived bias toward interpreting that Adam was more at fault, due to Romans 5 primarily. Is this common? Or did I just make a mere mistake? (pun intended

[steve7150]

Eve added to the command of God. She added, 'nor shall you touch it'. God said nothing about whether they could touch it or not (although it probably wasn't a bad idea to not touch it... because by touching it, you'd probably be tempted to take a bite.) Anyway, the point is that Eve added to the word of God. She misinterpreted the exact command of God. Therefore, she made a mistake. Yet, she did not sin. But isn't adding to the word of God a sin?






I think it depends on Eve's intention as to whether she simply meant to emphasize God's command or whether she meant to portray God as over-controlling and oppressive.
Considering her reaction to looking at the tree and believing eating it would give her wisdom which overode her trust in God therefore i think the intention of her heart was to gain her own wisdom apart from God. She was deceived but i think she allowed the devil to gain a foothold in her heart and she did sin because of allowing the lust in her heart to conceive into sin. Therefore considering the above i don't think Eve made a mistake at all, she did what she wanted to do.

[RICHinCHRIST]

steve4150,

we agree that her eating the fruit was a sin, but the adding of the 'you shall not touch it' to the command of God was what we were discussing as a mere mistake. Matt helped me think alot of it through, and I think his interpretation makes the most sense. I had been using 1 Tim. 2:13 and Romans 5 as assuming Adam was the only one responsible for the "Fall" due to the chronology of the events and the fact that he was not deceived.

[steve7150]

we agree that her eating the fruit was a sin, but the adding of the 'you shall not touch it' to the command of God was what we were discussing



Right and my response was about that point. I thought that Eve did not make a mistake at all but was rationalizing her intention of disobeying God.

[Homer]

RICHinCHRIST,

I am not sure of how you define "mistake", but the following scriptures might answer your question:

Numbers 15:22-39 (New King James Version)

22. ‘If you sin unintentionally, and do not observe all these commandments which the LORD has spoken to Moses— 23. all that the LORD has commanded you by the hand of Moses, from the day the LORD gave commandment and onward throughout your generations— 24. then it will be, if it is unintentionally committed, without the knowledge of the congregation, that the whole congregation shall offer one young bull as a burnt offering, as a sweet aroma to the LORD, with its grain offering and its drink offering, according to the ordinance, and one kid of the goats as a sin offering. 25. So the priest shall make atonement for the whole congregation of the children of Israel, and it shall be forgiven them, for it was unintentional; they shall bring their offering, an offering made by fire to the LORD, and their sin offering before the LORD, for their unintended sin. 26. It shall be forgiven the whole congregation of the children of Israel and the stranger who dwells among them, because all the people did it unintentionally.
27. ‘And if a person sins unintentionally, then he shall bring a female goat in its first year as a sin offering. 28. So the priest shall make atonement for the person who sins unintentionally, when he sins unintentionally before the LORD, to make atonement for him; and it shall be forgiven him. 29. You shall have one law for him who sins unintentionally, for him who is native-born among the children of Israel and for the stranger who dwells among them.

Psalm 19:12 (New American Standard Bible)

12. Who can discern his errors? Acquit me of hidden faults.