WI: In the biblical creation myth, Adam first ate the forbidden fruit instead of Eve?

This is a bit of a reach, but assume Abrahamic religions achieve a similar amount of influence. What if Adam was tempted to eat the forbidden fruit instead of Eve? Do you think we'd see any less sexism/misogyny than in OTL, because the blame for the fall of man falls on Adam instead of Eve? Or was the myth created to reinforce already-existing patriarchal gender roles in agrarian society?
 
I am not a biblical scholar but I think the first few books of the bible were cobbled together from the myths of the surrounding polytheistic societies, ( my memory says C700BC but I could be wrong) by extracting other gods and inserting a single male god. The powers that be in the Hebrew culture selected those myths that supported them and their idea of the way the world should work. This is how we ended up with two quite separate and contradictory creation myths in very different styles.

So the question is if we had a matriarchal society in the same position what myths would they steal? I suggest not a fruit of knowledge of right and wrong but instead something celebrating fertility and motherhood. Of course this then has to survive and be incorporated into a surviving memeplex for the next 2700 years which is not impossible but feels to me to be low probability outcome. After all there have been lots of patriarchal societies during that time who may have had a fitter memeplex.

To conclude I suggest the myth is a symptom not a cause of misogyny and survived because there was a chain of cultures that were sympathetic or at least indifferent to the implications.
 
It should be noted that the story isn't that central in Jewish theology than it has been in Christianity. So I don't think there would be necessarily that big changes to the development of Judaism outside scholarly circles interested in arguing about things like that. Even the whole creation story itself might be a relatively late addition to the canon. I would assume that this is something which would influence Christianity more, assuming a low-level butterfly scenario. (There is an extremely interesting debate about the textual history of the Tanakh/Old Testament lurking somewhere here but I am first to admit that it goes way beyond my knowledge on the subject.)
 
Last edited:
The medieval view was that Eve sinned and caused Adam to sin and was thus responsible for the expulsion from Eden. The punishment was that Adam had to work while Eve had to bear children and obey Adam.
This reinforced the belief that women were inherently more sinful, more sexual, weaker spiritually and physically than men.

Being an atheist I can't comment on modern interpretation of scripture but to outsiders many Christian sects still seem to treat women as less spiritual than men.
 
This is a bit of a reach, but assume Abrahamic religions achieve a similar amount of influence. What if Adam was tempted to eat the forbidden fruit instead of Eve? Do you think we'd see any less sexism/misogyny than in OTL, because the blame for the fall of man falls on Adam instead of Eve? Or was the myth created to reinforce already-existing patriarchal gender roles in agrarian society?

It depends on who is interpreting the text. I took a Judaic studies class that had several interpretations of the Garden of Eden. Yes Eve was tempted by the snake, but Adam chose to eat fruit, however it seems that God was more annoyed that both of them lied, first that tried to hide by saying they were naked when they should have no knowledge of that. Second by Adam saying that Eve tricked him into eating the apple, which again is trying to lie to an all-knowing deity. There's also an implication had they told the truth the first time God could have forgiven them, but instead used their knowledge to lie and blame each other.
 
In Islamic culture both ate it almost at the same time and was both blame for not obedying a simple order....
 
The medieval view was that Eve sinned and caused Adam to sin and was thus responsible for the expulsion from Eden. The punishment was that Adam had to work while Eve had to bear children and obey Adam.
This reinforced the belief that women were inherently more sinful, more sexual, weaker spiritually and physically than men.

Being an atheist I can't comment on modern interpretation of scripture but to outsiders many Christian sects still seem to treat women as less spiritual than men.

Can you provide any citations and/or sources for this? As far as I am/was aware, the concept of females being inherently more sinful and responsible for Original Sin fell out of the mainstream parts of Christianity in the early Middle Ages. We're talking 600s/700s at the absolute latest.

On top of that, I've never heard original sin be called the "Sin of Eve" before as this thread does. I've heard it be called the "Sin of Man", the "Sin of Adam", "Original Sin" and "Ancestral Sin", but never "Sin of Eve".

I know that Catholicism in particular is very clear that the "Sin" comes from Adam in that they refer to it as the "Sin of Adam" and have done so since at least 1099.
 
Can you provide any citations and/or sources for this? As far as I am/was aware, the concept of females being inherently more sinful and responsible for Original Sin fell out of the mainstream parts of Christianity in the early Middle Ages. We're talking 600s/700s at the absolute latestp

I know that Catholicism in particular is very clear that the "Sin" comes from Adam in that they refer to it as the "Sin of Adam" and have done so since at least 1099.
PAX. I already stated I can’t comment on modern religions.
I was simply trying to explain the phrase to someone who had not heard it before.
I have come across the phrase in several histories but I make no claim to expertise.
If you say it was not used after 700AD I won’t argue but I am surprised.
 
When you dig back to the probable origin of this story it occurs when the monotheistic Hebrews were in direct competition with other local religions, some also monotheistic, some polytheistic, and many matriarchal in religion & social structure. In the oldest available Judaic texts the tree seems to be a species of Fig that was regarded as sacred by a number of the matriarchal religions/societies. The Asp snake was also deeply connected to these matriarchal religions. In that context the story can be interpreted as a priestess or practitioner of a matriarchal religion 'corrupting' a otherwise innocent Hebrew male with her religions practice. There is also some evidence Hebrew women were for a time following the rites of a matriarchal religion in parallel to the patriarchal practices of the Judaic religion. The story may derive from a effort by the priests to wrest full control for either religious practice, or a economic control, or a political dispute. Probably a combination of the three, these things seldom are one simple cause in isolation. I've seen interpretations of the Biblical book The Song of Deborah as a remnant of this matriarchal aspect of Hebrew religion.
 
Top