# Who is responsible for the original sin? **URL:** \ **Category:** Philosophy of Religion\ **Created:** [May 14, 2026, 9:39pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003 "2026-05-14T21:39:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 13
**Author:** ![MoK](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex007/user_avatar/www.thephilosophyforum.com/mok/32/578_2.png) [@MoK](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/MoK)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2026, 2:38pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/241 "2026-05-25T14:38:41Z")
The God of the OT is the creator, especially the creator of humans! He must be an extremely intelligent Being. How could He not realize that keeping Adam and Eve in the presence of the tree of knowledge could be dangerous? ---
**Author:** ![Fooloso4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/aeb1de/32.png) [@Fooloso4](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/Fooloso4)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2026, 3:58pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/242 "2026-05-25T15:58:27Z")
> [@MoK](#): > > How could He not realize that keeping Adam and Eve in the presence of the tree of knowledge could be dangerous? Are there other dangers in the Garden? It is an open question whether “beasts of the field” refers to animals that live on the ground and whether the serpent is a beast of the field, but it is clear that the serpent was in the garden and that the serpent, because he deceives, is a danger. Knowledge can be dangerous but it can also be beneficial and protect us from danger. Whether it was good or bad (it was both) for God to keep knowledge from man,the story is told after the fact. This fact is at the heart of the myth. It is not about what might have been but about what is. Human beings are capable of both great good and great harm. Knowledge is at the root of the problem, but also at the root of possible solutions. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex007/user_avatar/www.thephilosophyforum.com/frank/32/216_2.png) [@Frank](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2026, 4:28pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/243 "2026-05-25T16:28:02Z")
You’re right, it’s a myth. You can do as the rabbis do and ponder for thousands of years what it means. I’m wondering why you want to defend the deity in the story. It’s a father figure? ---
**Author:** ![MoK](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex007/user_avatar/www.thephilosophyforum.com/mok/32/578_2.png) [@MoK](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/MoK)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2026, 4:42pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/244 "2026-05-25T16:42:50Z")
> [@Fooloso4](#): > > Are there other dangers in the Garden? According to the story, the tree was the only dangerous thing in the Garden. > [@Fooloso4](#): > > Knowledge can be dangerous but it can also be beneficial and protect us from danger. Whether it was good or bad (it was both) for God to keep knowledge from man,the story is told after the fact. This fact is at the heart of the myth. It is not about what might have been but about what is. Human beings are capable of both great good and great harm. Knowledge is at the root of the problem, but also at the root of possible solutions. I agree that knowledge could be dangerous and beneficial depending on how we use it. To my understanding, what is missing in humans is wisdom! ---
**Author:** ![Fooloso4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/aeb1de/32.png) [@Fooloso4](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/Fooloso4)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2026, 4:56pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/245 "2026-05-25T16:56:54Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > I’m wondering why you want to defend the deity in the story. It’s a father figure? I am not defending the deity. I interpret the story in terms of man and the problem of knowledge. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex007/user_avatar/www.thephilosophyforum.com/frank/32/216_2.png) [@Frank](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2026, 5:27pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/246 "2026-05-25T17:27:55Z")
> [@Fooloso4](#): > > I am not defending the deity. I interpret the story in terms of man and the problem of knowledge. That’s cool. Are you familiar with the different Jewish interpretations? ---
**Author:** ![Fooloso4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/aeb1de/32.png) [@Fooloso4](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/Fooloso4)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2026, 5:29pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/247 "2026-05-25T17:29:22Z")
> [@MoK](#): > > According to the story, the tree was the only dangerous thing in the Garden. The tree was the only thing that it was dangerous to eat.The garden contained every living creature. Some creatures, including the serpent, are dangerous. The story is quite clear as to its danger. Banishment from the Garden did not cause other animals to become dangerous. ---
**Author:** ![Corvus](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex007/user_avatar/www.thephilosophyforum.com/corvus/32/1606_2.png) [@Corvus](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/Corvus)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2026, 5:30pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/248 "2026-05-25T17:30:35Z")
> [@MoK](#): > > How could He not realize that keeping Adam and Eve in the presence of the tree of knowledge could be dangerous? Dangerous? Isn’t it your own subjective opinion? It sounds like far better deal for Adam and Eve having eaten the fruit, have some knowledge, and descend to the exciting human world starting the civilisation. ---
**Author:** ![Fooloso4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/aeb1de/32.png) [@Fooloso4](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/Fooloso4)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2026, 6:00pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/249 "2026-05-25T18:00:19Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > Are you familiar with the different Jewish interpretations? Do you have something specific in mind? I know that starting with the beginning, the first word ( **Bereshit** ,) there are differences in interpretation. This is obscured by what is now the standard English translation - “in the beginning”. Closer to the original is “in beginning”. That is, it is not _creatio ex nihilo_, but rather, a series of separations of what was pre-existing, without form and order - Day 1 separation of light from the dark. Day 2 separation of the waters above from the waters below. Day 3 separation of waters below from dry land. And so on. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex007/user_avatar/www.thephilosophyforum.com/frank/32/216_2.png) [@Frank](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2026, 6:18pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/250 "2026-05-25T18:18:06Z")
> [@Fooloso4](#): > > Do you have something specific in mind In some Jewish interpretations, the story of Adam and Eve is an allegory of a necessary descent. It’s a psychological development, or it’s a descent into physicality, so the Garden isn’t an earthly place. In others, the story is about a test of obedience, which they obviously failed. Get a book about the Talmud. It’s fascinating how diverse Jewish beliefs can be. You can do your own interpretation, of course, but so can everyone. ---
**Author:** ![MoK](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex007/user_avatar/www.thephilosophyforum.com/mok/32/578_2.png) [@MoK](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/MoK)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2026, 6:21pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/251 "2026-05-25T18:21:56Z")
> [@Fooloso4](#): > > The tree was the only thing that it was dangerous to eat. Correct. > [@Fooloso4](#): > > Some creatures, including the serpent, are dangerous. There is not too much information about the Serpent in Genesis. For example, it is not clear why he tempted Eve. But he was certainly a dangerous creature, considering what he did. It seems that God was not aware of his intention, according to Genesis, otherwise He would certainly have warned Adam and Eve about him. ---
**Author:** ![MoK](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex007/user_avatar/www.thephilosophyforum.com/mok/32/578_2.png) [@MoK](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/MoK)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2026, 6:23pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/252 "2026-05-25T18:23:52Z")
> [@Corvus](#): > > Dangerous? Isn’t it your own subjective opinion? Sure, it is not my subjective opinion. God warned them that they would die if eat from the tree. ---
**Author:** ![Esseus11](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/41988e/32.png) [@Esseus11](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/Esseus11)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2026, 6:43pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/253 "2026-05-25T18:43:24Z")
If God is defined as the highest good and authority, then there is no one or no thing to which God needs to be responsible, yes? We could say that God “should” have been more attentive to Adam and Eve, or that God “should” have made the fruit of knowledge less accessable to them, but “should” seems to imply something higher than God to which he is accountable. If God leaves Adam and Eve to their own devices, then all we can say is that this is what God has done, and it is morally neutral. I think. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex007/user_avatar/www.thephilosophyforum.com/frank/32/216_2.png) [@Frank](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2026, 6:53pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/254 "2026-05-25T18:53:32Z")
There is no one to whom the US military is responsible, and therefore the invasion of Vietnam was morally neutral. Still, the Vietnamese river God rose up and took terrible revenge, according to Neill Blomkamp. ---
**Author:** ![MoK](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex007/user_avatar/www.thephilosophyforum.com/mok/32/578_2.png) [@MoK](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/MoK)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2026, 7:01pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/255 "2026-05-25T19:01:55Z")
> [@Esseus11](#): > > If God is defined as the highest good and authority, then there is no one or no thing to which God needs to be responsible, yes? No. The authority comes with the responsibility. ---
**Author:** ![AmadeusD](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f9ae1b/32.png) [@AmadeusD](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/AmadeusD)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2026, 7:50pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/256 "2026-05-25T19:50:02Z")
I understand what you’re saying, but You need to make a pretty clear distinction: The artist did not create the vandals, or vandalism, or the circumstance that led to it (beyond having made the art, but logistically speaking). It does, of course, depend on your personal bent, but in general, God is responsible for _all_ of that. There’s no get out card for God, as there is for the artist. So essentially, I agree with you. But I don’t think you can apply that to God. Your (imo failed) analogy does well to illustrate. ---
**Author:** ![Corvus](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex007/user_avatar/www.thephilosophyforum.com/corvus/32/1606_2.png) [@Corvus](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/Corvus)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2026, 7:51pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/257 "2026-05-25T19:51:25Z")
> [@MoK](#): > > God warned them that they would die if eat from the tree. But they didn’t die. They were expelled from the garden, and descended into the human world. Dying in old age is not dangerous. It is natural. ---
**Author:** ![Fooloso4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/aeb1de/32.png) [@Fooloso4](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/Fooloso4)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2026, 8:10pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/258 "2026-05-25T20:10:15Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > Get a book about the Talmud. Somewhere I have a copy of “_Pikrei Avot_”. I read it many years ago. It may be in my son’s possession now. I have “Nine Talmudic Readings” by Levinas. From a different perspective I have read Zohar and Scholem’s “Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism”. Also “Mimekor Yisrael”, Classic Jewish Folktales contains stories from both. I have read more recent commentaries on Genesis, including Robert Sacks “A Commentary on the Book of Genesis”. ---
**Author:** ![Fooloso4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/aeb1de/32.png) [@Fooloso4](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/Fooloso4)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2026, 8:14pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/259 "2026-05-25T20:14:59Z")
> [@MoK](#): > > But he was certainly a dangerous creature, So, the same could be asked about the serpent - why did God create it? Even prior to banishment the world of Adam and Eve contained dangers. One might then conclude that God would have been irresponsible not to make knowledge available to them. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex007/user_avatar/www.thephilosophyforum.com/frank/32/216_2.png) [@Frank](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2026, 8:28pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/260 "2026-05-25T20:28:14Z")
I thought Everyman’s Talmud was great for giving broad outlines of Jewish thought, just cementing beyond a shadow of a doubt that no individual needs to be offering some sort of definitive interpretation of the Torah. To do so is ridiculous. [Previous page](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003.md?page=12) [Next page](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003.md?page=14)