Adam in Hell?

I don't think there's a definitive verse in scripture one way or the other. But somehow I expect to see Adam and Eve in heaven.

 

Gen 3:7
Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves.
NIV

This is their "works". Fig leaves fell short.

Gen 3:21
The LORD God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife and clothed them.
NIV

This was God's work. He covered them. It is also likely that to make these garments of skin an animal had to have shed its blood.

Heb 9:22
In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.
NIV

 

In Gen 3:15 we are told:

15 And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her Seed; He shall bruise your head, And you shall bruise His heel."

It appears that the Savior was promised to Redeem Adam and Eve. It seems strange to me that the this promise would be given to the hell bound, rather than the elect.

Also, in Gen 3:20, 21 it says this:

20 ¶ And Adam called his wife’s name Eve, because she was the mother of all living.
21 ¶ Also for Adam and his wife the LORD God made tunics of skin, and clothed them.

Matthew Henry says:

Ver. 20.

God having named the man, and called him Adam, which signifies red earth, Adam, in further token of dominion, named the woman, and called her Eve, that is, life. Adam bears the name of the dying body, Eve that of the living soul. The reason of the name is here given (some think, by Moses the historian, others, by Adam himself): Because she was (that is, was to be) the mother of all living. He had before called her Ishah—woman, as a wife; here he calls her Evah—life, as a mother. Now,

1. If this was done by divine direction, it was an instance of God’s favour, and, like the new naming of Abraham and Sarah, it was a seal of the covenant, an assurance to them that, notwithstanding their sin and his displeasure against them for it, he had not reversed that blessing wherewith he had blessed them: Be fruitful and multiply. It was likewise a confirmation of the promise now made, that the seed of the woman, of this woman, should break the serpent’s head.

2. If Adam did it of himself, it was an instance of his faith in the word of God. Doubtless it was not done, as some have suspected, in contempt or defiance of the curse, but rather in a humble confidence and dependence upon the blessing.

(1.) The blessing of a reprieve, admiring the patience of God, that he should spare such sinners to be the parents of all living, and that he did not immediately shut up those fountains of the human life and nature, because they could send forth no other than polluted, poisoned, streams.

(2.) The blessing of a Redeemer, and promised seed, to whom Adam had an eye, in calling his wife Eve—life; for he should be the life of all the living, and in him all the families of the earth should be blessed, in hope of which he thus triumphs.

Ver. 21.

We have here a further instance of God’s care concerning our first parents, notwithstanding their sin. Though he corrects his disobedient children, and put them under the marks of his displeasure, yet he does not disinherit them, but, like a tender father, provides the herb of the field for their food and coats of skins for their clothing. Thus the father provided for the returning prodigal, #Lu 15:22,23. If the Lord had been pleased to kill them, he would not have done this for them. Observe,

1. That clothes came in with sin. We should have had no occasion for them, either for defence or decency, if sin had not made us naked, to our shame. Little reason therefore we have to be proud of our clothes, which are but the badges of our poverty and infamy.

2. That when God made clothes for our first parents he made them warm and strong, but coarse and very plain: not robes of scarlet, but coats of skin. Their clothes were made, not of silk and satin, but plain skins; not trimmed, nor embroidered, none of the ornaments which the daughters of Sion afterwards invented, and prided themselves in. Let the poor, that are meanly clad, learn hence not to complain: having food and a covering, let them be content; they are as well done to as Adam and Eve were. And let the rich, that are finely clad, learn hence not to make the putting on of apparel their adorning, #1Pe 3:3.

3. That God is to be acknowledged with thankfulness, not only in giving us food, but in giving us clothes also, #Ge 28:20. The wool and the flax are his, as well as the corn and the wine, #Ho 2:9.

4. These coats of skin had a significance. The beasts whose skins they were must be slain, slain before their eyes, to show them what death is, and (as it is #Ec 3:18) that they may see that they themselves were beasts, mortal and dying. It is supposed that they were slain, not for food, but for sacrifice, to typify the great sacrifice, which, in the latter end of the world, should be offered once for all. Thus the first thing that died was a sacrifice, or Christ in a figure, who is therefore said to be the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. These sacrifices were divided between God and man, in token of reconciliation: the flesh was offered to God, a whole burnt-offering; the skins were given to man for clothing, signifying that, Jesus Christ having offered himself to God a sacrifice of a sweet-smelling savour, we are to clothe ourselves with his righteousness as with a garment, that the shame of our nakedness may not appear. Adam and Eve made for themselves aprons of fig-leaves, a covering too narrow for them to wrap themselves in, # Isa 28:20. Such are all the rags of our own righteousness. But God made them coats of skins; large, and strong, and durable, and fit for them; such is the righteousness of Christ. Therefore put on the Lord Jesus Christ.

 

some thoughts here:

The Promise of a Savior was given to all men before the consequences of sin had been pronounced to Adam and Eve. The answer was there first. This is completely in line with Revelation 13:8 which states that Christ was the Lamb slain from the foundation (creation) of the world. Just as death entered the world through Adam, so the Promise was given to the world through Adam and Eve.

We know Eve had many children. However, when Seth was born, she remarked that this child the Lord had given her. Did she think this was the promised Savior? There is evidence that Abraham thought that Isaac was. So the Promise was expected, possibly, to be fulfilled at ANY time.

If Eve thought the Savior might have come from her own body, then she would not have felt out of favor with God. This may indicate a restoration of the relationship between the two of them and God. There is also one other indication at the end of Genesis 4: "At that time men began to call on the name of the Lord."

But Adam and Eve had WALKED with the Lord. So this verse has the possibility of being something very negative OR very positive, depending on how it is seen in context. Was calling on the name of the Lord all they were left with because of the proliferation of evil? Or were people finally, after seeing what evil had done, starting to turn back to the Lord and call on His name?

If it is the first option, then we have an indication that Adam and Eve may have been saved, for their influence may have restrained a lot of the evil that they -- and they must have been heartbroken -- saw going on in their progeny. I cannot imagine what the murder of Abel by Cain must have done to them. They certainly were in a position to see the horror of the consequences of sin, as they were the only ones who knew what the world was like without it.
Adam lived long enough to see Lamech, Noah's father, born. He died shortly before Enoch was translated. With the removal of Adam and Enoch, this may be one of the major factors which unleashed the unrestrained evil and violence the antediluvian world experienced. Seth himself died pretty closely to the time Noah was born. Thus, the first two generations were gone before Noah was an adult, and if Noah was marked as righteous in his generation, then we have, by the time of Adam's grandchildren, evidence of how quickly wickedness can spread.

Having seen what he saw, and knowing what he had known, I have to rely on my own knowledge of human nature now, but I have a hard time thinking that Adam was not utterly heartbroken at what had occurred, and he must have clung to the Promise, begging God to send that Child soon.

Carrying this thought further, now, would part of the reason for the EXCUSE for wickedness in the antediluvian world have been that the Promise Adam and Eve had told them about failed to come through? Would Adam and Eve, and later Noah, have experienced the same mocking Christians get today because of their faith? It's a thought...

 

Exactly right Helen, and I'm amazed to hear you say that. And since redemption in, and glorification of Christ was set before the creation of the world, so were all events leading to his atonement, as well as the ordaining of Adam's sin prior to creation.

Eph 1:4 just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love,
5 having predestined us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will

 

In a sense, Scott, God DID offer a sacrifice to Himself in order to satisfy eternal justice. When Abraham was stopped from sacrificing Isaac (Genesis 22), he saw the ram caught in the bushes, and was able to sacrifice it, instead. "So Abraham called that place 'The Lord Will Provide. And to this day it is said, 'On the mountain of the Lord it will be provided.'"

In Revelation 13:8 we read that Christ is the LAMB slain from the foundation of the world.

Here is how it works from what I can see in the Bible.

God gives life. All life. To rebel against God is to rebel against the giver of life and thus to prefer death by definition.

In Genesis 1, there are three times the word "bara" is used, meaning, in that context, to create something from nothing. The first time is for the physical creation, in Genesis 1:1, where we see time, space, and mass all the resulted of "God created." After that, everything is formed, not created, meaning it has physical properties and is made of physical substances created at the beginning -- rocks, plants, stars, etc. None of these, by the way, even plants, are considered, by biblical standards, to be alive.

The second time 'bara' is used is in verse 21, when the large creatures, first of the sky and sea, are created. Now, their bodies are the same elements as stars and rocks and plants, so what was created from nothing? What was new? The answer, given in both Genesis 1:30 and 7:15 both is 'nephesh', or the breath of life. This is also translated as 'soul.' The soul of a man or animal is expressed through a complex nervous system but is not the same as that nervous system anymore than you are the same as the telephone you talk through.

The third time 'bara' is used is for man, in Genesis 1:27. Man has a body made of the same elements as the rest of creation (dust of the earth), and has nephesh (the breath of life, "and [God] breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being"), so what is new with man? Spirit. As Jesus told the woman at the well in John 4, God is spirit. And we are created in the image of God -- we are at the core spiritual beings.

And we, as spiritual beings, rebelled against the giver of life, thus reaping death for ourselves -- immediately spiritually and I presume the breakdown of the cellular structure began at that moment as well, although it took some time to have physical effect. We were separated from God. Spiritually -- the important way. So the only effective remedy had to be via man somehow, as a spiritual being. Animals, as the 'next step down', having unique individuality (nephesh) could present a picture of what was needed, but they could not achieve what had to be done on a spiritual plane. So the picture of animal sacrifices was important as a reminder, but not sufficient for salvation.

Problem: every time a man died, he deserved it, for he, like all men (generic!) was a sinner. Therefore man was stuck in death and there was no way out. We had EARNED it.

But wages are paid only once, and if a man who did not deserve death were to collect that wage on behalf of all men, then spiritual separation from God -- death -- would be conquered.

That is why Jesus had to do what He did. No animal could do it. No created human could do it. God is the only one who could have done it, and so He became a man in order to die for men as the perfect sacrifice capable on a spiritual plane of restoring life to men.

Yes, Scott, for all.
It's just that most people want nothing to do with the gift from God and prefer to live their own lives as their own bosses.

The Promise of a Messiah or Savior was given to Adam and Eve, the parents of all of us. "For God so loved the WORLD that He gave His only Son..."

There is an interesting picture of this which is applicable, I think: the writer of Hebrews (7:10) states that when Abraham tithed to Melchizedek (Genesis 14:20), Levi, the father of the Levites, to whom all the Israelites tithes, had tithed to Melchizedek since Levi was still in the body of his ancestor, Abraham. In the same way, we were ALL in the body of our ancestors, Adam and Eve, when the Promise was given. Peter states very clearly (2 Peter 3:9) that God is not willing that ONE should perish, but that ALL should come to repentance. We know this doesn't happen. That is because God has allowed us the option of accepting or refusing the work of Christ. The catch is that acceptance means the death of the sin heart we are each born with, and most people will not give themselves up for God (no matter He gave Himself up for us!). Most people figure they are quite fine the way they are, thank you!

But there are some who know better. They know something is dreadfully wrong and they cannot fix it themselves. And, led by God in their search for the truth, the come face to face with Christ. This is the call. Many are called. But we read that few are chosen. Even face to face with the truth, there are still many who back away and refuse Christ.

This is precisely what angers God so greatly. It is the diliberate suppression of the truth and preference for wickedness, even when the truth is clearly presented (Romans 1). In other words, there is not a person alive who goes to hell because of sin. That was taken care of on the cross. As John 3:18 says so clearly: "Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son."

In John 1:12 we also read, "Yet to ALL who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God."

Jesus died for everyone. But most refuse Him. God now has every right to be infuriated, even by our own finite understanding of justice and fairness!

 

Good point Scott. The Scriptural evidence of Adam and Eve's salvation is purely inferential, and even that not strongly. Yet I find it hard to believe that God would ordain the fall through Adam and not redeem him by grace

And God did make a covenant with himself to Abraham (God put Abe to sleep, and then walked between the divided animals alone , while normally both parties would do. The promise was to the Seed, Christ). So maybe God sacrificed to himself as well

 

Thank you, Helen, for your beautiful reply to this topic.