FALL OF MAN (fal Ov man). A theological term which denotes the loss of those perfections and that happiness which his Maker bestowed on him at his creation, through transgression of a posi tive command, given fur the trial of man's obedi ence, and as a token of his holding everything of God, as lord paramount of the creation, with the use of everything in it, exclusive of the fruit of one tree.
(1) Account in Genesis. The account in Genesis is that a garden having been planted by the Creator, for the use of man, he was placed in it, "to dress it, and to keep it ;" that in this garden two trees were specially distinguished, one as "the tree of life," the other as "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil ;" that from eating of the latter Adam was restrained by posi tive interdict, and by the penalty, "In the day thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die ;" that the serpent, who was more subtle than any beast of the field, tempted the woman to eat, by denying that death would be the consequence, and by as suring her that her eyes and her husband's eyes "would be opened," and that they would "be as gods, knowing good and evil ;" that the woman took of the fruit, gave of it to her husband, who also ate ; that for this act of disobedience they were expelled from the garden, made subject to death, and laid under other maledictions.
(2) Varied Interpretations. The character of thc primitive record in Genesis has been the subject of much discussion. Some have contcnded that the account is purely literal ; others, that it is figurative, poetic, or allegorical ; still others, rationalistic or semirationalistic, relegate the whole matter to the realm of the mythical. This last view, of course, cannot be consistently held by anyone who accepts the Scriptures as of divine authority.
It must be admitted that the account leaves room for many questions both as to its font and its meaning in relation to incidental details. But still the great, underlying, essential facts are sufficiently clear, especially when the account is taken in connection with other Scriptures. They are as follows (Barnes' Bib. Dict.): Those holding the orthodox view maintain that the account of Moses is to be taken as a matter of real history, and according to its literal im port.
It is claimed that this is established by two considerations, against which, as being facts, nothing can successfully be urged. (1) The first is that the account of the fall of the first pair is a part of a continuous history. Either,
then, the account of the fall must he taken as history, or the historical character of the whole five books of Moses must be unsettled. (2) The second consideration, as establishing the literal sense of the history, is that, as such, it is re ferred to and reasoned upon in various parts of Scripture (Job xx :4, 5 ; xxxi :33 ; xv :14)• "Eden" and "the garden of the Lord" are also frequently referred to in the prophets. We have the "tree of life" mentioned several times in the Proverbs and in the Revelation. "God," says Solomon, "made man upright." The enemies of Christ and his church are spoken of, both in the Old and New Testaments, under the names of "the serpent," and "the dragon ;" and the habit of the serpent to lick the dust is also referred to hy Isaiah.
If the history of the fall, as recorded by Moses. were an allegory, or anything but a literal history, several of the above allusions would have no meaning; but the matter is put beyond all possi ble doubt in the New Testament, unless the same culpable liberties be taken with the interpretation of the words of our Lord and of St. Paul as with those of the Jewish lawgiver (Matt. xix:4; 5; Cor. XV :22 ; 2 COT. Xi :3 ; Tim. ii :13, 14; Rom. v :12-19). (3) When, therefore, it is con sidered that these passages are introduced, not for rhetorical illustration, or in the way of classi cal quotation, but are made the basis of grave and important reasonings, which embody some of the most important doctrines of the Christian revela tion, and of important social duties and points of Christian order and decorum, it would be to charge the writers of the New Testament with the grossest absurdity, nay, with even culpable and unworthy trifling, to suppose them to argue from the history of the fall as a narrative, when they knew it to be an allegory. (4) By the act of disobedience of our first parents "sin entered into the world and death by sin." Shame and alienation from God were the first visible conse quences. The image of God, which contained among its features "righteousness and true holi ness," was marred and broken, though not com pletely lost. (See D,1 AGE OF GOD.) Expulsion from Eden followed. The ground was cursed on account of sin. Sorrow and toil and struggle with the evil in human nature became the lot of mankind. (For a full presentation of the subject see ADAM. For distinctively doctrinal, Calvinis tic and Arminian views, see PREDESTINATION.)