Category: Adam and Eve

In John Milton’s 17th century epic poem Paradise Lost, Milton aims to explain the fall of man while incorporating many themes that influenced English society then, and that still pertain to culture today. Paradise Lost is considered Milton’s greatest work as the themes that are presented are both an accurate reflection of the environment during the time it was written, and stood the test of time. These themes include but are not limited to: monarchy as a symbol of power, Reformation that lead to disobedience, and the status of men and women at the time.

Parliamentary monarchy became popular in 17th century England and set the conditions for the culture. The monarchy was a symbol of power that clearly deemed class and social status of the people, ultimately creating a divide. This type of rule is also displayed in Paradise Lost, as Milton illustrates the hierarchy of the universe: God ruling above all, then Earth, and Hell. This system of power in 17th century England is what triggered the movement of Reformation. Reformation was a revolt that the people of England sparked during the suppression of the king’s religious laws. This same kind of disobedience took place in Milton’s classic poem whose main subjects Adam and Eve, revolt against God, who is their superior figure. Neither Adam and Eve nor the king’s people were content with submitting to authority, especially regarding their religious beliefs. This disobedience in both cases caused them to face the consequences. Milton expresses his views on the religious suppression of the time in more than one of his works. In Milton’s speech to the commonwealth of England in 1659, he states that “it will concern you while you are in power, so to regard other men’s consciousness, as you would your own should you be regarded in the power of others; and to consider that any law against conscious is alike in force against any conscious and so may one way or another justly rebound upon yourselves” (Milton). Clearly the right to choose religious and political affiliation was of paramount importance, as it clearly resonates in Paradise Lost.

The political hierarchy was not the only hierarchy that existed in the 1700s. “In Early Modern England, both gender hierarchy, with the man at the top, and the husband’s patriarchal role as governor of his family and household were assumed to have been instituted by God and nature” (The Norton Anthology of English Literature 1). In the same way, Paradise Lost emphasizes the Biblical standard that Eve should submit to Adam. An example of this is shown in the garden when Eve removes herself from the conversation between Adam and Raphael. “Yet went she not, as not with such discourse / Delighted, or not capable of her ear / Of what was high: such pleasures she reserv’d, / Adam relating, she sole Auditress” (Milton 48-51). In this situation, Eve is proven to be able to understand the conversation, but she accepts her place in the hierarchy and leaves the discussion to Adam.

One of the main themes that is presented in the poem is disobedience. In this work, Milton tells the story of man’s transgression and in turn, his fall from grace. However, if man had never disobeyed God, death would have never entered the world and man would have never been afforded the chance to be saved. Because Adam and Eve gave into temptation and disobeyed God, they provided an opportunity for the manifestation of God’s love, mercy and grace. The sin ultimately produced good rather than the destruction that man deserved. This theme is paralleled by the English subjects during Milton’s time who refused to obey the political hierarchy of the monarchy, and papal power of the Pope, in both the Reformation and the subsequent protestant conversion.

Another prominent theme in the poem is both literal, and metaphorical hierarchy. Just as Heaven is literally located higher than Earth, God is deemed higher than man. Likewise, the king in England was seen as higher than his subjects. In either scenario, the order is not to be broken, as it can cause chaos if the natural flow is disrupted. An example of this order being broken is when Eve eats the forbidden fruit and thinks by eating it and disobeying God, that it “may render me more equal” (Milton 823). She then asks, “for inferior who is free?” (Milton 826). Her desire to break the order backfired on not just her, but all of mankind for all of eternity. The battle between sin and innocence play a crucial role in preventing the aging of this poem, as the two create a struggle that has no end. The original sin of Adam and Eve introduced evil to the once perfect and pure world that God made. Since then, sin has been ever present in our world and there is now no such thing as a perfect human.

These themes that are demonstrated throughout also show great relevance to the environment in England in the 1700s. During the late 1600s and early 1700s, a great chasm developed between the King and his subjects which resulted in a scathing conflict that is now referred to as the Reformation. The people of England were outraged and revolted against the king’s authority. Similarly, Adam and Eve revolted against God in the Garden of Eden by eating from the Tree of Knowledge. Both of these instances stemmed from man’s desire to rule themselves. At the end of the Reformation was the dawning of a new age of thinking. People began to not only question the authority of the king and the Pope, they also began to question their own religious beliefs. “The invincibility of ‘the mind and spirit’ is something which even the foes of God understand. Though the fallen angels corrupt their ‘heavenly Essences’ with disobedience and revolt, they still have a keen understanding of the powers of perception, of personal reaction to one’s environment ‘for neither do the Spirits damned/ Lose all their virtue’ ” (qtd. in Shah 5). This period in England’s history was a breakthrough time of personal independence and spiritual awakening which also included the Renaissance age. In the caste hierarchical structure, subjects have no authority to choose their position in society, or choose their religious beliefs. Milton’s Paradise Lost exhibits the struggle for superiority of mankind. Ultimately, Adam and Eve’s disobedience is a corruption of the hierarchy of God. Sin and innocence are the crux of the universal truth of humanity, which is why Milton spends much of the poem highlighting the fall of man, essentially attempting to convict the people of that time. Milton retells the story of the fall and in essence, also mirrors the people’s separation from the king during the time it was written.

Milton’s intent is revealed clearly in the first few lines of the poem as it says to “justify the ways of God to men” (25-6). Milton aims to explain why God allows Adam and Eve to commit the original sin. This Biblical parallel delves deeply into the psyche of man, his fall from grace, and ultimately his salvation and redemption. In retrospect, Milton only partially demonstrates this purpose in that ultimately he fails to fully justify God’s ways to man. At its essence, Paradise Lost is a tale of man’s failure to understand the depth and breadth of God and thereby falls from His grace. This is mentioned in the Bible as God says “My thoughts are nothing like your thoughts,” says the Lord. “And my ways are far beyond anything you could imagine” (New Living Translation Isa. 55.8). The Bible clearly states that God will never be able to be fully understood by man leaving holes in this major work of Christian theology.

Paradise Lost maintains its prevalence today because the themes represented are lessons that can still be taught and learned. In fact, it is a story formed at the beginning of time and continues for all time. The struggle between sin and innocence, disobeying God, and subjecting oneself to a higher authority are universal and timeless constructs. Children are taught the principles in early childhood and the precepts continue through adolescence and into adulthood. Since the topic is relevant to all ages, it adds to the timelessness and sustainability of not only Milton’s work, but the many works that have followed suit. The Smithsonian accounts for more than three hundred translations into fifty-seven different languages. In this article, Ben Panko writes that the poem illustrates the consequences of rebellion. “These explorations of revolt, Issa tells Flood, are part of what makes “Paradise Lost” maintain its relevance to so many people around the world today” (Panko 1).

Paradise Lost has greatly influenced pop culture today. The age old struggle of good versus evil abounds in every aspect of today’s culture from music, to literature, to mainstream movies. The main characters God, Satan, Adam, and Eve permeate most of American culture to varying degrees. “Feared by Puritans, fêted by Romantics, and reinvented by everybody else, Milton’s fallen archangel has worn many different masks over the centuries, from Moby-Dick’s Captain Ahab to television’s Tony Soprano and Walter White” (Simon 1). The work is recognized for not only accurately dissecting a Biblical story, but also being relatable to every time period since it was written.

This first true English epic has earned its place as one of the finest works of literature ever written. Milton successfully uses the combination of metaphors and allusions to relate a biblical story to the environment in which he lived. The way Milton personalized the characters, especially Satan, served as a tool to keep the readers engaged. Milton effectively placed himself in the time which the fall occurred in order to generate a work that made his thoughts relevant thousands of years later.

Works Cited

1. “Archive of Classic Poems.” Milton; Poetry of John Milton, Full Text; Paradise Lost, Paradise Regained, at Everypoet.com, www.everypoet.com/archive/poetry/john_milton/milton_paradise_lost_book_4.htm.
2. Isaiah 55 NLT, biblehub.com/nlt/isaiah/55.htm.
3. The Norton Anthology of English Literature: Credits, wwnorton.com/college/english/nael/credits.htm.
4. Panko, Ben. “Why ‘Paradise Lost’ Is Translated So Much.” Smithsonian.com, Smithsonian Institution, 20 July 2017, www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/why-paradise-lost-translated-so-much-180964137/.
5. Shah, Umama. Impact of Renaissance on Paradise Lost.” Academia.edu, www.academia.edu/8953808/Impact_of_Renaissance_on_Paradise_Lost.
6. Simon, Edward. “What’s So ‘American’ About John Milton’s Lucifer?” The Atlantic, Atlantic Media Company, 16 Mar. 2017,
7. “Online Library of Liberty.” The Prose Works of John Milton, Vol. 2 – Online Library of Liberty, oll.libertyfund.org/titles/1210.

John Milton’s Paradise Lost provides a historical-fiction narrative of the creation and fall of human beings in the biblical book of Genesis. Dianne K. McColley, who wrote about Mr. Milton and his use of gender throughout his work, said: “Milton believed that the Bible was divinely inspired but open to interpretation by the individual conscience guided by the Holy Spirit and the rule of charity. He believed also that next to the relation between each person and God, the relation of husband and wife was the chief source of personal happiness or misery” (McColley 178).

The way in which Mr. Milton portrays men and women has been critiqued by feminists and literary scholars since the Paradise Lost was first published in 1667. Adam and Eve, as the only human characters in Paradise Lost, are the first man and woman, respectively, to walk the Earth, and Mr. Milton portrays each of them as the archetypes of the male and female genders (Reimer 1).

The main issue that literary critiques have with Paradise Lost is its contradiction in its portrayal of the female gender. Eve, and the female gender, is a character who at times is highly valued, and at different times is degraded (Reimer 1). The clearest example of this portrayal is in book eight, when Adam expresses his happiness at being given a companion:

“For well I understand in the prime end

Of nature her the inferior, in the mind

And inward faculties, which most excel,

In outward also her resembling less

His image who made both, and less expressing

The character of that dominion given

O’er other creatures…” (Paradise Lost 520, 8.540-545)

In this speech, Adam describes the nature of Eve as inferior, both intellectually and physically. Adam states that she does not mirror God as much as he does, and he believes that she does not hold as much potential (Reimer 1-2). However, he continues by stating:

“…yet when I approach

Her lovliness, so absolute she seems

And in herself complete, so well to know

Her own, that what she wills to do or say,

Seems wisest, virtuousest, discreetest, best;

All higher knowledge in her presence falls

Degraded, wisdom in discourse with her

Loses discountenanced, and like folly shows…” (Paradise Lost 520, 8.547-553)

This contradiction is what makes Paradise Lost’s approach to gender so complex and controversial (Reimer 2).

Perhaps the most popular critique of Paradise Lost is through a feminist lens. Feminist critiques all hold that Mr. Milton’s Eve represents the oppressed experience of a woman living within a patriarchal system (Reimer 2). One of many such critics is Elspeth Graham. Mrs. Graham contends that due to Mr. Milton’s past in politics and “As prime defender of an all-powerful God-the-Father, [Milton] becomes the ultimate spokesman for a misogynistic western culture” (Graham 134). Mrs. Graham continues by writing, “Milton is currently either reaffirmed as the archetypal misogynist, or, at the other extreme, presented as some sort of proto-feminist” (Graham 134). There are times throughout her writing that Mrs. graham choses to side with the idea that Eve is a victim of oppression. However, throughout her analysis, she fails to focus on in depth analyzation of Eve’s character, and Mrs. Graham does not fully commit to one side of the argument (Graham 133-139).

This impartial opinion seems to be a reoccurring theme in modern feminist critiques of Paradise Lost. Patrick J. McGrath is another critique who does not fully commit to one side of the argument. In order to understand whether or not Eve is a victim of an oppressive patriarchal system, Mr. McGrath explores the differences in the language and literary devices used my Milton in writing the conversations between Adam and Eve. Mr. McGrath decides that Eve is nowhere near as oppressed as many other feminist critiques say she is. However, his findings leave him impartial towards Mr. Milton’s handling of gender in Paradise Lost (McGrath 71-90).

Through close examination of Mr. Milton’s Paradise Lost, one can come to understand the role gender plays in the nature of human beings. In book four, Adam and Eve are compared side by side:

“And worthy seemed, for in their looks divine

The image of their glorious maker shown

Truth, wisdom, sanctitude severe and pure,

Severe but in true filial freedom placed;

Whence true authority in men; though both

Not equal, as their sex not equal seemed;

For contemplation he and valour formed,

For softness she and sweet attractive grace,

He for God only, she for God in him…” (Paradise Lost 428, 4.291-299)

The first portion of this description puts both Adam and Eve at the same level – both are made in the image of God. However, the second portion of this quote separates them due to their contrasting gender. The key word in this quote is “seemed.” Eve did not seem equal to Adam, because Adam displayed valor and Eve displayed grace (Reimer 5).

The last line (4.299) of the above quoted section, “He for God only, she for God in him,” has often become the focus for many critics of Paradise Lost. The most common understanding of this phrase is that Adam need only submit to God, whereas Even must submit to God and Adam. However, I would argue that the meaning of this phrase can be found in its literal interpretation. “God in him” (4.299) could refer to Adam’s body and the creative capacity Adam and Eve hold when brought together. This phrase could also allude to the way in which Eve was created – from the rib of Adam (Reimer 6). Critic Kent R. Lehnof’s understanding of this passage is that “Eve is required to obey Adam not because he is ontologically superior but because God has arbitrarily ordained that this be so” (Lehnof 68). Mr. Lehnof does not portray the relationship of male and female as hierarchical. Rather, he contends that God has a different, but equally as important, role for men and women. Eve does not serve Adam because she is inferior to him – Eve serves God and Adam because that is what God requires of her (Lehnof 68).

The hierarchal contrast between Adam and Eve is conflicting due to descriptions of Eve later in Paradise Lost. In book five, Adam refers to Eve as “Best image of my self and dearer half…” (Paradise Lost 448, 5.95). In book eight, Adam refers to Eve as “thy likeness, thy fit help, thy other self” (Paradise Lost 518, 8.450). And, in book seven, Adam refers to Eve as “thy consort” (Paradise Lost 504, 7.529). In book eight, Adam and Eve emerge as “one flesh, one heart, one soul” (Paradise Lost 519, 8.499). These passages from Paradise Lost suggest nothing but gender equality, which further complicates Mr. Milton’s portrayal of gender in this work (Reimer 6).

One of the many other critiques of Paradise Lost is Mr. Milton’s description of Adam’s lament of the fall and Eve’s decision to eat of the fruit. In book ten, Adam states:

“O why did God,

Creator wise, that peopled highest heaven

With spirits masculine, create at last

This novelty on earth, this fair defect

Of nature, and not fill the world at once

With men as angels without feminine,

Or find some other way to generate

Mankind?” (Paradise Lost 575, 10.888-895)

This passage is one that many feminist critiques point to when identifying the potential oppression of women in this poem (Reimer 7-8). Christine Froula is a feminist critic who describes Mr. Milton’s portrayal of eve in the following way, “Eve is not a self, a subject, at all; she is rather a substanceless image, a mere ‘shadow’ whothout object” (Froula 328). However, In book nine, Mr. Milton writes:

“To whom thus Adam fervently replied.

O woman, best are all things as the will

Of God ordained them, his creating hand

Nothing imperfect or deficient left

Of all that he created, much less man,

Or aught that might his happy state secure,

Secure from outward force.” (Paradise Lost 532, 9.342-348)

This passage from book nine emphasizes Eve as a creature of God. She does have “self,” because she has the ability to reason outside of Adam. God does not create the “imperfect,” so Eve does have substance (Reimer 8).

One of the greatest arguments for an esteemed view of the female gender in Paradise Lost is Mr. Milton’s connection of Eve to the Mother of Jesus Christ, Mary. In book five, Raphael, an angel from heaven, approaches Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden and refers to Mary as “Mary, second Eve” (Paradise Lost 455, 5.387). This connection between Mary the “Mother of God” (as described by Catholics) and Eve in essential in Mr. Milton’s understanding of the nature of Eve. This phrase emphasizes the holiness and importance of Eve as the first woman on Earth and the first mother to human beings. In many Christian theologies today, Eve is understood as a representation of evil, and Mary is understood as a representation of morality. However, Mr. Milton’s reference to Mary as the second Eve changes this standard completely. Although Mary is the mother of the Son of God, Milton writes:

“Whence hail to thee,

Eve rightly called, mother of all mankind,

Mother of all things living, since by thee

Man is to live, and all things live for man.” (Paradise Lost 548, 11.158-161)

The responsibility Eve holds as the “Mother of all things living” seems to be paramount. Through Eve’s familial line came Mary and Jesus Christ, along with every other person who has ever walked this Earth. Through this connection, Mr. Milton is rejecting the reference of Eve as symbolic of sin, and he is holding her in a much holier place (Reimer 7).

Though there is plenty of evidence for a feminist critique of Mr. Milton’s Paradise Lost, oppression of women at the hands of God and men does not seem to be Mr. Milton’s intention for his portrayal of the relationship between God, men, and women. Men and women are in the same boat. They worked together in Paradise. And, at the end of Paradise Lost, God expells them from the garden of Eden. Milton writes:

“Some natural tears they dropped, but wiped them soon;

The world was all before them, where to choose

Their place of rest, and providence their guide:

They hand in hand with wandering steps and slow

Through Eden took their solitary way.” (Paradise Lost 618, 12.645-649)

They left Paradise “hand in hand,” and took on the world ahead of them together. Overall, Eve is not merely a “shadow,” as Mrs. Froula described her. Rather, she has a special relationship with God because of her connection with creation. Adam and Eve are equal beings – each playing an important role intended by God (Reimer 8).

At the heart of Paradise Lost lies Milton’s attempt to wrestle between two key ideals of the poem: the all-powerful Eternal Father and the notion of Free Will. In setting out to ‘justify the ways of God to men’ (I. 26) whilst maintaining his own anti-deterministic beliefs, Milton must ensure neither is compromised throughout his epic poem. Whilst the form of anti-Calvinism Milton chooses to extol appears to exonerate God from responsibility for the fall, there are still issues surrounding this interpretation. God has, after all, created man ‘sufficient to have stood, though free to fall’ (III. 99) and seems to succeed in this; his creations able to exercise their own free will to obey or rebel. Christ and, at least initially, Adam are able to prove themselves as devoted and obedient followers of Faith, however Eve’s journey is markedly different, her decisions leading her down a path leading to her great transgression and the ultimate expulsion of Adam and Eve from Eden. However, whilst Eve is condemned as the root of man’s suffering and her conscious decision to eat the apple is lamented, God’s creation of Eve is markedly flawed, setting her out as a vulnerable from the poem’s offset. Couple this with her treatment within the Garden of Eden and the tale’s success is brought into question. Rather than demonstrating the power of Free Will in ascertaining Faith, Eve appears placed in a position near impossible for her to succeed. This difficulty arguably stems from the irreconcilable fact that Eve is a subject of the period in which she was written, both biblically and to Milton the guilt Eve carries is a response towards feelings of inferiority subjugation towards women.

It often appears God’s omniscience can cast him in a cruel and indifferent light, not raising a hand to prevent the Fall, however, this is resultant in a misunderstanding of Milton’s theodicy, a system through which mankind, and indeed other beings must find themselves worthy through ‘degrees of merit rais’d’ (VII. 157). There are numerous points throughout Paradise Lost critics have pointed out as troubling when judging the responsibility of God in the fall of man. An early example is seen when God observes Satan winging his way to the new world. He describes Satan’s journey through chaos and his plans to usurp the new creation. The crucial moment takes place in the shift as God talks of Satan’s desire from ‘if…he can destroy, or worse’ (III. 91) to ‘shall pervert; for man will hearken to his glozing lies’ (III. 93). The tense change to the indicative future, strengthened with the caesura seems to convey absolute certainty. God has no doubt of man’s future and there seems to be no flexibility. Man’s fall is apparently already guaranteed, seemingly removing him of the Free Will so desired by Milton’s God. Nevertheless, it appears as if Milton is faced with a contradictory task. If God’s knowledge is not absolute, then there must be a deficiency in his nature. Any such deficiency in his nature means he cannot be God, for God’s very essence requires the perfection of all attributes. The Scripture informs us that God is omniscient, with Job 37:16; Psalm 139:2-4, 147:5; and 1 John 3:19-20 leaving no doubt that God’s knowledge is infinite, knowing everything of the past, present and future. The superlatives used throughout these verses: ‘perfect in knowledge’, ‘his understanding has no limit’ and ‘he knows everything’ illuminate very clearly God’s knowledge is not only greater than our own but infinite in its totality. It is undeniable God knows Adam and Eve are going to sin in much the same way he knows Satan will rebel against him. This must be simultaneously synthesised with the Calvinist theories of Predestination Milton seeks to refute, Adam and Eve having absolute ownership over their own actions and complete Free Will. The Almighty states as much in the infamous quote declaring Adam and Eve ‘decreed / their own revolt, not I: if I foreknew, / Foreknowledge had no influence on their fault, / which no less proves certain unforeknown’. (III. 116-119) Existing outside of time, God in Paradise Lost knows everything about what Adam and Eve experience but he cannot not dictate what his creations will choose. Nonetheless, this can be synthesised when understanding God’s desire to test all his creations obedience, a theory predicated on the existence of Free Will.

The quote that appears to embody the crux of God’s belief in Free Will and explains his decision not to intervene in man’s Fall is found in Book III during the Council of Heaven where God states ‘Not free, what proof could they have giv’n sincere / of true allegiance, constant faith or love’ (III. 103-104). God argues Virtue is only displayed when faced with a test. His creation’s must have Free Will as, for him, obedience through servitude is no cause for exultation and Milton’s own Aeropagitica itself suggests, in the words of Eve, ‘Virtue unassay’d’ (IX. 335) is meaningless. It is of note to mention Eve’s words to Adam echo that of God himself, she understands she must be strong enough to stand alone and be tested to prove her worth to God. The best example of this testing can be seen in regards to the son of God and his test of faith dependent on his own Free Will. The son is created as a separate entity from God, begotten in time not from eternity (III. 384) and, therefore, does not share his Father’s omniscience. The relationship between the two is not static, rather dialectic, especially in the Heavenly Council. He boldly exercises freedom going as far as to suggest, should Satan be successful, God’s goodness may be ‘question’d and blasphem’d without defense’ (III. 166). Christ is exercising his own Free Will and, through this, his obedience under the tenants of his Father’s wishes. Through this debate, the son emerges unwavering in his belief in the Eternal Father and, upon volunteering to die for man’s sins, proves he is ‘By Merit more than Birthright Son of God’ (III. 309). As a separate being, the Son is granted the same Free Will the angels and man are granted and proves a central theme of the tale, that freely chosen obedience is a sign of strength made perfect in weakness. Therefore, it is important that man, like Christ and the angels, is tested.

Eve’s test, however, is far more troubling when fitting within the system of merit based virtue and accolade, her incomplete creation at the hands of God marring her potential to ever succeed at all and leading to question God or indeed Milton’s intentions in regards to women. Adam exercises his Free Will when requesting a companion from God and is tested when the bright light before him pretends he will not create a companion, however, ultimately he is able to pass the test set out, with God claiming the ‘trial’ (VIII. 447) over. Adam requests from God a harmonious fellowship with someone who is not ‘unequals’ (VIII. 382) and God’s answer to provide him with ‘fit help’ (VIII. 450) appears as if he is entirely obliging. Yet the Eve he is presented with, although undoubtedly beautiful, kind and caring, is not an equal of Adam. Even from her inception she is made ‘crooked by nature’ (X. 885), taken from Adam’s ‘sinister’ (X. 886) side. God has absolute power in his creation so the question remains why he would choose to take not only a crooked object in the form of the rib but to take said object from Adam’s left side, both allusions to sin. Not only is Eve corporeally flawed but she also spiritually disabled from creation. Milton states how Adam lives ‘for God only’ whilst Eve lives ‘for God in him’ (IV. 299), immediately establishing a strong hierarchical order. The use of Adam as a conduit from Eve to God denies her the personal relationship every other higher power can enjoy. The angels and Adam are able to communicate directly whilst Eve is reduced to an impersonal conveyance. The inequity between the two is obvious, despite Adam’s belief their union is one of ‘one flesh, one heart, one soul’. (VIII. 40) Whilst they may be comprised of the same being, their character is anything but. The misbalance between the two is evident to Satan too who, upon discovering Eve wandering through Paradise, is delighted to find her alone as an ‘unspported flow’r / From her best prop so far’. (IX. 423-3) The implication here is immediately obvious with Eve’s appearance, although beautiful, masking a worrying lack of independence. Her reliance on Adam to stand erect in the face of sin not only removing her ability to commit herself wholly to God but leaving her all the more venerable when separated, as she must be, for her strength of faith. If Eve was created not strong enough to stand alone it is not fair to subject her to a test of faith that requires her to be alone and thus God has failed to distribute justice equally.

The greatest flaw with Eve is, however, a product of her environment rather than her creation, Adam and the Angels’ treatment of Eve. Adam’s test at the hands of Raphael saw his insatiable ‘thirst’ (VIII. 8) for knowledge silenced when Raphael refuses to answer questions concerning celestial motion and warns him of the limits in place on human knowledge. The reader is told multiple times of man’s curiosity and desire for knowledge when discovering new plants or naming new animals. However, at crucial moments when man is educated on the working of the universe and its place within the cosmos, Eve is not present. She is dependent on Adam’s retelling of events and, as such, is unable to explore the own realms of her curiosity. More importantly, Adam is informed what limits are placed by God on knowledge, warned by Raphael ‘Solicit not thy thoughts with matters hid, / Leave them to God above, him serve and fear’ (VIII. 167-168). With no awareness of the limits put in place, Eve’s insatiable but untested desire for knowledge has the potential to run rampant. Yet far more damning is the scene in which Michael’s physical suppression of Eve by placing her asleep in Book XI renders her once again incapable of exercising the Free Will both Adam and Christ in discovering faith for themselves. The passage in which Michael asks Adam to ‘ascend this hill’ (XI. 366-367) with him whilst Eve is left with her eyes ‘drenched’ sees Adam raised up alongside the angel with Eve below the two of them. Adam is aware of the significance of his journey, as they both ascend ‘in the visions of God’ to a vantage point from which he can view ‘all earth’s kingdoms and their glory’ (IX. 377-384) the passage saturated with Biblical and Historical reference designed to elevate the glory of this moment. This is not a moment in which he considers the knowledge of Eve, after all, Eve can only live for ‘God in him’ (IV. 299). It is no wonder she is unable to support herself alone, not given the equal opportunities as other tested characters to learn and grow as an individual. It is this refusal that leads to the success of the Serpent winning its way into her heart, Satan using a direct appeal to this insatiable curiosity of man through the fictional autobiography of the Serpent. As Satan speaks of his ‘alteration’ he claims he began to engage in ‘Speculations high or deep’ (IX. 602). These ‘speculations’ are something Eve has not been provided with answers to until now and, lacking a complete understanding of the world around her, her curiosity is piqued into delving further into the Serpent’s tale.

Clearly Milton highly values freedom and the notion of voluntary choice, making them central to his greatest power but he cannot relinquish the idea of God’s absolute power creating a tension that lingers within Paradise Lost. Ultimately, Eve’s failure to succeed and prove her faith is a result of her flawed creation and the constrictions her environment has placed her under. In Book IX lines 387- 395, as the Book begins to reach its climax with Eve nearing the Tree of Knowledge, Eve appears to adopt the blame for a multitude of tragic woman throughout classical history, her comparisons ranging from Persephone and Pomona to Delia and the Dryads who perish with their trees. Eve carries not just the guilt of a single woman in history but the mother of all female guilt forever more. Adam, when learning of the sin of Eve, cries out to the heavens in horror asking why God created women rather than filling the world ‘with men as angels without feminine’ (X. 893). The Biblical story of Adam and Eve relies on the failings of Eve and, through doing so, requires Eve to use her Free Will to choose against God. However, is it truly Free Will if Eve is not provided with the necessary agencies to make her decision? The increasing direction of blame towards not only Eve but the feminine form as a whole seems rooted in an establishment well versed in the subordination and disenfranchisement of women and the tale of Eve, no matter how Milton tries to reconcile this, is a product of this time.

‘Genesis’ is the first book of the Hebrew and Christian canon, and as it sets the scene for the rest of Scripture, its theological importance cannot be overstated. Every Biblical book that follows is to be read through the theological and historical lens offered in its foundational narrative. The subject of this exegetical tract is the third chapter of ‘Genesis’; with significant focus on verse 3:6. Within this text the Biblical author is telling of the temptation of the Woman by the serpent, which results in the fall of man. The reason this text is so interesting is because it is the hinge on which all Salvation history is placed. It is the result of the actions in this chapter that bring about the necessity of salvation through the sacrifice of Christ. When reading ’Genesis’ and getting to chapter 3 the reader will often start to wonder and begin to ask a lot of questions. Why does the serpent go after the woman? Why does Adam stay silent during the temptation of the woman? What would have happened if Adam did not take the fruit from Eve? These questions are almost impossible to completely understand and answer with confidence that they are correct. While reading into Genesis 3:6-12 and then moving forward to Romans 5:12-14 these chapters are hard to interpret and the questions cannot be answered in confidence, rather they can begin to cause some interpretive issues and in some rare cases the different commentators begin to contradict the biblical authors.

While it is important to interpret the divinely inspired words in the Bible, to better understand what God is saying, we have to realize that we will never completely be able to appreciate what point God is trying to get across. Chapter 3 in ‘Genesis’ is arguably the most important chapter in the Bible, where we are shown the reason that we needed Jesus to die on the cross for us. It is recorded in the book of ‘Genesis’ of the Bible. Shortly after being made ‘in the image of God‘ the first humans were tested. The account records an exchange with a ‘serpent’. The core of their choice, and thus the temptation, was that they could ‘be like God’. Up to this point they had implicitly trusted God for everything and taken Him at His word for everything. But now they had the choice to leave that behind, become ‘like God’, trusting themselves and taking their own word for things. That being said, interpreting these passages can cause confusion and can even be seen as interpreted incorrectly based on what we know about the Old and New Testament of the Bible. “The sin of the two has so much in common that it is practically one sin, and Adam, as the head, may be referred to exclusively as the originator of sin and the fall” (Leupold 146). Although the end result is true, Adam is referred to as the originator of sin and the fall, to say that the two sins were practically the same cannot be stressed enough. Eve being tempted by the devil is very different from Adam accepting fruit from his wife. Even though we do not know for sure the devil did not tempt Adam as well, the bible mentions nothing of the idea that Adam may have been tempted by the devil, or the serpent.

Although interpreters cannot know for sure what is a metaphor and what is not in the bible, we have a good idea behind most of what is being said when Eve takes the fruit of the tree and gives it to her husband. However, Brisco talks about the Fall and mentions the idea that the fall of man was in some ways sexual and the fruit of the tree was just a metaphor for this impure sexuality between Adam and Eve. Again this is almost an impossible interpretation of this chapter of the bible because God told them to be fruitful and multiply. The Old testament’s main theme is to be fruitful and to multiply, because it is following the creation Adam and Eve are husband and wife and should be fruitful and multiply. It might be safer to view the covering of their nakedness as an attempt to hide from each the fact that they were different and so that reminded them of God who made them that way.

Armstrong talks about how it was Eve’s first mistake was that she was even carrying on a discussion with the serpent. We are called to talk to the devil, but never to have a discussion with him. We simply and strongly tell him, “The Lord rebuke you!” (Jude 9). My question is regarding this interpretation is does she even know that she is even talking to the devil? The reason I find this issue in the interpretation is just because if a serpent begins to talk to a person, would that not cause Eve to question it more than she did? I can not really blame Eve for talking to the serpent since this may have not even been an unnatural occurrence. “It will be hard to claim with modernists that the new testament writers saw the devil in the serpent, but that on the level of the old testament men never thought of the tempter as any other than only a serpent” (Leupold 141). The bible does not even mention the devil in the serpent until the New Testament and because of this we cannot assume that Eve really sees the serpent as the devil knowing that she should not talk to the devil.

Even Wenham unintentionally has issues with his commentary which may bring confusion to the reader who may not be able to look into these passages any other way. Wenham talks about the ‘snake’ and how his first question seems to just be innocent curiosity. This may seem as an innocent interpretation, but before this first question God clearly talks about the serpent being more crafty than any other beast. It almost seems as though Wenham is trying to defend the serpent saying that he is not lying to Eve.

Romans talks about how God died for our sins while we were still weak because God’s love is greater than anything in the world. He then continues and begins to talk about the fall and how this has affected everyone who comes from Adam. Sin came to this world through one man and death through sin and death spreads to all men because all sinned. The wording of this may come as confusing ‘because all sinned’ some may take this differently and get confused about who is responsible for the fall. Some blame equally on the serpent, the woman, and Adam, and some just blame Eve, and some just blame Adam. Continuing on from who to blame for the fall of man Talbert helps also realize that “Just as one man’s trespass led to condemnation for all, so one man’s act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all” (Talbert 151). Where he goes next is where one can see an issue. Talbert continues by saying “All does not always mean every single individual, ‘all’ and ‘many’ are interchangeable” (151). Although eternal life is not given to everyone, by saying that all and many are interchangeable to me sounds as though he may be saying that many of the people who accept God as their savior will be saved instead of saying that all who accept God as their savior will be saved. By interpreting something as important as this, it is important to really make sure that the reader understands exactly what is trying to be said, and in this case it could cause people to think that there’s a chance that they do not get saved even as a believer.

Though the Covenant relationship was initiated by way of a ‘voluntary condescension’ on God’s part, it did stipulate as its condition ‘perfect and personal obedience’ on Adam’s part. By virtue of Adam’s sin and disobedience, the way of life and blessedness, which was promised to Adam upon condition of obedience, was closed to him and his posterity. Venema states: “However, in the covenant of grace, God graciously provides a Mediator, Christ as the ‘second Adam’, who fulfills all the obligations of the law of God on behalf of his people”. The New Testament emphasizes the importance of God coming to die on the Cross so much because of the fact that if we do not come to believe in Christ we will not be saved and have eternal life. Even as Talbert does not necessarily take the wrong approach to interpreting the justification for ‘all’ I feel like it is hard to interchange them in the context that it is used.

In Beale’s and Carson’s ‘Commentary of the NT’ use of the OT they talk about the fall, but they give other people’s opinions on who should take responsibility for the fall. They first state: “Paul makes no attempt here to trace the origin of evil behind Adam’s fall, as sometimes happens in early Jewish sources” (Beale 629). But then they continue to talk about the opinion of different Jewish sources. In the ‘Apocalypse of Moses’ ( Life of Adam and Eve ) the blame for the fall clearly rests with Eve, who appears weaker and more easily deceived than Adam (e.g., L.A.E. 9:2; 14:2; 21:2, 6; 24:1). Sirach 25:24 attributes the fall entirely to Eve: “From a woman sin had its beginning, and because of her we all die” (629). Even as this is not their exact opinion for the responsibility of the fall, the Bible clearly states that Adam is responsible for the fall of man. Just as Talbert discusses, it can be a huge issue in terms of interpreting the bible to even blame Eve for Adam. This being said, Talbert goes on to talk about the result of the fall if Adam had been with Eve the entire time. “It is likely he was not with her when she was tempted; surely if he had been, he would have interposed to prevent the sin; but he came to her when she had eaten, and was prevailed with, by her, to eat likewise” (Talbert). This is almost impossible to even talk yet Talbert says this with confidence. Who are we to say that the result of the discussion with the serpent would be any different if Adam was there talking about the tree of good and evil along with Eve. Would he have told Eve that they should not be eating from that tree? Eve pretty easily convinced Adam to eat the same fruit as her, so most likely, the serpent would not have had a hard time convincing the both of them to take the fruit from the tree to eat it together. The reason that this is so important to not interpret incorrectly is that with the introduction of the Fall of man we then can see that just as one man is responsible for the death of humans (Adam), one man is also the reason for the resurrection of man (Jesus).

The second half of Romans 5 is a summation of what is understood to be the gospel. Man’s need for a redeemer is demonstrated by the universality of sin and death, and thus man is helpless and thus requires salvation. But Christ, who is a type of Adam, has come to reverse the condition brought about by Adam. Sin is triumphed by righteousness, and death is triumphed by life. We have to think about what is going on during the time that Paul is boasting about how Jesus died for us. He is writing to the Romans in which he has never been to Rome, but he says that he would like to go sometime. He emphasizes that jesus died on the cross to save everyone that believes in him, and then goes back to talk about the fall because he wants us to realize that we are still sinners and the first Adam has brought death to the human race, but then the second Adam ‘Jesus’ has died for that sin and is going to resurrect all of those that believe in Him. The point is, Paul focuses on these subjects for a reason, and when we misinterpret these passages, based on what is going on during the time that Paul is writing this, the commentators are only causing problems for the readers and making God’s word harder to understand.

Going through ‘Genesis’ chapter 3 and ‘Romans’ chapter 5 really shows how quickly you can take one thing in the bible and take it in a direction that may make sense for some people, but could cause great confusion for others. Going through different commentaries for these passages, I see that there are very well thought out and very well written interpretations for the different verses in both the Old and the New Testament. Genesis 3:6-12 and Romans 5:12-14 are both talking about the same concept and in some ways interchangeable for different conversations between two people, but this does not mean that the interpretation of each of the verses in these chapters will be perfect and I experienced this first hand. Although many of the ideas that the authors have are perfectly in tune with my thinking of the verse, they still had many interpretations that I had issues with. Overall, we have to consider the theme behind the Old Testament and the New Testament when we are looking into the different interpretations for the bible verses.