• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Biblical Tree of Knowledge

tosca1

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 29, 2013
Messages
20,994
Reaction score
2,743
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
This is a continuation of the interesting discussion started with Grand Mal in the other thread. How mankind got the concept of right and wrong.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/religious-discussions/219075-directs-karma-w-203-a-20.html




I'd like to respond to his statement:

Grand Mal
I'd like to say that it was acquiring the knowledge of good and evil that got Adam and Eve evicted from the Garden, that learning the difference was the original sin. They had been told not to.

It's disobedience that got them evicted from the garden.



Genesis 3
17 To Adam he said, “Because you listened to your wife and ate fruit from the tree about which I commanded you, ‘You must not eat from it,

“Cursed is the ground because of you;
through painful toil you will eat food from it
all the days of your life.
18 It will produce thorns and thistles for you,
and you will eat the plants of the field.
19 By the sweat of your brow
you will eat your food
until you return to the ground,
since from it you were taken;
for dust you are
and to dust you will return.”




Furthermore, that would mean you're taking the narrative literally. Remember, you believe it's not supposed to be taken literally.


Originally Posted by Grand Mal View Post
The story in Genesis about the Garden of Eden, that's a creation myth. Like all creation myths it has a moral built into it but it was never meant to be taken literally.


God had already decided to make man in His image BEFORE He created Adam. Therefore, the morality of God had been bestowed in man before they ate from the tree.



Genesis 1
26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.




Also, even when you take it literally.... if it's the tree of knowledge that gave mankind the concept of good and evil (because they ate from the tree).....well, who created the tree of knowledge? God.
Therefore, that also supports my stance that, without God, mankind wouldn't have the concept of right and wrong.
 
Last edited:

Grand Mal

Question authority
DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
33,904
Reaction score
16,893
Location
on an island off the left coast of Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
This is a continuation of the interesting discussion started with Grand Mal in the other thread. How mankind got the concept of right and wrong.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/religious-discussions/219075-directs-karma-w-203-a-20.html




I'd like to respond to his statement:




It's disobedience that got them evicted from the garden.



Genesis 3
17 To Adam he said, “Because you listened to your wife and ate fruit from the tree about which I commanded you, ‘You must not eat from it,

“Cursed is the ground because of you;
through painful toil you will eat food from it
all the days of your life.
18 It will produce thorns and thistles for you,
and you will eat the plants of the field.
19 By the sweat of your brow
you will eat your food
until you return to the ground,
since from it you were taken;
for dust you are
and to dust you will return.”




Furthermore, that would mean you're taking the narrative literally. Remember, you believe it's not supposed to be taken literally.






God had already decided to make man in His image BEFORE He created Adam. Therefore, the morality of God had been bestowed in man before they ate from the tree.



Genesis 1
26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.




Also, even when you take it literally.... if it's the tree of knowledge that gave mankind the concept of good and evil (because they ate from the tree).....well, who created the tree of knowledge? God.
Therefore, that also supports my stance that, without God, mankind wouldn't have the concept of right and wrong.
No, I don't take it literally. It's a story, a creation myth and it's a damn good one, too.
It wasn't the tree of knowledge that was forbidden, it was the tree of knowledge of good and evil. They were forbidden to learn of good and evil and were evicted from the garden so they wouldn't eat from the tree of life, not to punish their disobedience. It was to protect the tree of life that the way back into the garden was guarded.
Odd, wasn't it, what God said in Genesis 3:22. What did He mean when He said, "Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil..."
All of this means that it's despite God that we know the difference between good and evil, not because of Him.
 

Manc Skipper

Wrinkly member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2008
Messages
32,206
Reaction score
21,101
Location
Southern England
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
When God says "One of us", who might the rest of "us" be?
 

laska

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 25, 2005
Messages
3,237
Reaction score
402
Location
United States
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Adam and Eve were meant to Fall. If they had not entered mortality they would not have had offspring, and they would have stayed innocent and not have the ability to know good and evil. They nor we their offspring could not then eventually become like our Heavenly Parents and achieve exaltation and achieve an infinite fullness of joy. Think of it like this, if a person has never tasted bitter, they cannot know the taste of sweet. Staying innocent like an infant baby, while we may not know misery, we cannot know joy either. Our Heavenly Parents want us to grow up and become like Them, to know good and evil, and use our free agency to hopefully choose good and the path to a fullness of joy. The Plan of Salvation put forth by our Heavenly Father in the pre-mortal world and accepted by all of us who have been born on this earth, is that we would Fall and go through an earthly mortality where we will sin and make mistakes, but as we taste the bitterness of sin we will have the ability to use our free agency to overcome sin through embracing the authorized gospel of Christ and Christ's Atonement. If Adam and Eve had not fallen, God's plan would have been frustrated, so they had to fall. Eve fell because she was tricked by the serpent, Adam, who was the great Michael the archangel in the pre-mortal world, chose to Fall because he knew he had to. These two of the most noble souls of God's family got the ball rolling for all of us. The reason why the tree of life was guarded is because if they or any of their posterity ate the fruit of it while in their mortal or fallen state, they would have lived forever in that fallen state. Which would have been a curse. Death in mortality is a blessing, as this temporal body that has inherited decay returns to dust. It is in the resurrection when we inherit a perfect incorruptible body that we are meant to live forever in.
 

laska

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 25, 2005
Messages
3,237
Reaction score
402
Location
United States
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
What makes the Genesis account confusing to many people is that both God and the serpent, in this one incident, shared the same goal. Both wanted Adam and Eve to Fall. One so that they could achieve a fulness of joy, and the other in hope he could lead them to eternal misery. They had to get off the fence though. So the serpent tempted Eve with the truth that she could become like God if she broke the commandment and Fall by partaking of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
 

laska

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 25, 2005
Messages
3,237
Reaction score
402
Location
United States
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
When God says "One of us", who might the rest of "us" be?
The LDS Book of Moses Ch 4 states:

28 And I, the Lord God, said unto mine Only Begotten: Behold, the man is become as one of us to know good and evil; and now lest he put forth his hand and partake also of the tree of life, and eat and live forever,

29 Therefore I, the Lord God, will send him forth from the Garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken;

So it looks like it was God the Father speaking to the pre-mortal Jesus.
 

laska

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 25, 2005
Messages
3,237
Reaction score
402
Location
United States
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Additional parts of the Genesis account that had been lost to mankind was restored through the prophet Joseph Smith. It helps clarify the Biblical account:

Several days after Adam and Eve had been banished from the garden.
Moses Ch 5:
6 And after many days an angel of the Lord appeared unto Adam, saying: Why dost thou offer sacrifices unto the Lord? And Adam said unto him: I know not, save the Lord commanded me.
7 And then the angel spake, saying: This thing is asimilitude of the sacrifice of the Only Begotten of the Father, which is full of grace and truth.
8 Wherefore, thou shalt do all that thou doest in the nameof the Son, and thou shalt repent and call upon God in the name of the Son forevermore.
9 And in that day the Holy Ghost fell upon Adam, which beareth record of the Father and the Son, saying: I am theOnly Begotten of the Father from the beginning, henceforth and forever, that as thou hast fallen thou mayest be redeemed, and all mankind, even as many as will.
10 And in that day Adam blessed God and was filled, and began to prophesy concerning all the families of the earth, saying: Blessed be the name of God, for because of mytransgression my eyes are opened, and in this life I shall have joy, and again in the flesh I shall see God.
11 And Eve, his wife, heard all these things and was glad, saying: Were it not for our transgression we never should have had seed, and never should have known good and evil, and the joy of our redemption, and the eternal life which God giveth unto all the obedient.
12 And Adam and Eve blessed the name of God, and they made all things known unto their sons and their daughters.
 

RAMOSS

Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2014
Messages
48,706
Reaction score
17,096
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
When God says "One of us", who might the rest of "us" be?
According to the Jewish commentary, he is talking to the 'cherubim'i.e. the angels. I personally think it is a left over from the fact that many of the ancient Jewish stories were adapted from other religions that were polytheistic. A number of people have proposed that different Mesopotamian myths were the source of the Garden of Eden stories. I find that plausible but not yet proven. The Cherubim are then given the task to make sure that Adam and Eve don't go back into the garden. Since the Garden has never been found, they must be doing a bang up job of it.
 

Jerry

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2006
Messages
51,124
Reaction score
15,258
Location
United States
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
...All of this means that it's despite God that we know the difference between good and evil, not because of Him.
God set the whole thing up, that means it's because of God, not despite God.
 

Grand Mal

Question authority
DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
33,904
Reaction score
16,893
Location
on an island off the left coast of Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
According to the Jewish commentary, he is talking to the 'cherubim'i.e. the angels. I personally think it is a left over from the fact that many of the ancient Jewish stories were adapted from other religions that were polytheistic. A number of people have proposed that different Mesopotamian myths were the source of the Garden of Eden stories. I find that plausible but not yet proven. The Cherubim are then given the task to make sure that Adam and Eve don't go back into the garden. Since the Garden has never been found, they must be doing a bang up job of it.
It's a confusing story, considering the trees- only one was forbidden but, having eaten from it they were evicted to protect the other. I wonder, if they had found the tree of life first would they still be alive in the garden, immortal and with no knowledge of good and evil?
I think the reason innocence and paradise were lost was agriculture. Adam was told to till the earth and Cain was a planter, Abel a herdsman. With agriculture comes the ability to create a surplus and I think all the problems mankind has had since are from trying to answer the question, "Who controls the surplus?"
It's a good myth. It's been polished over years, that's plain to see. I wonder about the trees...
 

Logicman

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 21, 2013
Messages
18,818
Reaction score
1,890
Location
United States
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
No, I don't take it literally. It's a story, a creation myth and it's a damn good one, too.
It wasn't the tree of knowledge that was forbidden, it was the tree of knowledge of good and evil. They were forbidden to learn of good and evil and were evicted from the garden so they wouldn't eat from the tree of life, not to punish their disobedience. It was to protect the tree of life that the way back into the garden was guarded.
Odd, wasn't it, what God said in Genesis 3:22. What did He mean when He said, "Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil..."
All of this means that it's despite God that we know the difference between good and evil, not because of Him.
There's nothing odd about what God said in Genesis 3:22. Here's what you're missing:

1. Man was to be created in the likeness and image of God (Genesis 1:26).

2. Part of this “likeness” was a knowledge of good and evil (Genesis 3:22)

3. For Adam to be truly “like” God, he had to acquire a knowledge of evil.

4. The means to that end was eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

5. To do that a “tempter” was likely needed to entice Adam into sin.

6. God provided, or allowed, Satan as the tempter.

7. God knew in advance what the outcome would be, but allowed it anyway.

8. God knew atonement would be required, and provided Jesus Christ as the “Lamb slain from the foundation of the earth” (Revelation 13:8).

9. Man achieves the likeness of God, acquires a knowledge of and overcomes evil, partakes of Christ, and is reunited in paradise with God. Man is now an overcomer with a keen knowledge of evil.

The key to all this remains, “Is acquiring a knowledge of good and evil a prerequisite to coming into the likeness and image of God? If the answer is yes, I think Adam has to eat from that tree, and God has to make it happen. If the answer is no, then I think you have to look back to Genesis 3:22 and reconcile that with Genesis 1:26, explaining how Adam is “like” God, but at the same time lacks a knowledge of good and evil. Also, how does man acquire that knowledge without eating of the fruit of that tree? (righterreport)

p.s. You claim the Garden of Eden story is a myth. That's your opinion, right? Because it's highly doubtful you can support your "myth" claim without having some evidence to back it up.
 

Logicman

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 21, 2013
Messages
18,818
Reaction score
1,890
Location
United States
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
According to the Jewish commentary, he is talking to the 'cherubim'i.e. the angels.
Angels don't have the creative ability to make a man.

Plurality in personal pronouns (such as "us" and "our") when used in reference to the Lord, lends evidence for the plurality of God (as in Father, Son, and Holy Spirit). A good case in point is Genesis 1:26:

"Then God said, 'Let us make man in our image, in our likeness,
and let have dominion over the fist of the sea, and over the birds
of the air, and over the livestock, and over all the earth."

Here, we see a conversation that is taking place prior to the creation of man. Who is this person or persons with whom God is conversing? First, this 'person' or 'persons' is able to communicate with God in His own realm of timeless eternity. Because man had not yet been created, He was not speaking to someone of earthly intelligence, but someone in the heavenly, supernatural and eternal realm.

Secondly, this person or persons with whom God is communicating apparently has the same kind of creative ability as God ("Let us make"). This clearly implies a cooperative effort between God (Elohim - plural) and the person or person with whom God is speaking.

And finally, the person or persons with whom God is speaking is comparable, or identical, with God ("Let us make man in our image, after our likeness").

When confronted with this passage, modern skeptics and Jewish rabbis often claim that God is speaking with angels. However, this explanation fails to address a number of problems. First, there is no indication found anywhere in the Bible that says angels can create life. Secondly, nowhere is it indicated that angels were ever made in the image and likeness of God. And finally, there is no indication from scripture that mankind was ever made in the likeness of angels.

Just one more example. In Genesis chapter 11, God is looking down at man's attempt to build the Tower of Babel to make a name for themselves. In verse 7 God states:

"Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand one another."

Once more, the personal pronoun "us" is used as a reference to God. Note that in verse 11:5 it is "the Lord" that is referred to when "us" is later used ("The Lord came down to see the city").

You're busted, Ramoss.
 

RAMOSS

Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2014
Messages
48,706
Reaction score
17,096
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Angels don't have the creative ability to make a man.

Plurality in personal pronouns (such as "us" and "our") when used in reference to the Lord, lends evidence for the plurality of God (as in Father, Son, and Holy Spirit). A good case in point is Genesis 1:26:

"Then God said, 'Let us make man in our image, in our likeness,
and let have dominion over the fist of the sea, and over the birds
of the air, and over the livestock, and over all the earth."

Here, we see a conversation that is taking place prior to the creation of man. Who is this person or persons with whom God is conversing? First, this 'person' or 'persons' is able to communicate with God in His own realm of timeless eternity. Because man had not yet been created, He was not speaking to someone of earthly intelligence, but someone in the heavenly, supernatural and eternal realm.

Secondly, this person or persons with whom God is communicating apparently has the same kind of creative ability as God ("Let us make"). This clearly implies a cooperative effort between God (Elohim - plural) and the person or person with whom God is speaking.

And finally, the person or persons with whom God is speaking is comparable, or identical, with God ("Let us make man in our image, after our likeness").

When confronted with this passage, modern skeptics and Jewish rabbis often claim that God is speaking with angels. However, this explanation fails to address a number of problems. First, there is no indication found anywhere in the Bible that says angels can create life. Secondly, nowhere is it indicated that angels were ever made in the image and likeness of God. And finally, there is no indication from scripture that mankind was ever made in the likeness of angels.

Just one more example. In Genesis chapter 11, God is looking down at man's attempt to build the Tower of Babel to make a name for themselves. In verse 7 God states:

"Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand one another."

Once more, the personal pronoun "us" is used as a reference to God. Note that in verse 11:5 it is "the Lord" that is referred to when "us" is later used ("The Lord came down to see the city").

You're busted, Ramoss.
You know, when you invoke 'the Jewish Rabbi's' you are almost always totally wrong. When it comes to 'let us make man in our image', the Jewish commentary says that it is the 'heavenly host', and points out that in the next phrase, when God actually does the creating, rather than a plural, it is a magnified singular.

And yes, I view the Garden of Eden as a midrash.
 

Logicman

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 21, 2013
Messages
18,818
Reaction score
1,890
Location
United States
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
You know, when you invoke 'the Jewish Rabbi's' you are almost always totally wrong. When it comes to 'let us make man in our image', the Jewish commentary says that it is the 'heavenly host', and points out that in the next phrase, when God actually does the creating, rather than a plural, it is a magnified singular.

And yes, I view the Garden of Eden as a midrash.
You still don't see it?

In Genesis chapter 11, God is looking down at man's attempt to build the Tower of Babel to make a name for themselves. In verse 7 God states:

"Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand one another."

Once more, the personal pronoun "us" is used as a reference to God. Note that in verse 11:5 it is "the Lord" that is referred to when "us" is later used ("The Lord came down to see the city").

"Us" is the Lord. Not the Lord and angels, just the Lord.
 

RAMOSS

Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2014
Messages
48,706
Reaction score
17,096
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
You still don't see it?

In Genesis chapter 11, God is looking down at man's attempt to build the Tower of Babel to make a name for themselves. In verse 7 God states:

"Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand one another."

Once more, the personal pronoun "us" is used as a reference to God. Note that in verse 11:5 it is "the Lord" that is referred to when "us" is later used ("The Lord came down to see the city").

"Us" is the Lord. Not the Lord and angels, just the Lord.
Sometimes.. sometimes not. it all depends on the state of the following verb. If the following verb is singular, then US is the 'royal we'. If it is following verb is pural, then 'US ' is plural, and you have to look at the context. Sometimes, it is the Lord and the heavenly host. It's just like when Moses was made 'Elohim' over Aaaron. Since the following verb was singular, it was a magified 'Elohim', rather than more than one Moses.
 

tosca1

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 29, 2013
Messages
20,994
Reaction score
2,743
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
No, I don't take it literally. It's a story, a creation myth and it's a damn good one, too.
It wasn't the tree of knowledge that was forbidden, it was the tree of knowledge of good and evil. They were forbidden to learn of good and evil and were evicted from the garden so they wouldn't eat from the tree of life, not to punish their disobedience. It was to protect the tree of life that the way back into the garden was guarded.
Odd, wasn't it, what God said in Genesis 3:22. What did He mean when He said, "Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil..."
All of this means that it's despite God that we know the difference between good and evil, not because of Him.
Here's the context: God had already told Adam not to eat from that tree and He also said why.
When God instructed Adam not to eat from the tree of Knowledge (of good and evil - I just shortened it above), Adam and Eve were already aware that to do so would be wrong. Adam knew the consequences:

Genesis 3:2 The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3 but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.'


NOTE: that term "die," is significant. It epitomizes what is evil. Thus when Jesus died and Resurrected, He triumphed over death!

When they ate from that tree, they were not simply aware of evil. They EXPERIENCED evil. They became sinners by nature.

Man knew what was good! He was created in goodness, and was surrounded by it. Check out every creation God made leading up to the creation of man. Everything was good!


Man knew what was good: he was created in goodness and was surrounded by it (Genesis 1:31). He had been given everything God wanted him to have, including authority over all the rest of God’s creation. Adam had everything he needed for a fulfilling life. He did not need to “know” evil, especially when the only way for him to “know” it was to experience it. It should have been enough that God had warned Adam against disobedience. God did not want Adam and Eve to “know” evil in the sense of participating in it.

The sin of Adam and Eve was not in attaining knowledge but in rejecting God’s will in favor of their own.


The apostle Paul spoke about the last Adam (Jesus) who came to restore our broken relationship with God (1 Corinthians 15:45). Paul also noted, “Since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man” (1 Corinthians 15:21). Adam was responsible for sin’s entrance into humanity. Jesus Christ was responsible for providing the way for resurrection. After sin entered humanity, Jesus became the perfect substitute for sin to allow every person the opportunity to believe and receive eternal life (John 3:16).



Read more: Why was it wrong for Adam and Eve to know good and evil (Genesis 3:22)?


Disobedience is, going against the will of God.
 
Last edited:

tosca1

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 29, 2013
Messages
20,994
Reaction score
2,743
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
It's a confusing story, considering the trees- only one was forbidden but, having eaten from it they were evicted to protect the other. I wonder, if they had found the tree of life first would they still be alive in the garden, immortal and with no knowledge of good and evil?

The key element in the passage is not the fruit itself, but the prohibition against eating it. God gave Adam and Eve only one prohibition in His instructions. Whether there was some spiritual property within the fruit is really irrelevant.
The sin was in disobeying God's command. By eating the fruit (an act of disobedience), Adam and Eve gained personal knowledge of evil. They already knew good, but now they had the contrasting experience of the evil of disobedience and the guilt and shame that came with it. Satan's lie was that knowing good and evil would make them like gods (Genesis 3:5). In reality, they were already made in the image of God and had the blessing of His good pleasure.


Read more: Was Adam and Eve's sin really about eating a piece of forbidden fruit?
 

tosca1

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 29, 2013
Messages
20,994
Reaction score
2,743
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
It's a confusing story, considering the trees- only one was forbidden but, having eaten from it they were evicted to protect the other. I wonder, if they had found the tree of life first would they still be alive in the garden, immortal and with no knowledge of good and evil?
You answered it yourself. Only one tree was forbidden to them.

Eating from the tree of knowledge got them committing an act of evil.
Committing the act is not the same as knowing that act is wrong.

Think about it this way: does it require for you to actually commit murder to know that it is wrong?
Does merely knowing murder is wrong, actually makes you a murderer?



I wonder, if they had found the tree of life first would they still be alive in the garden, immortal....
The serpent perhaps knew that.....hence, it lured them to the forbidden tree instead.
 
Last edited:

JP Cusick

The Expert
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 19, 2011
Messages
1,240
Reaction score
177
Location
Hollywood, MD. USA, 20636
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
No, I don't take it literally. It's a story, a creation myth and it's a damn good one, too.
It wasn't the tree of knowledge that was forbidden, it was the tree of knowledge of good and evil. They were forbidden to learn of good and evil and were evicted from the garden so they wouldn't eat from the tree of life, not to punish their disobedience. It was to protect the tree of life that the way back into the garden was guarded.
Odd, wasn't it, what God said in Genesis 3:22. What did He mean when He said, "Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil..."
All of this means that it's despite God that we know the difference between good and evil, not because of Him.
You are correct in all of this, and well done.

The words "good and evil" are more correctly translated as "good and bad" (the opposites) and "bad" has a significantly different meaning then evil. NLV.

Also "good and bad" are not the same as "right and wrong" as they knew that taking the poisoned knowledge was WRONG to eat.

The proof of that poisoned knowledge is that ever after including today people judge everything as "good or bad" even when they know what is right and wrong.

The knowledge was forbidden but it was only temporary as the people were not mature enough, so people got the knowledge too soon and that is why it was poison to them, and God was NOT angry after they were found out as God was sad and hurt, and the cursing was a result of the wrongdoing as God did not want humanity to live this way.

It is like having teenage children and the parents tell the children not to have children until they get married but the kids do it anyway, and then the parents are disappointed and sad but the children get the cursing anyway because they did wrong.
 

Goshin

The Hammer of Chaos
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 16, 2009
Messages
45,502
Reaction score
50,051
Location
Dixie
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I've long been of the opinion that there was nothing special about the tree, except that it was forbidden.


It was the ACT of defiance that gave them the knowledge of good and evil, ie that it was possible to disobey God, and that the fruit of that disobedience could be pleasurable, at least in the short term.


JMO and not as if it really matters one way or the other I suppose...
 

Logicman

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 21, 2013
Messages
18,818
Reaction score
1,890
Location
United States
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
I've long been of the opinion that there was nothing special about the tree, except that it was forbidden.

It was the ACT of defiance that gave them the knowledge of good and evil, ie that it was possible to disobey God, and that the fruit of that disobedience could be pleasurable, at least in the short term.

JMO and not as if it really matters one way or the other I suppose...
Trees in the Bible sometimes represent people, i.e. Daniel 4:22 -

"Your Majesty, you are that tree! You have become great and strong; your greatness has grown until it reaches the sky, and your dominion extends to distant parts of the earth."

I've thought a few times that could mean that the 'tree of life' represents Jesus, who gives life (John 14:6, etc.). But I never could figure out a good candidate for the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
 

Grand Mal

Question authority
DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
33,904
Reaction score
16,893
Location
on an island off the left coast of Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Here's the context: God had already told Adam not to eat from that tree and He also said why.
When God instructed Adam not to eat from the tree of Knowledge (of good and evil - I just shortened it above), Adam and Eve were already aware that to do so would be wrong. Adam knew the consequences:

Genesis 3:2 The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3 but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.'


NOTE: that term "die," is significant. It epitomizes what is evil. Thus when Jesus died and Resurrected, He triumphed over death!

When they ate from that tree, they were not simply aware of evil. They EXPERIENCED evil. They became sinners by nature.

Man knew what was good! He was created in goodness, and was surrounded by it. Check out every creation God made leading up to the creation of man. Everything was good!


Man knew what was good: he was created in goodness and was surrounded by it (Genesis 1:31). He had been given everything God wanted him to have, including authority over all the rest of God’s creation. Adam had everything he needed for a fulfilling life. He did not need to “know” evil, especially when the only way for him to “know” it was to experience it. It should have been enough that God had warned Adam against disobedience. God did not want Adam and Eve to “know” evil in the sense of participating in it.

The sin of Adam and Eve was not in attaining knowledge but in rejecting God’s will in favor of their own.


The apostle Paul spoke about the last Adam (Jesus) who came to restore our broken relationship with God (1 Corinthians 15:45). Paul also noted, “Since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man” (1 Corinthians 15:21). Adam was responsible for sin’s entrance into humanity. Jesus Christ was responsible for providing the way for resurrection. After sin entered humanity, Jesus became the perfect substitute for sin to allow every person the opportunity to believe and receive eternal life (John 3:16).



Read more: Why was it wrong for Adam and Eve to know good and evil (Genesis 3:22)?


Disobedience is, going against the will of God.
You're looking at the story as scripture, and scripture always goes hand-in-hand with commentary and interpretation from people learned in, well, scripture. I'm reading a story, and reading only what the story says.
Adam and Eve were warned not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, or they would die. At that point there was no mention of the tree of life, it wasn't until after they'd got the knowledge, after they'd became 'as gods', that eating from the tree of life became a threat. Can there be any other reading than that they were immortal before they acquired the knowledge of good and evil? Now they had the knowledge, so now they will die? They were evicted from the garden so they wouldn't eat from the tree of life, not because they disobeyed God. The garden is guarded to protect the tree of life.
That bolded part is important because so many people want to say that disobedience was the original sin but the Bible says clearly that preventing them eating from the other tree was what got them evicted from the garden.
As I've said, to me this is a story, a creation myth, and maybe the best story about the creation of mankind that I've encountered but certainly not literal truth. There's a moral and allegories in the story that can be instructive to anyone who reads them with the right attitude.
 

Grand Mal

Question authority
DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
33,904
Reaction score
16,893
Location
on an island off the left coast of Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
You are correct in all of this, and well done.

The words "good and evil" are more correctly translated as "good and bad" (the opposites) and "bad" has a significantly different meaning then evil. NLV.

Also "good and bad" are not the same as "right and wrong" as they knew that taking the poisoned knowledge was WRONG to eat.
Well, I'm just reading a story in the King James version and I'm not going to correct translations. I'm not qualified, for one thing.

The proof of that poisoned knowledge is that ever after including today people judge everything as "good or bad" even when they know what is right and wrong.

The knowledge was forbidden but it was only temporary as the people were not mature enough, so people got the knowledge too soon and that is why it was poison to them, and God was NOT angry after they were found out as God was sad and hurt, and the cursing was a result of the wrongdoing as God did not want humanity to live this way.

It is like having teenage children and the parents tell the children not to have children until they get married but the kids do it anyway, and then the parents are disappointed and sad but the children get the cursing anyway because they did wrong.
I don't try to make the story fit a notion of how it should be, as... 'it was only temporary as the people were not mature enough, so people got the knowledge too soon' and I'm certainly not guessing about the thoughts and intentions of the God in the story. The story is what it is.
 

Logicman

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 21, 2013
Messages
18,818
Reaction score
1,890
Location
United States
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
As I've said, to me this is a story, a creation myth, and maybe the best story about the creation of mankind that I've encountered but certainly not literal truth.
Once again you claim it's a myth and not the truth. Do you have something you can show us that substantiates your position?
 
Top Bottom