Tree of Good and Evil

(eternalarcadia;53361)
I've been wondering this -- Genesis - 16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: 17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.If the perfect world was intended for Adam and Eve, why was this tree created? It doesn't sound perfect if there is a tree of death in the garden.
Those are symbolic.The tree of life = Lord Jesus ChristThe tree of knowledge of good and evil (tree of death as you say) = SatanOriginal trees are symbolic to people.The serpent is also SatanSo you see, this is a big event that lead you to dig deeper into His Word.

(eternalarcadia;53361)
I've been wondering this -- Genesis - 16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: 17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.If the perfect world was intended for Adam and Eve, why was this tree created? It doesn't sound perfect if there is a tree of death in the garden.
Had they eaten of the tree of Life the way they were supposed to, then the tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil would not have hurt them. It was a perfect world, but with the "opportunity" to make it imperfect. They should have chosen life, but instead Eve fell for the devil's lie because it appealed to her flesh nature.

God told them there was ONLY one thing they could not do. If you are going to ask why was there was this one thing they could not do, then you are essentially asking why does man have free will. One is not free if there exists no choice, so whatever that one thing was it had to be there in order for them to be able to choose. The point of the story is that they freely chose to disobey God and to also express/explain the results/consequences of that choice for us all.

(eternalarcadia;53365)
If He really wanted to be in fellowship with them, why was the tree created? If it's only purpose is death, why is it there.
That was not its original purpose. Satan got jealous and wanted to be God, but there is only one God. God created Lucifer as a beautiful angel, who rebelled against God. It's original purpose was not death at all. Furthermore, we see that it is a "tree of knowledge" that posses the knowledge of good and evil. This shows that Satan had already rebelled against God and it was there because it was not destroyed at the end of the first earth age.

(eternalarcadia;53365)
If He really wanted to be in fellowship with them, why was the tree created? If it's only purpose is death, why is it there.
The tree was Satan and Alpha and Omega has it right it was Satan who chose to rebell because he wanted to be God it was his desire to foil the blood line which Christ would be born this is why he tempted Eve.Satan had already rebelled as Alpha says, it is the reason there had to be a flesh age,

One of the many gifts God bestowed on man was that of free will. Without choices, Adam and Eve would have been mere puppets or robots. True love always requires choices. God wanted Adam and Eve to choose to love and trust Him. The only way to give this choice was a divine command of something that was not allowed. God, in His infinite love, wanted man to love Him, by choice, not because it was the only option available.God specifically stated the consequences (death) of disobeying His command. The purpose was to see whether man would accept what they'd been taught and obey Him unquestioningly. After all, God should know what is best for those He created!

(eternalarcadia;53361)
I've been wondering this -- Genesis - 16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: 17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.If the perfect world was intended for Adam and Eve, why was this tree created? It doesn't sound perfect if there is a tree of death in the garden.
You know what else doesn't make sense to man... at least at a glance? Why did God take six days to create our world and then rest on the 7th? Why not do it all in one day? Why not do it all in an instant? Also, if God knows everything, why would He make us at all knowing that we would fall? Also, why did God flood the Earth? Why didn't He just make everyone disappear or instantly particalize into dust or turn into pillars of salt like Lot's wife? It seems to me that there are a lot of easier ways to do things, and if God is all powerful, He ought to have done them that way instead... However, God has a purpose for everything He does. Like others have said, it is symbolic. But, the question may arrise... why make anything symbolic? It wouldn't need to be symbolic of ANYTHING if it wasn't there... because Adam and Even never would have fallen in the first place. So, the simple answer is to simply trust God in faith, knowing that what He does is perfect and good.I'm not saying we shouldn't wonder or ask, "Why?", but we should be careful that it is from an attitude of faith, and not of doubt. God has a purpose for everything He does, and He is good all the time in everything He does. With that said... I guess the simple answer for me is that it gives us a choice. Until Adam and Eve took of the fruit of the tree of the knowlegde of good and evil... they were obey God. God made it VERY EASY to obey Him too. He said, here, have 99.999% of all that is here and walk in perfect peace with me. But, do not EAT of this .001% that I have put here, or you will surely die.I'm sure there are lots of explainations as to why we think God would be motivated to put the tree in the garden, but I'm sure His intentions are perfect and righteous.

(treeoflife;53397)
You know what else doesn't make sense to man... at least at a glance? Why did God take six days to create our world and then rest on the 7th? Why not do it all in one day? Why not do it all in an instant? Also, if God knows everything, why would He make us at all knowing that we would fall? Also, why did God flood the Earth? Why didn't He just make everyone disappear or instantly particalize into dust or turn into pillars of salt like Lot's wife? It seems to me that there are a lot of easier ways to do things, and if God is all powerful, He ought to have done them that way instead... However, God has a purpose for everything He does. Like others have said, it is symbolic. But, the question may arrise... why make anything symbolic? It wouldn't need to be symbolic of ANYTHING if it wasn't there... because Adam and Even never would have fallen in the first place. So, the simple answer is to simply trust God in faith, knowing that what He does is perfect and good.I'm not saying we shouldn't wonder or ask, "Why?", but we should be careful that it is from an attitude of faith, and not of doubt. God has a purpose for everything He does, and He is good all the time in everything He does. With that said... I guess the simple answer for me is that it gives us a choice. Until Adam and Eve took of the fruit of the tree of the knowlegde of good and evil... they were obey God. God made it VERY EASY to obey Him too. He said, here, have 99.999% of all that is here and walk in perfect peace with me. But, do not EAT of this .001% that I have put here, or you will surely die.I'm sure there are lots of explainations as to why we think God would be motivated to put the tree in the garden, but I'm sure His intentions are perfect and righteous.
Again with this treeoflife?The creation week is unrelated to the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Anyway...it wasn't even a literal tree and fruit.

(thesuperjag;53399)
Again with this treeoflife?The creation week is unrelated to the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Anyway...it wasn't even a literal tree and fruit.
Unrelated in what sense? The creation week is related because I was relating the fact that many question God's intent, when it would be best not to question God's intent. It is good to ask questions from the realm of faith, and not from the realm of doubt."Why would God do this? Why would God do that?" I could have brought up the event where the Lord spoke through an ass, and if I did, it would have been related. Not because the Lord speaking through an ass and the Lord creating us happened near eachother, but because I am relating them by the subject of *people questioning God's motives*. Whether the creation event is related to Adam and Eve cronologically, in the garden or not, on a literal level, is for you to change and believe however you will (but there is one right answer). It was a literal tree and it was a literal fruit, and anything otherwise is no less than a perversion and changing of God's clearly, plainly spoken Word of the matter.

(treeoflife;53406)
(thesuperjag;53399)
Again with this treeoflife?The creation week is unrelated to the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Anyway...it wasn't even a literal tree and fruit.
Unrelated in what sense? The creation week is related because I was relating the fact that many question God's intent. "Why would God do this? Why would God do that?" I could have brought up the event where the Lord spoke through an ass, but I didn't. But, if I didn't, the two events would be related. Not because they happened near eachother or because of eachother, but because I am relating them by the subject of *people questioning God's motives*. Whether the creation event is related to Adam and Even in the garden or not, on a literal level is for your to change and believe whatever you want. But, it was a literal tree and it was a literal fruit, and anything otherwise is no less than a perversion and changing of God's clearly, plainly spoken Word of the matter.Do you have scripture to prove on what you are saying?Can a literal tree be righteous? (Isaiah 61:3) Can a literal tree produce sin? (Matthew 7:16-20) Can a literal snake tempt Eve? (Ezekiel 28:13)

(thesuperjag;53408)
Do you have scripture to prove on what you are saying?Can a literal tree be righteous? (Isaiah 61:3) Can a literal tree produce sin? (Matthew 7:16-20) Can a literal snake tempt Eve? (Ezekiel 28:13)
Yes, I have scripture. Read Genesis and stop skewing it with a view that stands alone OUTSIDE of scripture, and reading into it.Can a literal tree be righteous? (Isaiah 61:3) What?Can a literal tree produce sin? (Matthew 7:16-20) It can produce fruit, and that's all that is told to us of the tree in the Garden of Eden. Nowhere does it say it produced sin. That is you saying what the tree did, not God's Word. It produced fruit. Mind you, we are also told that the fruit was good pleasant (it was good fruit), ergo the reason why they were tempted to eat it. God made it a sin to eat the fruit. The tree was not producing sin. And yes, this can be so because that's what God tells us is so.Gen 3:6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat. The tree didn't produce sin... it produced fruit... Fruit that could tempt a person to eat it. But, God forbid it. Thus, it was the act of doing what God said not to do that was sin, not the fruit itself.Can a literal snake tempt Eve? (Ezekiel 28:13) Obviously, yes, a serpant can.The burden of proof is not on me, or the millions of others who believe the literal fact in God's crearly spoken word... the burden of proof is on those who seek to read into it something different, and change it. That's what you want to do. Burden of proof is on you. I'm just believing what God says. Please explain why the scriptures you quoted proove that it was not a literal tree or a literal fruit.Realize that in Matthew 7:16-20 that Jesus was speaking of a literal object, but to a spiritual truth about the fruit that comes from us. Bad fruit not coming from a good tree and good fruit not coming from a bad tree. Furthermore, the fruit that came from the tree was not bad... it was EATING WHAT GOD FORBID that was bad. Just as money is not the root of all evil... it is the LOVE OF MONEY that is the root of all evils.If Matthew 7:16-20 is a problem for you, then the garden of Eden is a problem whether you believe it was literal (which it clearly is) or figirtive/spiritual. God refers to the TREE as a TREE in Genesis, and it was IN THE GARDEN. Whether you believe this to be emperical or spiritual is up to you, but the fact remains that the TREE was there, and the same fruit which came from it was consumed by Adam and Eve. Whether you believe it was a spiritual event, or some event that happend in another realm is up to you... but the fact remains... they ate the fruit from what God called a TREE that was IN THE GARDEN.If Matthew 7:16-20 is a problem for a literal presentation of the Garden of Eden and the tree therin, then it is also a problem for your non-literal presentation. Thus, since there are no contridictions in God's Word, your interpretation now simply becomes only a misinterpretation of Jesus Word's by making applications that are unnecessary and never intended.

(treeoflife;53411)
(thesuperjag;53408)
Do you have scripture to prove on what you are saying?Can a literal tree be righteous? (Isaiah 61:3) Can a literal tree produce sin? (Matthew 7:16-20) Can a literal snake tempt Eve? (Ezekiel 28:13)
Yes, I have scripture. Read Genesis and stop skewing it with a view that stands alone OUTSIDE of scripture, and reading into it.Can a literal tree be righteous? (Isaiah 61:3) What?Can a literal tree produce sin? (Matthew 7:16-20) It can produce fruit, and that's all that is told to us of the tree in the Garden of Eden. Nowhere does it say it produced sin. That is you saying what the tree did, not God's Word. It produced fruit. Mind you, we are also told that the fruit was good pleasant (it was good fruit), ergo the reason why they were tempted to eat it. God made it a sin to eat the fruit. The tree was not producing sin. And yes, this can be so because that's what God tells us is so.Gen 3:6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat. The tree didn't produce sin... it produced fruit... Fruit that could tempt a person to eat it. But, God forbid it. Thus, it was the act of doing what God said not to do that was sin, not the fruit itself.Can a literal snake tempt Eve? (Ezekiel 28:13) Obviously, yes, a serpant can.The burden of proof is not on me, or the millions of others who believe the literal fact in God's crearly spoken word... the burden of proof is on those who seek to read into it something different, and change it. That's what you want to do. Burden of proof is on you. I'm just believing what God says. Please explain why the scriptures you quoted proove that it was not a literal tree or a literal fruit.Realize that in Matthew 7:16-20 that Jesus was speaking of a literal object, but to a spiritual truth about the fruit that comes from us. Bad fruit not coming from a good tree and good fruit not coming from a bad tree. Furthermore, the fruit that came from the tree was not bad... it was EATING WHAT GOD FORBID that was bad. Just as money is not the root of all evil... it is the LOVE OF MONEY that is the root of all evils.If Matthew 7:16-20 is a problem for you, then the garden of Eden is a problem whether you believe it was literal (which it clearly is) or figirtive/spiritual. God refers to the TREE as a TREE in Genesis, and it was IN THE GARDEN. Whether you believe this to be emperical or spiritual is up to you, but the fact remains that the TREE was there, and the same fruit which came from it was consumed by Adam and Eve. Whether you believe it was a spiritual event, or some event that happend in another realm is up to you... but the fact remains... they ate the fruit from what God called a TREE that was IN THE GARDEN.If Matthew 7:16-20 is a problem for a literal presentation of the Garden of Eden and the tree therin, then it is also a problem for your non-literal presentation. Thus, since there are no contridictions in God's Word, your interpretation now simply becomes only a misinterpretation of Jesus Word's by making applications that are unnecessary and never intended.So you are saying that this tree of life is also a literal tree?So I am accused for seeing reality?Just in case you miss it, I am a tree, and I live in the garden alright.

Its called symbolics the Bible is full of it God interrupts his own symbolism without an understanding of Gods symbols you will never get passed the Milk of Gods Word, The Bible has layer upon layer of teaching the milk is for the Babes,To get to the meat symbolism is one of things necessary to learn the mistake most men make is they try to use there own symbolism and not Gods He is very specific in which words we are to understand as symbols

(thesuperjag;53408)
Do you have scripture to prove on what you are saying?Can a literal tree be righteous? (Isaiah 61:3) Can a literal tree produce sin? (Matthew 7:16-20) Can a literal snake tempt Eve? (Ezekiel 28:13)
You are correct Jag trees are often men God uses nature as symbol's because it never changes

(Kriss;53418)
(thesuperjag;53408)
Do you have scripture to prove on what you are saying?Can a literal tree be righteous? (Isaiah 61:3) Can a literal tree produce sin? (Matthew 7:16-20) Can a literal snake tempt Eve? (Ezekiel 28:13)
You are correct Jag trees are often men God uses nature as symbol's because it never changesThat's true Kriss, I agree with you 100%. God can never change also.Also when looking at reality, killing trees is just a foreshadow of killing men...And it's aweful.I wish people stop killing the forest as well.

(thesuperjag;53416)
So you are saying that this tree of life is also a literal tree?So I am accused for seeing reality?Just in case you miss it, I am a tree, and I live in the garden alright.
Yes, a literal man and a literal woman ate from a literal tree, and the tree of life was also a literal tree. Sad that we have even come to this.Those who are literally in sin according to a literal God's literal Word, also literally fall short of His literal glory. Whereby from one man (the first Adam) all have been brought into sin, by one man (Jesus Christ, the righteous, the second Adam) all may be removed from sin. Is there anything else you would like to know?

(treeoflife;53427)
(thesuperjag;53416)
So you are saying that this tree of life is also a literal tree?So I am accused for seeing reality?Just in case you miss it, I am a tree, and I live in the garden alright.
Yes, a literal man and a literal woman ate from a literal tree, and the tree of life was also a literal tree. Sad that we have even come to this.I see, tell me, where can we find this tree of life in this world today?

(thesuperjag;53428)
I see, tell me, where can we find this tree of life in this world today?
Heard about the flood did ya?BTW... 1 Corinthians 15:45-49: 45And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit. 46Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. 47The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven. 48As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly. 49And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.The Scriptures tell us, “The first man, Adam, became a living person.” But the last Adam—that is, Christ—is a life-giving Spirit. What comes first is the natural body, then the spiritual body comes later. Adam, the first man, was made from the dust of the earth, while Christ, the second man, came from heaven. Earthly people are like the earthly man, and heavenly people are like the heavenly man. Just as we are now like the earthly man, we will someday be like the heavenly man.Paul clearly makes the difference. We are in the same image as Adam was... read it over if you deny it. We are in the exact same "earthy" image that Adam was, who literally lived as a living person, as a living soul, and literally ate of a literal tree. Do not deny His Word. It is good.