The Tree Ponderings

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Mozzie

New Member
Aug 22, 2016
19
1
0
54
Western Australia
Not to sure where to put this, i did a search but found nothing, but my search descriptions are somewhat bad lol..

Anyway this is topic i have on my site and found it very interesting and am looking forward to your thoughts on this, So here it is

There are some certain elements of the Genesis account – particularly the events described in the first three chapters. Elements of the narrative simply baffle me, researching publications have never offered any meaningful answers to my specific questions.

In Chapters 1 and 2, Adam is created. The reader is left in no doubt that Adam was created in God’s “image”.

“Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness… and God proceeded to create the man in his image, in God’s image he created him; male and female he created them.” – Gen 1:26,27

The traditional assumption as to the meaning of God’s having created Adam “in his image” is that he imbued man with his own qualities or characteristics – the predominant quality being love. Love is essentially an emotional attribute, and I have long wondered what would have been the end result if God had chosen NOT to create man in his image for whatever reason. Would the resulting humans have been devoid of emotion? Or naturally heartless, cruel, and animalistic?

Along with the creation of the first human pair, the creation of two special trees is given center stage in the narrative. One tree is the “tree of life”, and the other is dubbed “the tree of the knowledge of good and bad”. We have to realize that there were two trees in the narrative rather than just the one that was forbidden. The exact properties of both trees are unclear, but much is learned from reading on into Chapter 3.

Evidently, the tree of life was the source of Adam and Eve’s everlasting life, and it was among the trees from which they were encouraged to “eat to satisfaction”. On the other hand, the “tree of the knowledge of good and bad” was strictly off limits, but it was the properties of this tree in particular that have to be looked at.

Remember that Adam and Eve had ALREADY been created “in God’s image” or “likeness”. Notice what God says after the fruit of the contraband tree has been eaten:

“Here the man has become like one of us in knowing good and bad…” – Gen 3:22

So my obvious question was: if Adam and Eve had already been created in God’s likeness, then how was it that by eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and bad they became LIKE God and Christ? This was, after all, the whole gist of the serpent’s temptation of Eve, when he said:

“You positively will not die. For God knows that in the very day of your eating from it your eyes are bound to be opened and you are bound to be like God, knowing good and bad”. – Gen 3:4 ,5

Technically speaking, nothing that the serpent told Eve was untruthful, because the fruit wasn’t itself deadly, and the claim that it would make the eater “like God, knowing good and bad” is later confirmed by the words of God himself in the previously quoted Genesis 3:22. The only way in which the serpent could be said to be misleading Eve was in its failure to warn her that she would die as an indirect consequence of eating the fruit. That is to say, it wasn’t the fruit that killed Eve, it was the punitive actions taken by God in response to Eve’s act of disobedience that killed her – albeit hundreds of years later (according to biblical chronology).

Notice what God goes on to say in Genesis 3:22...

“and now in order that he [Adam] may not put his hand out and actually take fruit also from the tree of life and eat and live to time indefinite…”

God’s statement in verse 22 is cut short, almost as though God needs to act SO quickly in retribution that he simply doesn’t have time to regale us with an explanation and finish his sentence. Here is what happens:

“With that Jehovah God put him [Adam] out of the garden of Eden to cultivate the ground from which he had been taken. And so he drove them out and posted at the east of the garden of Eden the cherubs and the flaming blade of a sword that was turning itself continually to guard the way to the tree of life.”

So it’s clear from the above account that the tree of life, whatever it actually was, was a source of eternal life to whoever ate from it – and the banishment from Eden was a punitive measure taken by God to ensure that the serpent’s claims would not come true. The serpent, Satan, claimed that the newfound “knowledge” obtained from the contraband tree would indeed make Adam and Eve “like God” – which it evidently did. The only issue was that they could not be permitted to live with this knowledge forever by eating further from the “tree of life”. God evidently determined that having BOTH the new knowledge AND eternal life was inconceivable – hence the banishment.

As you can imagine, this has left more questions than answers in my mind, as follows…

1. Just what was it about “the tree of the knowledge of good and bad” that made Adam and Eve even more godlike than they already were?


2. Was it in fact “sentience” itself – or human self-awareness?
This might explain the reaction of Adam and Eve to their nakedness. But if this WAS the case, then why would God want to prohibit humans from having such a basic human attribute? And if it made such a fundamental change to them, what were they like before this transition? Were they mindless automatons?

If these super-imposed godlike traits were something altogether more profound, do we still live with them as descendants of Adam and Eve, or did they take these enhancements to their grave?

Above all, where does the concept of “inherited sin” and human perfection fit into all of this? Irrespective of what the forbidden fruit contained or actually did to Adam and Eve, in God’s own words it made them MORE like him as opposed to making Adam and Eve sinful, or less like God. Obviously the act of eating the fruit was sinful, but not necessarily whatever it was that the fruit did to them. So where does the notion of inherited sin and the ransom fit into all of this?

The above events set the stage for the entire theme of the bible, so without having any true grasp of the beginning, I find it extremely difficult to truly comprehend where we personally fit in to the broader scope of the biblical narrative.

I have read the book of Adam and Eve ( Book of the cave of treasures )
but there is nothing there really that explains further into this.

So your thought on this.....
 

Mungo

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2012
4,332
643
113
England
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
Mozzie said:
Not to sure where to put this, i did a search but found nothing, but my search descriptions are somewhat bad lol..

Anyway this is topic i have on my site and found it very interesting and am looking forward to your thoughts on this, So here it is

There are some certain elements of the Genesis account – particularly the events described in the first three chapters. Elements of the narrative simply baffle me, researching publications have never offered any meaningful answers to my specific questions.

In Chapters 1 and 2, Adam is created. The reader is left in no doubt that Adam was created in God’s “image”.

“Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness… and God proceeded to create the man in his image, in God’s image he created him; male and female he created them.” – Gen 1:26,27

The traditional assumption as to the meaning of God’s having created Adam “in his image” is that he imbued man with his own qualities or characteristics – the predominant quality being love. Love is essentially an emotional attribute, and I have long wondered what would have been the end result if God had chosen NOT to create man in his image for whatever reason. Would the resulting humans have been devoid of emotion? Or naturally heartless, cruel, and animalistic?

Along with the creation of the first human pair, the creation of two special trees is given center stage in the narrative. One tree is the “tree of life”, and the other is dubbed “the tree of the knowledge of good and bad”. We have to realize that there were two trees in the narrative rather than just the one that was forbidden. The exact properties of both trees are unclear, but much is learned from reading on into Chapter 3.

Evidently, the tree of life was the source of Adam and Eve’s everlasting life, and it was among the trees from which they were encouraged to “eat to satisfaction”. On the other hand, the “tree of the knowledge of good and bad” was strictly off limits, but it was the properties of this tree in particular that have to be looked at.

Remember that Adam and Eve had ALREADY been created “in God’s image” or “likeness”. Notice what God says after the fruit of the contraband tree has been eaten:

“Here the man has become like one of us in knowing good and bad…” – Gen 3:22

So my obvious question was: if Adam and Eve had already been created in God’s likeness, then how was it that by eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and bad they became LIKE God and Christ? This was, after all, the whole gist of the serpent’s temptation of Eve, when he said:
Just a quick though on this point. The image & likeness does not mean we are God and know everything that God knows.

Perhaps at that stage it was not good for them to know good and evil and be like God in that way.

We could say a child is in the image and likeness of their parents but their knowledge and understanding is very limited. In time they will gow in knowledge and understanding and be more like their parents in that respect also.
 

Trekson

Well-Known Member
Jul 24, 2012
2,084
218
63
67
Kentucky
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Hi Mozzie, Okay, I’ve got to admit that it was the word “ponderings” that attracted me to this article. That happens to be one of my favorite words as it is an exercise I do a lot of! I certainly can’t offer expert opinion but I’ll put in my three cents anyways.

Your words: “In Chapters 1 and 2, Adam is created. The reader is left in no doubt that Adam was created in God’s “image”. “Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness… and God proceeded to create the man in his image, in God’s image he created him; male and female he created them.” – Gen 1:26,27

The traditional assumption as to the meaning of God’s having created Adam “in his image” is that he imbued man with his own qualities or characteristics – the predominant quality being love
.”

I’ve really never given any thought to emotions being part of this equation. I’ve always considered it just physical, characteristics. A head, a body, two arms, two hands, two legs and two feet with the ability to think and speak. I’m not sure about love as we don’t know how long Adam was w/o Eve. It could have been hundreds or thousands of years.


Your words: “Remember that Adam and Eve had ALREADY been created “in God’s image” or “likeness”. Notice what God says after the fruit of the contraband tree has been eaten:

“Here the man has become like one of us in knowing good and bad…” – Gen 3:22

So my obvious question was: if Adam and Eve had already been created in God’s likeness, then how was it that by eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and bad they became LIKE God and Christ
?

As stated earlier if we start with the premise of just physical likeness then the answer is given in your verse. Adam and Eve had no knowledge of evil having never had to deal with it. So just the awareness of sin now caused them to know they were naked and that there was something wrong with that.

Your words; “Technically speaking, nothing that the serpent told Eve was untruthful, because the fruit wasn’t itself deadly, and the claim that it would make the eater “like God, knowing good and bad” is later confirmed by the words of God himself in the previously quoted Genesis 3:22. The only way in which the serpent could be said to be misleading Eve was in its failure to warn her that she would die as an indirect consequence of eating the fruit. That is to say, it wasn’t the fruit that killed Eve, it was the punitive actions taken by God in response to Eve’s act of disobedience that killed her – albeit hundreds of years later (according to biblical chronology).”

I think you’re forgetting one part of the equation. When Adam and Eve learned love they had love for their children and all the animals in their care. When God made them “coats of skins” (Gen. 3:21) it was the first time something had died in Eden. They probably knew and loved the animal(s) from which they came. So, in a way they experienced “death” in general almost immediately after sinning. Back in verse 20 Eve is considered the “mother” of all the living and I believe that both her children and the animals fell into that category.

Your words: “Notice what God goes on to say in Genesis 3:22...God’s statement in verse 22 is cut short, almost as though God needs to act SO quickly in retribution that he simply doesn’t have time to regale us with an explanation and finish his sentence.”

Not all versions read that way. In the KJV it is like He completed His thought.



Your words: 1. “Just what was it about “the tree of the knowledge of good and bad” that made Adam and Eve even more godlike than they already were?”

The simplest answer is usually the best. The knowledge and awareness of evil.

Your words: 2. “Was it in fact “sentience” itself – or human self-awareness?
This might explain the reaction of Adam and Eve to their nakedness. But if this WAS the case, then why would God want to prohibit humans from having such a basic human attribute? And if it made such a fundamental change to them, what were they like before this transition? Were they mindless automatons
?”

I’m pretty sure they had self-awareness and the knowledge of God regarding earthbound things. They were far from stupid and most likely had use of 100% of their brain capacity. You combine those attributes with the added knowledge of evil and no death and you could end up with a planet full of Lucifers, now who would want that? It only took around 2256 years for mankind to become so corrupt that God felt the need to destroy them all.

Your words: “If these super-imposed godlike traits were something altogether more profound, do we still live with them as descendants of Adam and Eve, or did they take these enhancements to their grave?”

I believe the antediluvian civilization was far more advanced then we give them credit for and thankfully most of that knowledge was lost in the flood.

Your words: “Above all, where does the concept of “inherited sin” and human perfection fit into all of this? Irrespective of what the forbidden fruit contained or actually did to Adam and Eve, in God’s own words it made them MORE like him as opposed to making Adam and Eve sinful, or less like God. Obviously the act of eating the fruit was sinful, but not necessarily whatever it was that the fruit did to them. So where does the notion of inherited sin and the ransom fit into all of this?”


I’m not a scientist but it’s my opinion that both of those trees had genetic/dna consequences. The Tree of Life extended their lives and because of that it can be considered that they were created as eternal beings, another aspect of the likeness of God. Rev. 2:7 promises that we will be able to eat of that tree again. As stated earlier, the only way it made them more like God was the newly acquired knowledge and awareness of evil. That knowledge, I believe, was also inherently passed down through the generations via our gene pool. That is why God had to use His seed and a virgin so Jesus could be born w/o that basic sin nature. It was the only way He had a chance to live a sinless life and thus become the pure and spotless Lamb that was sacrificed for our sakes.

Anyways, those are my "ponderings" on the subject.
 

Mozzie

New Member
Aug 22, 2016
19
1
0
54
Western Australia
Thx for the replies, sorry for the late response, both very interesting replies. It has always interested me to look at the minor details of things, i am a strong believer with the DNA statement, and yes it didn't take long at all for man to go bad again, well worse i mean.