What I don't think literalists can avoid is: What was Satan (if that's what you believe the serpent was) doing in the Garden? Why was he allowed access to the innocent humans? If the placement of the tree and the divine warning were simply a test as to whether the humans would obey, why would God allow Evil to have unfettered access to them? Why not just let their free will take whatever course it might? I want you simply to obey My commands, free of any knowledge of Good and Evil, but I allow Pure Evil to beguile you. Rather a stacked deck. A literalist reading just doesn't work. As myth, the Genesis account is profound on several levels. As a literal newspaper report, it's silly. If someone thinks a literal reading is mandated in order to be a believer, I find that silly, too, but so be it.
What was wrong with Adam and Eve knowing good and evil?
- Thread starter TonyChanYT
- Start date
-
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!
We're all human. To be human is to be Adam and Eve. To encounter Good and Evil is to be human. To Fall is to be human. For us to be human, to encounter Good and Evil, and to Fall, was the divine plan.
That’s exactly what the devil says. The devil loves to speak on behalf of anyone & everyone but - the devil. (“We’re all”)
The devil loves to use the Bible to justify it’s ignorance and judgements.
Again, it’s deeply paradoxical, but there is no actuality of good & evil. It’s a belief.
The whole point of eating from the tree is Being overlooked.
Pure, nondual, eternal, indivisible, ineffable, infallible Goodness.
Reality as is. Without condition. Without judgment.
Ignorance is intrinsic. Not planned. Intrinsic as in, there is no other possible way.
What appears to forget, forgets by appearing.
Infinite can not know finite.
Ronald Nolette
Well-Known Member
Don't know, don't care. god just said there was one so there was one.
Bold assumption! False, but bold. that definition was taken out of a dictionary.
Genesis 3
King James Version
3 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:
3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
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.
7 And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.
bible calls it fruit, so it was a fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. What kind of fruit? don't know and don't care.
I have no idea what a human spirit is. Once again we are never on the same page. I never read about a human spirit in the Bible so I don't know what you are talking about. You would get the knowledge of good and evil if you stopped walking by the spirit and started walking by your senses. There's a bunch of people on here and I mean a whole lot that cannot come to grips with the concept that I walk by the spirit and therefore have no lust. It's outside of their understanding because just about everyone on here walks by their flesh and believe they are sinners and have lust. I can understand how one can go from walking by the spirit and not knowing lust or evil and then give that up to walk by the senses. I cannot understand how one could get in this situation by eating an apple. Now what Christ got back for us was the spirit. He did not bring us more grapes.
Webers_Home
Well-Known Member
~
Man's descent into sin via the forbidden fruit incident didn't take God by
surprise. He started getting ready for it prior to constructing the cosmos
and all of its forms of life, matter, and energy. (1Pet 1:18-21 & Rev 13:8)
The Bible says God regrets creating human life; but as a supernatural
being who can see the future, it's for sure that God anticipated regret and
went ahead and created Man anyway; viz: Noah's flood wasn't a contingency
to remedy a really big mistake, no, God was on track towards it all along
just as He was on track towards His son's crucifixion all along.
I honestly don't see how a reasonable person can read the Bible and not
come to the logical conclusion that the supreme being it depicts is some sort
of celestial psychopath who takes pleasure in hurting people; even His own
son.
● Isa 53:10 . . It pleased Yahweh to bruise him; He hath put him to grief
_
Man's descent into sin via the forbidden fruit incident didn't take God by
surprise. He started getting ready for it prior to constructing the cosmos
and all of its forms of life, matter, and energy. (1Pet 1:18-21 & Rev 13:8)
The Bible says God regrets creating human life; but as a supernatural
being who can see the future, it's for sure that God anticipated regret and
went ahead and created Man anyway; viz: Noah's flood wasn't a contingency
to remedy a really big mistake, no, God was on track towards it all along
just as He was on track towards His son's crucifixion all along.
I honestly don't see how a reasonable person can read the Bible and not
come to the logical conclusion that the supreme being it depicts is some sort
of celestial psychopath who takes pleasure in hurting people; even His own
son.
● Isa 53:10 . . It pleased Yahweh to bruise him; He hath put him to grief
_
Agreed. The decision to create beings with genuine free will carried with it the risk and inevitability that they would misuse that free will and become estranged from God if exposed to Evil. On the other hand, this was necessary if those beings were to have any real understanding of God's Goodness and be able to enter into genuine communion with Him. A non-literal reading of Genesis captures this perfectly. A literal reading does not.
The Flood account is just one of many ancient flood accounts. It can be viewed as a motif of what God would accomplish in Christ. I certainly agree the Flood wasn't a contingency to remedy a mistake. Again not taking it literally, I see it as expressing God's wrath toward the wicked and mercy toward the saved - but even in those terms, it is extremely troubling.
Well, yes, if the OT is read literally one must do a great deal of mental juggling and tap-dancing to preserve any notion of the God in whom Christians believe. I've read all the books like Is God a Moral Monster? by Paul Copan, and they just aren't convincing unless you're willing to join in the mental juggling and tap-dancing. When one steps out of the literalist mindset and accepts that the OT is expressing broad spiritual truths from the perspective of ancient people, the need for juggling and tap-dancing is greatly reduced.
I truly don't know how literalists preserve their sanity, and am not entirely convinced they do.
Ronald Nolette
Well-Known Member
well my my! Well I guess you are not as well read in Scripture as you claim to be!
Proverbs 18:14
The spirit of a man will sustain his infirmity; but a wounded spirit who can bear?
Proverbs 20:27
The spirit of man is the candle of the Lord, searching all the inward parts of the belly.
1 Corinthians 2:11
For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.
1 Thessalonians 5:23
And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Here are but a few places where God in His INspired Word speaks of a mans spirit.
Man is trichotomous-0- spirit, soul and body.
Ronald Nolette
Well-Known Member
Well Gods love for His children is unconditional and infinite.
But the bible does not tell us what kind of tree it was, what it looked liie, what it leaves looked like, what it fruit looked like, etc. So to guess is irrelevant to me.
We already talked about where does it mention that they "stopped walking by the spirit"...to 'walk by their senses'? The Bible does not say and therefore we do not know. So let the guessing begin.
They were not Christian in the Old Testament so that word for spirit is man's soul life.
There's no human spirit in Thessalonians. The spirit in 5:23 is the spirit of God. Not the spirit of man.
Could say they died spiritually right when they ate by the decision to go and hide away from Yahavah. And that Sin was in the Garden, upon the act, and thus God made them better clothes than the “fig leafs” - which represents trying to cover oneself us with religion and not Christ.
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
He was a “covering cherub” assigned to the Garden….a position of responsibility and guardianship that he abused. He was right there watching, and out of selfish ambition he began planning his move to take the humans from God in order to worship him.
According to Ezekiel….who was told to “lift up a dirge to the King of Tyre”, we see that it was a direct application to the one this wicked king was emulating….
“You were in Eʹden, the garden of God.
You were adorned with every precious stone . . .
And their settings and mountings were made of gold.
They were prepared on the day you were created.
14 I assigned you as the anointed covering cherub.
You were on the holy mountain of God, and you walked about among fiery stones.
15 You were faultless in your ways from the day you were created
Until unrighteousness was found in you.
16 Because of your abundant trade,
You became filled with violence, and you began to sin.
So I will cast you out as profane from the mountain of God and destroy you,
O covering cherub, away from the stones of fire.
17 Your heart became haughty because of your beauty.
You corrupted your wisdom because of your own glorious splendor.
I will throw you down to the earth.
I will make you a spectacle before kings.” (Ezek 28:11-19)
The king of Tyre was not in the garden of Eden, he was not a cherub, nor was he ”created”.
Because rebellion began in the spirit realm…among God’s angelic sons, we see from the Bible’s account that this one angel derailed God’s first purpose and introduced sin, not only in the material realm, but also in heaven.
Angels are very powerful creatures as the Bible indicates, so this was never just about humans. We are basically the hostages in this situation.
In order to restore his first purpose, Jehovah had to make sure that this abuse of free will could never happen again. If he had simply dispatched the rebels and started again, there was nothing to stop a repeat performance with the next angel who might get carried away with his own magnificence and see humans as a source of worship. So an object lesson of major proportions was implemented to establish precedents and to create real life experiences that would deter anyone from repeating the scenario.
God could fix the humans by restoring all that they lost, but he cannot fix the angels powerful angels if they go wrong. He has to destroy them. Free will determines the future of all of God’s intelligent “sons and daughters”.
Perhaps it could be illustrated this way…..a child is born with a major physical defect that affects their whole quality of life…..and only a series of painful operations will correct it. Because it is going to be painful, would the parents refrain from consenting to such intervention if they knew that a better life was at the end of the suffering? With the defect completely cured, would the child remember the pain or revel in the freedom that the operations afforded? Does the end justify the means? Who would say no?
This painful lesson would have a major impact on the quality of life that God offered his human children.
Think back to what God provided in the Garden for their enjoyment….beautiful surroundings, an abundance of life in many forms, a perpetual supply of delicious food at their fingertips, a useful purpose to their life in populating the earth and spreading the boundaries of paradise until the whole world looked like the Garden of Eden.….then think about what they lost as the penalty. They were evicted from their paradise home, and access to the only thing that would keep them alive forever was denied. (Gen 3:22-24)
They could not be told of the benefits of obedience, so they were shown the consequences of disobedience….they chose a course of independence from God…..a life without God’s abundant protection and blessing. Within one generation a murderer was produced and death entered their lives in a way they had not imagined. Hardship on cursed ground replaced their privileged life in the Garden. What a contrast!
The rebels would be permitted to live the life they chose, and it affected all their children, who were now caught up in the results of their parent’s disobedience.
What are the lessons?
Humans are not designed to rule themselves, but to be ruled by their Creator.
independence from God results in a life of selfish misery….corruption of every sort hampers peace and security.
Obedience would have protected them from all harm….forever.
Our actions affect not only ourselves but others, especially our children.
When things are good, why expect better? Contentment means not always wanting more.
Every free willed creature would be tested as to their worthiness to continue living. And all who qualify both in heaven and on earth will be those who have proven their love and loyalty to God under test.
The apostle Peter spoke of the joy that those who qualify will experience as those….
“…being safeguarded by God’s power through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last period of time. 6 Because of this you are greatly rejoicing, though for a short time, if it must be, you have been distressed by various trials, 7 in order that the tested quality of your faith, of much greater value than gold that perishes despite its being tested by fire, may be found a cause for praise and glory and honor at the revelation of Jesus Christ. 8 Though you never saw him, you love him. Though you do not see him now, yet you exercise faith in him and are greatly rejoicing with an indescribable and glorious joy, 9 as you attain the goal of your faith, your salvation.”
That is what he did…they withdrew from him…he did not withdraw from them. Despite the activity of the wicked, he still provided for them…but not in the way he would have if they had remained obedient.
They got what they asked for…..they did not want God telling them what they could and couldn’t do…so he gave them the freedom they wanted…..but was it really what they wanted? Life without God is no life at all.
The life we have is not the life we want….having experienced this life, will we ever want it back?
I believe you have missed the whole purpose of allowing free willed creatures to reap what they have sown.
Pure evil cannot “beguile” one who has God as his teacher and Christ as his mentor. Only the children of the devil can enjoy sin and wickedness…..God allows each and every one of us to be caught in the act of being ourselves. The worthy ones will not be overtaken…they will seek God and find him, and then enjoy his protection from the wicked acts of others. Even if they lose their lives due to circumstances beyond their control, he will restore anything they have lost as a result of their faithfulness and loyalty….even their lives.
It works beautifully if you have the right perspective. God will not alter anything to suit our perspective….we have to adopt his…and if we don’t want to, that is our free willed choice, and we will also reap what we sow.
It’s called “faith” and it is not the possession of all. It has to be built like a wall…one brick at a time.
amigo de christo
Well-Known Member
ALLOW me a short story .
about eight years ago i had grown my beard out long and fat
and i had also buzzed my head to zero .
When my mom came to see me at work
what do you think the first thing she told me was ........
BOY , you got more hair on your face than on your head .
I been waiting a long time to tell someone this my friend . when i seen your avator
i just had to make mention . LOL .
Ronald Nolette
Well-Known Member
They still has a human spirit. Just because mans knowlege had not been given it by god doesn't negate the fat.
And as for 1 Thess. 5:23- you are simply wrong.
1 Thessalonians 5:23
King James Version
23 And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body beIt is OUR spirit and not THE HOLY Spirit that Paul is asking to be blessed. God does know how to speak and insure His writers write correctly.
I have no idea what you're talking about. Your religion is just way apart from my biblical concepts.
Bill Judson
Member
There's something wrong with questioning the way God decided to do things.
But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes - 2 Timothy 2:23
God did not want them to be corrupted which is what ended up happening once they sinned against God and disobeyed Him.
What appears to forget, forgets by appearing.
“God decides”, “Them to be corrupted” and “they sinned against God” anthropomorphize God by attributing human-like emotions, desires, and intentions. It suggests that God experienced a specific emotional reaction (not wanting them to be corrupted) and implies a cause-and-effect relationship between human actions and God's response. This interpretation does not accurately reflect theology.
This is the very ‘eating from the tree’ referred to.
“God decides”, “Them to be corrupted” and “they sinned against God” anthropomorphize God by attributing human-like emotions, desires, and intentions. It suggests that God experienced a specific emotional reaction (not wanting them to be corrupted) and implies a cause-and-effect relationship between human actions and God's response. This interpretation does not accurately reflect theology.
Similar threads
