Adam And Eve - Did They Already Know Good And Evil?

[jbearnolimits]

I just had a thought that I would like to bounce off of the members here. God is not the author of confusion from what the Bible says. Now there are many who believe it would have been better for Him to never give us the law since without law there is no transgression. But without law, wouldn't that also mean confusion and disorder?

Think of Adam and Eve. They were given one rule, don't eat from that tree. Before they ate, they had no knowledge of good and evil, correct? Or did they already know since they were given the law? Just something to think about.

 

[ViaCrucis]

In the Garden narrative Adam and Eve are, more or less, described as innocent. Innocent not in the sense of guilty and innocent, but innocent in the sense of, perhaps, being naive.

It is often said in popular thinking that they were perfect already, though I think we see instead that they weren't, they were immature, naive, there was a great potential for growth and maturity. And like children frequently do, they broke the only rule they were given: Do not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Why? Because a snake told Eve that it would make her divine (or quasi-divine) "like God". A shortcut, as it were, to growing up. So Adam and Eve messed up, and the reality of pain, suffering, death, and sin entered their world, they became aware of something they were not beforehand aware.

A number of theologians have, over the centuries, contemplated the fact that in Scripture Jesus is described as the fullness of being human, He is humanity as humanity ought to be, He is the mature man. To that end, Adam and Eve had before them growth and maturity to reach, but they ultimately rejected what was to be theirs in Christ in due time for something immediate and ultimately very small. It has been said that the Incarnation would have happened even without the Fall, as the Incarnation isn't some bandage upon the wound of mankind, it is the reality of God's fullness in union with human creature-ness. Jesus is God and man joined together in perfect Hypostatic Union forever.

Jesus was always the whole point, fall or no fall.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[yeshuasavedme]

I just had a thought that I would like to bounce off of the members here. God is not the author of confusion from what the Bible says. Now there are many who believe it would have been better for Him to never give us the law since without law there is no transgression. But without law, wouldn't that also mean confusion and disorder?

Think of Adam and Eve. They were given one rule, don't eat from that tree. Before they ate, they had no knowledge of good and evil, correct? Or did they already know since they were given the law? Just something to think about.

They were innocent of knowing good and evil and choosing to do evil or to do good. "Be innocent concerning evil" is still the way to live.
To know about evil is to have innocence stripped away.
Every child comes into the world with that same innocence, though they come in dead in the Adam spirit, to the Life Adam and Eve were cut off from in the fall and which the Messiah has come as Kinsman/Redeemer to ransom us back, for. Each human born of Adam is born without understanding of good or evil, and each has to come to the understanding of good and evil and make their choices with that understanding before they can ever come into judgment for doing deeds of either good or evil, and receiving the rewards for the same.

 

[GeorgiaGuyinAtlanta]

They did not know good and evil before eating of the tree because it was the tree of the "KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD AND EVIL". All Adam knew was to not eat of that tree.

I just had a thought that I would like to bounce off of the members here. God is not the author of confusion from what the Bible says. Now there are many who believe it would have been better for Him to never give us the law since without law there is no transgression. But without law, wouldn't that also mean confusion and disorder?

Think of Adam and Eve. They were given one rule, don't eat from that tree. Before they ate, they had no knowledge of good and evil, correct? Or did they already know since they were given the law? Just something to think about.

 

[fhansen]

Aquinas related the 'knowledge of good and evil' to real, direct, experiential knowledge. To know something directly by having experienced it. In this case, A & E were innocent to evil prior to the Fall. Their eyes had not yet been opened because they knew only the good of Gods creation until they placed themselves outside of His will by their act of disobedience, a radical disorder in the harmony of Gods universe. They would now experience reality from a totally different perspective; sin had entered mans world; he was "free" from the constraints or demands of his God; evil, and by contrast, good, we're now identifiable, they would now be known.

Man must remain in conscious, willing obedience to and communion with God in order to simply be who he was created to be, in order to have moral integrity, let alone peace, harmony, happiness. This obligation is intrinsic to his nature. But as with any obligation-or law/comandment-obedience can come by compulsion or it can come by our willing it, for ourselves. To will the right thing one must be convinced of its goodness, as we're all drawn to that which we perceive to be the greatest good. Basil of Cesarea, a second or third century believer, put it this way, which really sums up the essence of the New Covenant:
"If we turn away from evil out of fear of punishment, we are in the position of slaves. If we pursue the enticement of wages, . . . we resemble mercenaries. Finally if we obey for the sake of the good itself and out of love for him who commands . . . we are in the position of children."

And this kind of love is strictly a work of God's in us, a matter of grace.

 

[Emmy]

Dear jbearnolimits. Adam and Eve did not know Good and Evil, but they KNEW that God had told them NOT TO EAT of the tree, and they rather believed Satan`s lies, and ate some fruit. That was an act of direct disobedience. God knew that was the time to learn for Adam, Eve and Mankind. The Old Testament is full of the selfishness and bad deeds of men and women. It was not until Jesus came and taught Love and Obedience, that Mankind gradually changed from selfishness and loveless and unkind behaviour.
God is Love, and Jesus God-Son died on the Cross that we might live. In Matthew 22: 35-40: Jesus gives us the two Commandments on which hang all the Law and Prophets:
" Love God with all our hearts, with all our souls, and with all our minds, AND love our neighbour as we love ourselves." Matthew 7: 7-10: tells us: " Ask and you shall receive,"
we ask God for Love and Joy, then thank God and share all Love and Joy with our neighbour: all we know and all we meet, friends and not friends. We keep asking and receiving
then share all with our neighbour. God will see our loving efforts, and God will approve and bless us. We might stumble and forget at times, but then we ask God to forgive us and carry on loving and caring. God wants loving and caring sons and daughters. I say this with love, jbearnolimits. Greetings from Emmy, your sister in Christ.

 

[ChristsSoldier115]

I just had a thought that I would like to bounce off of the members here. God is not the author of confusion from what the Bible says. Now there are many who believe it would have been better for Him to never give us the law since without law there is no transgression. But without law, wouldn't that also mean confusion and disorder?

Think of Adam and Eve. They were given one rule, don't eat from that tree. Before they ate, they had no knowledge of good and evil, correct? Or did they already know since they were given the law? Just something to think about.

Isn't evil essentially something that disobeys God? if they knew what good and evil was, they would have known it would be evil eating the fruit. They didn't.

 

[Steeno7]

I just had a thought that I would like to bounce off of the members here. God is not the author of confusion from what the Bible says. Now there are many who believe it would have been better for Him to never give us the law since without law there is no transgression. But without law, wouldn't that also mean confusion and disorder?

Think of Adam and Eve. They were given one rule, don't eat from that tree. Before they ate, they had no knowledge of good and evil, correct? Or did they already know since they were given the law? Just something to think about.

They were given a choice, and warned of the consequences of choosing wrongly. The Law was added much later, and it was added to make clear the condition of man as a result of that choice in the garden. The lie of the garden was that man could be "like God" by determining "good and evil" in reference to himself.

It is the humanistic premise that posits man as his own center of reference, whereby all revolves around his individual or collective determinations. I think we all know how well we have done with that. The father of lies foisted upon mankind the lie of independency and autonomy, and persuaded man to align with him in his self-orientation and selfishness. Which is the antithesis of God's character and intent to express His character of love for others through man.

 

[bling]

They knew right and wrong. It is wrong to play in the street, but it is not evil.

 

[daydreamergurl15]

They ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. So I will assume that's when they knew good and evil.

Remember this, they were the first on earth so many of the things we know as good or evil, they would not have been exposed to it in the garden. Except for the ultimate good which so God.

 

[Wordkeeper]

I just had a thought that I would like to bounce off of the members here. God is not the author of confusion from what the Bible says. Now there are many who believe it would have been better for Him to never give us the law since without law there is no transgression. But without law, wouldn't that also mean confusion and disorder?

Think of Adam and Eve. They were given one rule, don't eat from that tree. Before they ate, they had no knowledge of good and evil, correct? Or did they already know since they were given the law? Just something to think about.

A good way to understand Adam's condition is to know what he was before eating of the tree of knowledge of right and wrong , and what he became after he ate.

Suppose an insane person found a gun in the trash, pointed it at another person and pulled the trigger, injuring the other.

When brought before a judge, will be be found guilty?

No!

Because he does not know right from wrong.

The law prohibiting a person from.injuring another person does not apply to insane persons.

That was the status of Adam before he ate of the tree of knowledge of good and evil as far as knowledge of right and wrong is concerned.

Suppose he is treated and is declared cured of his insanity.

Now he knows right from wrong.

Now if he repeats the crime, or any sin, God will find him guilty, declare him a sinner.

This is the state of Adam and all his descendants after he ate from the tree.

 

[jbearnolimits]

I just thought I would tell you guys that I have put a study together on this now if you would like to read it. This was a very interesting thing for me to learn about and it makes me happy to share my thoughts. http://onthelineministries.com/knowrightandwrong.php

 

[Open Heart]

In the Garden narrative Adam and Eve are, more or less, described as innocent. Innocent not in the sense of guilty and innocent, but innocent in the sense of, perhaps, being naive.
-CryptoLutheran

Right, innocent as in naive. No moral sentience. The whole point of the Tree of Knowledge was that its fruit contained the ability to know good and evil.

It may seem odd, but it was always God's plan that they eat from the tree and become morally aware. Remember that his plan for salvation was there from before the creation of the world. This was Plan A. There was no Plan B.

 

[Open Heart]

bump

 

[Wordkeeper]

http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/2568/jewish/The-Tree-of-Knowledge.htm

Quote
Thus the Midrash tells us that if only Adam and Eve had waited until the Sabbath, they would have been permitted to eat of the Trees of Knowledge and Life, and the purpose of creation would have been complete.

 

[yeshuasavedme]

http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/2568/jewish/The-Tree-of-Knowledge.htm

Quote
Thus the Midrash tells us that if only Adam and Eve had waited until the Sabbath, they would have been permitted to eat of the Trees of Knowledge and Life, and the purpose of creation would have been complete.

That meant the Millennial Sabbath...

 

[Wordkeeper]

That meant the Millennial Sabbath...

Judaism has studied Tanakh longer than Christianity, and some of their insights are amazing.

However, Yeshua is a stumbling block for them.

They can't substitute Sabbath for the rest we have in Christ, but we can!

Doing that, if Adam had waited for the real Sabbath rest, he would have been completed.