The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil

[x141]

Your children understand and trust your words to be true. If they did touch the stove they would have knowledge of the potential terrible consequences and pain of their disobedience.

They became as gods. In other words instead of continuing to be in close fellowship with God and trust him as the source of all knowledge and wisdom, they became their own judges of right and wrong. That caused them to immediately fall from God’s holy standard and become self motivated.

Eve was deceived she saw that the fruit was good for food. Satan tempted, Eve was deceived by the eye it was not the touching it was the eating that caused her downfall. Tempted, looking with the eyes, touching and then eating in deliberate defiance to God’s command. The apparent good of the tree caused her downfall and that of Adam. After that they were spiritually dead, condemned by their own conscience, knowing fully the consequence of evil in their physical lives.

She ate of it before she ever touched it ... Adam ate of it, without knowing he had, until the woman was taken out of the man, or separated into two.

(... thought into the obedience of Christ.)

 

[x141]

Now ... if I could just find where God hid the money tree at ...

 

[TamaraLynne]

Now ... if I could just find where God hid the money tree at ...

I heard of that money tree...

 

[Habakk]

She ate of it before she ever touched it ... Adam ate of it, without knowing he had, until the woman was taken out of the man, or separated into two.

Well sctipture says that she took (handled) and then ate. She then gave it to Adam. I see to reason to suppose that Adam was duped into eating it.

Adam said "And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat."

 

[Achilles6129]

The is no reason to speculate that God changed the laws of physics and the nature of the universe at the fall. This physical world is temporary there will one day be a new heaven and a new earth, a spiritual heaven and earth.

Why not? Had Adam/Eve not eaten of the tree they would have lived forever. There was no death whatsoever in the pre-fall world, which means that their bodies would not age, etc. Something must have been very radically different.

Obviously, that is not the way things are now. So something must have changed dramatically. The only source of change can be the tree of the knowledge of good/evil.

Curse McDonalds. They made people fat.
Curse video games. They make children violent.
Curse feminism. It makes men hate women.

Curse the serpent. He made Eve eat.
Curse the tree. It made man fall.


WHAT?!

No. How bout go to the root cause of all of it? PEOPLE make decisions that have CONSEQUENCES. Let's not place the blame on an inanimate object. Its not the socket's fault when a child, after being told not to, places something in it and gets shocked. It isn't the Twinkies fault that millions of people spend more money on Jenny Craig than they do on their families, and its not Jenny's fault either.

ITS NOT THE TREE'S FAULT THAT EVE ATE AND GAVE TO ADAM AND HE TOOK IT. ITS THEIRS.

/rant

Right, but the tree caused things to be the way they are today. Our bodies age because of the tree of the knowledge of good/evil. Animals eat one another because of the tree of knowledge of good/evil. They were originally not created like that. So the tree (which they ate of) is still very dangerous.

To think God planted it knowing they would eat of it, and that through this tree the earth became filled with violence.

Right. So God must have had to plant the tree there for some reason.

Notice that the tree that was in the midst of the garden was the tree of life, but when the woman was taken out of the man, in the woman's perception, the forbidden tree becomes the tree that is in the midst of the garden.

I think that they were both in the midst of the garden.

 

[fhansen]

Asking why God planted the tree in the garden is like asking why God created gravity, if doing so made heights potentially dangerous for us.

Like jumping off a cliff, disobedience of God is simply, naturally, dangerous for man. Man was given the freedom to disobey, just like he has the freedom to jump, but not the right to do so; God's command expressly forbade that right, as nature's "command" forbids us to jump. The consequences of disobedience are as natural as the consequences of jumping off a cliff; man was simply not designed to be out of alignment with God's will, out of communion with Him, anymore than he was designed to take a nasty fall. As God is the God of the laws of nature or physics, so is He the God of the laws of morality, of man's nature.

Disobedience=death. The physical death which resides in our bodies from the moment of birth and hangs like a specter at every moment of our lives eventually, inexorably, has its way, and it parallels and shadows and gives definition to the spiritual death that's likewise operative in us, the result of willful separation from God.

It's been said that, by the act of disobedience, man preferred himself to God. That preference is what we must deal with in this life; do we continue to want our own way rather than "Nature's" way, do we really trust God to have our best interests at heart, do we even believe that such a God exists and cares whether we do this rather than that, right rather than wrong? Are we really dead, in need of being born again or born from above? That's the message of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil and the Fall of man in my understanding.

 

[x141]

Well sctipture says that she took (handled) and then ate. She then gave it to Adam. I see to reason to suppose that Adam was duped into eating it.

Adam said "And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat."

The tree represents our reasoning, as Jesus is that Life.

 

[x141]

I think that they were both in the midst of the garden.

There can only be one, just as he does not share his glory with another, but in the end, in the city, the tree of life becomes this knowledge to us, that genders to life rather than unto death, and it's leaves the healing of the nations, occuping three places but being one tree, bearing 12 manners of fruit every month or a 144 fruits a year ...

 

[Gelb1472]

Your children understand and trust your words to be true. If they did touch the stove they would have knowledge of the potential terrible consequences and pain of their disobedience.

They became as gods. In other words instead of continuing to be in close fellowship with God and trust him as the source of all knowledge and wisdom, they became their own judges of right and wrong. That caused them to immediately fall from God’s holy standard and become self motivated.

Eve was deceived she saw that the fruit was good for food. Satan tempted, Eve was deceived by the eye it was not the touching it was the eating that caused her downfall. Tempted, looking with the eyes, touching and then eating in deliberate defiance to God’s command. The apparent good of the tree caused her downfall and that of Adam. After that they were spiritually dead, condemned by their own conscience, knowing fully the consequence of evil in their physical lives.

So Habkk, are you saying that my children do not have knowledge of the good vs evil of touching the stove unless they actually do touch the stove? It seems to me that the evil in both cases is not the act of touching the stove or the act of eating the fruit, but the act of defiance, the disobedience.

My question then is this, if I have the knowledge of my duty to obey, then I already have the knowledge of good and evil (in Eve's case, prior to eating from the tree). If I do not have the knowledge of my duty to obey, then I have no competency to be morally responsible. So I feel that my question still remains.....In different words, how could Eve have the moral competency to choose to obey, prior to the knowledge of good and evil.

 

[daydreamergurl15]

Now ... if I could just find where God hid the money tree at ...

He probably hid it under the streets of gold.

 

[Habakk]

So Habkk, are you saying that my children do not have knowledge of the good vs evil of touching the stove unless they actually do touch the stove? It seems to me that the evil in both cases is not the act of touching the stove or the act of eating the fruit, but the act of defiance, the disobedience.

My question then is this, if I have the knowledge of my duty to obey, then I already have the knowledge of good and evil (in Eve's case, prior to eating from the tree). If I do not have the knowledge of my duty to obey, then I have no competency to be morally responsible. So I feel that my question still remains.....In different words, how could Eve have the moral competency to choose to obey, prior to the knowledge of good and evil.

No, I did not say that, my point was about realisation of consequences. When did Adam and Eve realise they were naked before God, before or after they disobeyed?

 

[Gelb1472]

I think that verse 11 of chapter 3, specifically addresses your question. God seems to equate their knowledge of nakedness with the "eating from the tree." Do you agree?

 

[Habakk]

I think that verse 11 of chapter 3, specifically addresses your question. God seems to equate their knowledge of nakedness with the "eating from the tree." Do you agree?

Yes, its the consequence of their disobediance. Something they realised only after they disobeyed.

 

[Achilles6129]

The interesting thing is what follows the eating of the tree:

"22 Then the Lord God said, “See, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever”— 23 therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from which he was taken." Gen. 3:22-23 (NRSV)

And:

"4 But the serpent said to the woman, “You will not die; 5 for God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God,[a] knowing good and evil.”" Gen. 3:4-5 (NRSV)

So the tree contains something in it that will make Adam/Eve "like God" and also "knowing good/evil." I think that this is a reference to being able to decide between good/evil for yourself, under your own power. Perhaps this explains why human beings always think they're good and always think they're right - they are their own god.

Regardless, we really need to study this tree of the knowledge of good/evil b/c clearly it is the reason why things are the way they are today. So this tree must hold the reason for everything.

 

[x141]

In one view, the tree is symbolic of the fruit of our soul.

The first commandment is what all other commandments are tied to, or is required to walk in his commandments; or as Jesus put, what one must do to be his disciple.

 

[AmericanChristian91]

In one view, the tree is symbolic of the fruit of our soul.

I to think its symbolic.

 

[Nanopants]

I tend to think that a redeemed individual knows the difference between good and evil as the scripture says, but also the error of his former ways, meaning humanity was destined to fall in its innocence and ignorance, but redeemed humanity will have an advantage over that weakness. To put it another way, perhaps the fall was the necessary cost of the creation of those who will not fall.

 

[x141]

... the difference between the two Jerusalem as they relate to our soul as a picture of something in the given moment, and the process surrounding it, each individually as well as the collective, both happening within us and without us and to which the scriptures testify to.

... and we know that life is not a tree any more than life is a box of chocolates, this is nonsense, our Father is not a tree and neither is his son ... in truth (Christ/Word/Son) it is part of the language of God which is also all around us. We are a part of this language, just as Jesus is the Word this language is summed up in, which is God.

The language of God outside of us is in picture form and shows the truth of the process happening in all of us, bar none.

 

[Achilles6129]

The tree of the knowledge of good/evil is literal or there is no real reason for the gospel of Jesus Christ. It is not symbolic - it was a literal event or the gospel is unnecessary.

 

[Tzaousios]

The tree of the knowledge of good/evil is literal or there is no real reason for the gospel of Jesus Christ. It is not symbolic - it was a literal event or the gospel is unnecessary.

For you does everything have to be literal in order for there to be a reason for the Gospel?