Tree of the Knowledge of Good & Evil

[joshua 1 9]

Joseph Smith & others teach that it was God's will for Adam and Eve to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. The problem with this is that God told them NOT to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. A lot of the Bible is based on us doing the will of God. We know that God will cause good to come out of their disobedience. But I do not see how by any stretch of the imagination they can claim this was God will to do what HE told them NOT to do.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

God hadn't given them the "spirit of obedience" (the Holy Spirit). He allowed them to fall to Satan's chicanery. It was all foreordained.

The fall of Eve (and then of Adam) was a reenactment of the fall of Lucifer, and was the opening act of God's plan of "the restitution of all things".

 

[Jonathan Walkerin]

Joseph Smith & others teach that it was God's will for Adam and Eve to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. The problem with this is that God told them NOT to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

So an all potent and wise being creates humans with all their flaws and curiosity with zero life experience and to occupy their time they can like admire the scenery, name animals and the like so if we looked at this it would sound like they are behaving like children, have tasks of the children and no responsibilities. No hardship, no needs.....

Then this all potent being puts in middle of the garden something intriguing and tells them not to touch it, lets an agitator snake in and suddenly it is the human`s choice ( female of course) the led to fall.

Does not really make any sense does it unless you consider it foreordained which of course seems a pretty nasty thing to do to humans.

How can anyone take this being anything other than allegory is beyond me.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

So an all potent and wise being creates humans with all their flaws and curiosity with zero life experience and to occupy their time they can like admire the scenery, name animals and the like so if we looked at this it would sound like they are behaving like children, have tasks of the children and no responsibilities. No hardship, no needs.....

Then this all potent being puts in middle of the garden something intriguing and tells them not to touch it, lets an agitator snake in and suddenly it is the human`s choice ( female of course) the led to fall.

Does not really make any sense does it unless you consider it foreordained which of course seems a pretty nasty thing to do to humans.

How can anyone take this being anything other than allegory is beyond me.

If it weren't for God's plan, as flawed as you think it is, you and I wouldn't exist. Thank you God.

 

[bling]

So an all potent and wise being creates humans with all their flaws and curiosity with zero life experience and to occupy their time they can like admire the scenery, name animals and the like so if we looked at this it would sound like they are behaving like children, have tasks of the children and no responsibilities. No hardship, no needs.....

Then this all potent being puts in middle of the garden something intriguing and tells them not to touch it, lets an agitator snake in and suddenly it is the human`s choice ( female of course) the led to fall.

Does not really make any sense does it unless you consider it foreordained which of course seems a pretty nasty thing to do to humans.

How can anyone take this being anything other than allegory is beyond me.

There is a ton of information we learn from the garden scenario, whether it is actual or allegorical.

In the story (true or not) humans are made “very good” by God’s standard of very good, but they are not “perfect” like Christ is perfect, so what is lacking?

There are just somethings that are impossible to do like: make a being which has always existed (Christ has always existed so a clone of Christ cannot be made), so what can God not create from the start in a human?

What humans are lacking and God could not provide to humans instinctively is what could have kept them from sinning, so yes, they will sin, but sin unfortunately can help them in fulfilling their earthly objective and obtain what they are lacking. So, what is our objective?

Answer me this: Would you prefer to be in a place where your eternal close relationship with God was dependent on your personal ability to obey God (the Garden) or in a place where your eternal close relationship with God is dependent on your just humbly accepting His Charity as charity (where you are now)?

The Garden story helps us understand why what we might consider an ideal place is actually a lousy place to fulfill our objective, while this messed up world is the best place for willing individuals to fulfill their objective.

Much more can be said if you want to really talk about it.

 

[public hermit]

What about making a distinction between God's permissive will and God's ultimate will? God certainly permits many things that are contrary to God's ultimate will. So, in that sense, wouldn't you say God willed it? Or, maybe better, God could have stopped it (say, by not creating such creatures that could make such a choice)?

 

[bling]

Joseph Smith & others teach that it was God's will for Adam and Eve to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. The problem with this is that God told them NOT to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. A lot of the Bible is based on us doing the will of God. We know that God will cause good to come out of their disobedience. But I do not see how by any stretch of the imagination they can claim this was God will to do what HE told them NOT to do.

From the story of Jesus in the Garden praying we know he personally did not “want” to go to the cross and God’s empathy for Christ would have meant God personally did not “want” Christ to go to the cross, but out of Love for humans God and Christ willed Christ going to the cross.

God desire (will) is not always met, but God’s overall will is met.

God’s desire (will) is for all humans to come to Him, but God also “willed” for humans to have the limited amount of autonomous free will, to fulfill their earthly objective, so they could become Like He is.

God does not “will” us into sinning nor does God desire us to sin, but God is allowing us to have limited free will so we can sin.

Sin is not the problem, while unforgiven sin is a huge problem. Sin actually has purpose for the nonbeliever which helps the nonbeliever initially fulfill the first part of his objective. Adam and Eve did not and really could not fulfill their earthly objective in the Garden Scenario, but could after sinning and outside the Garden.

 

[BobRyan]

Joseph Smith & others teach that it was God's will for Adam and Eve to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. The problem with this is that God told them NOT to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. A lot of the Bible is based on us doing the will of God. We know that God will cause good to come out of their disobedience. But I do not see how by any stretch of the imagination they can claim this was God will to do what HE told them NOT to do.

God did not "will" for Lucifer to fall
God did not "will" for rebellion on Earth.
God "is not willing that any should perish" 2 Peter 3 and yet only the "FEW" of Matt 7 will actually be saved in the end.

But all that stuff did happen anyway because God also sovereignly "willed" that free will should exist

 

[BobRyan]

So an all potent and wise being creates humans with all their flaws

There was no "flaw" created by God in the bad angels that made them fall while the faithful angels remains.

There was no "flaw" created by God in Adam to dictate his rebellion.

 

[BobRyan]

What about making a distinction between God's permissive will and God's ultimate will? God certainly permits many things that are contrary to God's ultimate will. So, in that sense, wouldn't you say God willed it? Or, maybe better, God could have stopped it (say, by not creating such creatures that could make such a choice)?

If "WE were God" WE could fix it all by making robots or as in your suggestion "making nothing".

But infinite God can do a bit better than us - so He makes an entire universe and yet only 1/3 of the angels and one planet choose rebellion.. everyone else is just fine.

God "could" have ninja-like "tweeked" the thought cycle in Lucifer - before Lucifer ever became aware that his thinking was 'going off the rails' - Lucifer would never have been the wiser and God would have saved himself a heap of trouble.

He chose not to do that -- because it is a level of free will that is "less than"

 

[joshua 1 9]

God is allowing us to have limited free will so we can sin.

He does give us choice. Science says we can choose. The legal system says we can choose. Only people like the Calvinists say we are little more than an animal that has a brain that has not evolved to being able to make choices. Science contradicts Calvinism.

out of Love for humans God and Christ willed Christ going to the cross.

This is why they say Adam is type of Christ. Adam did not want to be separated from Eve so he followed her in death. Adam sacrificed himself to die for his wife. Christ did not want to be separated from His Bride so He followed her to die for her on the Cross.

 

[joshua 1 9]

God certainly permits many things that are contrary to God's ultimate will.

Because He causes good to come out of everything. So He does work all things according to His plan. He declares the end from the beginning. He writes the book of our life before we are even born. Every chapter and every verse. So we decide if we want to follow His plan for us and our life. Our angels work with us to help us to follow His plan for us and our life.

 

[joshua 1 9]

How can anyone take this being anything other than allegory is beyond me.

The way you tell the story it isn't even an allegory.

 

[bling]

He does give us choice. Science says we can choose. The legal system says we can choose. Only people like the Calvinists say we are little more than an animal that has a brain that has not evolved to being able to make choices. Science contradicts Calvinism.

I have a Masters in Chemistry and do not see how science could really "proof" we have free will in the strictest sense?

This is why they say Adam is type of Christ. Adam did not want to be separated from Eve so he followed her in death. Adam sacrificed himself to die for his wife. Christ did not want to be separated from His Bride so He followed her to die for her on the Cross.

It is the Romeo and Juliet story.

 

[joshua 1 9]

God did not "will" for Lucifer to fall
God did not "will" for rebellion on Earth.
God "is not willing that any should perish" 2 Peter 3 and yet only the "FEW" of Matt 7 will actually be saved in the end.

One third followed Lucifer in his rebellion. So God only needs one third of humans to be saved to take their place.

 

[public hermit]

If "WE were God" WE could fix it all by making robots or as in your suggestion "making nothing".

But infinite God can do a bit better than us - so He makes an entire universe and yet only 1/3 of the angels and one planet choose rebellion.. everyone else is just fine.

God "could" have ninja-like "tweeked" the thought cycle in Lucifer - before Lucifer ever became aware that his thinking was 'going off the rails' - Lucifer would never have been the wiser and God would have saved himself a heap of trouble.

He chose not to do that -- because it is a level of free will that is "less than"

So, you're not a fan of making a distinction between God's permissive will and God's ultimate will?

 

[joshua 1 9]

I have a Masters in Chemistry and do not see how science could really "proof" we have free will in the strictest sense?

You do not see it because you do not have a masters degree in neuroscience. What I was talking about are the Brain Surgeons that operate on the brain to remove cancer or any other benign tumor. They have to know what part of the brain they are working on and what can be effected by that operation. In this case we are talking about the part of the brain (cerebral cortex) that is responsible for making choices or decisions. This is not a primitive part of the brain like the hormones. This is an advanced highly evolved part of the brain that we do not find in animals. We do not hold animals accountable because we do not think that they have the same choice we do to control their impulses. They do not know what is right or wrong until we tell them what is right or wrong.

 

[bling]

If "WE were God" WE could fix it all by making robots or as in your suggestion "making nothing".

But infinite God can do a bit better than us - so He makes an entire universe and yet only 1/3 of the angels and one planet choose rebellion.. everyone else is just fine.

God "could" have ninja-like "tweeked" the thought cycle in Lucifer - before Lucifer ever became aware that his thinking was 'going off the rails' - Lucifer would never have been the wiser and God would have saved himself a heap of trouble.

He chose not to do that -- because it is a level of free will that is "less than"

Not sure what you are saying?

 

[joshua 1 9]

So, you're not a fan of making a distinction between God's permissive will and God's ultimate will?

God's permissive will is that He allows us to have free will because He knows that HE can still cause good to come out of every choice we make. Moses tells us to choose life or death, sickness or health, poverty or prosperity, blessing or curse. There are many more choices that we make every day. God will not make our choices for us. We have to take full responsibility for the choices that we make in life. Even making the right choice can be difficult.

 

[bling]

You do not see it because you do not have a masters degree in neuroscience. What I was talking about are the Brain Surgeons that operate on the brain to remove cancer or any other benign tumor. They have to know what part of the brain they are working on and what can be effected by that operation. In this case we are talking about the part of the brain (cerebral cortex) that is responsible for making choices or decisions. This is not a primitive part of the brain like the hormones. This is an advanced highly evolved part of the brain that we do not find in animals. We do not hold animals accountable because we do not think that they have the same choice we do to control their impulses. They do not know what is right or wrong until we tell them what is right or wrong.

This is outside my training, but just having a place where the brain makes decisions, does not mean it is outside of natural determining factors. I do believe we have all been gifted with a limited amount of free will, but most of our seemingly "choices" are the result of our environment (what has happened in our life) and our genes. What neuroscience has not found is the place (even if there is a place) where our want neurons are. They stimulate brain cells and get reactions, but have not found stimulating a brain cell and having a person say: "the stimulation made me "want" to do something", so "wants" maybe lots of cells working together or something even greater.