Garden of Eden, tree of knowledge

[chris4243]

How does satan look more honest? The serpent says they won't die but they do die. Much later, but they do die and the serpent said they would not die if they ate from the tree.

Check out what God says in Genesis 3:22. He confirms that Adam could still eat from the tree of life and live forever. The cause of Adam's death cannot be the eating of the fruit; it is God's action. But God did not say "if you eat of the fruit I will kill you myself", He said they would die and they didn't (depending on the translation, a time period is involved). Meanwhile, the serpent said they wouldn't die and they didn't. Doesn't that seem more honest?

As for the death being metaphorical, what kind of sick twisted bastard makes metaphors about death without indicating that they are metaphors? eg "A tsunami is coming, flee for your life!!! Oh, I just meant a tsunami of obesity, what do you mean I'm a liar."

 

[chris4243]

Without the knowledge of the difference between good and evil there is no basis for morality. If one doesn't know the difference how can one claim to be moral? In effect they were deprived of morality before they ate and had the potential for moral behavior after. Their sin was not from immorality but from disobedience and lack of faith in God. They listen to the words of the serpent and reject the words of God choosing to believe one that has done nothing to deserve their faith over the One who has given them every reason to believe that He speaks the truth. Had God not stipulated the tree of knowledge of good and evil as the one off limits Adam and Eve would still not have been aware that the thing that they had done was wrong.

What use is free will without morality? You're free to choose but don't know what is good and what is evil? And how can someone without knowledge of good and evil be guilty of any sin?

If I had been in Adam's place and God asked me if I ate from the tree, I'd have said that yes I did and that I did not know before that it was wrong to disobey God, and now that I did eat from it I know that was the correct choice. By knowing good and evil, I can now choose the good and reject the evil, and am a better person for it. In particular, knowledge of good and evil would mean that I know obeying God would be good. I think God would have to accept this argument. For what manner of God would wish me to wallow in evil due to not knowing what is evil, that I might reject it?

Yet instead Adam sinned by trying to pass off the blame for his actions -- his first sin.

I think that the choice of that particular tree is central to the lesson we are to learn about the causes of sin and evil in the world.

Would it not have been better to tell Adam to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, and then pick some random tree in the garden to forbid? Why deny man the ability to be a better person, when to give Adam a choice to use his free will for any tree would do?

 

[grasping the after wind]

Check out what God says in Genesis 3:22. He confirms that Adam could still eat from the tree of life and live forever. The cause of Adam's death cannot be the eating of the fruit; it is God's action. But God did not say "if you eat of the fruit I will kill you myself", He said they would die and they didn't (depending on the translation, a time period is involved). Meanwhile, the serpent said they wouldn't die and they didn't. Doesn't that seem more honest?

As for the death being metaphorical, what kind of sick twisted bastard makes metaphors about death without indicating that they are metaphors? eg "A tsunami is coming, flee for your life!!! Oh, I just meant a tsunami of obesity, what do you mean I'm a liar."

Are you saying that Adam and Eve are still alive? I don't think so. They did die. Just as God said they would. He didn't say "you will immediately fall down dead if you eat that fruit" he only said that they would surely die and they did die. The serpent said "you will not die". The serpent didn't say"you will not die right away but someday you will die." How is it more honest to tell a half truth than to tell a truth? Access to The Tree of Life was taken away after the sin (disobedience to God is the definition of sin that I am using here so morality is irrelevant) not before, so their death was a consequence of their sin. What would have happened if they had eaten the fruit of the Tree of Life before they ate from the Tree of Knowledge? Well, that is simply not how the story goes. If you want a different story you will have to write it yourself and you can use any sort of metaphor that pleases you. You may find that when using them you aren't inclined to stop suddenly and say to your reader "Oh, BTW this is a metaphor in case you might be confused that it is real"

 

[chris4243]

It is only God who told a half-truth, and not the serpent, in that story. God said that when they eat of the tree they will die; and they did not. Furthermore, they were still able to live forever until God acted to prevent that (Genesis 3:22). The half-truth here is saying "you will die" vs "I will kill you". The serpent said they would not die from eating the fruit (see context of the conversation), and they didn't. It was not the fruit, but God's reaction, that resulted in their death.

Incidentally, there is no indication whatsoever that Adam and Eve would have lived forever, other then that they could have by eating from the tree of life. Eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil did not change this.

 

[elman]

It is only God who told a half-truth, and not the serpent, in that story. God said that when they eat of the tree they will die; and they did not. Furthermore, they were still able to live forever until God acted to prevent that (Genesis 3:22). The half-truth here is saying "you will die" vs "I will kill you". The serpent said they would not die from eating the fruit (see context of the conversation), and they didn't. It was not the fruit, but God's reaction, that resulted in their death.

Incidentally, there is no indication whatsoever that Adam and Eve would have lived forever, other then that they could have by eating from the tree of life. Eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil did not change this.

I think Adam did die on the same day, spiritually. He died physically later. I believe our existence is both physical and spiritual, unless we kill our own soul with our own sin. Then we are only alive physically. Ezekiel 18

 

[Bear.Fr00t]

Another way to look at it is that the process of death began when they transgressed. This can be seen in a more literal translation such as Youngs.

and of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou dost not eat of it, for in the day of thine eating of it -- dying thou dost die (Gen 2:17)

 

[chris4243]

Another way to look at it is that the process of death began when they transgressed. This can be seen in a more literal translation such as Youngs.

and of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou dost not eat of it, for in the day of thine eating of it -- dying thou dost die (Gen 2:17)

And I'll say again, Read Genesis 3:22

 

[grasping the after wind]

It is only God who told a half-truth, and not the serpent, in that story. God said that when they eat of the tree they will die; and they did not. Furthermore, they were still able to live forever until God acted to prevent that (Genesis 3:22). The half-truth here is saying "you will die" vs "I will kill you". The serpent said they would not die from eating the fruit (see context of the conversation), and they didn't. It was not the fruit, but God's reaction, that resulted in their death.

Incidentally, there is no indication whatsoever that Adam and Eve would have lived forever, other then that they could have by eating from the tree of life. Eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil did not change this.

Adam and Eve died. The serpent lied. God told the truth. It was not God's reaction but the sin that caused the death. God did not react to the sin He merely fulfilled the covenant He made with Adam. Would you have God renege on His promise to Adam that if Adam ate the fruit of that tree Adam would surely die? When God told Adam don't eat or you will die did Adam object? Did he go to God and say " remember that tree, well I really think that your being unfair and I think you should let me eat of it" or I'm going to eat of that tree because I don't believe you"? No, he just did what he was told not to do without even trying to get permission and you seem to think that when God follows up on His word that , that is somehow dishonest. The serpent knowing that Adam and Eve are somewhat ignorant and naive tells them the fruit is good to eat but there is no evidence that the serpent ever tasted the fruit or has anyway of knowing what will happen when they eat the fruit he just tells Eve things about the fruit though actually he knows nothing about it or about what will happen because he wants to cause trouble. But that in your opinion is being honest.

 

[chris4243]

OK... wouldn't it have been more honest to say "if you eat from it I will kill you" than "if you eat from it you will die"?

 

[elman]

OK... wouldn't it have been more honest to say "if you eat from it I will kill you" than "if you eat from it you will die"?

No. God did not kill them.

 

[HisHomeMaker]

OK... wouldn't it have been more honest to say "if you eat from it I will kill you" than "if you eat from it you will die"?

You are arguing the nuances of contemporary English. The Bible has been translated many times.

 

[chris4243]

No. God did not kill them.

Then how do you explain Genesis 3:22?

 

[razeontherock]

But why the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, the one that Satan claims and God confirms, that eating from it will make them more like God? Why not mark some random tree in the garden, and tell them to not eat from that one? That would give them a choice and also not deprive them of morality.

There was no "deprivation of morality." You have missed the entire point of the story!

 

[razeontherock]

How does satan look more honest? The serpent says they won't die but they do die. Much later, but they do die and the serpent said they would not die if they ate from the tree.

No, they died right then and there! Until you see that, you're not grasping the story. Also please notice G-d ... SAVED them. That *might be* important?

 

[HisHomeMaker]

God created mankind in His image; with the capacity for freewill and love. Humanity turned from God, creation and each other. We should not underestimate what happened because we -- Adam and Eve -- turned away. God has not turned his back on us. God's image is still in us. God plannned to rescue people and he made promises later on in Genesis. Nothing can destroy the eternal life given to us by God. Sadness and brokenness will not have the final word.

Genesis 12 NIV
1 The LORD had said to Abram, “Go from your country, your people and your father’s household to the land I will show you.

2 “I will make you into a great nation,
and I will bless you;
I will make your name great,
and you will be a blessing.
3 I will bless those who bless you,
and whoever curses you I will curse;
and all peoples on earth
will be blessed through you.”


John 3:16 NIV
16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

Romans 4:13-17
13 It was not through the law that Abraham and his offspring received the promise that he would be heir of the world, but through the righteousness that comes by faith. 14 For if those who depend on the law are heirs, faith means nothing and the promise is worthless, 15 because the law brings wrath. And where there is no law there is no transgression.

16 Therefore, the promise comes by faith, so that it may be by grace and may be guaranteed to all Abraham’s offspring—not only to those who are of the law but also to those who have the faith of Abraham. He is the father of us all. 17 As it is written: “I have made you a father of many nations.” He is our father in the sight of God, in whom he believed—the God who gives life to the dead and calls into being things that were not.

 

[elman]

Then how do you explain Genesis 3:22?

Genesis 3:22 (New International Version, ©2011)
22 And the LORD God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.”
That says to me he was banished from the garden. It does not say God killed him.

 

[grasping the after wind]

No, they died right then and there! Until you see that, you're not grasping the story. Also please notice G-d ... SAVED them. That *might be* important?

I wasn't disputing the point of the story only dealing with the particular words as they were written. There are many levels to the written word and on a purely objective reading of the passage one does not know that they died spiritually. As the person I was addressing was using the absolutely literal meaning of the word die i.e. physical death, I was responding to that. The discussion we were having was a very shallow one concerning only the physical elements of the story. The deeper elements which you refer to are much more important and would be better discussed apart from what we were discussing.

 

[chris4243]

Genesis 3:22 (New International Version, ©2011)
22 And the LORD God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.”
That says to me he was banished from the garden. It does not say God killed him.

He must not be allowed to live forever? That doesn't quite sound like banishing from a garden.

Just wondering, is it killing someone if you cut off their access to something they need to live? Like, is choking someone to death killing them, or just cutting off their air supply?

 

[elman]

He must not be allowed to live forever? That doesn't quite sound like banishing from a garden.

Just wondering, is it killing someone if you cut off their access to something they need to live? Like, is choking someone to death killing them, or just cutting off their air supply?

You assume they had already eaten of the tree of life. That is not what it says. God's gift of life to us is limited. We are all mortal and we all die. That does not translate into God killing us.

 

[chris4243]

You assume they had already eaten of the tree of life. That is not what it says. God's gift of life to us is limited. We are all mortal and we all die. That does not translate into God killing us.

Does me cutting off your air supply translate into me killing you?