Garden of Eden, tree of knowledge

[chris4243]

Did you just say that Jesus mastered sin? I'm not grading you on your answer, I just want to know what and how you think.

Sin is disobeying God, Jesus is God, so Jesus can't sin unless He disobeys Himself.

Moreover I am keen to see you think more about the real truth than what you happen to like and dislike. If God tells Cain that he has to master sin, doesn't it seem as though God is training him to master sin? Why do you think God would tell him to master sin unless He thought Cain was capable of mastering sin? Does the same expectation apply to us today? There's a lot to think about from that one verse.

It's possible to master the "worst" sins, and most of the sins of action. Sins of thought or sins of inaction are much harder, perhaps impossible for man. In any case, it would take a lot of practice and plenty of sins along the way.

I'd like to know your thoughts about my other questions too.

I looked through a couple of pages and couldn't find your questions. Do you mind re-asking them?

 

[oi_antz]

Sin is disobeying God, Jesus is God, so Jesus can't sin unless He disobeys Himself.

It's possible to master the "worst" sins, and most of the sins of action. Sins of thought or sins of inaction are much harder, perhaps impossible for man. In any case, it would take a lot of practice and plenty of sins along the way.

I looked through a couple of pages and couldn't find your questions. Do you mind re-asking them?

Please see posts 74 to 77, it is possible you didn't see them. I would like you to share your thoughts.

Another thing is your presumption that Jesus is God and therefore Jesus makes the rules. I understand it differently, that Jesus is the Christ, He is the eternal son of God who became incarnate as a human, and applied Himself to learn God's law and how to master sin, just as any human does. Allow me to quote Jesus to prove this:

Luke 2:49 (King James Version)

49And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business?

Matthew 7:21 (New Living Translation)

True Disciples

21 “Not everyone who calls out to me, ‘Lord! Lord!’ will enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Only those who actually do the will of my Father in heaven will enter.

Also, if we can master the "worst" sins, why can a person not master the "slightest" sin?

Edit: I think perhaps with your comment about sinful thoughts, remember that Paul wrote about "I do what I hate to do, but I am terrible at doing what is right"? This is the war of the flesh against the spirit. That although our spirit has been restored by Jesus' sacrifice, the flesh is still corrupt by Adam's sin. Thus, as long as we live, our flesh is at war with the spirit. There is a difference though between having a thought flash through your mind when you see a beautiful woman, and thinking about how much the presence of that woman might please you. Perhaps have a think about that, that the basic hormonal effect of a person's appearance is not in itself lust, but it is the worshiping of sex that constitutes lust - fantasy and prowling. And sex is of course only one example of the war between our carnality and spirituality.

 

[HisHomeMaker]

...before the fall, the humans weren't persuaded by these things, just as repentant born again Christians aren't persuaded by these things.

I think that everyone is persuaded by these things. The difference, perhaps, is that repentant Christians are aware of their sin. Hopefully Christians give in to sin less than they are tempted. We are all sinners. Jesus was the only sinless man.

 

[chris4243]

He said that humans having now become "like us", therefore being aware of good and evil, what if they were to live forever? What do you think would have happened to the world if that happened? An untamed human knowing good and evil that would never die. Well, maybe have a think about that.

As far as I know, humans knowing good and evil are better than amoral humans. Humans that know morality will still do immoral things from time to time, but amoral humans wouldn't even be able to try.

So the law that was in effect from verse 17 stands to state that they will be judged for their sins, and we know later that God shortened their lifespan to 120 years. So the serpent lied and in doing so, murdered the humans.

I already answered this one.

 

[chris4243]

They had the conscience, but they didn't have a tempter. So when the serpent came and tempted them they had no experience dealing with temptation. A Christian does however, because it is a daily battle with the serpent who tries to get us to disobey our conscience and therefore commit sin. Adam was clearly told in Genesis 2:17 that eating from that tree would doom him to death, and Genesis 3:3 shows that Eve knew full well the consequences of disobeying God.

If one has a conscience, then one knows good and evil. You can't have your conscience telling you "what you're doing is evil" without you knowing what evil is.

So, were they tricked or did they consciously decide to doubt what God had told them and to trust the serpent instead? Furthermore, what motivated their decision?

I'm not a mind-reader, but it says what motivated them was that the fruit was good for food, pleasant to the eye, and desirable for gaining wisdom. In Genesis 3:22 God Himself confirms word for word what the serpent told them.

 

[chris4243]

The point is that all they had to do was trust what God had told them, instead they decided to trust what the serpent told them. Up to that point in time, they seemed quite happy with God's terms didn't they?

I don't know. I still don't know why God didn't mark some other tree instead of trying to deprive them of morality.

 

[elman]

[=chris4243;57233426]As far as I know, humans knowing good and evil are better than amoral humans. Humans that know morality will still do immoral things from time to time, but amoral humans wouldn't even be able to try.



.[/QUOTE]
I think the only amoral humans are the mentally defective. God has written on every human heart. Rom 2.

 

[elman]

I don't know. I still don't know why God didn't mark some other tree instead of trying to deprive them of morality.

I don't see God trying to deprive them of morality.

 

[razeontherock]

Did you see my point though, that some things that are considered to be sin are actually material things of this world that people happen to like?

YES! That's the problem with sin, we LIKE it. You seem to have great insight into how the devil uses this sort of thing, how to recognize what's going on as it happens, and what to do about it. My efforts are largely to shine some light on that, and bring it out into the open for all to see, because we can't help but benefit.

Scripture speaks of "the pleasures of sin for a season," which is only one great reason to read Hebrews 11. So the devil tends to "show" us this aspect, (a good working definition of carnality?) and hide the negative consequences which are (at least primarily) Spiritual. There is also a parallel here to who Lucifer was before his fall, and I think this gets right to the "root" of the tree under discussion But that is even deeper than what I have unsuccessfully tried to convey so far, so I'll leave that alone for now.

Backtracking to our previous lack of communication, you said "God wasn't speaking to you through that." Try this angle:

"Through wisdom is an house builded; and by understanding it is established: Proverbs 24:4 And by knowledge shall the chambers be filled with all precious and pleasant riches."

Those 3 words get a LOT of attention in Proverbs, at least in the KJV which uses them consistently throughout all books with the same meaning. Also significant is that the word in the original Hebrew is the same, as well as re: the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

____________________________________________________________

So it's important (especially for unbelievers) to realize G-d is NOT anti-knowledge! So often I see that accusation made, and it just distorts everything.
______________________________________________________________


What then is the usage of this word, "knowledge?" When I was a new follower of Jesus, something He showed me may be helpful here. Looking back at the above passage from Proverbs, He showed me wisdom is seeing the difference, (between good and evil, right and wrong, holy and unholy, etc) understanding is choosing the better of the two, and KNOWLEDGE is what we get as a result of those choices and our pursuant actions.

These fit perfectly with everything the book of Proverbs says, and the idea has never led me astray. This adds insight to A & E's events at the tree ...

 

[razeontherock]

I don't see God trying to deprive them of morality.

This is one of the HUGE points I have been trying to make! As long as one sees G-d as wanting to deprive mankind of morality, it's impossible to see the point of the story. I have seen many on this site suffer from that ...

A & E knew right from wrong. They had a conscience. They violated it. G-d did NOT regard their reasons why, and He treats us the same way, EXCEPT - -

His plan of Salvation has come to fruition; a benefit A & E did not have.

 

[chris4243]

This is one of the HUGE points I have been trying to make! As long as one sees G-d as wanting to deprive mankind of morality, it's impossible to see the point of the story. I have seen many on this site suffer from that ...

A & E knew right from wrong. They had a conscience. They violated it. G-d did NOT regard their reasons why, and He treats us the same way, EXCEPT - -

His plan of Salvation has come to fruition; a benefit A & E did not have.

Why did Adam and Eve not care that they were naked before they ate the fruit?

 

[elman]

Why did Adam and Eve not care that they were naked before they ate the fruit?

It does not tell us.

 

[elman]

This is one of the HUGE points I have been trying to make! As long as one sees G-d as wanting to deprive mankind of morality, it's impossible to see the point of the story. I have seen many on this site suffer from that ...

A & E knew right from wrong. They had a conscience. They violated it. G-d did NOT regard their reasons why, and He treats us the same way, EXCEPT - -

His plan of Salvation has come to fruition; a benefit A & E did not have.

I think the benefits of the cross flow back in time as well as forward. I think A& E did have access to the grace and forgiveness of God just as we do.

 

[HisHomeMaker]

Why did Adam and Eve not care that they were naked before they ate the fruit?

I think they were also emotionally naked. The fall of man brought a challenge to the relationship between people and between God and people.

 

[HisHomeMaker]

We think that we know how to love better than God does; we don't trust him to be better at it than we are. We are trapped by our sins and we don't trust the affection we are being offered by God.

 

[razeontherock]

Why did Adam and Eve not care that they were naked before they ate the fruit?

This does NOT pertain to morality.

There are many ways of discussing this point, but it has no bearing on this thread.

 

[razeontherock]

I think the benefits of the cross flow back in time as well as forward.

This is a great Truth! Not easy to discuss ...

I think A& E did have access to the grace and forgiveness of God just as we do.

The bolded part is objectively false. I do think it's VERY important to recognize that G-d began unfolding His plan of Salvation with them, via blood sacrifice, in order to make them clothes. And even in these simple things, deeper meaning takes form; whether we choose to call that allegory or something else.

So yes they did have G-d's Grace and forgiveness extended towards them, and it seems to me that the primary purpose of the OT is to show us how that was accepted and also rejected, and how G-d kept advancing His overall plan anyway. WOW is that ever applicable to us!

And yet "the way" Grace is extended to us was unprecedented before the Cross

 

[razeontherock]

We think that we know how to love better than God does; we don't trust him to be better at it than we are. We are trapped by our sins and we don't trust the affection we are being offered by God.

Not only are these good observations of mankind's plight - it's not a bad summary of the book of Proverbs!

 

[oi_antz]

I think that everyone is persuaded by these things. The difference, perhaps, is that repentant Christians are aware of their sin. Hopefully Christians give in to sin less than they are tempted. We are all sinners. Jesus was the only sinless man.

Nope. I have to say that the sin I have already conquered is certainly not persuasive. It may be tempting occasionally, but only momentarily and it is clear to me at the time that the sin is wrong. Certainly though, I can say that if I'm a repentant Christian the sins I have repented from are certainly not persuasive. Sin's that I've never dealt with before.. well that is a process of discovery.

 

[oi_antz]

As far as I know, humans knowing good and evil are better than amoral humans. Humans that know morality will still do immoral things from time to time, but amoral humans wouldn't even be able to try.

Fair enough comment, but we are only speculating what an amoral human would be like. From my understanding, the serpent was not able to tempt them since the only sin was eating of that specific tree. So there was only one sin they could commit. Lying, stealing, killing just weren't even options because these things didn't even exist yet. There were no fallen humans that had introduced those sins to the world, and no other creature had done it either. So I would say that your speculation that humans were originally "amoral" is probably quite a far cry from a human not knowing good and evil, since they were sinless and the only sin they had to deny was the fruit of one tree and we can see how easy it was until the serpent came along and told them that God had lied. Once they ate the fruit however, the humans began discovering a whole new world of pleasures that lead to sin. So I don't believe Adam and Eve were "amoral" sinners before the fall. I believe they were blameless and holy, completely without the knowledge of the capacity for sin.