The Tree of Knowledge

[KnightOfChrist]

I'm going to paraphrase for now.

When Eve bit the apple, as she was thus tempted, apparently she gained "knowledge;" coaxing Adam to do the same, they both gained knowledge.

Then, they realized they were naked and covered up.

What I don't get is, why does their being naked matter? They're "mates." They've seen each other naked already for their whole lives.

Why does Adam hide from God? God has seen him naked. God made him, why would it bother God to see Adam naked?

 

[G4m]

I'm going to paraphrase for now.

When Eve bit the apple, as she was thus tempted, apparently she gained "knowledge;" coaxing Adam to do the same, they both gained knowledge.

Then, they realized they were naked and covered up.

What I don't get is, why does their being naked matter? They're "mates." They've seen each other naked already for their whole lives.

Why does Adam hide from God? God has seen him naked. God made him, why would it bother God to see Adam naked?

Perhaps its symbolic of sin?

 

[KnightOfChrist]

Perhaps.

But how would nudity be symbolic of sin? Especially between the father and mother of mankind.

They wouldn't know what "naked" was; who would model the covering of those parts? And how would they know them sinfully if no sexual sin had yet ever been committed?

 

[G4m]

Perhaps.

But how would nudity be symbolic of sin? Especially between the father and mother of mankind.

They wouldn't know what "naked" was; who would model the covering of those parts? And how would they know them sinfully if no sexual sin had yet ever been committed?

I'm not sure. Nakedness seems to always be connected with shame. Symbolically what do we need covering from?

2 Corinthians 5
2 For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven:
3 If so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked.
4 For we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened: not for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed up of life.

Revelation 3
18 I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see.

Another thing I find interesting is that it wasn't until they had the knowledge of good and bad, that they realised there was shame in nakedness...

 

[PaladinValer]

Such tree really should be called "The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil." Or, more simply, "The Tree of Consciousness." It provided Adam and Eve with the ability to discern right from wrong. Before partaking of the tree's fruit (and its rather persumptuous to say it was an apple), Adam and Eve were ignorant and innocent.

When they both eat of the fruit (both were deceived, not just Eve [or Adam]), they knew that being naked was a sin. It should be noted that the Hebrew words for "naked" and "crafty" are very close, and the snake was rather crafty by telling the truth (yes, it did, because God didn't kill them and they did learn how to decern wrong from right) in order to make them disobey God. Thus, when they realized that it was wrong to be "naked," the author is using a play-on-words to allude to their craftiness in trying to become equals with God. Thus, they wanted to hide their shame...thus the clothes.

The story IMO comes with several messages

1. Knowledge comes with a price sometimes
2. Humanity isn't itself without a consciousness of right and wrong
3. Humanity isn't itself if it isn't able to sin and reject God (not that we should, mind you)
4. Humanity is a religious creature; we desire to know what cannot be explained through "rational" and/or tangible means.

 

[KnightOfChrist]

Such tree really should be called "The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil." Or, more simply, "The Tree of Consciousness." It provided Adam and Eve with the ability to discern right from wrong. Before partaking of the tree's fruit (and its rather persumptuous to say it was an apple), Adam and Eve were ignorant and innocent.

When they both eat of the fruit (both were deceived, not just Eve [or Adam]), they knew that being naked was a sin. It should be noted that the Hebrew words for "naked" and "crafty" are very close, and the snake was rather crafty by telling the truth (yes, it did, because God didn't kill them and they did learn how to decern wrong from right) in order to make them disobey God. Thus, when they realized that it was wrong to be "naked," the author is using a play-on-words to allude to their craftiness in trying to become equals with God. Thus, they wanted to hide their shame...thus the clothes.

The story IMO comes with several messages

1. Knowledge comes with a price sometimes
2. Humanity isn't itself without a consciousness of right and wrong
3. Humanity isn't itself if it isn't able to sin and reject God (not that we should, mind you)
4. Humanity is a religious creature; we desire to know what cannot be explained through "rational" and/or tangible means.

Thank you, that helped explain a lot.

But what I don't understand is... it may be a play on words, but doesn't a play have to retain purposeful meaning in all cases?

And if that is the case, then why was it wrong for them to be naked?

 

[PaladinValer]

It was wrong of them to be crafty and to be so easily deceived. That is what the "naked" really is referring to primarily. Their actual nakedness was a secondary problem.

In order to sin, we must be able to know we are sinning, after all.

 

[Piano Player]

I read an article that thought the Tree of Knowledge story might be a biblical allegory for sexual awareness. In biblical times, the snake was a pagen symbol for sex. The knowledge they gained was the awkwardness of sexual awareness. Sort of a contrast of the innocence of children in their nakedness versus uncomfortable self awareness once we discover we are sexual beings.

I have found the story to be facinating in its complexity. As Paladin points out, the snake actually seems to be telling the truth about the consequences of eating the fruit. God warns Adam that they will die if they eat the fruit, but the snake tells them the fruit actually gives them the knowledge of good and evil. When Eve eats the fruit, the snake's version seems more accurate than God's! What are we supposed to make of that?

The actual knowledge gained does seem pretty pathetic. How does it make them like God to know they are naked, and therefore should be ashamed? Is there more knowledge gained than the story suggests? It is a very interesting way for the Bible to introduce God's relationship with man.

 

[Knight]

Thank you, that helped explain a lot.

But what I don't understand is... it may be a play on words, but doesn't a play have to retain purposeful meaning in all cases?

And if that is the case, then why was it wrong for them to be naked?

When man fell sin entered the world.... Along with sin comes shame. Remember that before the fall they were in the garden and felt no shame.

Personal opinion here but I think this is symbolic of our desire to cover our sin. Not that the Genesis creation account is symbolic. I believe that to be literal. Rather, the idea that we are ashamed of our sin and desire to cover it is symbolized in most people's desire to cover their nakedness. This seems to make sense when you look at the context of the rest of the Genesis 3 account. They made clothes for themselves but these were insufficient so God made leather coverings for them. He presumably killed animals to get them which supports the Biblical mandate that without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness for sin.

I declare none of the above docturnal. Simply my views and opinions.

BTW, KnightofChrist, I love the username.

 

[tesnusxenos]

I think that the Genesis account is literal but that does not stop it from being symbolic also.
My opinion is that the nakedness that Adam and Eve felt and tried to cover was the realization that we could not measure up to Gods standard. When we are later given the opportunity to cover ourselves(Jesus's atonement) some take advantage of it and some do not hence the following parable

--------------------------------------------------------- l-------------------------Matthew 22

1Jesus spoke to them again in parables, saying: 2"The kingdom of heaven is like a king who prepared a wedding banquet for his son. 3He sent his servants to those who had been invited to the banquet to tell them to come, but they refused to come.
4"Then he sent some more servants and said, 'Tell those who have been invited that I have prepared my dinner: My oxen and fattened cattle have been butchered, and everything is ready. Come to the wedding banquet.'
5"But they paid no attention and went off--one to his field, another to his business. 6The rest seized his servants, mistreated them and killed them. 7The king was enraged. He sent his army and destroyed those murderers and burned their city.
8"Then he said to his servants, 'The wedding banquet is ready, but those I invited did not deserve to come. 9Go to the street corners and invite to the banquet anyone you find.' 10So the servants went out into the streets and gathered all the people they could find, both good and bad, and the wedding hall was filled with guests.
11"But when the king came in to see the guests, he noticed a man there who was not wearing wedding clothes. 12'Friend,' he asked, 'how did you get in here without wedding clothes?' The man was speechless.
13"Then the king told the attendants, 'Tie him hand and foot, and throw him outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.'
14"For many are invited, but few are chosen."(NIV)

 

[KnightOfChrist]

When man fell sin entered the world.... Along with sin comes shame. Remember that before the fall they were in the garden and felt no shame.

Personal opinion here but I think this is symbolic of our desire to cover our sin. Not that the Genesis creation account is symbolic. I believe that to be literal. Rather, the idea that we are ashamed of our sin and desire to cover it is symbolized in most people's desire to cover their nakedness. This seems to make sense when you look at the context of the rest of the Genesis 3 account. They made clothes for themselves but these were insufficient so God made leather coverings for them. He presumably killed animals to get them which supports the Biblical mandate that without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness for sin.

I declare none of the above docturnal. Simply my views and opinions.

BTW, KnightofChrist, I love the username.

I agree with most of what has thus far been said. Alas, will we ever truly know?

I do question, though... human nature to hide our shame, I believe someone said? What would be shaming in Adam and Eve's being naked? God created us, sculpted us in His image... what shame is there in the human body?

I love yours, too, Knight. I'd have liked "Knight of Christ" better, had I known I could use spaces (I'm sure it said somewhere and I just assumed, ignorantly, that I couldn't). Whatever, some other millenium.

Shall we seek out the sangreal together!?

 

[Knight]

I do question, though... human nature to hide our shame, I believe someone said? What would be shaming in Adam and Eve's being naked? God created us, sculpted us in His image... what shame is there in the human body?

Remember that they were now fallen, sinful human beings. Maybe this had something to do with being completely exposed. Again, I think a portion of this is symbolic. We are naturally embarrased to display our physical nakedness because of the innate desire to conceal our sin.

I love yours, too, Knight. I'd have liked "Knight of Christ" better, had I known I could use spaces (I'm sure it said somewhere and I just assumed, ignorantly, that I couldn't). Whatever, some other millenium.

If you're REALLY nice to the mods and admins maybe they'll let you change it.

Shall we seek out the sangreal together!?

Sure.... Is your sword sharpened?

 

[KleinerApfel]

There's another thread I posted on yesterday covering this but I can't find it!

I suggested that their nakedness was not bad at first, because of their innocence, but when they fell it became a problem.

After the fall, they and their descendants would, amongst other things, become prone to lust, and so clothes would be needed to keep this in check.

Otherwise all relationships between men and women might become insecure and constantly disrupted by uncontrolled urges.

I might have explained it better yesterday, but I can't find my post. Help!

(Does anyone know what happened to that find-a-post button?

 

[KleinerApfel]

Found the other similar discussion if anyone's interested. (I posted #25)

http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=8054738#post8054738

 

[Duggie]

Such tree really should be called "The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil." Or, more simply, "The Tree of Consciousness." It provided Adam and Eve with the ability to discern right from wrong. Before partaking of the tree's fruit (and its rather persumptuous to say it was an apple), Adam and Eve were ignorant and innocent.

I just have one question; If Adam and Eve were ignorant and innocent before eating off the tree then where did their knowledge (being that they obviously disobeyed God's command to not eat from the tree) Come from? The fact that the thought to go and eat off the tree entered their minds must surely indicate they had a knowledge of good and evil, right and wrong before they ate the fruit.

 

[Andry]

Why would God not want us to know right from wrong?

 

[Duggie]

Why would God not want us to know right from wrong?

I'm not suggesting God doesn't want us too know right from wrong. The point I'm making is simply that Adam and Eve had some form of knowledge of good and evil before they ate from the tree. When God completed His creation everything was "good" and perfect with the inclusion of both Adam and Eve. I am therefore asking the question did they have any knowledge of good and evil before eating from the tree?

 

[KleinerApfel]

oops - double posted

 

[KleinerApfel]

This is an answer I gave on the other forum, (link in my last post), where this is being discussed:

First an explanation of "knowledge" in this context.

The Hebrew word used here is the same as the one used when a person in the bible "knows" his wife, and so the knowledge spoken of here relates to an intimate, personal involvement, not to a abstract, intellectual understanding of a concept.

God was not witholding good things from them - He had already given Adam and Eve all the knowledge and understanding they would require for the time being, along with the intellect to work things out, and a close relationship with Him to help them with what they didn't yet understand.

Nakedness was not bad at the beginning - God saw all He had made and said that it was good.

The man and woman "opened the door" the door to sin, causing a situation where the whole human race would eventually be tempted by lust, and the consequences of that being unchecked would be very damaging to future relationships, and all of society.

Therefore, in mercy, God gave them an awareness of their nakedness being an "issue", and they felt shame. This was for their protection - they realised there was a problem, then God gave them clothing to cover themselves.

The knowledge they gained was not intellectual, but an actual experience of sin and the effect it has - potential danger to society, shame and fear.

Adam and Eve did not gain some wonderful, new and exciting knowledge previously hidden from them by God, rather, their disobedience exposed them to a nasty experience they should not have had to endure.

That is the "knowledge of good and evil" which they received. God had already given them all the knowledge they needed - they did not need this!

Blessings, Susana

 

[G4m]

I'm not suggesting God doesn't want us too know right from wrong. The point I'm making is simply that Adam and Eve had some form of knowledge of good and evil before they ate from the tree. When God completed His creation everything was "good" and perfect with the inclusion of both Adam and Eve. I am therefore asking the question did they have any knowledge of good and evil before eating from the tree?

This is a good point. If we were good and perfect in the sense that we were created morally good and perfect, then it should have been impossible for us to sin. However, if we were good according to God's plan, we didn't have to be morally good...