What are your thoughts on Adam and Eve's decision to eat the fruit?

[LegacyJB]

While I've heard people say it was a bad thing, I'm grateful they did what they did. It was a good thing. If they hadn't we wouldn't be here. Adam and Eve would have remained in ignorant bliss forever. Because they would have never know what was bad they would have never known what was good.

What are your thoughts on their actions?

 

[kevinmaynard]

While I've heard people say it was a bad thing, I'm grateful they did what they did. It was a good thing. If they hadn't we wouldn't be here. Adam and Eve would have remained in ignorant bliss forever. Because they would have never know what was bad they would have never known what was good.

What are your thoughts on their actions?

I think since they didn't know right from wrong before they ate the apple they didn't know eating the apple was wrong. Therefore it was a sabotage. A set up from the very beginning.

 

[Vanguard PCD]

I think since they didn't know right from wrong before they ate the apple they didn't know eating the apple was wrong. Therefore it was a sabotage. A set up from the very beginning.

Where does it say it was an apple?

 

[LegacyJB]

I think since they didn't know right from wrong before they ate the apple they didn't know eating the apple was wrong. Therefore it was a sabotage. A set up from the very beginning.

What verse says they ate an apple? I'll give you a year to find it.

 

[kevinmaynard]

Where does it say it was an apple?

Well whatever they ate it was a set up.

 

[Vanguard PCD]

Well whatever they ate it was a set up.

That I tend to agree with. It was a test to see if they would fall into temptation. The story is an allegory.

 

[kevinmaynard]

That I tend to agree with. It was a test to see if they would fall into temptation. The story is an allegory.

I think it is more strait up myth than allegory. If it is allegory what is the underlying moral?

 

[freezerman2000]

I think it is more strait up myth than allegory. If it is allegory what is the underlying moral?

Don't do what you are told not to?

 

[kevinmaynard]

Don't do what you are told not to?

I know that because I know right from wrong. They didn't know that though.

Seems more like a simple fable to explain why evil and suffering exist.

 

[freezerman2000]

I could go off on a tangent,but it would totally derail the thread.

What would be more tempting to you if you were in Eve'
s place (if she historically existed)..What the fruit tasted like or the knowledge of right and wrong?
The knowledge would be a safe bet.

 

[Tony Kara]

While I've heard people say it was a bad thing, I'm grateful they did what they did. It was a good thing. If they hadn't we wouldn't be here. Adam and Eve would have remained in ignorant bliss forever. Because they would have never know what was bad they would have never known what was good.

What are your thoughts on their actions?

So, are you saying that they needed to sin so that grace may abound?

 

[LegacyJB]

So, are you saying that they needed to sin so that grace may abound?

At this point they didn't know what sin is. But yes, sin had to enter the world. It was done in an interesting manner.

God cannot create sin or a sinner. Each of these things are imperfections and if God created imperfection He would cease to be God. He also created the world perfectly. There was nothing wrong with the tree itself or even the fruit. Nothing in the scriptures gives any statement or implication of this. This shows the perfect nature of God. God simply let Adam and Eve make their own choice.

What do you think would happen if they didn't eat the fruit? Not only was sin introduced, so was death. If the fruit wasn't eaten we wouldn't even be here. They would have remained in their innocent state forever bearing no children. But let's say they still somehow had children. Hypothetically of course since this actually couldn't have happened. No one would sin. This is because we would never have knowledge of what's good or evil. We would have nothing to learn from.

Maybe the bands of death would have still been broken? No. That couldn't have happened either. As mentioned, death was also introduced as a result of the disobedience of Adam and Eve. This means if the fruit wasn't eaten death wouldn't exist either. If we were still able to be born to the earth we would never leave it because death wouldn't exist. We would live on the earth forever ignorant of literally everything meaning there would be an absolute 0% chance of living with God.

Like I said, I'm grateful they made the choice they did. Rather than saying they made the wrong choice, it's obvious they made the right choice.

 

[Phantasman]

While I've heard people say it was a bad thing, I'm grateful they did what they did. It was a good thing. If they hadn't we wouldn't be here. Adam and Eve would have remained in ignorant bliss forever. Because they would have never know what was bad they would have never known what was good.

What are your thoughts on their actions?

Eating from the tree of life was a "transgression", not a sin. They were taught to see what was good and what was evil, and now given a choice between the two. The question is, was man perfect in the eyes of God before the transgression. I believe he wasn't. He was still a part of decaying matter in a decaying world. He was being lied to (by a demiurge) to do the will of his creator under ignorance.

Christ, through the Father, saw the truth, and used the serpent to coax Eve to eat, thus causing man to see the reality. When the demiurge's hand was shown, he admitted the death, and Christ now intervened to save mankind.

As the OT is full of a demiurge and the Holy Spirit showing man the truth, it wasn't until Christ came in the flesh, that we understood the real truth.

"But what they call the tree of knowledge of good and evil, which is the Epinoia of the light, they stayed in front of it in order that he (Adam) might not look up to his fullness and recognize the nakedness of his shamefulness. But it was I who brought about that they ate."
And to I said to the savior, "Lord, was it not the serpent that taught Adam to eat?" The savior smiled and said, "The serpent taught them to eat from wickedness of begetting, lust, (and) destruction, that he (Adam) might be useful to him. And he (Adam) knew that he was disobedient to him (the chief archon) due to light of the Epinoia which is in him, which made him more correct in his thinking than the chief archon. And (the latter) wanted to bring about the power which he himself had given him. And he brought a forgetfulness over Adam."-Apocryphon of John

 

[grasping the after wind]

I could go off on a tangent,but it would totally derail the thread.

What would be more tempting to you if you were in Eve'
s place (if she historically existed)..What the fruit tasted like or the knowledge of right and wrong?
The knowledge would be a safe bet.

The temptation wasn't knowledge but power. To be like God.Was knowledge of good and evil a thing that the fruit of the tree gave to the one eating it or was the fruit just a fruit and the transgression by eating of it actually what gained one knowledge of good and evil? Does the first disobedience itself impart the knowledge that disobedience is bad?

 

[LegacyJB]

Eating from the tree of life was a "transgression", not a sin. They were taught to see what was good and what was evil, and now given a choice between the two. The question is, was man perfect in the eyes of God before the transgression. I believe he wasn't. He was still a part of decaying matter in a decaying world. He was being lied to (by a demiurge) to do the will of his creator under ignorance.

Christ, through the Father, saw the truth, and used the serpent to coax Eve to eat, thus causing man to see the reality. When the demiurge's hand was shown, he admitted the death, and Christ now intervened to save mankind.

As the OT is full of a demiurge and the Holy Spirit showing man the truth, it wasn't until Christ came in the flesh, that we understood the real truth.

"But what they call the tree of knowledge of good and evil, which is the Epinoia of the light, they stayed in front of it in order that he (Adam) might not look up to his fullness and recognize the nakedness of his shamefulness. But it was I who brought about that they ate."
And to I said to the savior, "Lord, was it not the serpent that taught Adam to eat?" The savior smiled and said, "The serpent taught them to eat from wickedness of begetting, lust, (and) destruction, that he (Adam) might be useful to him. And he (Adam) knew that he was disobedient to him (the chief archon) due to light of the Epinoia which is in him, which made him more correct in his thinking than the chief archon. And (the latter) wanted to bring about the power which he himself had given him. And he brought a forgetfulness over Adam."-Apocryphon of John

This is how I view it too. Sin entered the world through transgression.

 

[Vanguard PCD]

At this point they didn't know what sin is. But yes, sin had to enter the world. It was done in an interesting manner.

God cannot create sin or a sinner. Each of these things are imperfections and if God created imperfection He would cease to be God. He also created the world perfectly. There was nothing wrong with the tree itself or even the fruit. Nothing in the scriptures gives any statement or implication of this. This shows the perfect nature of God. God simply let Adam and Eve make their own choice.

While I agree with free will, I disagree on your statement about God ceasing to be God. My understanding is that God is the all powerful creator. He can pretty much do whatever He likes, including the creation of evil, temptation, sin, challenges, etc. if that is what He felt like doing at the time. Who are we, as mere mortals, to limit His scope and reach?

 

[Sayre]

Did the effect of the resurrection take place before the fall or after?

I think the resurrection occurred "before all time" and hence before the fall. This makes the fall necessary.

17 And if you call on the Father, who without partiality judges according to each one’s work, conduct yourselves throughout the time of your stay here in fear; 18 knowing that you were not redeemed with corruptible things, like silver or gold, from your aimless conduct received by tradition from your fathers, 19 but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot. 20 He indeed was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you 21 who through Him believe in God, who raised Him from the dead and gave Him glory, so that your faith and hope are in God.

 

[donfish06]

It is not an allegory nor a myth. it is truth. But it is deeper than you think, and it isn't what you think.

I have a thread about it:

http://www.christianforums.com/t7785575/

 

[donfish06]

Eating from the tree of life was a "transgression", not a sin.
[/I]

You do mean the tree of knowledge?

 

[Sophrosyne]

In order for there to be love, there must be choice to not love. God needed a way of providing Adam and Eve a choice of being able to "not love" him and this choice was through disobedience which gave them the knowledge of good and evil.
As for it being a "good" thing as some think, there is nothing in the Bible that equates that if Adam had guarded eve properly and been there when she was tempted by the serpent that God would have been satisfied and then things would be completely different now.
The problem we have is that people are only using one possible scenario, that is what happened instead of giving any thought to alternative scenarios.

What if Eve had gone to Adam and asked him about the apple and Adam said don't eat it and she obeyed and nobody ate of the tree and then God let them have children and they grew up and lived in the garden forever with everyone taught not to eat of the tree nobody ever eating from it for eternity? Or what if Eve ate the apple and Adam refused to eat of it?