hifaif: I don't know if anyone has ever noticed anything while reading this biblical verse:


And the Lord God said, Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil and blessing and calamity; and now, lest he put forth his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.
Gen 3: 22.


From the above passage, we are made to understand that man had no knowledge of good and evil before he ate the forbidden fruit. So why was God so angry?

Man clearly didn't know what he was doing (he couldn't differentiate between good and evil).

If man had no knowledge (of good and evil), how could he have responded to the laws of not eating of the fruit?

How can a man who cannot differentiate between good and evil resist temptation?

How can he tell if what his tempter is saying is good or evil since he cannot differentiate one from the other?

The first man (before he sinned) seems more like a robot to me. So why did God make a big deal out of it?

Tagged:

nora544 , DeepSight, infonubia, macof, Seun,
PAGAN9JA, Rossikk, FOLYKAZE, plaetton ,
musKeeto, rinrin23, marieolae, MrsBreezy, datalossvictim1, Vikky014, Missyhorlah, Creamish, Joagbaje, Gombs, OLAADEGBU, torchwave, kevoh, oduduwaboy, alienvirus, Kay17, bluish, PastorKun, musKeeto, malvis, HumbledbYGrace, pesty100, ProphetUdeme, OlaoChi, emmyskies, 2tex, Gorzy1, Delydex, Macelliot, frosbel, bolaino, alexleo, Ishilove, Elantracey, Liveair, Macelliot, jbird, MizMyColi, Dayvhid, Pr0ton, Tallesty1, uzolexis, logicboy01, youngwarlocks, tpia1, BossTdiamonds, mstik Dolemite.

FOLYKAZE: I think the passage is metaphoric. . . .

Would come back. . . .busy with her

hifaif: I don't know if anyone has ever noticed anything while reading this biblical verse:


And the Lord God said, Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil and blessing and calamity; and now, lest he put forth his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.
Gen 3: 22.


From the above passage, we are made to understand that man had no knowledge of good and evil before he ate the forbidden fruit. So why was God so angry?

Man clearly didn't know what he was doing (he couldn't differentiate between good and evil).

If man had no knowledge (of good and evil), how could he have responded to the laws of not eating of the fruit?

How can a man who cannot differentiate between good and evil resist temptation?

How can he tell if what his tempter is saying is good or evil since he cannot differentiate one from the other?

The first man (before he sinned) seems more like a robot to me. So why did God make a big deal out of it?

.

Dayvhid: god was just bored and decided to use Adam and Eve to while away time. praise jiZz-us

FOLYKAZE: I think the passage is metaphoric. . . .

Would come back. . . .busy with her

hifaif: I don't know if anyone has ever noticed anything while reading this biblical verse:


And the Lord God said, Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil and blessing and calamity; and now, lest he put forth his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.
Gen 3: 22.


From the above passage, we are made to understand that man had no knowledge of good and evil before he ate the forbidden fruit. So why was God so angry?

Man clearly didn't know what he was doing (he couldn't differentiate between good and evil).

If man had no knowledge (of good and evil), how could he have responded to the laws of not eating of the fruit?

How can a man who cannot differentiate between good and evil resist temptation?

How can he tell if what his tempter is saying is good or evil since he cannot differentiate one from the other?

The first man (before he sinned) seems more like a robot to me. So why did God make a big deal out of it?

Tagged:

nora544 , DeepSight, infonubia, macof, Seun,
PAGAN9JA, Rossikk, FOLYKAZE, plaetton ,
musKeeto, rinrin23, marieolae, MrsBreezy, datalossvictim1, Vikky014, Missyhorlah, Creamish, Joagbaje, Gombs, OLAADEGBU, torchwave, kevoh, oduduwaboy, alienvirus, Kay17, bluish, PastorKun, musKeeto, malvis, HumbledbYGrace, pesty100, ProphetUdeme, OlaoChi, emmyskies, 2tex, Gorzy1, Delydex, Macelliot, frosbel, bolaino, alexleo, Ishilove, Elantracey, Liveair, Macelliot, jbird, MizMyColi, Dayvhid, Pr0ton, Tallesty1, uzolexis, logicboy01, youngwarlocks, tpia1, BossTdiamonds, mstic, Dolemite.

LordReed:

The good and evil referenced there is not the same good and evil of morality. For instance one effect of eating the fruit was their sudden "awareness" of their unclothedness and even God asks them "who told you you are naked?". Their eyes are opened to things that should not have been problems to them, they lost the innocence of children and have to begin to discern everything for themselves and most times their discernment is wrong because they no longer have the benefit of the wisdom of God. The moral good and evil was already with them as they had a commandment not to eat the fruit. The tempter did not change their ability to obey, he just gave them a "reason" to disobey.

pesty100: sorry but what is the name of that tree again

pesty100: the fact that sin was created and humans had to die; is that also metaphoric

LordReed:

The good and evil referenced there is not the same good and evil of morality. For instance one effect of eating the fruit was their sudden "awareness" of their unclothedness and even God asks them "who told you you are naked?". Their eyes are opened to things that should not have been problems to them, they lost the innocence of children and have to begin to discern everything for themselves and most times their discernment is wrong because they no longer have the benefit of the wisdom of God. The moral good and evil was already with them as they had a commandment not to eat the fruit. The tempter did not change their ability to obey, he just gave them a "reason" to disobey.

FOLYKAZE:

Where did you read in the passage that sin was created?

One they were never married, and they had sex which lead to pregnancy. In the bible, is this not fornication? Why were Adam and eve not punished for fornication if they had sinned?

The fruit was eaten by human so they have to die like you stated. . . .was it eaten by animals and plants too because they die?

You just dont read bible like story book. And all ancient accounts have there essense.

Someon on this thread explained Adam and Eve are nations of people. Reading from you won lines, you mean they are two individuals.

Some people understand the account to be passage of time and change of ages. You took it as a time within short period.

You dont have to hold me down if you got perplexed in between.





And between. . . .no time for argument on sundat. There is nothing to achieve here so I better hook up with something better

hifaif:

So what really was the good and evil referenced in that passage. The bible said 'knowledge of good and evil' what sort of good and evil was mentioned here?

pesty100: sorry but what is the name of that tree again

FOLYKAZE:

Where did you read in the passage that sin was created?

One they were never married, and they had sex which lead to pregnancy. In the bible, is this not fornication? Why were Adam and eve not punished for fornication if they had sinned?

The fruit was eaten by human so they have to die like you stated. . . .was it eaten by animals and plants too because they die?

You just dont read bible like story book. And all ancient accounts have there essense.

Someon on this thread explained Adam and Eve are nations of people. Reading from you won lines, you mean they are two individuals.

Some people understand the account to be passage of time and change of ages. You took it as a time within short period.

You dont have to hold me down if you got perplexed in between.





And between. . . .no time for argument on sundat. There is nothing to achieve here so I better hook up with something better

LordReed:

It is the good and evil of subjective observation (my words). Adam and Eve did not "know" that they were naked or rather their unclothedness was neither good nor evil until they ate the fruit. Their new "powers of subjective observation" led to conclude that their unclothedness was an issue thus they became ashamed of their unclothedness were before it was of no consequence to their actions. This theme is carried forward to more complex issues, Cain jealous of Abel whereas he could have just done the same as Abel, his "observation" leads him to conclude that he is better served by killing Abel. And on and on, look at your own motives and you will see that some things you do are really as a result of this type of faulty conclusions.

FOLYKAZE:

Where did you read in the passage that sin was created?

One they were never married, and they had sex which lead to pregnancy. In the bible, is this not fornication? Why were Adam and eve not punished for fornication if they had sinned?

The fruit was eaten by human so they have to die like you stated. . . .was it eaten by animals and plants too because they die?

You just dont read bible like story book. And all ancient accounts have there essense.

Someon on this thread explained Adam and Eve are nations of people. Reading from you won lines, you mean they are two individuals.

Some people understand the account to be passage of time and change of ages. You took it as a time within short period.

You dont have to hold me down if you got perplexed in between.





And between. . . .no time for argument on sundat. There is nothing to achieve here so I better hook up with something better

LordReed:

The knowledge of good and evil.

hifaif:

So according to you, there already existed knowledge of objective observation (my words) before Adam ate the forbidden fruit? They could already differentiate some form of good and evil, right?

pesty100: you just contradicted yourself

LordReed:

No I did not. Read my previous post properly.

LordReed:

No I did not. Read my previous post properly.

LordReed:

Yes, the command God gave to them was a touchstone of that.

pesty100: if they already had morality... What is the need for a tree of knowledge of good and evil

LordReed:

The fruit of that tree was not going to give them morality. The tree was there to prove their ability to choose.

hifaif:

But they became like God only after they ate the fruit. What were they like before they ate this fruit?

pesty100: says who?

LordReed:

They were "innocent", "unspoilt", "without guile", "pure". The fruit only served to "corrupt" them.

hifaif:

But, sir, the only difference between this innocence and ignorance is that the former is positive.

The lack of knowledge stems from a lack of wrongdoing.

It was when they ate of this fruit, that they had the knowledge to differentiate between good and evil not before.

If they were already aware of some forms of good and evil, then they were not created innocent. Guilt came after they ate the fruit. Their eyes opened and they were ashamed. Prior to this, they had no guilt (they were innocent)

FOLYKAZE:

Where did you read in the passage that sin was created?

One they were never married, and they had sex which lead to pregnancy. In the bible, is this not fornication? Why were Adam and eve not punished for fornication if they had sinned?

The fruit was eaten by human so they have to die like you stated. . . .was it eaten by animals and plants too because they die?

You just dont read bible like story book. And all ancient accounts have there essense.

Someon on this thread explained Adam and Eve are nations of people. Reading from you won lines, you mean they are two individuals.

Some people understand the account to be passage of time and change of ages. You took it as a time within short period.

You dont have to hold me down if you got perplexed in between.





And between. . . .no time for argument on sundat. There is nothing to achieve here so I better hook up with something better

LordReed:

Let me try to explain using the analogy of children. Children are born with certain instincts like hunger and feeding however they have to be taught other things like signs of danger. With Adam and Eve they were being taught, eating the fruit was like a shortcut to the knowledge they would have gained from God teaching them correctly. What they now had was "subjective" that is it arose from themselves and not from God's teaching. Was unclothedness evil or good? It was neither but through their "subjective observation" they conclude that it is shame worthy. Notice again God's response to Adam saying "I am naked" God says "WHO told you...". Paraphrasing, God is saying "I certainly did not teach you shame for your unclothedness so where did that knowledge come from? Who informed you? Have you eaten of the tree?".