Assuming the garden of Eden is true

[Aquitaine]

If it's true, I see it as no different than cooking a steak, putting it on the floor in a room, putting a dog in the room with the steak, telling the dog to not eat the steak, and closing the door to leave the two alone, and then punishing the dog for eating the steak even though you knew it was going to happen.

That and then punishing all the dog's offspring for it too.
The whole thing makes zero sense, it just reeks of early primitive human attempts to control people through fear.

 

[savagewind]

Okey, I see the confusion...
When i said serve i didn't mean as in serve food...
I meant as in to be under the control of another person...
It says:
וְאֶל-אִישֵׁךְ, תְּשׁוּקָתֵךְ, וְהוּא, יִמְשָׁל-בָּךְ
which means in free translation:
And to your man you'll desire and he will rule you...

יִמְשָׁל
which derives from the word
מושל
which means govern or rule...

I know. It is ok with me that he makes decisions for us. I married wisely imo. He does not rule me, but I am much more likely to bend his way than he would bend my way. It is not punishment, like someone said.

I was a Jehovah's Witness. He did not like it, but he allowed it. I am SO GLAD that he did not bend my way respecting the Watchtower. Some husbands do.

 

[Segev Moran]

As in
"והאדם ידע את חוה". Its the tree of intimate joining of good and bad. It has to do with the story, because according to Jewish theology, eating from the tree caused evil to become mixed into the man and the world. It joined good and bad.

Its a nice idea but not quite fitting the text...
The structure of the sentence:
עץ הדעת טוב ורע
if you break it up its
עץ הדעת
the of knowledge
טוב ורע
good and bad...
when structured together, the free translation would be : "The tree of knowing good and bad"
and not really the "tree of knowledge good and bad",
To make the word דעת here to present the sexual act, will create a bad grammar in Hebrew.

Is that a general question about why G-d tests people as is found throughout Tanach, or is that specifically here that you're asking.

No, Specific to the creation story.
I Know the explanation from the "first sin" and on...
But as Adam was "created" without the ability to understand Good and evil,
And he was given the ability to choose,
it would be like telling a kid to choose white box or white box and punish him for choosing a white box...
this i mean, in the sense that without the understanding of good and bad, you can't expect someone to not choose the bad.

Go and learn. There's plenty more.

I Actually learn quite a lot...
I've learned the bible itself for 5 years.
I've learned the HAZAL translations and RASHI translations...
I've red quite a lot of articles and books and I've never encountered that claim.. As i know my knowledge is lacking, I would really love if you could provide me with a source to learn about this theory...
I wasn't asking it as a ridicule or something.

Cheers

 

[Segev Moran]

Educate me, please.

One of the biggest claims that Theists raise is the fact that GOD is what gives us the ability to know right or wrong.
Their claim is that the fact that there is a Moral sense is only due to the fact that there is an absolute good and absolute bad...
The other claim (Atheistic) is that the concepts of good and bad are human's invention and are something we learn as a social skill that raise from the understanding that in order to survive as a specie we have to treat other beings with the minimal harm we can...
Thus the concept of morality, Good and bad is changing based on our social understandings and understanding of the universe we live in.

 

[Segev Moran]

many people call the event a test.....and Man failed....and that is why we die

I don't read it that way.
the alteration performed was intended to change the course of Man.....
his body and his spirit

the tree of knowledge was a test
to be sure the alteration had taken hold
was Man curious to know?.....even if death is consequence

yes

Man IS that creature ...wanting to know....
and will risk death in the venture of discovery

THAT quality is what makes it possible for Man to survive his last breath

Man has indeed passed the test

Yet again, the deity GOD that created the Man and woman, created them with the "Urge" the learn and understand?
Still... its giving someone the sense of hunger and not allowing him to eat yet have a delicious food in the center of the room.
Than, punishing him for following that same instinct or feeling that you yourself gave him...?!

 

[Tumah]

Its a nice idea but not quite fitting the text...
The structure of the sentence:
עץ הדעת טוב ורע
if you break it up its
עץ הדעת
the of knowledge
טוב ורע
good and bad...
when structured together, the free translation would be : "The tree of knowing good and bad"
and not really the "tree of knowledge good and bad",
To make the word דעת here to present the sexual act, will create a bad grammar in Hebrew.

Actually according to Ibn Ezra, it should read as (עץ הדעת דעת טוב ורע) 'the tree of knowing good knowledge and bad'. He gives a few other examples where this occurs.

Technically דעת should really be translated as wisdom and חכמה as (raw) knowledge. A בר דעת in Jewish law is not someone who has a certain amount of knowledge, but a certain about of wisdom and intelligence. The difference between a שוטה and a פקח is that the latter is a בר דעת, not a בר חכמה. In certain literature, it refers to the product of using one's intellect on one's knowledge (ie. joining knowledge חכמה and understanding בינה).

But anyway, I didn't mean to say that the word means the act, but that the act and the word both refer to the same thing, joining two things. In one case, two people, in the other case, two concepts. The tree of [joining of] good and evil. The tree mixed evil into the good.
In the words of the Alshich "ועץ הדעת - שכח קדושה מעורב עם כח חיצוני טמא" "The holy power is mixed with the external impure power."
And the Sfas Emes, "...אך עץ הדעת טוב ורע מדה אחרת יש בו, שבאשר יש בו עירוב טוב ורע" "The tree of knowledge had a different aspect, that since it had in it a mixture of good and evil..." For a greater treatment see R' Chaim Volozhin's Nefesh HaChaim.

No, Specific to the creation story.
I Know the explanation from the "first sin" and on...
But as Adam was "created" without the ability to understand Good and evil,
And he was given the ability to choose,
it would be like telling a kid to choose white box or white box and punish him for choosing a white box...
this i mean, in the sense that without the understanding of good and bad, you can't expect someone to not choose the bad.

This is what I'm arguing against. Its not that Adam didn't have the ability to understand good and evil. He understood what good and evil are and that was never the issue. He even knew that he was meant to eat from the tree. [One of] the problem was that he was commanded not to eat from the tree and rather than doing as commanded, he acted according to his own understanding: that ideally he should be eating from the tree. But G-d's understanding is greater than his and he should have relied on that.
A similar problem happened at the sin of the golden calf, where the Israelites intended the calf to be a vehicle to their worship of G-d. Something they understood was intended - and in fact shortly afterwards, they are commanded to build the Tabernacle. The problem was again that they didn't wait until they were commanded. So we find in Jewish sources that say that at Mt. Sinai, the impurity of the snake was removed and with the golden calf, it was returned. It was the same sin.

Interestingly, we similarly find that Abraham, who according to Jewish literature was a reincarnation of one aspect of Adam's soul waited for G-d to command him to circumcise himself, even though according to the Talmud, he was already keeping all the other commandments. The Talmud compares Adam's sin to returning the foreskin. And Abraham waits for G-d's command to cut his foreskin.

I Actually learn quite a lot...
I've learned the bible itself for 5 years.
I've learned the HAZAL translations and RASHI translations...
I've red quite a lot of articles and books and I've never encountered that claim.. As i know my knowledge is lacking, I would really love if you could provide me with a source to learn about this theory...
I wasn't asking it as a ridicule or something.

Cheers

You can find it here from the Ramcha"l and the Shem MiShmuel (quoting the Ariza"l). As well as a lot of other sources on the subject in general.

 

[Thief]

Yet again, the deity GOD that created the Man and woman, created them with the "Urge" the learn and understand?
Still... its giving someone the sense of hunger and not allowing him to eat yet have a delicious food in the center of the room.
Than, punishing him for following that same instinct or feeling that you yourself gave him...?!

to be sure the alteration performed in the garden took hold......
the situation would need to be .....stressed

tell them ....no
and then stand back to see if they do so anyway.

strange as it may seem to you.....the disobedience is proof
they are thinking for themselves
and they are willing to risk death that they might be like God

 

[psychoslice]

Then why not just remove the tree until they were both old enough?
Why condemn humanity for something so trivial?

True, if a parent planted a tree that would bring death to their child, and the tree was planted right where the child plays, that parent would be in big trouble.

 

[psychoslice]

That and then punishing all the dog's offspring for it too.
The whole thing makes zero sense, it just reeks of early primitive human attempts to control people through fear.

Yes and that was the whole idea, to control people, and their still doing it.

 

[Jiddanand]

According to the story and the consequences Adam was made immortal and the tree of death (not knowledge) was forbidden. But the Deity of death deluded Eve and won in making Adam mortal and easily susceptible to the death. God being truth, lie is opposite and takes the form of death.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

And i mean it even if it only a symbolism of the creation of man and not an actual story...

Endless of times i hear this story of the Tree of Knowledge Good and bad is GODs gift to humans.. because GOD gave us the wisdom and ability to learn

The story was intended to be allegory and is one of the best in the Bible. It's not that we're merely able to learn, it's that we've acquired the knowledge of good and evil simultaneously with and as a result of the acquisition of full self-awareness. The latter caused the former, and that inherent knowledge of good and evil means we have an inherently built in universal moral code. That's huge. It's something we still don't get to this day, thinking either that God has got to inundate us with an overwhelming moral code (via God's self-appointed prophets and clerics); or the totally absurd notion that morality is relative. The inherent understanding is there, but we have to heed it.

BTW, that FULL self-awareness is not only evident due to a newfound modesty, but more importantly, the knowledge that death is universal and inevitable. But we acquired that knowledge not because we partook of some so called forbidden fruit, but merely as a result of acquiring full self-awareness. We're apparently the only animal that has it, all the rest (including very young children) being innocent.

yet, the story itself , as truth or a symbolism, describes that GOD has made the garden of Eden, and made it full of trees with the exception of one special tree.. yet this tree unlike the others, was forbidden to be fed upon...

Yes, forbidden fruit is the flaw in the analogy, inserted there as the original source of clerical hegemony. In fact, self-awareness, if God exists, would necessarily be the most precious gift possible from God since it is the wellspring of our moral free will--the acquisition of which had to be the sole purpose for creating this natural, rational universe as a stage on which we could develop and exercise it.

So basically GOD Didn't want humans to have the "Moral" and understanding of what is right and what is wrong...

No, just the opposite (if God exists), see above. More likely, it's an expression of clerical regret of the development of man's moral independence.

[/quote]Not only that.. GOD was so envious of his precious knowledge, it actually threatened Adam and Eve that if they will eat from this tree.. they will die("End of life") [that was a little developers joke here ]

Actually, it just allowed them to have the knowledge that they could see their future in that they would always have to toil to survive, and eventually die anyway.

Where in all that story.. have you seen the word "Gift" or "Gave us"?
What this story actually tells, is that GOD didn't want us to be able to understand whats good and whats bad but we took it anyways, assuming we don't know it bad to take it...
to me it sounds, quite the opposite of "gift of GOD"...

I don't know if it was intended to be understood that way by the ancient author(s), but yet it's there. (See above.) Our moral free-will via full self-awareness would necessarily be an incredible gift from God, if God exists--no matter how men portray it.

 

[Aquitaine]

True, if a parent planted a tree that would bring death to their child, and the tree was planted right where the child plays, that parent would be in big trouble.

Indeed!

 

[Muffled]

And i mean it even if it only a symbolism of the creation of man and not an actual story...

Endless of times i hear this story of the Tree of Knowledge Good and bad is GODs gift to humans.. because GOD gave us the wisdom and ability to learn ...
yet, the story itself , as truth or a symbolism, describes that GOD has made the garden of Eden, and made it full of trees with the exception of one special tree.. yet this tree unlike the others, was forbidden to be fed upon...

So basically GOD Didn't want humans to have the "Moral" and understanding of what is right and what is wrong...

Not only that.. GOD was so envious of his precious knowledge, it actually threatened Adam and Eve that if they will eat from this tree.. they will die("End of life") [that was a little developers joke here ]

after that, when Adam and Eve ate from the tree.. GOD was so furious that they ate it.. that it actually gave them the horrible punishment we call life... and not only that, it will forever remain in the human species..

Where in all that story.. have you seen the word "Gift" or "Gave us"?
What this story actually tells, is that GOD didn't want us to be able to understand whats good and whats bad but we took it anyways, assuming we don't know it bad to take it...
to me it sounds, quite the opposite of "gift of GOD"...

Welcome to RF.

I don't believe it is symbolism or the original creation but instead a creation from earth. The original creation was ex nihilo (out of nothing).

I believe it is more likely that the gods did the creation and made the garden and God simply takes credit for having them do it.

I believe it is most likely that God did not wish for them to have the knowledge of evil.

I believe that God was not envious or jealous.

I believe I don't but then I don't see an "us" in that either.

I believe that is not a threat but simply saying what the results of their actions would be.

I believe I don't see any veracity in that statement.

I believe that statement fails on two levels. One that God doesn't want us to know what is good. Two that all of us were affected by that event.

 

[Muffled]

The way I see it is it is like telling a very young child about SEX. The time was not right for Adam to have the knowledge of God and it was Eve who gave it to him and not God.

I believe there is never a good time to know evil.

 

[Muffled]

I think the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and bad are the same tree.

I believe there is no textual evidence for that.

 

[rusra02]

And i mean it even if it only a symbolism of the creation of man and not an actual story...

Endless of times i hear this story of the Tree of Knowledge Good and bad is GODs gift to humans.. because GOD gave us the wisdom and ability to learn ...
yet, the story itself , as truth or a symbolism, describes that GOD has made the garden of Eden, and made it full of trees with the exception of one special tree.. yet this tree unlike the others, was forbidden to be fed upon...

So basically GOD Didn't want humans to have the "Moral" and understanding of what is right and what is wrong...

Not only that.. GOD was so envious of his precious knowledge, it actually threatened Adam and Eve that if they will eat from this tree.. they will die("End of life") [that was a little developers joke here ]

after that, when Adam and Eve ate from the tree.. GOD was so furious that they ate it.. that it actually gave them the horrible punishment we call life... and not only that, it will forever remain in the human species..

Where in all that story.. have you seen the word "Gift" or "Gave us"?
What this story actually tells, is that GOD didn't want us to be able to understand whats good and whats bad but we took it anyways, assuming we don't know it bad to take it...
to me it sounds, quite the opposite of "gift of GOD"...

Nowhere do the Scriptures refer to the "tree of the knowledge of good and bad" as a "gift". It was, IMO, a limit to Adam and Eve's freedom. That tree represented God's right to exercise rulership over man, showed that man is accountable to God, and God has the right to decide what is good or bad, not we. Adam already knew it was bad to disobey God, and he knew the punishment. Made in God's image, he could display moral qualities of love, loyalty, and obedience. He chose to be disloyal and disobedient, stealing what had not been given him, and rebelling against God's authority. I believe most people today in a similar way defy God's authority and presume to decide, or know, for themselves what is good and bad. The results have been disastrous, as was the result of Adam's sin.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I believe there is never a good time to know evil.

A crucial element to victory is to know oneself and your enemy. If you do not know evil, you cannot triumph over it.

 

[savagewind]

I believe there is never a good time to know evil.

I think it might be like a road sign that says, "do not enter". I think that is a good thing to know.

 

[savagewind]

I believe there is no textual evidence for that.

That is correct, imo. There is no textual evidence for the opinion that to know bad means to know sin.

 

[Muffled]

A crucial element to victory is to know oneself and your enemy. If you do not know evil, you cannot triumph over it.[/QUOTE]

I believe I will stand corrected on that concept at least.

I believe I still don't see it as a good thing but definitely a necessary evil.