How could Adam know?

[Riverwolf]

Correct.
No god with integrity of character would create a quasi-perfect Garden and next prohibit part of its content to an innocent pair!
Better create NOTHING!!!
Pretty dishonest, and a fallacious policy.
Therefore: Christians believe all sorts of the weirdest of superstitions.
Allow me, then, to believe the moon is made of French Roquefort cheese.

Dude, you honestly think that all Christians take this story literally? Or that it means something ONLY to Christians?

It's not a Christian story at all; it's a Jewish story. Christians simply borrowed it.

 

[djewleu]

Tell you what, guys. I'll tell you what the story, ON ITS OWN TERMS, is about. Remember: ignore the rest of the Biblical canon:

The story is applicable. It means something different for different people. For me, it's a story about adolescence. For historians, it's a story about the "fall" from a hunter-gatherer society to a farming society.

Of course, taken in context with the rest of Parashat Bere**** alone, it takes on a whole new meaning, and eventually a new meaning once again with the rest of the Torah and the Tanakh. The Christians have added their own meaning, as well.

Even Hindus have their own idea of what the story is about.

When it comes to stories this old, there is no "right" or "wrong" interpretation.

Well, that is a good description. I accept it.
Nevertheless, I do not accept that fanatical Christianity [cultic fundamentalism] would use the myth to cash in for a parasitic elite who takes advantage of superstitions spread by those hypocrites who in the end don't believe anything literal in the story!

 

[LittleNipper]

Jehovah told him “in the day” you eat the forbidden fruit you shall surely die.
He died 930 years later.
How do you think Adam could have known the difference between eternal living and dying?
Jehovah never told him [in the epic] he would live forever!
Surely, he would die one day, like all other species around him in the garden.
The epic smells a rat, don't you think?

What GOD considers death and what you consider death are most likely entirely different. By death, GOD could have been considering Adam's spirituality and Adam's ability to be one with GOD. In that regard Adam hid himself from GOD, and so it would seem that clearly the spiritual relationship Adam had with GOD ---------- died that day...

What makes you believe animals died before the Fall of man? Man was not even supposed to eat animals until after the FLOOD. But one must be willing to read his Bible to come across such interesting pieces of the puzzle.

Perhaps a rat smells a rat.....................

 

[Zadok]

I believe one of the problems in dealing with ancient scripture texts is the effort of individuals in a modern setting to “separate” individual concepts or doctrines if you will and then to take those concepts out of their ancient context by themselves and make sense of them in a modern setting.

It is my impression that the Eden epoch is incomplete when viewed literally from a modern setting. If G-d really was smart enough to have impressions of the future he would have known full well that “the serpent” would “interfere” in the peaceful enjoyments of man in Eden. And yet G-d is devoid of any responsibility? In addition we assume that G-d is just despite the fact that he is willing to “punish” all mankind for the “indiscretions” of their parents.

There are a few elements of the epoch that are important in understanding the paradox of our lives. These elements include:
1. Adam and Eve
2. The Eden Garden of G-d
3. The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil
4. The fall of mankind
5. The Tree of life
I submit that all of these elements are presented in the garden epoch in symbolic form. In other words the story is a paradigm in the purpose of man, man’s relationship to G-d in mortality and the crisis or dilemma we each must deal with as we live and die.

I give a short version of my understanding of these elements and their symbolic meaning.

Adam and Eve = Symbolize all mankind – male and female and the “choice” to have a mortal existence capable of experiencing and realizing good and evil as well as their polar opposite characteristics and effects.

The Eden Garden of G-d. In essence to have mortal experience of Good and Evil mankind could not remain within the “shelter” of G-d and under the influence of his enlightenment.

The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil – This is symbolic of part of the role and purpose of a Messiah. That in order to become “knowledgeable” one must descend into hell (hell being death and the wage of sin which is evil) to experience the bitterness of evil in order to understand the contrast of good or living free without encumbrances.
The Fall of Mankind: To live “separated” from G-d in an environment in which G-d cannot be realized. In other words live without proof of G-d.

The Tree of Life: The symbolism of Messianic redemption and the deliverance from hell which is the ultimate good.

Each of these symbolic representations can constitute vast discussion on their own. I do not purport to have all knowledge of these things but from the posts I have seen on this forum there appears to be a great deal about ancient scripture missing in understanding. And in some cases it would seem that there is an element of delight in what is missing and I do not want to interfere more in that with more than this post.

Zadok

 

[LittleNipper]

I believe one of the problems in dealing with ancient scripture texts is the effort of individuals in a modern setting to “separate” individual concepts or doctrines if you will and then to take those concepts out of their ancient context by themselves and make sense of them in a modern setting.

It is my impression that the Eden epoch is incomplete when viewed literally from a modern setting. If G-d really was smart enough to have impressions of the future he would have known full well that “the serpent” would “interfere” in the peaceful enjoyments of man in Eden. And yet G-d is devoid of any responsibility? In addition we assume that G-d is just despite the fact that he is willing to “punish” all mankind for the “indiscretions” of their parents.

There are a few elements of the epoch that are important in understanding the paradox of our lives. These elements include:
1. Adam and Eve
2. The Eden Garden of G-d
3. The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil
4. The fall of mankind
5. The Tree of life
I submit that all of these elements are presented in the garden epoch in symbolic form. In other words the story is a paradigm in the purpose of man, man’s relationship to G-d in mortality and the crisis or dilemma we each must deal with as we live and die.

I give a short version of my understanding of these elements and their symbolic meaning.

Adam and Eve = Symbolize all mankind – male and female and the “choice” to have a mortal existence capable of experiencing and realizing good and evil as well as their polar opposite characteristics and effects.

The Eden Garden of G-d. In essence to have mortal experience of Good and Evil mankind could not remain within the “shelter” of G-d and under the influence of his enlightenment.

The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil – This is symbolic of part of the role and purpose of a Messiah. That in order to become “knowledgeable” one must descend into hell (hell being death and the wage of sin which is evil) to experience the bitterness of evil in order to understand the contrast of good or living free without encumbrances.
The Fall of Mankind: To live “separated” from G-d in an environment in which G-d cannot be realized. In other words live without proof of G-d.

The Tree of Life: The symbolism of Messianic redemption and the deliverance from hell which is the ultimate good.

Each of these symbolic representations can constitute vast discussion on their own. I do not purport to have all knowledge of these things but from the posts I have seen on this forum there appears to be a great deal about ancient scripture missing in understanding. And in some cases it would seem that there is an element of delight in what is missing and I do not want to interfere more in that with more than this post.

Zadok

There is another view. That GOD knows everything and totally realized that in order for those HE would predestined to be born, satan had to rebell, Adam needed to fall, and the foreordained needed to be born in sin or they would not have ever existed........................

I most certainly am no the product of a perfect world. My father's father was a bigamist. My mother's parents met and married in the United States as the indirect result of the Franco/Prussian War. GOD only knows how many sinful twists and turns occurred for even me to be born. But GOD foreknew me, and allowed it all to happen so that all those HE foreknew could come to exist. Those HE so loved are the result of a fallen world. GOD must have loved those HE predestined very much indeed.

 

[Zadok]

There is another view. That GOD knows everything and totally realized that in order for those HE would predestined to be born, satan had to rebell, Adam needed to fall, and the foreordained needed to be born in sin or they would not have ever existed........................

I most certainly am no the product of a perfect world. My father's father was a bigamist. My mother's parents met and married in the United States as the indirect result of the Franco/Prussian War. GOD only knows how many sinful twists and turns occurred for even me to be born. But GOD foreknew me, and allowed it all to happen so that all those HE foreknew could come to exist. Those HE so loved are the result of a fallen world. GOD must have loved those HE predestined very much indeed.

Are you willing to consider more? That G-d knew you before you were born mortal? That you made choices before you were born and that G-d gave you the freedom and agency to plan your mortal life. And then G-d also provided for you a way home?

Zadok

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Oh!?...
So, this verse is not true?
Revelation 20:2, "And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years."
OK. That's fine with me. I actually believe there is no such beast.
Likewise for the Elohim Jehovah.
It's all defected brain cells.
[PS: Who first saw the Serpent in the Garden, I insist?]

This only proves your lack of understanding. The Satan of the OT and the NT are two completely different entities. The OT Satan is more of how you would find him in Judaism, while the NT Satan is entirely reinvented.

Correct.
No god with integrity of character would create a quasi-perfect Garden and next prohibit part of its content to an innocent pair!

The Garden seemed a fair test to me. Don't eat from a specified tree and live in bliss. Eat from it and suffer. Now OTOH, wiping out two cities, flooding the planet, kill someone here, someone there, and even send your own son to die a gruesome death, while having the title of "loving and merciful" is the odd part. Do you know that Satan only killed 7 people in the Bible? And even then, those seven God gave Satan permission to do so.

 

[Cobblestones]

What GOD considers death and what you consider death are most likely entirely different. By death, GOD could have been considering Adam's spirituality and Adam's ability to be one with GOD

Any competent being would use a different word than "death" then. If man had no idea what "death" meant (because no animals had died or anything) then he would have no reference points for "In that day you shall surely die" and therefore would not necessarily even thought that dying was a bad thing. For all he knew it could have been a treat!

 

[Cobblestones]

GOD must have loved those HE predestined very much indeed.

But not everyone else? The rest of humanity is expendable? You can have your freakin' heinous god!

 

[Cobblestones]

OTOH, wiping out two cities, flooding the planet, kill someone here, someone there, and even send your own son to die a gruesome death, while having the title of "loving and merciful" is the odd part. Do you know that Satan only killed 7 people in the Bible? And even then, those seven God gave Satan permission to do so.

And let us not forget that god hardened Pharaoh's heart and then thrashed an entire country because of his hard heartedness. Good job there god! That'll show them that you are good and loving!!!

 

[Riverwolf]

Well, that is a good description. I accept it.
Nevertheless, I do not accept that fanatical Christianity [cultic fundamentalism] would use the myth to cash in for a parasitic elite who takes advantage of superstitions spread by those hypocrites who in the end don't believe anything literal in the story!

Well, guess what? They exist. You can either tolerate them or complain about them, which is just a waste of energy, unless you're making Youtube videos.

 

[Riverwolf]

This only proves your lack of understanding. The Satan of the OT and the NT are two completely different entities. The OT Satan is more of how you would find him in Judaism, while the NT Satan is entirely reinvented.


The Garden seemed a fair test to me. Don't eat from a specified tree and live in bliss. Eat from it and suffer. Now OTOH, wiping out two cities, flooding the planet, kill someone here, someone there, and even send your own son to die a gruesome death, while having the title of "loving and merciful" is the odd part. Do you know that Satan only killed 7 people in the Bible? And even then, those seven God gave Satan permission to do so.

It's only odd if "loving and merciful" were his ONLY title.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

And let us not forget that god hardened Pharaoh's heart and then thrashed an entire country because of his hard heartedness.

That's actually doubly backwards.

 

[rusra02]

You do realize how incredibly stupid a concept this is, don't you. That's like saying that I ought to have been born and raised in a prison because my great-great-great grandfather committed murder.

No, it's more like your inheriting a disease such as diabetes from an ancestor.
Adam could only pass on to his offspring his 'disease' of sin and imperfection, resulting in death for us all.

As Jeremiah pointed out:If god is omnipotent then he knew what the choice would be and yet he went ahead and created people with this mystical "free will" that you're talking about.

God did not foreknow what choice Adam and Eve would make, before they made it. However, God is perfectly capable with dealing with any event that may occur, just as he has shown time and again.

Oh, and BTW, there is no such thing as free will in the Christian doctrine. Observe:
And again, speaking of “those who do not know God and to those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus”:

Those who choose to not know God and to not obey the good news make those choices through free will. God does not predestine them to do so. He is simply stating what he intends to do as rightful sovereign of the Earth and mankind. He will destroy wicked ones who for so long have made much of this Earth and life itself a misery for so many. Also, God's foreknowledge of choosing people to serve a special purpose does not imply predestination. Rather, he states his purpose to use a class of people to do his will, but the individual members make their own choice as to whether to be part of God's purpose or not. In all cases, God does not determine the final destiny of people as individuals.

 

[Cobblestones]

Those who choose to not know God and to not obey the good news make those choices through free will. God does not predestine them to do so. He is simply stating what he intends to do as rightful sovereign of the Earth and mankind. He will destroy wicked ones who for so long have made much of this Earth and life itself a misery for so many. Also, God's foreknowledge of choosing people to serve a special purpose does not imply predestination. Rather, he states his purpose to use a class of people to do his will, but the individual members make their own choice as to whether to be part of God's purpose or not. In all cases, God does not determine the final destiny of people as individuals.

Wow. And you actually believe that? My goodness.

He will destroy wicked ones who for so long have made much of this Earth and life itself a misery for so many.

OK. So let's talk about reality here for a second. First of all, have you bothered looking about you, I mean outside of the species known as homo sapiens sapiens? Watch the Blue Planet or any other nature documentary. Know what you'll find? Beauty, certainly, but also lots of mess and violence. Ever seen a documentary on cosmology? The universe itself is a chaotic and violent place. That, my friend, is nature. It is not a result of "wicked ones" it is simply the way things are.

This is true even among humans. Now, please read this before you respond because reactionary responses are not helpful in a discussion like this.

Humans are biological creatures with natural biological impulses. Remove "reason" from the equation and people will still have these impulses. The difficulty for humans is that we are able to employ "reason" to our actions and we discover then that some of our natural impulses are in fact harmful and need to be controlled if we intend to live in a "civilized" manner. It does not mean that the impulses are not there. Indeed, "reason" is what you call "free will." That is, you can choose to go against your natural instincts. But the point is that those instincts are there whether you like it or not and those instincts are not a "sin nature" they are simply Nature.

No remotely intelligent deity would create biological creatures with such natural instincts, toss in "reason" (or rationality or whatever you want to call it), and then get p*$$d off at those who are less successful at opposing the natural instincts that he gave them in the first place unless that deity is himself wicked.

Why people ignore the obvious facts about human nature and weave a tale of wickedness and punishment is beyond me. To date, humans have found chemical means of overcoming all manner of mental illnesses from bipolar syndrome to manic-depression which are far more effective than any religious dogma or ideologue has ever been. Why then are people wasting time with the same religious crap that has proven to be completely ignorant of the causes of "wickedness" in the first place and completely impotent in resolving the conflicts rather than using intelligence to identify the biological causes of undesirable behaviours and treating them on a biological level? It doesn't matter if one employs meditation, a change of diet and exercise regimen or medication to the problem; all three of these affect our biology and impact our behaviour.

This is why the Apostle Paul was wrong in claiming that Christians are "a new creature." Even Christians have to employ force-of-will to overcome their bad behaviours. There's nothing "new" about that and certainly the core nature of Christians is just as human as everyone else. There's nothing special about them except that they refuse to open their eyes to the realities around them and embrace their humanity.

 

[Riverwolf]

The horror of biblical exegesis is that OPPORTUNISTS appear to take financial advantage from the gullible and naive [stupid] "learning" from them!
You go to church and are told you were born with the "Original Sin", and now the pope has to live a nice life making merchandise of that OFFENSIVE dogma!!
The Bible is an IMMORAL book, for sure, and should be officially [SYMBOLICALLY] burnt once a years in front of the UN to remind humankind that "Religion is an inoffensive pastime IF nobody gets hurt!".

How is this kind of thinking any different that when the Nazis burnt books they disagreed with?

Besides, remember, the Bible isn't a single book; it's a small library of books.

Before you even consider burning a book, you should STUDY IT and therefore know it. Unlike modern books, reading the Biblical canon casually is very inappropriate, and will lead to misunderstanding.

If you don't know what a book even is, then burning it is no different than when Alexander burnt libraries or when the early Roman Catholic church tried to destroy the Old Ways, or when the early Muslims conquered the Middle East, destroying most of the remaining pre-Judaism religions.

 

[rusra02]

Wow. And you actually believe that? My goodness.

Humans are biological creatures with natural biological impulses. Remove "reason" from the equation and people will still have these impulses. The difficulty for humans is that we are able to employ "reason" to our actions and we discover then that some of our natural impulses are in fact harmful and need to be controlled if we intend to live in a "civilized" manner. It does not mean that the impulses are not there. Indeed, "reason" is what you call "free will." That is, you can choose to go against your natural instincts. But the point is that those instincts are there whether you like it or not and those instincts are not a "sin nature" they are simply Nature.

Sorry, we don't get off the hook that easily for what we do, by calling it human nature. It is in our nature to do bad because we are imperfect and sinful by nature.

The first man and woman had before them the prospect of perfect endless life in a paradise setting that they, with their children, would eventually spread to all corners of the earth. But that prospect hinged on their loyalty to God. Disobedience would introduce into the picture a new genetic element—imperfection and death—that would be passed on to future generations. What happened?—Genesis 2:15-17.
The apostle Paul explains the situation very simply, saying that “through the disobedience of the one man [Adam] many were constituted sinners” and “death ruled as king through that one.” (Romans 5:17-19) By rejecting God’s sovereignty, Adam and Eve started humankind down the road to suffering, sickness, and death. Even as Moses said regarding Israel, so it can be said of mankind in general: “They have acted ruinously on their own part; they are not his children, the defect is their own. A generation crooked and twisted!”—Deuteronomy 32:5.
Despite our sinful nature, God expects us to come to know him and his standards and follow them to the best of our imperfect ability. God has made himself known to men but the majority of mankind remain willfully ignorant (Romans 1:18-23). The vile wickedness that fills the earth today is in most cases deliberate and God will hold men to account for what they do or fail to do. (Romans 1:28-32) Romans 1:32 states "Although [wicked ones] know full well the righteous decree of God, that those practicing such things are deserving of death, they not only keep on doing them but also consent with those practicing them."
Therefore, God is fully justified in destroying those who use their free will to harm others, ruin the environment, and ignore Earth's rightful Ruler.​

 

[Cobblestones]

Sorry, we don't get off the hook that easily for what we do, by calling it human nature. It is in our nature to do bad because we are imperfect and sinful by nature.

Therein reposes the lie that makes Christianity possible.

Even a casual study of primates is most revealing. Or will you say that apes also are sinful by nature? Hmmm?

Your position is devoid of merit.

 

[Cobblestones]

The apostle Paul explains the situation very simply, saying that “through the disobedience of the one man [Adam] many were constituted sinners” and “death ruled as king through that one.”

And you do not find that amazingly stupid? That is equivalent to saying that because my father was a thief the consequences of his actions are that I am born a thief. But this is not so.

Your idea that Adam had so much power over god is amazing. Nor is there any merit to the idea that his "sin" resulted in all of humanity being born "in sin." It's utter nonsense. How can you think God is "good" and yet he set up a system whereby you or I have to pay for the singular act of disobedience of Adam? Adam ate the fruit and so I will curse all of humanity and there will be untold suffering throughout history for this outrageous crime! That seems singularly cruel and merciless to me.

It's all a myth anyways and there never was an actual Adam and Eve even though Paul claimed that there was. It is physically impossible for this to be true.

 

[djewleu]

How is this kind of thinking any different that when the Nazis burnt books they disagreed with?

Besides, remember, the Bible isn't a single book; it's a small library of books.

Before you even consider burning a book, you should STUDY IT and therefore know it. Unlike modern books, reading the Biblical canon casually is very inappropriate, and will lead to misunderstanding.

If you don't know what a book even is, then burning it is no different than when Alexander burnt libraries or when the early Roman Catholic church tried to destroy the Old Ways, or when the early Muslims conquered the Middle East, destroying most of the remaining pre-Judaism religions.

Burning the Bible symbolically, I said.
The Bible is not the Book of God, but the weapon of religious men, who have used it to destroy the lives of uncountable numbers of innocent people.
Even today!
The Bible has much INNOCENT blood on its cover and its pages.
It is a bloody book.
The Bible is an IMMORAL BOOK.
Take that bloody book away and see humanity become better!