The Tree in the Garden

[Meow Mix]

This one is aimed in particular at the Christian Genesis story when taken literally.

Why do children believe in Santa Claus and the tooth fairy? No, this isn't a trite and tasteless jab at God "being like a Santa Claus for adults," don't worry. I have a point here.

It seems to be because children are more receiving of anything that's told to them, even if it would otherwise obviously not be true. We have to teach our children not to listen to the deceit of strangers. Put simply, kids -- who lack a concept of the ramifications for their actions and the faculties to discern fact from fiction -- are imperfect analogies to a person who lacks knowledge of good and evil.

If someone doesn't know what "evil" is, then they have no idea what a "lie" is. Do you see where I'm going with this?

Now let's suppose that God drops a forbidden tree in the middle of a garden. (Let's put aside the obviously bizarre question of why God would need or create such a thing in the first place other than as a form of entrapment). He creates Adam and Eve devoid of any knowledge of good and evil.

Along comes a serpent, whom God must have known would be there (as per His omniscience), who tells Eve a lie. Now, regardless of whether or not God says "Don't eat from the tree," the only possible outcome of the serpent telling someone who doesn't know deception that it's OK to eat from the tree is that Eve would genuinely believe it's OK to eat from the tree, being unable to discern a lie from the truth.

So, if God creates a tree that He doesn't even need (omnipotence would mean that God doesn't require anything, so why create a forbidden tree?), inadequately prepares His creation against an evil He knows exists (Adam and Eve were innocent of knowledge of deception, yet God freely allowed a liar in the garden), and furthermore God must have foreknown the consequences of this setup, then we have the most elaborate entrapment ever perpetrated by anyone on anyone else.

Worse still, God then punished Adam and Eve for something they had no control over with a Pandora's Box of cruel and hideous amounts of suffering.

Yet, this is a "good" God?

Dropping an unnecessary forbidden tree in a garden with inadequately prepared, innocent people with a liar on the loose is no different from dropping a loaded revolver in a baby's crib.

 

[footprints]

This one is aimed in particular at the Christian Genesis story when taken literally.

Why do children believe in Santa Claus and the tooth fairy? No, this isn't a trite and tasteless jab at God "being like a Santa Claus for adults," don't worry. I have a point here.

It seems to be because children are more receiving of anything that's told to them, even if it would otherwise obviously not be true. We have to teach our children not to listen to the deceit of strangers. Put simply, kids -- who lack a concept of the ramifications for their actions and the faculties to discern fact from fiction -- are imperfect analogies to a person who lacks knowledge of good and evil.

If someone doesn't know what "evil" is, then they have no idea what a "lie" is. Do you see where I'm going with this?

Now let's suppose that God drops a forbidden tree in the middle of a garden. (Let's put aside the obviously bizarre question of why God would need or create such a thing in the first place other than as a form of entrapment). He creates Adam and Eve devoid of any knowledge of good and evil.

Along comes a serpent, whom God must have known would be there (as per His omniscience), who tells Eve a lie. Now, regardless of whether or not God says "Don't eat from the tree," the only possible outcome of the serpent telling someone who doesn't know deception that it's OK to eat from the tree is that Eve would genuinely believe it's OK to eat from the tree, being unable to discern a lie from the truth.

So, if God creates a tree that He doesn't even need (omnipotence would mean that God doesn't require anything, so why create a forbidden tree?), inadequately prepares His creation against an evil He knows exists (Adam and Eve were innocent of knowledge of deception, yet God freely allowed a liar in the garden), and furthermore God must have foreknown the consequences of this setup, then we have the most elaborate entrapment ever perpetrated by anyone on anyone else.

Worse still, God then punished Adam and Eve for something they had no control over with a Pandora's Box of cruel and hideous amounts of suffering.

Yet, this is a "good" God?

Dropping an unnecessary forbidden tree in a garden with inadequately prepared, innocent people with a liar on the loose is no different from dropping a loaded revolver in a baby's crib.

Whoa, what can I say, that is one way I suppose we could relate to things.

Children believe in Santa, because Santa is real and is tangible. People children love and trust also promote Santa to them. As children grow up, children come to the understanding that Santa is really a person dressed in a costume, and the person or people who really deliver the presents is their own mum and dad, just because they love them so much. As the child turns into an adult and has children of their own, they do the same loving kindness to their children as it brought them so much joy when they were children. Personally I think it is beautiful the lengths some people will go to, just to see a smile on their face and feel the warmth of their laugh.

I cannot speak for everybody, but I know the lesson I received from the Santa saga, and the lesson I always promote, is that people can do lovely and beautiful things without having to get benefit or credit from it. Just doing it, because it is a beautiful and wonderful thing to do.

The same applies to God or any deity figures. In order to relate to a deity figure, base cultures like the Hebrew, needed something real and tangible to be able to relate to it.

As for the tree of knowledge and the entrapment theory, again this one way of looking at it. Another way is, this is how God per se, would know when Adam and Eve didn't trust him or respect him any more. When they viewed something else as their higher authority. Keeping in mind, as with other base cultures, from time to time, certain foods were off limits to them, irrespective of how much they liked it or how abundant this food may have been. It served as a strenghening method for times when food was short and it served as a character building exercise.

 

[Baydwin]

As for the tree of knowledge and the entrapment theory, again this one way of looking at it. Another way is, this is how God per se, would know when Adam and Eve didn't trust him or respect him any more. When they viewed something else as their higher authority. Keeping in mind, as with other base cultures, from time to time, certain foods were off limits to them, irrespective of how much they liked it or how abundant this food may have been. It served as a strenghening method for times when food was short and it served as a character building exercise.

Yes, but the argument is that Adam and Eve were naiive of good and evil, and so of the concept of a lie and equally would have had no concept of trust.
God said don't eat of the tree, then the snake came along and said it's ok to eat of the tree. They would have taken each statement at face value having no intuition that one statement was more important or trustworthy than the other.

 

[rusra02]

Yes, but the argument is that Adam and Eve were naiive of good and evil, and so of the concept of a lie and equally would have had no concept of trust.
God said don't eat of the tree, then the snake came along and said it's ok to eat of the tree. They would have taken each statement at face value having no intuition that one statement was more important or trustworthy than the other.

The idea that Adam and Eve did not know it was wrong to eat from the tree is incorrect. They knew God had told them not to eat from it. They also knew the consequences. While Eve was deceived by the serpent, the deception related to the supposed outcome from eating from the tree, not the fact the God said not to do it.
Eve apparently believed Satan's lie that she could decide for herself what was good and bad. Adam, however, was NOT deceived. (1 Timothy 2:14). He joined his wife in rebellion apparently because of his desire for her. The fact that Eve was deceived does not excuse her. She had every reason to trust what God told her. At the very least, she could have waited until her husband was with her rather than deciding for herself what was good or bad. Put yourself in her place. The serpent’s claim completely distorted what God and Adam had said. How would you feel if a stranger charged someone you love and trust with dishonesty?

 

[Tiapan]

Whoa, what can I say, that is one way I suppose we could relate to things.

Children believe in Santa, because Santa is real and is tangible. People children love and trust also promote Santa to them. As children grow up, children come to the understanding that Santa is really a person dressed in a costume, and the person or people who really deliver the presents is their own mum and dad, just because they love them so much. As the child turns into an adult and has children of their own, they do the same loving kindness to their children as it brought them so much joy when they were children. Personally I think it is beautiful the lengths some people will go to, just to see a smile on their face and feel the warmth of their laugh.

I cannot speak for everybody, but I know the lesson I received from the Santa saga, and the lesson I always promote, is that people can do lovely and beautiful things without having to get benefit or credit from it. Just doing it, because it is a beautiful and wonderful thing to do.

The same applies to God or any deity figures. In order to relate to a deity figure, base cultures like the Hebrew, needed something real and tangible to be able to relate to it.

As for the tree of knowledge and the entrapment theory, again this one way of looking at it. Another way is, this is how God per se, would know when Adam and Eve didn't trust him or respect him any more. When they viewed something else as their higher authority. Keeping in mind, as with other base cultures, from time to time, certain foods were off limits to them, irrespective of how much they liked it or how abundant this food may have been. It served as a strenghening method for times when food was short and it served as a character building exercise.

Perhaps Santa and God are not so far removed.

that people can do lovely and beautiful things without having to get benefit or credit from it. Just doing it, because it is a beautiful and wonderful thing to do.

.

Perhaps there is alternative motive. Consider the nice parent and belligerent kid.

"Now, Now, Johny if you don't behave Santa will see and not bring you a christmas present."

"Now Now Johny if you dont behave God will see and you wont go to heaven."

The bribe does not work if mum or dad threatens, kids have them tied around there little finger, so we have come up with this third party approach.

"If you wont do it for me ok but you better do it for santa/god or you wont get your candy."

It is on this basis of deferred authority that early leaders controlled their tribes.

Cheers

 

[Baydwin]

The idea that Adam and Eve did not know it was wrong to eat from the tree is incorrect. They knew God had told them not to eat from it. They also knew the consequences. While Eve was deceived by the serpent, the deception related to the supposed outcome from eating from the tree, not the fact the God said not to do it.
Eve apparently believed Satan's lie that she could decide for herself what was good and bad. Adam, however, was NOT deceived. (1 Timothy 2:14). He joined his wife in rebellion apparently because of his desire for her. The fact that Eve was deceived does not excuse her. She had every reason to trust what God told her. At the very least, she could have waited until her husband was with her rather than deciding for herself what was good or bad. Put yourself in her place. The serpent’s claim completely distorted what God and Adam had said. How would you feel if a stranger charged someone you love and trust with dishonesty?

So you believe they knew good from evil before eating from the tree?

 

[enchanted_one1975]

Dropping an unnecessary forbidden tree in a garden with inadequately prepared, innocent people with a liar on the loose is no different from dropping a loaded revolver in a baby's crib.

As a responsible gun owner I have to disagree with this. Adam and Eve were adult and capable of making a decision. They were "tricked" by the serpent, as it is written. A baby is not able to make a decision for itself, therefore does not know it is not supposed to play with a loaded weapon. Besides, the death resulting from eating the forbidden fruit did not start happening until centuries later. Careless handling of a firearm is more apt to result in instant death.

 

[Kaironimo]

Interpretation of scripture is something that will always be contested by others, but ultimately everyone is going to have a different view than another person no matter what the subject happens to be, and no one can ever be certain of anything unless they themselves are a god.
Looking at this account from Genesis from a literal viewpoint is one way to look at it, but another way to understand this story is through etiology. If this account is not taken literally but rather as a story used to explain how certain things came to be then it may be easier to understand. Everyday people search for answers as to why something is the way it is in the world around them, and it is likely that the writer(s) of this account was looking for a way to explain some of the happenings in their surroundings. The writer of this account may be attempting to enable people to understand why it is that women experience pain during child birth or why the earth can be so unfriendly and difficult to work with, or even why it is that snakes crawl on the ground. Many cultures throughout history have had stories that attempt to explain similar phenomena. What needs to be remembered is that this account was written down and arranged into the book of Genesis by humans and therefore can be fallible. There are likely to be parts of these accounts that we do not understand or make little sense in our individual contexts. The writer(s) of this story were no doubt influenced by their surroundings and more likely than not had a targeted audience for this story. Whether taken literally or not, this account in Genesis does become one of the foundational stories for later events in the Bible, including the foundation of the nation of Israel. Regardless scripture always seems to raise more questions than it answers.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

This one is aimed in particular at the Christian Genesis story ...

Just to be clear, do you mean "the Christian Genesis story" that evolved in Canaan centuries before the Christians evolved in the Roman Empire?

 

[footprints]

Yes, but the argument is that Adam and Eve were naiive of good and evil, and so of the concept of a lie and equally would have had no concept of trust.
God said don't eat of the tree, then the snake came along and said it's ok to eat of the tree. They would have taken each statement at face value having no intuition that one statement was more important or trustworthy than the other.

An infant child has no knowledge of good and evil until such time they gain the knowledge of what is right and wrong. Keeping in mind, Adam and Eve were in an infant child like state, they had no knowledge other than that which God per se had given them. Just like a parent, God per se, put a lot of trust in his children.

The Adam and Eve scenario as it pertains to the tree and snake happens on a very frequent basis in real life. Generally the scenario goes something like this, an older brother or sister wants a cake off the table, they know if they get caught taking one they will be in trouble, so they get their baby brother or sister to do it for them. The younger sibling wouldn't know it was wrong until such time as they were caught and found themselves in trouble for the mischief their older sibling(s) put them up to. After they get into the trouble the first time, they now know right from wrong. In general children don't stop doing the wrong thing, they just become more devious and sneaky such is the beauty of their intelligence.

A vast majority of adults still do these sneaky and devious things. A spouse may put a cake, some grapes, whatever in the fridge, on the cupboard, and the other spouse will come along, check that nobody is looking if the other spouse has asked them not to touch, and sneak a little bit. Some adults believe this to be a loving, fun thing, and so pass the same teachings onto their children who in turn learn to be sneaky and devious for which most children will get into trouble.

 

[footprints]

Perhaps Santa and God are not so far removed.

Perhaps not, both are projected as kind, loving and sharing entities.

Perhaps there is alternative motive. Consider the nice parent and belligerent kid.

"Now, Now, Johny if you don't behave Santa will see and not bring you a christmas present."

"Now Now Johny if you dont behave God will see and you wont go to heaven."

The bribe does not work if mum or dad threatens, kids have them tied around there little finger, so we have come up with this third party approach.

"If you wont do it for me ok but you better do it for santa/god or you wont get your candy."

It is on this basis of deferred authority that early leaders controlled their tribes.

Cheers

Yes there are some horrible parents out there who would blackmail and bribe their own children. This I can surely agree with and have witnessed it with my own ears and eyes. What a fantastic (said sarcastically) thing to teach children, how to blackmail and bribe people. Children above all, watch, listen and learn.

A belligerent child is generally the product of a belligernent parent or parents.

 

[Krok]

Another way is, this is how God per se, would know when Adam and Eve didn't trust him or respect him any more.

Interesting. You are saying that your God has to test people to find things out about them. In other words, your God does not know everything. Do you have a list of things you think he knows and a list of things you think he doesn't know?

 

[Mr Cheese]

Interesting. You are saying that your God has to test people to find things out about them. In other words, your God does not know everything. Do you have a list of things you think he knows and a list of things you think he doesn't know?

God has no idea that daffy duck's rear end is black...

 

[LittleNipper]

Interesting. You are saying that your God has to test people to find things out about them. In other words, your God does not know everything. Do you have a list of things you think he knows and a list of things you think he doesn't know?

Actually, this is a wrong notion. GOD allows people to be tested in order that they may learn something concerning HIM, correct their wrong notions, and bring people closer to HIMSELF. Read the book of JOB. Job was influenced with the wrong idea that bad things only happen to people who do bad things. GOD was setting the record straight, and Job and his friends would have never have learned the reality of this false notion unless Job had been tested.

GOD already knows how we will react. HE wants us to see what HE sees...

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

So, if God creates a tree that He doesn't even need (omnipotence would mean that God doesn't require anything, so why create a forbidden tree?

All early orthodox Christians (that I have read) believe that the temptation in the Garden was Sex. Adam and Eve was tempted by Sex not an Apple. That was caused the fall, that is why they put on clothing later.:yes:

Sex is how sin entered mankind.

 

[gnostic]

I have posted up similar view about illogical myth of Adam and Eve, the forbidden tree, and how without the knowledge of good and bad, there being no way to distinguish a lie from the truth. And I agreed with you

There are so many way to view and interpret the event that had the early couple banished from Eden.

I agreed with you that is impossible to distinguish what is lie and what is truth, if you don't know the difference between good and bad, right and wrong. To be able to make proper judgement on anything, you'd need to have sufficient knowledge or information to determine your choices.

If God truly knew the choice they would make before they themselves know, then why place that tree in the Garden in the 1st place. It doesn't make sense.

Adam and Eve were "stuck on a rock and a hard place", as the saying ago. God wanted them to obey him and yet they can't have knowledge of good and bad, which would enable them to distinguish between truth and a lie, and they were punished for disobedience, when they were so easily deceived. A catch-22 situation they were in.

Perhaps, there were other reasons or motives for God to do this. Perhaps, this serpent was God's agent, who was meant to test them, or God himself in the guise of serpent.

Perhaps, God didn't want them to stay there in the 1st place. Which is another possibility.

Because in Genesis 1, God gave specific orders, which seemed to be his 1st set of orders:

1. Be fruitful and multiply, which mean populate the earth.
2. And to rule over all the animals.

I don't think either 1 or 2, if they were to stay in the garden, but since they have knowledge of good and bad, which they would need to make judgement and survive in the wide world. Because in the Garden, they were innocent and don't know how to grow their own food. So if they were to survive in the world outside the Garden, they will have to know how to grow crops, to herd cattle or other livestock, or to hunt games.

Had they stayed in the Garden, then eventually there would be too many people to live in the Garden, which mean they would have to venture out in the world outside the Garden. If they have knowledge of living in the outside world other than pick fruit from the tree, they would starve as the people began populating outside world. And if all descendants of Adam and Eve ate from the Tree of Life and can't die, then this earth would eventually become a wasteland because it couldn't possibly sustain the overcrowded earth.

Some Christians and even Muslims would say to test them and give them free will, a popular argument for them. But can you really make the right choice, if you don't have enough information?

Also, if God know the eventual outcome, then the test is actually a test that they could not possibly pass. As you've said, MM, being innocent, they couldn't understand the consequence of their decisions/actions.

Sure, God said they would die if they ate from the wrong tree, but did they truly understand what "death" mean?

Nothing had died before. No one and no animals have died while they stayed in the Garden. Because at least 7 days have passed and not long after that they were banished. Without knowledge of what dead or death mean, they really have no understanding of God's dire warning.

As it stand, the story of Adam in Genesis, doesn't make sense.

 

[Heneni]

Now now...before we stone god for putting a loaded gun in the garden lets think about this.

God made adam and eve..would probably have been happy with just the two of them, and probably was...then satan interferred and now god is happy to have MILLIONS of sons and daughters....good plan. Nobody gets to take overtake god when it comes to smart. Talk about return on investment.

 

[gnostic]

Now now...before we stone god for putting a loaded gun in the garden lets think about this.

Not stoning God...not that I could find a stone big enough to "stone him".

Just stating that the Genesis provided too many loose ends, so the story is open to many possibilities or interpretations. As I demonstrate in my last post, I can see all sort of possibilities and interpretations.

If you look at the Genesis 1-3, closely, you will see that the reason for putting the tree there, doesn't make sense. And it also don't make sense if God knew everything, and yet still place the tree there. And if he knew everything, he could have easily stop the serpent from communicating with Eve in the 1st place.

If you just read the Genesis and take it at its face value, as most Christians do, then they don't see that the Genesis provide more questions than answers, because the story don't make sense.

 

[Krok]

Actually, this is a wrong notion. GOD allows people to be tested in order that they may learn something concerning HIM, correct their wrong notions, and bring people closer to HIMSELF. Read the book of JOB. Job was influenced with the wrong idea that bad things only happen to people who do bad things. GOD was setting the record straight, and Job and his friends would have never have learned the reality of this false notion unless Job had been tested.

GOD already knows how we will react. HE wants us to see what HE sees...

It would be a lot simpler just to tell them. No tests needed then, or can't he do it?

 

[footprints]

Interesting. You are saying that your God has to test people to find things out about them. In other words, your God does not know everything. Do you have a list of things you think he knows and a list of things you think he doesn't know?

Hmmm, interesing Krok, my God. To the best of my knowledge, God per se, isn't the property of one person, there cannot be a my (your) in it, God is shared by millions of people around the world.

LOL human perception will never cease to amaze me and the associations people make.

In my world, we first have to establish if a deity exists or not, before we can gain any more facts. Though from my world, your world seems like anything is possible providing you put your imagination to it.